Stress and Vibration Analysis of A MDOF Excavator Bucket

Stress and Vibration Analysis of a MDOF
Excavator Bucket
By
Md Shahriar Islam
Student No. 131601
Supervised By
Prof. Dr. Md. Zahid Hossain
A thesis submitted to the Department of Mechanical and Chemical

Engineering (MCE) in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the
degree of Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering
Department of Mechanical and Chemical Engineering (MCE)
Islamic University of Technology (IUT)

October, 2015
Certificate of Approval
The thesis titled “Stress and vibration analysis of a MDOF excavator bucket” submitted by Md
Shahriar Islam bearing student number 131601 of Academic Year 2013-2014 has been found as
satisfactory and accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of
Science in Mechanical Engineering on 30 October, 2015.
Board of Examiners
……………………………………..
Prof. Dr. Md. Zahid Hossain Chairman
Professor (Supervisor)
Department of Mechanical and Chemical Engineering
Board Bazar, Gazipur
Dhaka, Bangladesh
……………………………………..
Prof. Dr. A.K.M. Sadrul Islam Member
Head, (Ex-officio)
Dhaka, Bangladesh
……………………………………..
Prof. Dr. Md. Nurul Absar Chowdhury Member
Professor
Dhaka, Bangladesh
……………………………………..
Prof. Dr. Md. Abdus Salam Akanda Member
Professor (External)
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET)
Dhaka, Bangladesh
i
Candidate’s Declaration
It is hereby declared that this thesis or any part of it has not been submitted elsewhere for the
award of any degree or diploma.
Signature of the Candidate
Md Shahriar Islam
Dhaka, Bangladesh
Signature of the Supervisor
Prof. Dr. Md. Zahid Hossain
Professor
Dhaka, Bangladesh
ii
Dedication
This thesis is dedicated to my parents and adorable wife.
iii
Acknowledgement
The author expresses gratefulness to almighty Allah for his blessings, which enabled him to
complete this thesis successfully.
The author expresses gratitude to his supervisor Prof. Dr. Md. Zahid Hossain, Department of
Mechanical and Chemical Engineering (MCE), Islamic University of Technology (IUT), for his
continuous guidance, helpful suggestions and supervision at all stages of this thesis work. Deepest
gratitude to Mr. Rakibul Hassan, Assistant Engineer, Applied Mechanics Lab, Department of
Mechanical and Chemical Engineering (MCE), Islamic University of Technology (IUT), for his
help throughout this work.
The author expresses his acknowledgement to Islamic University of Technology (IUT) authority,
all the faculty and staff members of the Department of Mechanical and Chemical Engineering
(MCE).
The author is indebted to his parents for providing the financial and mental support in pursuing
this degree and research work. Without their supports, none of these works would be possible. The
author expresses his thanks to his wife for her continuous support and encouragement, which
helped for the best use of time.
In spite of his best effort to complete this work, the author seeks excuses if there is any mistake
found in this report.
Author
iv
Abstract
Multi degrees of freedom (MDOF) excavator is a very popular machine in today’s mining
industry and are also popularly used in roads and building constructions or demolition and for
material handling. All these uses involve exposer of the bucket to high amount of linear and non-
linear reaction forces which might sometimes cross the limit of endurable stress of the bucket, also
because of the continuation of reaction forces noise and vibration is observed in the bucket which
propagates to the whole excavator body.
There have been very limited research works done till now on the engineering analysis of
excavator or excavator bucket. Most of the works concentrated on the different attachments’
modified or optimized design, and almost no work has been done on the vibration analysis of the
bucket particularly. The vibration due to input digging force and reaction force damage the bucket
and its cutting teeth with the time being, so it is a common practice to change the bucket with a
new one or replace the teeth which are no longer usable. Some companies use reinforced steel with
the bucket as attachments to increase its strength and resist wear when mining. This research work
is focused on different techniques of using rubber and other materials with the bucket as
attachments to reduce vibration so that it can last longer and work under less disturbances.
In this thesis work three dimensional (3D) MDOF (Multi Degrees of Freedom) bucket is
modelled with the help of SOLIDWORKS software and analyzed in ANSYS 14 software. In
ANSYS Software three different analysis platform is used on the 3D model namely Modal,
Harmonic and Static Structure analysis. Firstly, the Modal analysis is done to understand the mode
shapes and natural frequencies of the bucket. Secondly, Harmonic analysis is done to understand
the vibration amplitudes in different natural frequencies. And lastly Static Structure analysis is
performed to understand the equivalent von-misses stresses developed in the bucket. The
simulation or numerical analysis has been performed on a standard bucket then several cases were
developed. The use of rubber materials with the bucket as attachments to reduce vibration and to
observe change in the mode shapes and natural frequencies is a major highlight of this thesis work.
Also use of other materials and their effect is observed in this thesis work. Different techniques
were studied to use rubber strips which will not increase the total weight of the bucket but will
reduce vibration and stress developed in the system. The thesis also includes how the different
v
aspects of using attachments such as how much thickness it should be or what are the effects of
thickness of attachments.
The numerical simulation is validated with published journal paper for the stress developed
in the bucket and results found are in well agreement with the results of the paper. An experiment
is also performed on a bucket model made locally with local materials and using common
mechanical tools such as bending, rolling, scissor and welding. The experimental model is fixed
on a fixture then vibration output was measured under different loads. Then rubber sheet and
rubber strips also attached with this experimental model and experimentation was done. Similar
model was developed in the SOLIDWORKS software and analyzed accordingly in ANSYS and
validated with the experimentation. The experiment was only performed on the harmonic analysis
of the bucket with and without rubber and the results found from the experiments are in similar
pattern with the simulation results.
vi
Table of Contents
Certificate of Approval
Candidate’s declaration
Dedication
Acknowledgement
Abstract
Table of Contents
List of Tables
List of Figures
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1. Excavator……………………………………...........................................................................2
1.1.1. Excavator attachments and configuration………………..………………………………3
1.1.2 Excavator Bucket……………………………………........................................................4
1.2 Vibration…………....................................................................................................................6
1.3. Von Mises Stress ……………………......................................................................................7
1.4. The importance of vibration analysis and reduction…………………………………………09
1.5. Research Objective………………………………………………………………………….10
1.6. Possible outcomes………………………………………………….......................................10
1.7. Outline of methodology……………………………………………………………………..11
Chapter 2: Literature Review
2.1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………….14
2.2. Utility of FEA and optimization for backhoe attachment …………………………………..15
vii
2.3. Optimization of backhoe attachment………………………………………………………...17
2.5. Summary of the literature review……….……………………………………………………19
Chapter 3: Problem specification and numerical Simulation
3.1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………….21
3.2. Modeling of the Bucket ……………………………………………………..........................21
3.3. Numerical Analysis Procedure....……………........................................................................22
3.4. Boundary Conditions and Input Force……………………………………………………….23
3.5. Meshing……………………………………………………………………………………...24
3.6. Definition of Cases…………………………………………………………………………..25
Chapter 4: Result of Numerical Simulation and Discussion
4.0. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………….31
4.1. Modal Analysis …………………………………………………..…………………………31
4.1.1. Mode Shapes and Natural Frequencies for Case 1……………………………………..31
4.1.2. Mode Shapes and Natural Frequencies for Case 2……………………………………..35
4.1.3. Mode Shapes and Natural Frequencies for Case 3…………………………………......38
4.1.4. Mode Shapes and Natural Frequencies for Case 4..........................................................39
4.1.5. Mode Shapes and Natural Frequencies for Case 5...........................................................42
4.1.6. Mode Shapes and Natural Frequencies for Case 6……………………………………...44
4.2. Harmonic Analysis…………………………………………………………………………..46
4.2.2. Harmonic Response of Case 2……………………………...............................................46
4.2.3. Harmonic Response of Case 3…………………………………………………………..53
4.3. Static Structure Analysis ……………………………………………………………………79
viii
4.3.1. Von Mises Stress and Total Deformation for Case 1…………………..…………………79
4.3.2. Von Mises Stress and Total Deformation for Case 2…………………..…………………81
4.3.3. Von Mises Stress and Total Deformation for Case 3……..………………………………82
4.3.4. Von Mises Stress and Total Deformation for Case 4……………………………………..85
4.3.5. Von Mises Stress and Total Deformation for Case 5……………………………………88
4.3.6. Von Mises Stress and Total Deformation for Case 6……………………………………90
Chapter 5: Experimental Results and Validation
5.1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………….93
5.2. Experimental Set-up…………………………………………………………………………93
5.3. Experiment and Simulation Case……………………………………………………………97
5.4. Experimental Procedure……………………………………………………………………..98
5.5. Experiment and Simulation Results………………………………………………………..100
Chapter 6: Conclusion and Recommendation
6.1. Conclusion….........................................................................................................................105
6.2. Recommendations...…………….…….……………………………………………………105
REFERENCE
ix
List of Tables
Chapter 4: Result of Numerical analysis and Discussion Page Number
Table 4.1.1. Natural Frequency (Hz) at Case 1 32
Table 4.3.1. Von-mises stress and Total Deformation at case 1 79
Table 4.3.2. Von-mises stress and Total Deformation comparison at case 2 81
List of Figures
Chapter 1: Introduction Page

No.
Fig.1.1. A Typical Excavator. 2
Fig. 1.2. Different Types of Excavator. [19] 3
Fig. 1.1.2. Excavator Bucket Terminology. [by CWS Industries] 5
Fig. 1.3.1. A simple tension test and a real life loading condition. 7
Fig.1.3.2. Representation of a pure distortion case. 8
x
Chapter 3: Problem Specification and Numerical Simulation
Fig. 3.1. Bucket Model Specifications. 21
Fig. 3.2. Bucket Model General Terminology. 22
Fig. 3.4. Boundary conditions and input forces on the bucket. 23
Fig. 3.5. Bucket model after meshing. 24
Fig. 3.6.1 Bare Bucket model. 25
Fig. 3.6.2. Bucket models with different attachments. 26
Fig. 3.6.3. Bucket models with different arrangement of rubber strips. 27
Fig. 3.6.4. Bucket models with different arrangements of rubber. 28
Fig. 3.6.5. Bucket models with different thickness of rubber strips. 29
Chapter 4: Result of Numerical analysis and Discussion

Fig. 4.1.1 (a) 1st mode shape at case 1. 32
Fig. 4.1.1 (b) 2nd mode shape at case 1. 33
Fig. 4.1.1 (c) 3rd mode shape at case 1. 33
Fig. 4.1.1 (d) 4th mode shape at case 1. 34
Fig. 4.1.1 (e) 5th mode shape at case 1. 34
Fig. 4.1.2.1. 1st mode shapes for case 2. 36
Fig. 4.1.2.2. 2nd mode shapes for case 2. 36
Fig. 4.1.2.3. 3rd mode shapes for case 2. 37
Fig. 4.1.2.4. 4th mode shapes for case 2. 37
Fig. 4.1.5.4 4th mode shapes for case 5. 43
xi
Fig. 4.2.2.1.a Amplitudes along X-Direction at 1st mode for case 2 compared with case 1. 48
Fig. 4.2.2.1.b Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 1st mode for case 2 compared with case 1. 48
Fig. 4.2.2.1.c Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 1st mode for case 2 compared with case 1. 48
Fig. 4.2.2.2.a Amplitudes along X-Direction at 2nd mode for case 2 compared with case 1. 49
Fig. 4.2.2.2.b Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 2nd mode for case 2 compared with case 1. 49
Fig. 4.2.2.2.c Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 2nd mode for case 2 compared with case 1. 49
Fig. 4.2.2.3.a Amplitudes along X-Direction at 3rd mode for case 2 compared with case 1. 50
Fig. 4.2.2.3.b Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 3rd mode for case 2 compared with case 1. 50
Fig. 4.2.2.3.c Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 3rd mode for case 2 compared with case 1. 50
Fig. 4.2.2.4.a Amplitudes along X-Direction at 4th mode for case 2 compared with case 1. 51
Fig. 4.2.2.4.b Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 4th mode for case 2 compared with case 1. 51
Fig. 4.2.2.4.c Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 4th mode for case 2 compared with case 1. 51
Fig. 4.2.2.5.a Amplitudes along X-Direction at 5th mode for case 2 compared with case 1. 52
Fig. 4.2.2.5.c Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 5th mode for case 2 compared with case 1. 52
Fig. 4.2.3.1.a. Amplitudes along X-Direction at 1st mode for case 3 compared with case 1. 54
Fig. 4.2.3.1.c. Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 1st mode for case 3 compared with case 1. 54
Fig. 4.2.3.2.a. Amplitudes along X-Direction at 2nd mode for case 3 compared with case 1. 55
Fig. 4.2.3.2.c. Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 2nd mode for case 3 compared with case 1. 55
Fig. 4.2.3.3.a. Amplitudes along X-Direction at 3rd mode for case 3 compared with case 1. 56
Fig. 4.2.3.3.c. Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 3rd mode for case 3 compared with case 1. 56
Fig. 4.2.3.4.a. Amplitudes along X-Direction at 4th mode for case 3 compared with case 1. 57
xii
Fig. 4.2.3.4.c. Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 4th mode for case 3 compared with case 1. 57
Fig. 4.2.3.5.c. Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 5th mode for case 3 compared with case 1. 58
Fig. 4.2.4.1.a. Amplitudes along X-Direction at 1st mode for case 4 compared with case 1. 61
Fig. 4.2.4.1.c. Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 1st mode for case 4 compared with case 1. 61
Fig. 4.2.4.2.a. Amplitudes along X-Direction at 2nd mode for case 4 compared with case 1. 62
Fig. 4.2.4.2.c. Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 2nd mode for case 4 compared with case 1. 62
Fig. 4.2.4.3.a. Amplitudes along X-Direction at 3rd mode for case 4 compared with case 1. 63
Fig. 4.2.4.3.c. Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 3rd mode for case 4 compared with case 1. 63
Fig. 4.2.4.4.c. Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 4th mode for case 4 compared with case 1. 64
Fig. 4.2.4.5.b Amplitudes along X-Direction at 5th mode for case 4 compared with case 1. 65
Fig. 4.2.4.5.c. Amplitudes along X-Direction at 5th mode for case 4 compared with case 1. 65
Fig. 4.2.5.1.a Amplitudes along X-Direction at 1st mode for case 5. 68
Fig. 4.2.5.1.b Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 1st mode for case 5. 68
Fig. 4.2.5.1.c Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 1st mode for case 5. 68
Fig. 4.2.5.2.a Amplitudes along X-Direction at 2nd mode for case 5. 69
Fig. 4.2.5.2.b Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 2nd mode for case 5. 69
Fig. 4.2.5.2.c Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 2nd mode for case 5. 69
xiii
Fig. 4.2.5.3.a Amplitudes along X-Direction at 3rd mode for case 5. 70
Fig. 4.2.5.3.b Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 3rd mode for case 5. 70
Fig. 4.2.5.3.c Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 3rd mode for case 5. 70
Fig. 4.2.5.4.a Amplitudes along X-Direction at 4th mode for case 5. 71
Fig. 4.2.5.4.c Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 4th mode for case 5. 71
Fig. 4.2.5.5.b Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 5th mode for case 5. 72
Fig. 4.2.6.1.a Amplitudes along X-Direction at 1st mode for case 6. 74
Fig. 4.2.6.1.b Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 1st mode for case 6. 74
Fig. 4.2.6.1.c Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 1st mode for case 6. 74
Fig. 4.2.6.2.a Amplitudes along X-Direction at 2nd mode for case 6. 75
Fig. 4.2.6.2.b Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 2nd mode for case 6. 75
Fig. 4.2.6.2.c Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 2nd mode for case 6. 75
Fig. 4.2.6.3.a Amplitudes along X-Direction at 3rd mode for case 6. 76
Fig. 4.2.6.3.b Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 3rd mode for case 6. 76
Fig. 4.2.6.3.c Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 3rd mode for case 6. 76
Fig. 4.2.6.5.b Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 5th mode for case 6. 78
Fig. 4.3.1.1. Von-mises stress for the bare bucket at case 1. 80
Fig. 4.3.1.2. total deformation for the bare bucket at case 1. 80
Fig. 4.3.2.1. Von-mises stress for case 2. 82
xiv
Fig. 4.3.2.2. Total deformation for Case 2. 82
Chapter 5: Experimental Results and Validation

Fig. 5.2.1 (a) Bucket Model and Fixture for Experiment 93
Fig. 5.2.1 (b) Experimental Bucket model specifications. 94
Fig. 5.2.2. Shaker K2007E01 95
Fig. 5.2.3. Force Sensor 95
Fig. 5.2.4. Signal Conditioner 95
Fig. 5.2.5. Cable 95
Fig. 5.2.6. Function Generator 95
Fig. 5.2.7. Oscilloscope 96
Fig. 5.3. The Cases of Experiment and Simulation. 98
Fig. 5.4. Experimental Arrangement to perform vibration analysis of bucket. 99
Fig. 5.7.1. Experimental Results Comparison at 2nd mode. 102
Fig. 5.7.2. Experimental Results Comparison at 3rd mode. 102
Fig. 5.7.3. Simulation Results Comparison at 2nd mode. 103
Fig. 5.7.4. Simulation Results Comparison at 3rd mode. 103
xv
APPENDIX
Fig A.1.1 Von Mises stress developed in the bucket. [16] 109
Fig A.1.2. Total deformation developed in the bucket. [16] 109
Fig A.2.1. Von Mises stress developed in the bucket. 110
Fig A.2.2. Total deformation developed in the bucket. 110
Fig. 4.1.3.1 1st mode shapes for case 3. 111
Fig. 4.1.5.1 1st mode shapes for case 5. 119
Fig. 4.1.5.2 2nd mode shapes for case 5. 119
Fig. 4.1.5.3 3rd mode shapes for case 5. 120
Fig. 4.1.6.2 2nd mode shapes for case 6. 121
Fig. 4.1.6.3 3rd mode shapes for case 6. 122
xvi
Chapter 1
Introduction
Page | 1
1.1 Excavator:
Excavators are heavy construction equipment consisting of a boom, arm or stick, bucket
and cab on a rotating platform known as the "house". The house sits atop an undercarriage with
tracks or wheels. They are a natural progression from the steam shovels and often called power
shovels. All movement and functions of a hydraulic excavator are accomplished through the use
of hydraulic fluid, with hydraulic cylinders and hydraulic motors. Excavators are also called
diggers, JCBs, mechanical shovels, or 360-degree excavators (sometimes abbreviated simply to
360). Tracked excavators are sometimes called "trackhoes" by analogy to the backhoe. In the UK,
wheeled excavators are sometimes known as "rubber ducks."
Fig.1.1. A Typical Excavator.
Excavators are used in many ways:
 Digging of trenches, holes, foundations

 Material handling
 Brush cutting with hydraulic attachments
 Forestry work and Forestry mulching
 Demolition
 General grading/landscaping
 Mining, especially, but not only open-pit mining
 River dredging
 Driving piles, in conjunction with a pile driver
Page | 2
 Drilling shafts for footings and rock blasting, by use of an auger or hydraulic drill
attachment
CAT 5230 in coal mining A L&T Komatsu Excavator A New Holland E215 in
operation seen in India Hamburg, Germany.
Fig. 1.2. Different Types of Excavator. [22]
Modern, hydraulic excavators come in a wide variety of sizes. The smaller ones are called mini or
compact excavators. For example, Caterpillar's smallest mini-excavator weighs 2,060 pounds
(930 kg) and has 13 hp; their largest model is the largest excavator available (a record previously
held by the Orenstein & Koppel RH400) the CAT 6090, it weighs in excess of 2,160,510 pounds
(979,990 kg), has 4500 hp and has a bucket size of around 52.0 m³ depending on bucket fitted.
1.1.1 Excavator attachments and configuration
Hydraulic excavator capabilities have expanded far beyond excavation tasks with buckets.
With the advent of hydraulic-powered attachments such as a breaker, a grapple or an auger, the
excavator is frequently used in many applications other than excavation. Many excavators feature
a quick coupler for simplified attachment mounting, increasing the machine's utilization on the
jobsite. Excavators are usually employed together with loaders and bulldozers. Most wheeled,
compact and some medium-sized (11 to 18-tonne) excavators have a backfill (or dozer) blade. This
is a horizontal bulldozer-like blade attached to the undercarriage and is used for levelling and
pushing removed material back into a hole.
The two main sections of an excavator are the undercarriage and the house. The undercarriage
includes the blade (if fitted), tracks, track frame, and final drives, which have a hydraulic motor and
gearing providing the drive to the individual tracks, and the house includes the operator
cab, counterweight, engine, fuel and hydraulic oil tanks. The house attaches to the undercarriage
Page | 3
by way of a center pin. High pressure oil is supplied to the tracks' hydraulic motors through a
hydraulic swivel at the axis of the pin, allowing the machine to slew 360° unhindered.
The main boom attaches to the house, and can be one of several different configurations:
 Most are mono booms: these have no movement apart from straight up and down.
 Some others have a knuckle boom which can also move left and right in line with the machine.
 Another option is a hinge at the base of the boom allowing it to hydraulically pivot up to 180°
independent to the house; however, this is generally available only to compact excavators.
 There are also triple-articulated booms (TAB).
Attached to the end of the boom is the stick (or dipper arm). The stick provides the digging force
needed to pull the bucket through the ground. The stick length is optional depending whether reach
(longer stick) or break-out power (shorter stick) is required.
On the end of the stick is usually a bucket. A wide, large capacity (mud) bucket with a straight
cutting edge is used for cleanup and levelling or where the material to be dug is soft, and teeth are
not required. A general purpose (GP) bucket is generally smaller, stronger, and has hardened side
cutters and teeth used to break through hard ground and rocks. Buckets have numerous shapes and
sizes for various applications. There are also many other attachments which are available to be
attached to the excavator for boring, ripping, crushing, cutting, lifting, etc.
1.1.2 Excavator Bucket:
Excavator buckets are made of solid steel and generally present teeth protruding from the
cutting edge, to disrupt hard material and avoid wear-and-tear of the bucket. Subsets of the
excavator bucket are: the ditching bucket and trenching bucket. A ditching bucket is a wider bucket
with no teeth, 5–6 feet (1.5–1.8 m) used for excavating larger excavations and grading stone. A
trenching excavator bucket is normally 6 to 24 in (150 to 610 mm) wide and with protruding teeth.
Page | 4
Fig. 1.1.2. Excavator Bucket Terminology. [by CWS Industries]
This is an advanced excavator bucket by CWS Industries which have additional side cutter to cut
an advanced design of tooth. Also it is reinforced with side wear plate and lateral wear bars to
resists wear. The coupling mechanism at the hook and hinge plate is also an advanced one to
withstand high load at the bucket. This type of advanced bucket is of high cost so will not be
available to all consumers. However was the key idea of using reinforcement with the standard
and usual bucket in this thesis.
Page | 5
1.2 Vibration
Modal analysis:
Modal analysis is the study of the dynamic properties of structures under vibrational
excitation.
Modal analysis is the field of measuring and analyzing the dynamic response of structures
and fluids when excited by an external force. Examples would include measuring the vibration of
a car's body when it is attached to an electromagnetic shaker, or the Modal analysis is the study of
the dynamic properties of structures under vibrational excitation.
The goal of modal analysis in structural mechanics is to determine the natural mode shapes
and frequencies of an object or structure during free vibration. It is common to use the finite
element method (FEM) to perform this analysis because, like other calculations using the FEM,
the object being analyzed can have arbitrary shape and the results of the calculations are
acceptable. The types of equations which arise from modal analysis are those seen in Eigen
systems. The physical interpretation of the eigenvalues and eigenvectors which come from solving
the system are that they represent the frequencies and corresponding mode shapes. Sometimes, the
only desired modes are the lowest frequencies because they can be the most prominent modes at
which the object will vibrate, dominating all the higher frequency modes.
Harmonic analysis:
Any sustained cyclic load will produce a sustained cyclic response (a harmonic response)
in a structural system. Harmonic response analysis gives the ability to predict the sustained
dynamic behavior of structures, thus enabling to verify whether or not the designs will successfully
overcome resonance, fatigue, and other harmful effects of forced vibrations.
Harmonic response analysis is a technique used to determine the steady-state response of

a linear structure under loads that vary sinusoidally (harmonically) with time. The idea is to
calculate the structure's response at several frequencies and obtain a graph of some response
quantity (usually displacements) versus frequency. "Peak" responses are then identified on the
graph and stresses reviewed at those peak frequencies.
Page | 6
This analysis technique calculates only the steady-state, forced vibrations of a structure.
The transient vibrations, which occur at the beginning of the excitation, are not accounted for in a
harmonic response analysis.
1.3. Von Mises Stress:
Von Mises stress is widely used by designers to check whether their design will withstand
a given load condition.
Use of Von Mises stress: Von Mises stress is considered to be a safe haven for design engineers.
Using this information an engineer can say his design will fail, if the maximum value of Von Mises
stress induced in the material is more than strength of the material. It works well for most cases,
especially when the material is ductile in nature.
When does a material fail? : One of the easiest way to check when a material fails is a simple
tension test. Here the material is pulled from both ends. When the material reaches the yield point
(for ductile material) the material can be considered as failed. The simple tension test is a
unidirectional test, this is shown in the first part of Fig.1.3.1.
Fig. 1.3.1. A simple tension test and a real life loading condition.
Now consider the situation in second part of Fig.1.3.1, an actual engineering problem with a
complex loading condition. Can we say here also, that the material fails when the maximum normal
stress value induced in the material is more than the yield point value. If we use such an
assumption, we would be using a failure theory called 'normal stress theory'. Many years of
Page | 7
engineering experience has shown that normal stress theory doesn’t work in most of the cases. The
most preferred failure theory used in industry is ‘Von Mises stress’ based.
Distortion energy theory: The concept of Von Mises stress arises from the distortion energy
failure theory. Distortion energy failure theory is comparison between 2 kinds of energies, 1)
Distortion energy in the actual case 2) Distortion energy in a simple tension case at the time of
failure. According to this theory, failure occurs when the distortion energy in actual case is more
than the distortion energy in a simple tension case at the time of failure.
Distortion energy: It is the energy required for shape deformation of a material. During pure
distortion, the shape of the material changes, but volume does not change. This is illustrated in
Fig.1.3.2.
Fig.1.3.2. Representation of a pure distortion case.
Distortion energy required per unit volume, u𝑑 for a general 3 dimensional case is given in terms
of principal stress values as:
Distortion energy for simple tension case at the time of failure is given as:
Page | 8
Expression for Von Mises stress: The above 2 quantities can be connected using distortion
energy failure theory, so the condition of failure will be as follows.
The left hand side of the above equation is denoted as Von Mises stress.
So as a failure criterion, the engineer can check whether Von Mises stress induced in the material
exceeds yield strength (for ductile material) of the material. So the failure condition can be
simplified as
1.4. The importance of vibration analysis and it’s reduction:
The measurement of natural frequencies is a major concern as it will tell us if a system’s

natural frequencies will be same as the operating frequencies which can tell if resonance will occur
or not. It is a major aspect to avoid resonance as it will destroy the system. The vibration amplitude
measurement is important because there will always be vibration in any system which has moving
parts and exposed to any force. These vibration amplitude is required to reduce because the
operator involved with the system will be exposed to vibration that can harm him physically and
mentally in the long run. Also because of the vibration noise occurs which harms people nearby
after certain level.
Page | 9
1.5. Research Objective
a) The thesis is focused on vibration analysis and stress developed in an excavator bucket due
to reaction force from the soil or rock that it can cut or mine. Firstly, modal analysis is done
to understand the natural frequencies and mode shapes, secondly harmonic analysis is done
to understand vibration amplitudes an lastly stress analysis is done to find out Von mises
stress developed at the different regions of the bucket.
b) Design modification is done for further reduction of stress and vibration using different
damping materials. The use of rubber is focused most as rubber is the popular damping
material used and also a cheaper one. Then the results were analysed and compared.
c) Finally design optimization of an effective excavator bucket with reinforcements is given
which will be a cheaper one after modification but less exposed to vibrations.
1.6. Possible outcome
a) A clear understanding of the Mode shapes and natural frequencies of the standard excavator
bucket.
b) An effective model of excavator bucket with less stress developed or keeping the stress
constant but less vibration developed.
c) A much less vibrating model because of optimization in damping for most of the natural
frequencies.
d) Less weight obtained for employing structural concept. Where traditional reinforcements
use high density steel increasing the weight of the bucket but the modification in this thesis
will literally keep the bucket weight same as low density rubber is used.
e) Increase in the strength of the bucket because of reinforcements of different materials in
the bucket.
Page | 10
1.7. Outline of Methodology:
a) Modelling of an excavator bucket using Solidworks software. The modelling was done
using a standard specification provided online by Hand Engineering Ltd., Drumone,
Oldcastle, Co. Meath, Ireland. The modelling procedure in the software involve using 2D
drawing, shell and extrude options and all other necessary features. The model involves a
constant thickness almost everywhere for the ease of design and analysis. The bush is also
attached with the bucket hanger which is modelled likewise where the fixed support is
given as boundary condition.
b) The model needs to be converted into proper file to take to the analysis platform and
analyse afterwards which is done by the software itself. The import of the model is then
done in the ANSYS analysis platform.
c) ANSYS Workbench is used as project platform where different analysis methods are
available to use. The Modal, Harmonic and Static Structure analysis tools is opened in the
workbench project.
d) The input of the engineering data is an important step to be done at the beginning of the
analysis where material properties have been put in the system for specific part of the model
drawn and imported in the system.
e) Use of Different techniques (using rubber and other materials with bucket) to reduce stress,
vibration and weight is a major highlight of the thesis which is done in the modelling and
engineering data section.
f) Proper meshing is performed to analyse the model. A method of automated meshing is
done at the beginning then individual meshing and sizing was performed for getting
solution.
g) The boundary conditions have been put on the meshed region of interest and also reaction
and input forces have been defined using direct tool from the software at the different
meshing region of interest.
h) The solution is performed and results have been extracted from the software for further
analysis and comparisons.
i) An experiment have also been performed on a small bucket model which was manufactured
locally. The experiment of harmonic analysis was done and the results of amplitudes and
input forces have been taken for consideration at first three natural frequencies.
Page | 11
j) Comparison of the results of the experiment with the simulation results is done as the
similar experimental model is drawn in the Solidworks software then simulation was
performed in that model.
k) The natural frequencies, mode shapes and von mises stress were found out of the standard
excavator bucket and later compared with the modifications in each section.
l) A conclusion and recommendation is given for the different modification of the bucket in
each section of the result comparison.
Page | 12
Chapter 2
Literature Review
Page | 13
2.1 Introduction:
Considerable attentions were focused on designing of the excavator equipment, where

basically the attachments which are boom, arm and bucket were designed [1]. The designs
involved also included modifications in sizes and actually the basic thesis to understand excavator
attachments.
Today hydraulic excavators are widely used in construction, mining, excavation, and
forestry applications. The terrain condition, soil parameters, and the soil-tool interaction forces
exerted during excavation operation are required to find out because these forces are important for
better design of the tool, backhoe parts and for trajectory planning [2]. There are many variations
in hydraulic excavators. They may be either crawler or rubber-tire-carrier-mounted, and there are
many different operating attachments such as boom, arm and bucket. With the options in types,
attachments, and sizes of machines, there are differences in appropriate applications and therefore
variations in economic advantages of using excavator. Due to severe working conditions,
excavator parts are subject to corrosive effects and high loads [3]. The excavator
mechanism/attachment works under unpredictable working conditions that is why poor strength
properties of the excavator parts like boom, arm and bucket limit the life expectancy of the
excavator. Therefore, excavator parts must be strong enough to cope with caustic working
conditions of the excavator [4]. Normally the excavator is working under cyclic motion during
excavation process. Due to this repetitive nature of work, cyclic stresses are developed in the parts
of backhoe attachment. The various cyclic loads depend on the working conditions. It is necessary
to perform field measurement to take these loads into account in design. Loads and strains of the
excavator attachments have been measured and investigated for three excavator models to
determine the design loads of attachments comparing stresses [5]. High level of stresses can cause
the damage of critical parts of excavators and it will adversely affected on productivity of machine.
Now a days weight is major concern while designing the machine components. So for
reducing the overall cost as well as for smoothing the performance of machine, optimization is
needed.
Page | 14
2.2. Utility of FEA and optimization for attachment
Finite Element Analysis (FEA) is a very effective technique in strength calculations of the
structures working under known load and boundary conditions. We can determine the critical
loading conditions of the excavator by performing static force analysis of the mechanism involved
for different piston displacements. Preparation of the CAD model can be done either using a
commercial FEA program or using a separate commercial program, which is specialized for CAD.
Structural optimization for strength is a popular subject in modern engineering design. It has been
widely used to obtain an optimum strength/material mass ratio for structures under specified load
conditions [4]. The FEA and optimization is versatile tool for designing the backhoe attachment
in hydraulic excavator.
Finite element analysis is an important part of the overall design process, serving to verify
or validate a design prior to its manufacture. Because finite element analysis is a simulation tool,
the actual design is idealized, with the quality of the idealization dependent on the skill and
experience of the analyst. Naresh N. Oza, had carried out the FEA and optimization of Earth
moving attachment as backhoe in 2006 [6]. They have done the EFA of the boom, arm and bucket
by following the standard practice of analysis and carry out the solution for stress and deflection
analysis, finally the results are compared with the results obtained from the MathCAD.
Optimization for weight is also carried by them and reduces the weight of arm from 180 Kg to 154
Kg and stresses reduced from 386 MPa to 263 MPa. The weight of the bucket is reduced from 165
Kg to 156 Kg, and the developed stresses are within the limit [6].
The computational modeling techniques and computer programs developed for the
structural design analysis of a micro excavator digging arm mechanism under static or quasi-static
loading conditions are outlined by MA Bromfield and WT Evans in 1988 [7]. The computer
programs allow the design engineer to analyze the forces and stresses at numerous locations on
the digging arm, which can assume various geometric configurations. The computer theory was
used to develop an integrated CAD software package to allow the design engineer to carry out
structural analysis and design optimization calculations on the Powerfab 360WT microexcavator.
Product development times and costs have been reduced as a result of using the CAD software.
The results showed good correlation between theoretical and experimental stresses, considering
Page | 15
the many simplifications that were made in the modelling technique [7]. Ram Vadhe and Vrajesh
Dave, in 1993 have developed a multi-body model of an excavator and to simulate the prototype
testing conditions. Multi-body simulation involves the simulation of rigid body system under the
application of cylinder forces and/or motions. The link to be designed is considered as a flexible
body. Two cycles of digging and dumping operations are simulated to determine the reaction
forces generated at each joint and stresses generated on the flexible body. The generated load case
can be used for detailed FE analysis. The stress results of particular gauge locations are also
compared with experimental data. They have concluded that the desktop prototype testing helps
the designer to find out the worst operating condition, severe conditions and locate the trajectory
of operation [8].
Tadeusz Smolnicki, Damian Derlukiewicz, and Mariusz Stańco, in 2008, have represented
an application of the finite element method and accurate representation of the rigidity of support
elements, mounting bolts, and phenomena occurring in the raceway–rolling element–raceway
assembly of a caterpillar excavator, allowed for identification of the load distribution onto the
individual rolling elements of the bearing. The results were compared with the classical compound
model (iterative solution), however not taking into account deformation of the support elements
under load. It was concluded that there is a significant discrepancy in not only the load distribution
but also in the maximum load values. For the upper track the differences reach 70%, and for the
lower track 25%. The evaluated bearing, selected according to the guidelines of one of the largest
manufacturers of slewing bearings, for an existing single-bucket excavator, is subject to very high
loads [9].
Luigi Solazzi, in 2010, have carried out study on the boom and the arm of an excavator in
order to replace the material, which they are usually made of, with another material. In particular,
the study wants to substitute the steel alloy for an aluminum alloy. This change lightens the
components of the arm, allows to increase the load capacity of the bucket and so it is possible to
increase the excavator productivity per hour. It has been assumed that the material used to make
the arm is the steel alloy S355 JO EN 10025.
The evaluation of the new geometry of the arm with the different material has been studied
in order to obtain at least the same safety factor and deformability of the original geometry (steel
Page | 16
alloy) and for the new geometry (aluminium alloy). On the basis of the relationships state above
between the geometry of the steel alloy panel and the geometry of the aluminium alloy panel, for
each component of the arm has been developed a new cross-section. They achieve that the total
weight of the arm is reduced of about 50% and the capacity of the bucket increase of about 30%.
Also increase the capacity of the bucket from 1 cubic m to 1.35 cubic m and so to increase the
productivity per hour of the excavator [10].
2.3. Optimization of excavator attachment
J. Mottl has described ‘Voting Method’ for optimization of the weight of an excavator in
1992. He has carried out optimization for all parts of the excavator such as the chassis, cabin, jib,
etc. with consideration as non-linear programming problem [11].
Mehmet Yener, in 2005, Parameterization of boom geometry is done to add some

flexibility to interface called OPTIBOOM. Optimization of boom carried out for HMK 220LC
model excavator [4].
In general there are 3 types of structural optimization techniques: sizing, geometrical and
topology optimization. Out of these three techniques, topology optimization may give better results
by changing the initial topology. Starting from an initial design, more than 100 alternative designs
were created and compared with each other in terms of boom mass and maximum von Mises
stresses. 21 shape parameters have been changed to obtain new boom geometries and the best
design has been found at 90th design alternative. Maximum von Mises stress value at the 90th
boom is 146 MPa while it is 186 MPa in the initial boom shape. Maximum von Mises stress has
been reduced by 21.5 %. Mass of the 90th model is 1454 Kg and mass of the initial boom is 1403
kg. thus, mass of the boom increases only by 3.6 % [4].
Yefei Li, Xianghong Xu and Qinying Qiu, in 2006, have described a Grid-enabled analysis
with self-developed codes provides easy access to computational and database capabilities to
enhance the engineering system based on FEM results. The aim is to obtain better lighter and
cheaper designs by using Finite Element Method. They have explained a strategy of combining a
design of expert system platform and at genetic algorithm (GA). Optimization is carried out using
genetic algorithm followed by a local search on the best point found using the Lagrange interval
Page | 17
search method from self-developed codes. The results then used to build CAD model for validating
the stress and displace distribution of the whole parts of working equipment using the ANSYS
model. A parametric geometry model suitable for FEM analysis is first generated using CAD
software Pro/Engineer. The subsequent mesh is generated with minimum reference to the
geometry information, as only the top-level entities in the CAD model are referenced in the
meshing. There are two typically mesh tools used, either direct access provided to CAD parts and
assemblies in their native mode, or third-party standard exchange data formats used. They have
utilized interface between them which produce ANF file format as exchange geometry. Generation
is processed in ANSYS batch mode. Volume mesh is then generated by applying parameters on
adaptive meshing. The structure FEA solver ANSYS is then used to solve the problem, the model
used in this work is an assembly static analysis. The problem is both complex and has a high
computational cost. The goal is to reduce the weight and manufacture cost of hydraulic excavator,
FEM is adopted here to analysis the whole structure’s stress and displacement distribution [12].
Evolutionary structural optimization method is used for removing inefficient material from
the structure by using the predefined criteria. Optimum solutions of boom of HMK360 LC
excavator is carried out. Initial design of the boom was 5% heavier than the final design and
maximum stress was 10% higher than the Von Mises design stress criterion. Maximum stress was
limited by predetermined global maximum stress value and weight is decreased 4.6% of the initial
design. Actually obtained result is not the best one but it is one of the good results which is
satisfying design criteria and aimed mass [13].
Jakub Gottvald (2012) evaluated measuring of vibrations on a Bucket Wheel Excavator

(BWE) during mining process [14]. They have studied the dynamic behavior of buckets wheel
during working under mines. The main aim of this study was on vibration caused and its effect on
the arm assembly of the excavator. Natural frequencies and shapes are very significant
characteristic of dynamical behavior of structures. Their determination is mostly the first step in
solving of various dynamical problems. Knowledge of natural frequencies and shapes gives us the
possibility to assume how the structure will be sensitive to dynamical loads. Calculations of
dynamical characteristics are very significant part in designing of structures in which various
loadings are of utmost priority (Jakub Gottvald, 2011 and Jakub Gottvald, 2012) [15].
Page | 18
Bhaveshkumar P. PATEL and Jagdish M. PRAJAPATI [16] in their paper focused on
structural weight optimization of backhoe excavator attachment using FEA approach by trial and
error method. Shape optimization also performed for weight optimization and results are compared
with trial and error method which shows identical results. The FEA of the optimized model also
performed and their results are verified by applying classical theory [16].
In their paper Anil Jadhav, Vinayak Kulkarni, Abhijit Kulkarni, Prof. Ravi. K [17] depicted
importing and meshing of CAD model of bucket and lower arm of excavator and its finite element
analysis for strength and deformation evaluation. Also this paper covers the kinematic analysis of
whole assembly for understanding the behavior of the various joints which are used for connecting
the parts of excavator [17].
From the technical paper of KOMATSU the concept of using reinforced laminated steel
damper at different places of the bucket provide an attenuation of about 5db noise. However detail
investigation is still under process for this concept [18].
2.4. Summary of the literature review and scope of present work:
Considerable amount of vibration analysis is done by Gottvald for BWE (Bucket Wheel
Excavator) which is for multiple bucket attached with wheel, but not for the single bucket. Some
works were done on the design optimization of bucket, mostly by Jagdish M. PRAJAPATI [16]
[19] [20] but not on the harmonic analysis of the bucket. These works are based on stress analysis
which include load and design optimization. Optimization also performed in the size and material
section for the attachments. Some paper [17] contains free vibration analysis for a bucket which
did not consider material optimization or damping of the vibration and only discussed the natural
frequencies of the attachments (boom, arm and bucket). This thesis will be focused on both
vibration and strength analysis of the bucket with different reinforced materials as damping
materials. Different techniques of using damping materials will also be used to upgrade excavator
bucket. The natural frequencies and mode shapes for these optimizations will also be discussed.
Page | 19
Chapter 3
Problem Specification and Numerical Simulation
Page | 20
3.1. Introduction:
This chapter will discuss the excavator model’s standard specification and modeling of the
bucket. Later how the bucket was taken into a FEA platform and with boundary conditions the
solution was performed. The modifications done on the bucket that are reinforcing of bucket with
rubber and other materials are categorized into different cases for further explanation and
discussion.
3.2. Modeling of the Bucket:
A standard 0.8 T Digging bucket of Hand Engineering Ltd., Drumone, Oldcastle, Co.
Meath, Ireland, is used to model and perform numerical simulation. The bucket is drawn in
SOLIDWORKS Software and later transformed into specific file to perform numerical analysis in
ANSYS Software.
General Dimensions:
Height : 303 mm
Length: 340 mm
Width: 300 mm
Thickness: 6 mm
Material: Hardox 400 alloy

steel, density 9410 kg/m^3,
poisson’s ratio 0.3 and young’s
modulus of elasticity 210 GPa.
Fig. 3.1. Bucket Model Specifications.
Page | 21
Fig. 3.2. Bucket Model General Terminology.
3.3. Numerical Analysis Procedure:
The numerical analysis involves following several procedures in the ANSYS Software. The flow
chart of the procedure:
Create a New Project at the ANSYS Workbench
Open 3 Analysis System
Modal Harmonic Response Static Structure
Open Engineering Data to input all the material properties
Import Geometry
Open Model from each analysis system
Specify Geometry with specific material
Mesh
Analysis Setting specifies analysis specifications
Define Boundary Conditions
Page | 22
Define Input Force in the System
Solve
Collect Specific Data Set from Solution Tree
3.4. Boundary Conditions and Input Force:
The boundary conditions and input forces on the bucket for different analysis have been
taken from a published research papers [16] where the digging force is taken on the three teeth
maximum 2542 N distributed at an angle 38.23 degree with the surface of the bottom plate or X-
direction and the force given by the cylinder on the bucket is constant 11380 N perpendicular on
the surface of the bottom plate or parallel to Y-direction. The boundary condition taken here in
form that the bucket mounting lug bush is fixed from inside at A and B, so the cylindrical surface
A and B from inside is considered fixed.
Fig. 3.4. Boundary conditions and input forces on the bucket.
The modal analysis is done only giving these boundary conditions. Then for the Harmonic analysis
the boundary conditions were kept as usual and the forces given where maximum force at the three
Page | 23
teeth 2542 N and Cylinder force constant 11380N at the C. Lastly for stress analysis the boundary
conditions were kept same and the forces given as constant 2542N and 11380N.
3.5. Meshing:
Proper meshing is performed to analyse the model. A method of automated meshing is

done at the beginning then individual meshing and sizing was performed for getting simulation
results. A total of 17762 elements and 35085 nodes were produced after meshing. A minimum
edge length of 1mm is used in the meshing.
Fig. 3.5. Bucket model after meshing.
Page | 24
3.6. Definition of Cases:
Several techniques have been studied in this thesis to reduce vibration and stress of the
excavator bucket. For this, the techniques have been categorized in different cases for the ease of
analysis and conclusion. The cases are:
3.6.1. Case 1
a. Bucket.
The 1st case is taken as a bare bucket which is a standard bucket drawn in SOLIDWORKS
Software with no attachments with it. This bucket will be analyzed for modal, harmonic and
stress analysis and later will be compared with other techniques/cases that will be applied and
analyzed to see the changes of vibration and stress output.
(a)
Fig. 3.6.1. Bare Bucket model.
The material properties of the bucket taken are density 9410 kg/m^3, Poisson’s ratio 0.3 and
young’s modulus of elasticity 210 GPa. [16]
Page | 25
3.6.2. Case 2
(a) Bucket with 2 whole side rubber sheets.
(b) Bucket with 1 whole rubber sheet at the back
The case 2 includes two different investigations of excavator with rubber where 5 mm
thickness rubber sheet have been used as showed in the figures. Fig. (a) is bucket with 5 mm
thickness rubber sheets on the both side plates of the bucket. And Fig. (b) is bucket with 5 mm
thickness rubber sheet at the back plate of the bucket.
(a) (b)
Fig. 3.6.2. Bucket models with different attachments.
The modelling of the case 2 involves 1st modelling of part file in the SOLIDWORKS
Software then using mating option the rubber sheets are attached with bucket in assembly section.
The material properties taken for the rubber are density 4100 kg/m^3, Poisson’s ratio 0.41 and
young’s modulus of elasticity 8 MPa. [21]
Page | 26
3.6.3. Case 3
(a) Bucket with 1 rubber strip, (b) Bucket with 1 round rubber,
(c) Bucket with 1 back strip
5 mm thickness rubber strips have been used here for investigation.
(a) (b)
(c)
Fig. 3.6.3. Bucket models with different arrangement of rubber strips.
Page | 27
3.6.4. Case 4
(a) Bucket with 3 rubber strips, (b) Bucket with 4 rubber,
(c) Bucket with 2 bottom rubber strips, (d) Bucket with 2 side rubber strips.
All the modifications use 5 mmm thickness rubber.
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Fig. 3.6.4. Bucket models with different arrangements of rubber.
Page | 28
3.6.5. Case 5
(a) Bucket with 3 rubber strips of 5 mm thickness.
(b) Bucket with 3 rubber strips half thickness (2.5 mm thickness).
(c) Bucket with 3 rubber strips Double thickness (10 mm thickness).
At this case 5 mm thickness rubber have been used for case 5 (a). The half thickness means to use
rubber strip of 2.5 mm thickness case 5 (b). And the double thickness means to use rubber strips
of 10 mm thickness case 5 (c).
(a) case 5.b (b) case 5.c
Fig. 3.6.5. Bucket models with different thickness of rubber strips.
3.6.6. Case 6
a. Bucket with 3 rubber strips

b. Bucket with 3 aluminium strips
c. Bucket with 3 steel strips
At this case the technique is to use aluminum and steel strips of 5 mm thickness in place of
rubber strips of 5 mm thickness.
Page | 29
Chapter 4
Results of Numerical Simulation and

Discussion
Page | 30
4. Introduction
The numerical simulation was performed on the bucket without any rubber attachments
and then with different attachments. Then for each attachments or arrangements of rubber which
are categorized into different cases results were compared and a conclusion was drawn for all the
modifications. Firstly, modal analysis was performed on the bucket, secondly harmonic analysis
and lastly stress analysis was performed. For all the analysis comparative discussion with
conclusion was drawn in each section and also at the conclusion chapter an overall conclusion and
recommendations were made based on the results of these numerical simulations.
4.1 Modal Analysis:
Modal analysis results show us the mode shapes and natural frequencies of different modes
of the system. The mode shapes can show and predict the vulnerable places of vibration for a
particular natural frequency. That is why it is important to learn about the mode shape of the bucket
for different natural frequencies. In this section we have found mode shapes and natural
frequencies of the bare bucket and bucket with different attachments up to 5th mode. The mode
shapes were discussed with the actual figure found from the numerical simulation tool. The change
of the mode shapes can be observed more vividly if animations directly seen from the software.
To understand from the figure we need to concentrate on the color grading in the bucket for
different deformations. Red color means highest deformations in the area and dark blue color
means no deformations at the area. The deformation range can be of different for different
attachments of rubber with bucket. The natural frequencies are listed for different cases and
compared accordingly.
4.1.1. Mode Shapes and Natural Frequencies for Case 1
The mode shapes of different natural frequencies are different and the range in
deformations and their concentration on different areas on the bucket changes shown in Fig. 4.1.1.
(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e). At the 1st and 2nd modes most of the deformations occur at all three teeth
and mostly in Y-direction. The second mode shows a lot of vibration or deformation in the bottom
plate and back plate of the bucket than 1st mode as the light red color suggests and also highest
vibration at all the teeth like 1st mode. At the 3rd mode interestingly high deformation is in the
Page | 31
middle tooth than other teeth and very less deformation at other places. The 4th and 5th modes
suggest maximum vibration at the side plates but not at the bottom and back plate and very less
vibration at all teeth.
The natural frequencies of case 1 are listed in the table and later with other cases they are compared.
Table 4.1.1. Natural Frequency (Hz) at Case 1
Modes of Natural Frequency (Hz)
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
a. Bucket ( case 1) 55.6 96.865 253.54 373.09 471.51
(a)
Figure 4.1.1.(a) 1st mode shape at case 1.
Page | 32
(b)
Figure 4.1.1.(b) 2nd mode shape at case 1.
(c)
Figure 4.1.1.(c) 3rd mode shape at case 1.
Page | 33
(d)
Figure 4.1.1.(d) 4th mode shape at case 1.
(e)
Figure 4.1.1.(e) 5th mode shape at case 1.
Page | 34
The mode shapes at case 2 for different attachments of rubber are observed in these figures
from Fig. 4.1.2.1 to Fig. 4.1.2.5 and found for most modes the mode shapes are similar to the mode
shape of the bare bucket (case 1) except 4th mode shape. For the modifications of whole back
rubber sheet (case 2.b) the deformation area increases at the side plates of the bucket seen in Figure
4.1.2.4.b. The reason for such phenomenon can be explained as we have used rubber sheet at the
back of the bucket so the back side has become stiffer than side plates, which is why side plates
are vulnerable to vibration with high amplitudes.
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
a. Bucket (Case 1) 55.6 96.865 253.54 373.09 471.51
b. Bucket with 2
whole sides rubber 53.492 93.763 249.48 348.63 425.56
sheets (Case 2.a)
c. bucket with 1
whole rubber sheet at
the back (Case 2.b) 54.891 91.86 252.17 351.49 469.1
The natural frequencies for the case 2 compared with case 1 is shown in table 4.1.2. The
1st mode shows that for using 2 whole side rubber sheets natural frequency shifts to the left most
or reduced from bare bucket’s natural frequency. For the 2nd mode it is for the use of 1 whole
rubber sheet at the back. The 3rd modes’ natural frequency shift to the left also for both the
attachments but shifts mostly for using 2 whole side rubber sheets. Again at the 4th mode use of 2
whole side rubber sheets shifts natural frequency to the left most or reduce highest. Similar shift
is seen at the 5th mode. For all these modes the percentage of change in natural frequency is
maximum 10%. The rubber sheets used in case 2 are of 5 mm thickness and less density 4100
kg/m^3 which is why the amount of external material in the system is very less compared to the
Page | 35
mass of the bucket. That is why the stiffness to weight ratio doesn’t change or deviate much from
the actual system resulting very less deviation of natural frequency of the system.
4.1.2.1. 1st Mode Shapes
(a) (b)
Figure 4.1.2.1 1st mode shapes for case 2.
4.1.2.2. 2nd Mode Shapes
(a) (b)
Figure 4.1.2.2 2nd mode shapes for case 2.
Page | 36
4.1.2.3. 3rd Mode Shapes
(a) (b)
Figure 4.1.2.3 3rd mode shapes for case 2.
4.1.2.4. 4th Mode Shapes
(a) (b)
Figure 4.1.2.4 4th mode shapes for case 2.
Page | 37
(a) (b)
Figure 4.1.2.5 5th mode shapes for case 2.
The mode shapes obtained from case 3 does not show much difference from the color
grading figure (Fig. 4.1.3.1 to 4.1.3.5 of APPENDIX B) and also from the animation compared to
mode shapes obtained from case 1. However the range in the deformation for different
modifications are not same in all the modes.
The 1st mode shows that for using 1 rubbers strip natural frequency shifts to the left most
than any other modification from bucket’s natural frequency. Similar shift in natural frequency
occurs for the 2nd mode. The 3rd modes’ natural frequency shift to the left also for all the
modifications but shifts mostly for using 1 round rubber. Again at the 4th mode use of 1 rubber
strip shifts natural frequency to the left most. Similar observation is seen at the 5th mode also. For
all these modes the percentage of change in natural frequency is maximum 0.8%.
Page | 38
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
a. Bucket (Case 1) 55.6 96.865 253.54 373.09 471.51
b. Bucket with 1
rubber strip (Case 55.452 96.378 253.19 371.5 470.21
3.a)
c. Bucket with 1
round rubber 55.471 96.619 252.07 372.99 471.67
(Case 3.b)
d. Bucket with 1
back rubber strip 55.593 96.485 253.47 371.62 471.68
(Case 3.c)
and found for most modes the mode shapes are similar (shown in Fig. 4.1.4.1 to Fig. 4.1.4.3. of
APPENDIX C) to the mode shapes of the bare bucket without attachments (case 1) except 4th mode
and 5th mode shapes (shown in Fig. 4.1.4.4. and Fig. 4.1.4.5.) of bucket with two side rubber strips
(case 4.d). At this case the deformation decreases at the side plates of the bucket seen in Figure
4.1.4.4.d and 4.1.4.5.d. It is obvious for these two mode shapes when side rubber strips are used
as these strips increase the stiffness at the side plates which is why it actually damps the vibration
at these regions if we compare with case 1.
The 1st mode shows that for using 3 rubbers strips natural frequency shifts to the left most
than any other modification from bucket’s natural frequency. Similar shift in natural frequency
occurs for the 2nd mode also. The 3rd modes’ natural frequency shift to the left also for all the
modifications but shifts mostly for using 2 bottom rubber strips, then using 2 side rubbers strips,
and then for 3 rubber strips. Again at the 4th mode use of 3 rubber strips shifts natural frequency
Page | 39
to the left most. For the 5th mode most shift occurs when 2 side rubber strips used. For all these
modes the percentage of change in natural frequency is maximum 5%.
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
a. Bucket (Case 1) 55.6 96.865 253.54 373.09 471.51
b. Bucket with 3
rubber strips 54.579 95.426 252.83 368.15 467.83
(Case 4.a)
c. Bucket with 4
54.736 95.552 251.25 369.2 467.98
rubber (Case 4.b)
d. Bucket with 2
bottom rubber 55.235 96.267 250.02 372.58 470.89
strips (Case 4.c)
e. bucket with 2
side rubber strips 54.916 96.441 251.83 368.69 448.49
(Case 4.d)
(a) (b)
Page | 40
(c) (d)
Fig. 4.1.4.4. 4th mode shapes for case 4.
(a) (b)
Page | 41
(c) (d)
and found for most modes the mode shapes are similar (shown in Fig.4.1.5.1. to Fig. 4.1.5.3. of
APPENDIX D) to the mode shape of the bare bucket without any attachment (case 1) except 4th
mode and 5th mode shapes of bucket with double thickness 3 rubber strips (case 5.(c)). At this
modification the deformation is not seen any place in the bucket but only in the rubber that is used
as seen in Fig. 4.1.5.4.b and 4.1.5.5.b.
The 1st mode shows that for using 3 rubber strips of double thickness, natural frequency shifts to
the left most than any other modification from bucket’s natural frequency. Similar shift of natural
frequency is seen for the 2nd mode, 3rd mode, 4th mode and 5th modes. For all these modes the
percentage of change in natural frequency is maximum 28%.
Page | 42
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
a. Bucket (case 1) 55.6 96.865 253.54 373.09 471.51
b. Bucket with 3
rubber strips (case 54.579 95.426 252.83 368.15 467.83
5.(a))
c. Bucket with 3
rubber strips half
55.158 96.337 252.96 370.97 468.22
thickness (case
5.(b))
d. bucket with 3
rubber strips
53.34 93.416 252.24 333.36 336.72
double thickness
(case 5.(c))
Page | 43
The mode shapes are also similar for all these attachments of case 6 shown in Fig. 4.1.6.1
to Fig. 4.1.6.5. of APPENDIX E, though the range in the deformation varies for different
attachments.
The 1st mode shows that for using 3 aluminum strips natural frequency shifts to the left
most than any other modification from bucket’s natural frequency. For the 2nd mode it is for the
use of 3 rubber strips. The 3rd modes’ natural frequency shift to the left only for the use of 3 rubber
strips and for other two modification natural frequency shifts to the right. Similar shift is seen at
the 5th mode. Again at the 4th mode use of 3 steel strips shifts natural frequency to the left most.
For all these modes the percentage of change in natural frequency is maximum 10%.
Page | 44
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
a. Bucket (case 1) 55.6 96.865 253.54 373.09 471.51
b. Bucket with 3
rubber strips 54.579 95.426 252.83 368.15 467.83
(case 6.a)
c. Bucket with 3
aluminum strips 55.426 95.992 257.04 371.19 475.22
(case 6.b)
d. bucket with 3
steel strips (case 54.612 93.775 261.83 365.82 482.34
6.c)
The change in natural frequencies at case 6 from case1 are way different than any other
attachments of any other cases. As we have used here different materials so the stiffness to weight
ratio changes abruptly which is why sometimes we see the deviation in the natural frequency to
the left or sometimes to the right than the natural frequencies of the bare bucket of case 1. The
weight and stiffness of aluminum and steel is different than that of rubber. As we know that the
natural frequency of any system depends on the mass matrix and stiffness matrix of the system so
it is obvious the change in these two properties will change the natural frequencies of the system.
Page | 45
4.2. Harmonic Analysis:
Harmonic analysis is performed on the bare bucket of case 1 and then for different cases.
The boundary conditions are same as modal analysis where fixed support is considered at the first
two holes (A and B) of the hanger. The force from the hydraulic cylinder 11380 N was considered
a constant force in the bucket at the second two pins of the hanger. The reaction force on the teeth
are consider sinusoidal and amplitude is 2542 N. The boundary conditions and forces are taken
from a published paper which analyzed similar excavator bucket for stress analysis [16]. The
output result of amplitude vs frequency graph was drawn according to different cases and
compared in each sections.
4.2.2. Harmonic Response of Case 2
The amplitudes shown in Fig. 4.2.2.1 (a) for all the rubber attachments reduce along X-
axis of the 1st mode and the use of whole back rubber sheet reduces vibration amplitude most at
this mode. Though along Y-axis of this mode seen in Fig. 4.2.2.1 (b) the amplitude for using all
the attachments reduce but for the use of whole back rubber sheet literally gives no vibration. And
also along Z-axis shown in Fig. 4.2.2.1 (c) the amplitude for all the attachments reduces. So, the
use of whole back rubber sheet is the best choice at this 1st mode to reduce vibration.
The amplitudes observed at 2nd mode along all the axis from Fig. 4.2.2.2 (a), (b) and (c)
show us that all the attachments reduce vibration. However the use of 2 whole side rubber will be
wise choice at this 2nd mode than other attachment.
The amplitudes along X-axis of the 3rd mode reduce for all the attachments of rubber than
the actual bucket of case 1 without rubber but not much seen in Fig. 4.2.2.3 (a). But for the
vibration along Y-axis in Fig. 4.2.2.3 (b) of the mode the use of whole back rubber sheet increases
vibration. And along Z-axis of Fig. 4.2.2.3 (c) the use of 2 whole side rubber sheet increases
vibration amplitude while other reduce the vibration amplitude. So, we can say both the
modifications are not wise choice to reduce vibration at the 3rd mode.
Page | 46
The vibration amplitude along X-axis of the 4th mode is literally absent for the use of 2
whole side rubber sheet but an increase in the amplitude is seen for the use of whole back rubber
sheet Fig. 4.2.2.4 (a). Along Y-axis of this mode all the vibration amplitude increase Fig. 4.2.2.4
(b). Similarly at Z-axis Fig. 4.2.2.4 (c) the use of whole back rubber sheet give high amplitude of
vibration. So, the use of 2 whole side rubber sheet at this 4th mode is good but still not much
reliable to reduce overall vibration
Similar observation like 4th mode is seen in the 5th mode along all the directions Fig. 4.2.2.5
(a), (b) and (c). The use of 2 whole side rubber sheet show literally no vibration compared to the
use of whole back rubber sheet. So, 2 whole side rubber sheets can be chosen to reduce vibration
at this 5th mode.
From all the harmonic response it is seen that whole back rubber sheet can be used to
reduce vibration at 1st mode but not for 2nd, 4th or 5th mode. And the use of 2 whole side rubber
sheets is good for 2nd, 4th and 5th mode but not for other modes. So, both the attachments do not
give much modifications which is why other cases are need to be studied. However as we know
that the vibration amplitudes depend on the operating frequencies so these attachments still can be
used to reduce vibration for certain conditions.
Page | 47
5
without rubber (case 1)
4 2 Whole Side Rubber Sheet (case 2.a)
Whole back Rubber Sheet (case 2.b)

Amplitude (mm) 3
0
52 53 54 55 56 57
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.2.1 (a) Amplitudes along X-Direction at 1st mode for case 2 compared with case 1.
1.2
1
2 Whole Side Rubber Sheet (case 2.a)
Amplitude (mm)
0.8 Whole back Rubber Sheet (case 2.b)
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
52 53 54 55 56 57
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.2.1 (b) Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 1st mode for case 2 compared with case 1.
1000
Amplitude (mm)
600 Whole back Rubber Sheet (case 2.b)
400
200
0
52 53 54 55 56 57
-200
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.2.1 (c) Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 1st mode for case 2 compared with case 1.
Page | 48
800
Amplitude (mm)
400
200
0
91 92 93 94
Frequency 95
(Hz) 96 97 98
Fig. 4.2.2.2 (a) Amplitudes along X-Direction at 2nd mode for case 2 compared with case 1.
250
Amplitude (mm)

150
100
50
0
91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.2.2 (b) Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 2nd mode for case 2 compared with case 1.
7
5
Amplitude (mm)
0
91 92 93 94
Frequency 95
(Hz) 96 97 98
Fig. 4.2.2.2 (c) Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 2nd mode for case 2 compared with case 1.
Page | 49
80
60
Amplitude (mm) 40
20
0
248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.2.3 (a) Amplitudes along X-Direction at 3rd mode for case 2 compared with case 1.
700
500
Amplitude (mm)
400
300
200
100
0
248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.2.3 (b) Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 3rd mode for case 2 compared with case 1.
0.5
0.4 2 Whole Side Rubber Sheet (case 2.a)
Amplitude (mm)

0.3
0.2
0.1
0
248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.2.3 (c) Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 3rd mode for case 2 compared with case 1.
Page | 50
0.4
0.3 Whole back Rubber Sheet (case 2.b)
Amplitude (mm)
0.2
0.1
0
348 353 358 363 368 373
-0.1
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.2.4 (a) Amplitudes along X-Direction at 4th mode for case 2 compared with case 1.
0.35
0.3 2 Whole Side Rubber Sheet (case 2.a)
0.25
Amplitude (mm)
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
348 353 358 363 368 373
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.2.4 (b) Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 4th mode for case 2 compared with case 1.
10
Amplitude (mm)
0
348 353 358 363 368 373
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.2.4 (c) Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 4th mode for case 2 compared with case 1.
Page | 51
500
Amplitude (mm)
300
200
100
0
424 434 444 454 464
-100
Frequency (Hz)
2000

Amplitude (mm)
1000
500
0
424 434 444 454 464 474
-500 Frequency (Hz)
40

Amplitude (mm)
20
10
0
424 434 444 454 464 474
-10
Frequency (Hz)
Page | 52
The harmonic analysis of bucket with different rubber attachments in case 3 is observed
here in these three figures for the 1st mode at different directions Fig. 4.2.3.1 (a), (b) and (c). The
amplitude of vibration is easily observed here and for all these attachments the amplitude
decreases. However, incorporation of 1 rubber strip gives less vibration and is seen preferable than
any other attachments for all the directions. For this attachment of using 1 rubber strip literally
gives no vibration at this 1st mode comparatively with other attachments. It is better choice over
other attachments.
At this 2nd mode the amplitude increases in all three attachments of with 1 rubber strip,
with 1 round rubber and with 1 back rubber strip than the bucket’s (case 1) vibration in all
directions Fig. 4.2.3.2 (a), (b) and (c). None of the attachments should be chosen to reduce
vibration at this 2nd mode.
The 3rd mode’s amplitudes along X-axis show us that the use of attachments do not reduce
vibration amplitudes Fig. 4.2.3.3 (a). A similar observation is found at this mode along Y-axis Fig.
4.2.3.3 (b). But for the vibration along Z-axis the use of 1 rubber strip reduce vibration amplitude
Fig. 4.2.3.3 (c), other attachments increase the vibration. So, again none of the attachments here
can be selected to reduce vibration amplitude at this mode.
The amplitudes at the 4th mode along X-axis for 1 rubber strip and 1 round rubber are way
bigger than the amplitude for bucket without any rubber, and other attachments actually decrease
vibration amplitude Fig. 4.2.3.4 (a). Similarly none of the observation reduce vibration along Y-
axis of this mode and also along Z-axis Fig. 4.2.3.4 (b) and Fig. 4.2.3.4 (c). So, none of the
modification is better at this mode.
The vibration amplitude along X-axis for all the modifications is less than the amplitude
for bucket without any rubber at this 5th mode Fig. 4.2.3.5 (a). However, the amplitude because of
bucket with 1 round rubber is most reduced at this mode. Similar observation is found for the
vibration along Y-axis and also along Z-axis Fig. 4.2.3.5 (b) and Fig. 4.2.3.5 (c). So, it is concluded
that use of 1 round rubber is best choice for this 5th mode of vibration.
Page | 53
5
with 1 rubber strip (case 3.a)
4
with 1 round rubber (case 3.b)
Amplitude (mm)
3 with 1 back rubber strip (case 3.c)
0
54 54.5 55 55.5 56
Frequency (Hz)
1.5
Amplitude (mm)
0.5
0
54 54.5 55 55.5 56
Frequency (Hz)
1000
Amplitude (mm)
0
54 54.5 55 55.5 56
-500
Frequency (Hz)
Page | 54
2000
1500
Amplitude (mm) with 1 round rubber (case 3.b)
with 1 back rubber strip (case 3.c)
1000
500
0
94 94.5 95 95.5 96 96.5 97 97.5 98
Frequency (Hz)
600
Amplitude (mm)

400
200
0
94 94.5 95 95.5 96 96.5 97 97.5 98
Frequency (Hz)
20
15 with 1 round rubber (case 3.b)
Amplitude (mm)
10
0
94 94.5 95 95.5 96 96.5 97 97.5 98
Frequency (Hz)
Page | 55
200
150 with 1 rubber strip (case 3.a)
Amplitude (mm)
100
50
0
250 251 252 253 254 255
Frequency (Hz)
1500
Amplitude (mm)
500
0
250 251 252 253 254 255
Frequency (Hz)
5.00E-01
4.00E-01
Amplitude (mm)

3.00E-01
2.00E-01
1.00E-01
0.00E+00
250 251 252 253 254 255
Frequency (Hz)
Page | 56
5.00E-01
4.00E-01
Amplitude (mm)
3.00E-01
2.00E-01
1.00E-01
0.00E+00
370 370.5 371 371.5 372 372.5 373 373.5 374
-1.00E-01
Frequency (Hz)
4
3
Amplitude (mm)

2
0
370 370.5 371 371.5 372 372.5 373 373.5 374
-1 Frequency (Hz)
3.00E+00 without rubber (case 1)

Amplitude (mm)
2.00E+00 with 1 back rubber strip (case 3.c)
1.00E+00
0.00E+00
370 370.5 371 371.5 372 372.5 373 373.5 374
Frequency (Hz)
Page | 57
4.00E+01
3.00E+01 with 1 round rubber (case 3.b)
Amplitude (mm) 2.00E+01
1.00E+01
0.00E+00
467 468 469 470 471 472 473
-1.00E+01
Frequency (Hz)
300
200 with 1 round rubber (case 3.b)
Amplitude (mm)
100
0
467 468 469 470 471 472 473
-100
Frequency (Hz)
4.00E+00
Amplitude (mm)
2.00E+00
0.00E+00
467 468 469 470 471 472 473
-2.00E+00
Frequency (Hz)
Page | 58
The amplitudes along X-axis at 1st mode for all the attachments reduce for case 4 shown in
Fig. 4.2.4.1 (a). Most reduction is found when 3 rubber strips used in the bucket, then the use of 2
side strips, then the use of 4 rubber and lastly the use of 2 bottom strips. Similarly at the Y-direction
most amplitude reduction occurs for 3 rubber strips Fig. 4.2.4.1 (b). And along Z-axis most reduced
amplitude is for the use of 2 bottom strips then the use of 4 rubber Fig. 4.2.4.1 (c). So, it can be
said that the use of 3 rubber strips is comparatively better than any other attachments to reduce the
vibration amplitude at this 1st mode.
The 2nd mode along X axis show us the amplitude of vibration increases when 3 rubber
strips is used with the bucket along with the use of 2 bottom strips Fig. 4.2.4.2 (a). The use of 2
side strips reduces vibration and also 4 rubber. But along Y axis all of them reduces vibration while
use of 3 rubber strips and 4 rubber reduces most Fig. 4.2.4.2 (b). And similar reduction in vibration
amplitude is seen along Z-axis of this mode Fig. 4.2.4.2 (c). Here we can say the use of 4 rubber
is best choice while use of 3 rubber strips also a good choice to reduce vibration at 2nd mode.
The amplitude along X-axis and Y-axis for both the attachments except the use of 3 rubber
strips and 4 rubber increases Fig. 4.2.4.3 (a) and Fig. 4.2.4.3 (a). But similarly along Z axis the
amplitudes increase for three attachments while for the use of 3 rubber strips amplitude reduces
Fig. 4.2.4.3 (c). So, at this 3rd mode the use of 3 rubber strips should be the only choice over other
attachments.
The 4th mode along X-axis shows us only the use of 2 side strips increases vibration
amplitude while the use of other two attachments reduces vibration Fig. 4.2.4.4 (a). And along Y-
axis use of 2 bottom strips and 2 side strips both increase vibration while use of 3 rubber strips and
4 rubber literally shows no peak of vibration amplitude. Lastly along Z-axis of this mode similarly
both cases increase vibration amplitude a lot while use of 3 rubber strips and 4 rubber literally
shows no vibration amplitude Fig. 4.2.4.4 (c). So, the use of 3 rubber strips and 4 rubber at this
mode is best attachments.
Page | 59
The amplitude along X-axis at the 5th mode for the use of 2 bottom strips increases while
for other three attachments it decreases Fig. 4.2.4.5 (a). For the use of 3 rubber strips the reduction
is very much. And for the vibration along Y-axis for all the attachments amplitude reduces being
lowest for the use of 3 rubber strips Fig. 4.2.4.5 (b). Lastly, though most reduction along Z-axis is
observed for the use of 2 side strips but other three attachments also reduce the vibration amplitude
Fig. 4.2.4.5 (c). In conclusion, the use of 3 rubber strips is better choice than any other at this 5th
mode.
The summary of this section should be that the use of 3 rubber strips to reduce vibration
amplitude along with 4 rubber should be considered over any other attachments as they reduce
vibration amplitudes at most natural frequencies comparatively than other attachments. Over this
conclusion next two cases were developed and the use of thickness and materials are discussed
and studied in later sections.
Page | 60
5
with 3 rubber strips (case 4.a)
4
2 Bottom strips (case 4.c)
Amplitude (mm) 3 2 Side strips (case 4.d)
with 4 rubber (case 4.b)
2
0
54 54.5 55 55.5 56 56.5 57
Frequency (Hz)
1.2
1 with 3 rubber strips (case 4.a)
Amplitude (mm)
0.8 2 Side strips (case 4.d)

0.6
0.4
0.2
0
54 54.5 55 55.5 56 56.5 57
Frequency (Hz)
1000
Amplitude (mm)
600 2 Side strips (case 4.d)

400
200
0
54 54.5 55 55.5 56 56.5 57
-200
Frequency (Hz)
Page | 61
1200
without rubber (case 1) with 3 rubber strips (case 4.a)
1000 2 Bottom strips (case 4.c) 2 Side strips (case 4.d)
Amplitude (mm) with 4 rubber (case 4.b)
800
600
400
200
0
94 94.5 95 95.5 96 96.5 97 97.5 98
Frequency (Hz)
250
200 2 Bottom strips (case 4.c)
2 Side strips (case 4.d)
Amplitude (mm)

150
100
50
0
94 94.5 95 95.5 96 96.5 97 97.5 98
Frequency (Hz)
8
6
Amplitude (mm)
0
94 94.5 95 95.5 Frequency
96 (Hz) 96.5 97 97.5 98
Page | 62
120
Amplitude (mm) 80 with 4 rubber (case 4.b)
60
40
20
0
248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255
Frequency (Hz)
1000
Amplitude (mm)

600
400
200
0
248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255
Frequency (Hz)
1
0.8 2 Bottom strips (case 4.c)
Amplitude (mm)

0.6 with 4 rubber (case 4.b)
0.4
0.2
0
248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255
Frequency (Hz)
Page | 63
0.2
0.18
0.16
0.14
Amplitude (mm)
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
368 369 370 371 372 373 374
Frequency (Hz)

2 Bottom strips (case 4.c) 2 Side strips (case 4.d)
3.5
2.5
Amplitude (mm)
1.5
0.5
0
368 369 370 371 372 373 374
-0.5
Frequency (Hz)

2 Bottom strips (case 4.c) 2 Side strips (case 4.d)
Fig. 4.2.4.4 (c) Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 4th mode for case 4 compared with case 1.
Page | 64
50
Amplitude (mm)
30 2 Side strips (case 4.d)

20
10
0
446 451 456 461 466 471
-10
Frequency (Hz)
300
200
Amplitude (mm)

150 with 4 rubber (case 4.b)
100
50
0
446 451 456 461 466 471
-50
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.4.5 (b) Amplitudes along X-Direction at 5th mode for case 4 compared with case 1.
4
Amplitude (mm)

2 with 4 rubber (case 4.b)
0
446 451 456 461 466 471
-1 Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.4.5 (c) Amplitudes along X-Direction at 5th mode for case 4 compared with case 1.
Page | 65
The vibration amplitudes along X-axis and Y-axis of the 1st mode reduce for all the
attachments of the case but when use 3 rubber strips of 5mm thickness then it reduces most Fig.
4.2.5.1 (a) and Fig. 4.2.5.1 (b). And along Z-axis though all the modification reduce amplitude,
the use of half thickness and double thickness of 3 rubber strips give lesser amplitudes Fig. 4.2.5.1
(c). However combining all three figures we can still say that the use of 3 rubber strips of 5 mm
thickness is comparatively better choice at this 1st mode.
The amplitude for the use of double thickness (10 mm) case 5 (c) of 3 rubber strips
increases along all the axis of this 2nd mode while the use of half thickness (2.5 mm) case 5 (b)
reduces Fig. 4.2.5.2 (a), (b) and (c). And the use of 3 rubber strips of 5mm thickness along X-axis
increases but for Y and Z-axis the amplitude decrease. So, we can conclude that the use of 3 rubber
strips with half thickness is better choice at this 2nd mode then comes the choice of 3 rubber strips.
The amplitude at this 3rd mode along X-axis reduces most for the use of 3 rubber strips of
double thickness (10 mm), then the use of half thickness (2.5 mm) and then the use of 3 rubber
strips (5 mm) Fig. 4.2.5.3 (a). Similar pattern is observed along Y-axis Fig. 4.2.5.3 (b). And along
Z-axis the use of half thickness and double thickness both increase vibration amplitude only
reduction occurs for the use of 3 rubber strips Fig. 4.2.5.3 (c). So, we can say the use of 3 rubber
strips of 5mm is best choice at this 3rd mode.
Huge vibration occurs for the use of Double thickness 3 rubber strips (10 mm) along X-
axis and Y-axis of the 4th mode but literally no amplitude along Z-axis Fig. 4.2.5.4 (a), (b) and (c).
Also huge vibration occurs for the use of 3 rubber strips of half thickness along X-axis and Z-axis
of this mode. But no vibration amplitude is seen for the use of 3 rubber strips along all the axis.
So, the use of 3 rubber strips is the best choice here also.
Page | 66
The vibration amplitude for the use of double thickness is not seen here as the mode’s
natural frequency shifts to the left so much that it actually overlaps with 4th mode’s natural
frequency. However the use of other two attachments reduces vibration amplitude along all the
axis while the use of 3 rubber strips reduces most Fig. 4.2.5.5 (a), (b) and (c). So, at the 5 th mode
the use of 3 rubber strips is better choice.
From all these discussion we can say use of double thickness can be critical as it shows
abrupt behavior of overlapping modes. And from all comparisons we can say use of 3 rubber strips
of 5 mm thickness is a very good choice over other attachments. The study suggests the importance
of thickness should be considered reinforcing rubber materials with bucket and also show the
opportunity of wide future works on the optimization of bucket model design based on thickness
considerations.
Page | 67
1.6
1.4 Half thickness (case 5.b)
Double thickness (case 5.c)
1.2
Amplitude (mm)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
52 53 54Frequency (Hz)55 56 57
Fig. 4.2.5.1 (a) Amplitudes along X-Direction at 1st mode for case 5.
0.35
Half thickness (case 5.b)
0.3
0.25
Amplitude (mm)
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
52 53 54Frequency (Hz)55 56 57
Fig. 4.2.5.1 (b) Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 1st mode for case 5.
200
150 Double thickness (case 5.c)
Amplitude (mm)
100
50
0
52 52.5 53 53.5 54Frequency
54.5 (Hz)55 55.5 56 56.5 57
Fig. 4.2.5.1 (c) Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 1st mode for case 5.
Page | 68
2000
Amplitude (mm) 1500 Double thickness (case 5.c)
1000
500
0
92 93 94 95 96 97 98
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.5.2 (a) Amplitudes along X-Direction at 2nd mode for case 5.
400
350
Amplitude (mm)
250
200
150
100
50
0
92 93 94 95 (Hz)
Frequency 96 97 98
Fig. 4.2.5.2 (b) Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 2nd mode for case 5.
14
12 Half thickness (case 5.b)
Amplitude (mm)
0
92 93 94 95 (Hz)
Frequency 96 97 98
Fig. 4.2.5.2 (c) Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 2nd mode for case 5.
Page | 69
70
60
Amplitude (mm) 50
30
20
10
0
251 251.5 252 252.5 253 253.5 254 254.5 255
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.5.3 (a) Amplitudes along X-Direction at 3rd mode for case 5.
600
500
Amplitude (mm)
300
200
100
0
251 251.5 252 252.5Frequency
253 (Hz)253.5 254 254.5 255
Fig. 4.2.5.3 (b) Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 3rd mode for case 5.
6.00E-01
5.00E-01 Half thickness (case 5.b)
Amplitude (mm)
4.00E-01 Double thickness (case 5.c)
3.00E-01
2.00E-01
1.00E-01
0.00E+00
251 251.5 252 252.5Frequency
253 (Hz)253.5 254 254.5 255
Fig. 4.2.5.3 (c) Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 3rd mode for case 5.
Page | 70
0.6
0.5
0.4
Amplitude (mm)
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
334 339 344 349 354 359 364 369 374
-0.1
Frequency (Hz)
with 3 rubber strips (case 5.a) Half thickness (case 5.b) Double thickness (case 5.c)
Fig. 4.2.5.4 (a) Amplitudes along X-Direction at 4th mode for case 5.
2.5
2
Amplitude (mm)
1.5
0.5
0
334 339 344 349 354 359 364 369 374
Frequency (Hz)
with 3 rubber strips (case 5.a) Half thickness (case 5.b) Double thickness (case 5.c)
Fig. 4.2.5.4 (c) Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 4th mode for case 5.
Page | 71
18
16
Amplitude (mm) 14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
465 466 467 468 Frequency
469 (Hz) 470 471 472 473
45
40
35
Amplitude (mm)
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.5.5 (b) Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 5th mode for case 5.
1.6
1.4 Half thickness (case 5.b)
1.2
Amplitude (mm)
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
465 466 467 468 Frequency
469 (Hz) 470 471 472 473
Page | 72
The vibration along X-axis and Y-axis of the 1st mode show very less vibration amplitude
when use 3 rubber strips compared to the other attachments Fig. 4.2.6.1 (a) and Fig. 4.2.6.1 (b).
But along Z-axis most reduction occurs for the use of 3 aluminum strips Fig. 4.2.6.1 (c). However
we can still say the use of 3 rubber strips is better choice compared to other attachments at this
mode.
The use of 3 aluminum strips increases vibration amplitude along all the axis of 2nd mode
Fig. 4.2.6.2 (a), (b) and (c). With the use of 3 rubber strips the vibration amplitude increases along
X-axis but decreases along Y-axis and Z-axis. And the use of 3 steel strips literally shows no
vibration along any of the axis. So the use of 3 steel strips is the best choice at this 2nd mode while
use of 3 rubber strips is the next.
At the 3rd mode along X-axis and Y-axis though the amplitude reduces for all the case but
natural frequency shifts to the right while using 3 aluminum and steel strips Fig. 4.2.6.3 (a) and
(b). And along Z-axis the use of aluminum and steel increases vibration while 3 rubber strips
decreases the vibration amplitude Fig. 4.2.6.3 (c). So, the 3 rubber strips is the best choice at this
3rd mode.
The use 3 aluminum strips increases vibration amplitude along X-axis and Z-axis of 4th
mode while no vibration is observed along Y-axis Fig. 4.2.6.4 (a), (b) and (c). And the use of steel
strips increases amplitude along Y-axis and Z-axis but reduces along X-axis. But the use of 3
rubber strips literally shows no vibration amplitude along any of the axis at this mode. So, the use
of rubber is still better choice at this mode.
Though the vibration amplitude decreases for the materials along all the axis of this 5 th
mode the use of aluminum and steel shift the natural frequency to the right side of the natural
frequency of the bucket’s natural frequency Fig. 4.2.6.5 (a), (b) and (c). However here also we can
say that the use of 3 rubber strips is the best choice.
Page | 73
5
3 Aluminum strips (case 6.b)
3 Steel strips (case 6.c)
Amplitude (mm) without rubber (case 1)
3
0
53 53.5 54 54.5 Frequency
55 (Hz) 55.5 56 56.5 57
Fig. 4.2.6.1 (a) Amplitudes along X-Direction at 1st mode for case 6.
1.2
1 3 Steel strips (case 6.c)
Amplitude (mm)
0.8 without rubber (case 1)
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
53 53.5 54 54.5 55 55.5 56 56.5 57
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.6.1 (b) Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 1st mode for case 6.
1000
Amplitude (mm)
600 without rubber (case 1)
400
200
0
53 53.5 54 54.5 55 55.5 56 56.5 57
-200
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.6.1 (c) Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 1st mode for case 6.
Page | 74
3500
3000
Amplitude (mm) 2500 with 3 rubber strips (case 5.a)
1500
1000
500
0
94 94.5 95 95.5 96 96.5 97 97.5 98
-500 Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.6.2 (a) Amplitudes along X-Direction at 2nd mode for case 6.
800
700
600
Amplitude (mm)

400
300
200
100
0
-100 94 94.5 95 95.5 96 96.5 97 97.5 98
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.6.2 (b) Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 2nd mode for case 6.
25
Amplitude (mm)
10
0
94 94.5 95 95.5 96 96.5 97 97.5 98
-5
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.6.2 (c) Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 2nd mode for case 6.
Page | 75
80
Amplitude (mm) 60 without rubber (case 1)
50
40
30
20
10
0
240 245 250 255 260 265
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.6.3 (a) Amplitudes along X-Direction at 3rd mode for case 6.
600
500
Amplitude (mm)
400
300
200
100
0
240 245 250 255
Frequency (Hz) 260 265
Fig. 4.2.6.3 (b) Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 3rd mode for case 6.
0.4
0.3 with 3 rubber strips (case 5.a)
Amplitude (mm)
0.2
0.1
0
240 245 250Frequency (Hz)255 260 265
Fig. 4.2.6.3 (c) Amplitudes along Z-Direction at 3rd mode for case 6.
Page | 76
0.2
0.15
Amplitude (mm)
0.1
0.05
0
364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374
-0.05
Frequency (Hz)
3 Aluminum strips (case 6.b) 3 Steel strips (case 6.c)

with 3 rubber strips (case 5.a) without rubber (case 1)
6
Amplitude (mm)
0
364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374
Frequency (Hz)
3 Aluminum strips (case 6.b) 3 Steel strips (case 6.c)

with 3 rubber strips (case 5.a) without rubber (case 1)
Page | 77
40
35
Amplitude (mm) 30 with 3 rubber strips (case 5.a)
20
15
10
5
0
467 469 471 473 475 477 479 481 483 485
-5
Frequency (Hz)
300
Amplitude (mm)
150
100
50
0
467 469 471 473 475 477 479 481 483 485
-50
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4.2.6.5 (b) Amplitudes along Y-Direction at 5th mode for case 6.
4
Amplitude (mm)

2
0
467 469 471 473 475 477 479 481 483 485
-1
Frequency (Hz)
Page | 78
4.3. Static Structure Analysis:
The static structure analysis give us different stresses and strains developed in the bucket.
From the popular engineering procedure we know that the calculation of Von-mises stress is an
important one to understand the strength of any device. So, we have measured the Von-mises stress
and total deformation accordingly of the bucket (case 1) and bucket with attachments (case 2 to
case 6). Then the change in the stresses is discussed at each section. To understand the changes in
the buckets’ Von-misses stress and total deformation, a table is also made and compared
accordingly.
The boundary conditions for stress analysis are, fixed support at A and B of Fig. 3.4. The
input load from the cylinder on C is 11380 N is parallel to the direction of Y and the reaction force
from the soil/rock is static 2542 N distributed on the edges of three teeth (Fig. 3.4).
4.3.1. Von Mises Stress and Total Deformation for Case 1
The Von-mises stress developed at case 1 are mostly near the teeth (Fig. 4.3.1 (a) ) and
near fixed support and total deformation is mostly seen at the tip of the middle tooth (Fig. 4.3.1
(b)). The Yield Strength of Hardox 400 alloy steel is 1000 MPa which is way higher than the Von-
Mises stress developed in the bucket because of the input load (11380 N) and reaction load (2542
N) which suggest the bucket will endure these loads under the boundary conditions.
Table 4.3.1. Von-mises stress and Total Deformation at case 1.
Yield Strength Calculated Total

Calculated Von- of HARDOX Deformation
Mises Stress 400 (mm)
(MPa)
(MPa)
a. Bare Bucket (case 1) 291 1000 1.2465
Page | 79
(a)
Fig. 4.3.1 (a) Von-mises stress for the bare bucket at case 1.
(b)
Fig. 4.3.1 (b) total deformation for the bare bucket at case 1.
Page | 80
4.3.2. Von Mises Stress and Total Deformation for Case 2
The Von-mises stress developed for all the attachments (Fig. 4.3.2.1) are slightly more than
the von-mises stress of the actual bucket (case 1) which is negligible being maximum value 6.8%.
Similarly the total deformation for all the modifications are almost similar to the deformation
observed in the bucket without rubber at case 1 (Fig. 4.3.2.2). So these attachments will not reduce
bucket’s strength.
Table 4.3.2. Von-mises stress and Total Deformation comparison at case 2.
Calculated Von-Mises Calculated Total

Stress Deformation
(mm)
(MPa)
a. Bucket (case 1) 291 1.2465
b. Bucket with whole side rubber

311.98 1.2593
sheets (case 2.a)
c. Bucket with 1 whole rubber

291.85 1.2504
sheet at the back (case 2.b)
(a) (b)
Page | 81
Fig. 4.3.2.1. Von-mises stress for case 2.
(a) (b)
Fig. 4.3.2.2. Total deformation for Case 2.
4.3.3. Von-mises stress and Total Deformation for Case 3
The Von-mises stress developed for all the attachments of rubber strips (Fig. 4.3.3.1.) are
slightly more than the von-mises stress of the actual bucket which is negligible being maximum
value 1%. Similarly the total deformation (Fig. 4.3.3.2) for all the attachments are almost similar
to the deformation observed in the bucket without rubber case 1.

Stress Deformation
(mm)
(MPa)
a. Bucket (case 1) 291 1.2465
b. Bucket with 1 rubber strip (case

291.86 1.2465
3.a)
Page | 82
c. Bucket with 1 round rubber
291.91 1.2499
(case 3.b)
d. Bucket with 1 back rubber strip

294.04 1.2473
(case 3.c)
(a) (b)
(c)
Page | 83
(a) (b)
(c)
Page | 84
The Von-mises stress developed for all the rubber attachment (Fig. 4.3.4.1.) are slightly
more than the von-mises stress of the actual bucket which is negligible being maximum value
4.5%. Similarly the total deformation (Fig. 4.3.4.2.) for all the attachments are almost similar to
the deformation observed in the bucket without rubber case 1.

Stress Deformation
(mm)
(MPa)
a. Bucket (case 1) 291 1.2465
b. Bucket with 3 rubber strips

294.01 1.251
(case 4.a)
c. Bucket with 4 rubber (case 4.b) 291.91 1.2523
d. Bucket with 2 bottom rubber

304.74 1.248
strips (case 4.c)
e. Bucket with 2 side rubber strips

291.86 1.2502
(case 4.d)
Page | 85
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Page | 86
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Page | 87
At the case 5 the Von-mises stress developed for all the attachments (Fig. 4.3.5.1.) are
slightly more than the von-mises stress of the actual bucket which is negligible being maximum
value 1%. Similarly the total deformation for all the attachments (Fig. 4.3.5.2.) are similar to the
total deformation observed in the bucket without rubber case 1.

Stress Deformation
(mm)
(MPa)
a. Bucket 291 1.2465

294.01 1.251
(case 5.a)
c. Bucket with 3 rubber strips half

291.89 1.2525
thickness (case 5.b)
d. Bucket with 3 rubber strips

291.85 1.2453
Page | 88
(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Page | 89
The case 6 shows that the Von-mises stress developed for all the attachments (Fig. 4.3.6.1.)
are slightly more than the von-mises stress of the actual bucket which is negligible being maximum
value 1%. Similarly the total deformation for all the attachments (Fig. 4.3.6.2.) are very less than
the deformation observed in the bucket without rubber.

Stress Deformation
(mm)
(MPa)
a. Bucket (case 1) 291 1.2465

294.01 1.251
(case 6.a)
c. Bucket with 3 aluminum strips

294.01 1.2299
(case 6.b)
d. Bucket with 3 steel strips

294.01 1.2068
(case 6.c)
Page | 90
(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Page | 91
Chapter 5
Experimental Results and Validation
Page | 92
5.1. Introduction
The thesis includes detailed analysis of different techniques of using rubber materials and
other metals with excavator bucket to study it’s modified behavior in vibration and stress. That
includes a lot of experiment to be done which in practice takes a lot of time to perform and not
economical. That is why Chapter 3 is introduced where a lot of simulations have been performed
to study the bucket’s modified behavior from different angles. However the numerical simulation
performed by ANSYS Software is validated in this chapter with experimentation. For the purpose
of experiment a model is manufactured and both modal and harmonic analysis is performed on it.
Similar model is developed in SOLIDWORKS Software and analysis is performed on it in ANSYS
Software and these results are compared with experimental results.
5.2. Experimental Set-up
5.2.1. Bucket Model
A model excavator bucket is made in the workshop using 2.5 mm thickness sheet metal
and using different cutting tools, welding and rolling etc. A fixture is also made and fixed with a
rigid structure using royal bolt.
Fig. 5.2.1 (a) Bucket Model and Fixture for Experiment
Page | 93
Fig. 5.2.1 (b) Experimental Bucket model specifications.
5.2.2. SmartShaker K2007E01
This electrodynamic exciter is a small, portable permanent magnet shaker with a new
generation of ultra compact precision power amplifier integrated in its base. The revolutionary
SmartShaker™ eliminates the need for a separate, cumbersome power amplifier - just plug the
excitation signal from a dynamic signal analyzer or function generator directly into the BNC on
the base of the shaker. SmartShaker provides up to 7 pounds (31 N) pk sine force during testing.
The unit is supplied with a DC power supply but can be run directly from any 12-21 VDC supply.
Page | 94
Fig. 5.2.2. Shaker K2007E01
5.2.3. ICP® Force Sensor Model 208C01
ICP force sensors incorporate a built-in

MOSFET microelectronic amplifier. This
serves to convert the high impedance charge
output into a low impedance voltage signal for
analysis or recording. They are powered from
a separate constant current source, operate
over long ordinary coaxial or ribbon cable
without signal degradation. The low
impedance voltage signal is not affected by
triboelectric cable noise or environmental
contamination.
Fig. 5.2.3. Force Sensor
5.2.4. ICP® signal conditioner 485B36
2-channel, USB-powered, ICP®

signal conditioner, unity gain
Fig. 5.2.4. Signal Conditioner
Page | 95
5.2.5. Low-noise coaxial cable 003C03
Low-noise coaxial cable, blue

TFE jacket, 3-ft, 10-32 coaxial
plug to BNC plug
Fig. 5.2.5. Cable
5.2.6. Kenwood FG-281 Function Generator
Kenwood FG-281, FG SERIES Function

Generators 0.01Hz to 15MHz
Fig. 5.2.6. Function Generator
5.2.7. Oscilloscope GDS1000-U Series
The GDS-1000-U provides an excellent

balance of performance between memory
length and sampling speed. Other major
features include user-friendly menu tree
operations, compact size, ergonomic design,
USB host for PC connectivity and USB device
port support.
Fig. 5.2.7. Oscilloscope
Page | 96
5.3. Experiment and Simulation Case:
Three of the cases were taken to perform experiment.
a. Bucket (without rubber).

b. Bucket with whole rubber sheet at the back.
c. Bucket with 3 rubber strips.
Page | 97
Fig. 5.3. The Cases of Experiment and Simulation.
5.4. Experimental Procedure:
The hanger of the bucket was fixed using a fixture as shown in the Fig. 5.4. The fixing was
done with the hanger by using nut bolt. The three teeth are made with certain angle of 38.23 degree
with respect to the bottom plate. The shaker was controlled using a signal generator and amplifier
with a sinusoidal excitation at a range of frequencies 0- 75 Hz.. The force sensor was used in
between the shaker and the teeth to measure the input force from the shaker to the bucket. The
force sensor was connected to the oscilloscope through a signal conditioner. Another eddy current
sensor was used to measure displacement of vibration at a certain position of the bucket shown in
Figure 5.4. The output of the eddy current sensor was captured by the oscilloscope through a signal
conditioner. A bucket model of approximately same dimension was taken from the
SOLIDWORKS Software and harmonic analysis was performed in the ANSYS Software. In the
experiment for convenience the excitation was implied on the middle tooth of the bucket.
Page | 98
Fig. 5.4. Experimental Arrangement to perform vibration analysis of bucket.
Page | 99
5.5. Experiment and Simulation Results:
In the ANSYS Software fixing the inner surface of the pair of wholes of the hanger,
excitation was given on the middle tooth of the bucket similar to the force given in the experiment.
The material properties assumed for the model in ANSYS Software are,
Steel
Density (𝜌) 7850 kg/m^3
Young’s modulus of elasticity 170 GPa
Poisson’s Ratio 0.35
Rubber
Density 𝜌 1500 kg/m^3
Young’s modulus of elasticity 8 MPa
Poisson’s Ratio 0.41
Results of experiment and simulation are shown in Fig. 5.5.1, Fig. 5.5.2, Fig. 5.5.3 and Fig.
5.5.4 for 2nd and 3rd modes. The experimental results taken are the vibration response along Y-axis
and also the simulation results are the amplitude response along Y-axis. Deviation in natural
frequencies are observed in the simulation results from the actual experiment. The deviation at the
2nd natural frequency is 6.6 % and at the 3rd natural frequency is 6.5 %. These deviations occur
because of the material properties taken for simulation do not perfectly match with the material
properties of the experimental model. But the pattern from the frequency response in both
experiment and simulation suggest that the simulation is in good agreement with experiment.
The frequency response from the experiment shows that for the 2nd mode Fig. 5.5.1 the
vibration amplitude increases when a rubber sheet is attached at the back of the bucket and natural
frequency shifts to the left from the natural frequency of the bare bucket. However, if 3 rubber
strips are attached at the bottom then vibration amplitude reduces at the 2nd mode. A similar pattern
in the frequency response is observed for the numerical simulation of the similar experimental
model. From the analysis of the model in the 2nd mode Fig. 5.5.2, it is observed similar frequency
response pattern as in the experiment. The use of 3 rubber strips at the bottom reduces the vibration
Page | 100
amplitude of the bucket in the 2nd mode whereas the sheet rubber at the back increases the vibration
amplitude from the bare bucket amplitude.
For the 3rd mode (Fig. 5.5.3), the experiment showed that vibration amplitude increases
for both cases of attaching a rubber sheet at the back and attaching 3 rubber strips at the bottom
and both the natural frequencies shift to the left from the natural frequency of the bare bucket. And
similarly for the 3rd mode of Simulation Fig. 5.5.4 both techniques of rubber used in the bucket
increase the vibration amplitudes and natural frequencies shift to the left than that of the bare
bucket.
The results found from the experiment can be explained from the mode shapes of the bucket
shown in the Fig. 4.1.1. (b) and Fig. 4.1.1 (c). The amplitude reduction occurs when three rubber
strips were attached at the 2nd mode because the rubber works as a damper at this mode. From the
Fig. 4.1.1 (b) we see vibration occurs mostly in X and Y directions. At these directions 3 rubber
strips dampen the vibration amplitude being near to the most deformation zone developed at the
bottom plate and teeth. Use of whole rubber sheet at the back of the bucket does not reduce
vibration amplitude because the rubber is attached away than the bottom plate and also it makes
the back plate stiffer than the bottom plate, which is why an increase in vibration amplitude is
observed here. In the 3rd mode Fig. 4.1.1 (c) it is seen that three teeth are more exposed to vibration
because of force applied. The highest deformation zone at this 3rd mode is the three teeth. Both
attachments are far away from the highest deformation zone, that is why for this mode vibration is
not damped and amplitude increases.
Limitations:
Local steel material was used to manufacture the bucket and local rubber material was used
for experimentation, which is why the material properties used in the numerical simulation does
not match perfectly with the actual case of the experiment. Matching damping coefficient with the
experiment in the simulation is very difficult. In addition the damping coefficient is also frequency
dependent, so some deviation of the amplitude in the simulation results from the experimental
results was observed.
Page | 101
2nd Mode (Experiment)
1.6
bucket without rubber x/f
1.4
Amplitude per unit force (mm/N)
bucket with whole rubber sheet at the back x/f

1.2
1 bucket with 3 rubber strips x/f
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 5.5.1. Experimental Results Comparison at 2nd mode.
2nd Mode (Simulation)

2.5
bucket without rubber
2
bucket with whole rubber sheet at the back
bucket with 3 rubber strips

1.5
0.5
0
5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 5.5.2. Simulation Results Comparison at 2nd mode.
Page | 102
3rd Mode (Experiment)
bucket without rubber x/f

bucket with whole rubber sheet at the back x/f
bucket with 3 rubber strips x/f
55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 5.5.3. Experimental Results Comparison at 3rd mode.
3rd Mode (Simulation)
bucket without rubber

bucket with whole rubber sheet at the back
bucket with 3 rubber strips
55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 5.5.4. Simulation Results Comparison at 3rd mode.
Page | 103
Chapter 6
Conclusion and Recommendation
Page | 104
6.1. Conclusion
 The modal analysis represents the mode shapes and change in natural frequencies of the bucket.
These mode shapes can show us the vulnerable places of vibration amplitude in the bucket.
Then the modal analysis is performed on the bucket with different techniques of using rubber
sheets or strips. The results found from the bucket with rubber are compared with case 1 and
discussed the change in natural frequencies with change in mode shapes obtained. Then the
thickness of rubber is considered to perform analysis and found different thickness is an
important factor to change the mode shapes and natural frequencies. Lastly the materials of the
attachments also changed and for that the change in mode shape and natural frequencies in the
bucket observed and discussed.
 The harmonic analysis for different cases can be used to modify a bucket for certain operating
natural frequencies. The techniques of using different sized rubber with the bucket is analysed
and the results were compared with case 1 amplitudes. Though it is the operating natural
frequencies that decides which techniques should be used to reduce vibration amplitudes of
bucket but from the results of our analysis we can say the use of 4 rubber and 3 rubber strips
with the bucket reduce vibration for most natural frequencies and preferred over other
techniques. Thickness of the reinforced rubber can be an important aspect in reducing vibration
amplitudes which is found and discussed in case 5. Material properties of reinforced materials
should also be considered as it has important effect on the reduction of amplitudes discussed
in case 6.
 The von-misses stress are found for employing different techniques and found that the use of
techniques do not change the overall stress developed in the bucket which is why we can say
these techniques are safe to use and will not damage the bucket under usual loads.
6.2. Recommendation
 Mode shapes of the bucket should be analysed to understand the buckets behaviour for
certain operating conditions.
 Natural frequency should be checked when a modification is made to adjust with the
operating frequency.
 Harmonic analysis can be done to reduce vibration for certain operating condition of the
bucket.
 For all the modifications the stress analysis is important to know which will tell us if the
bucket is prone to damage.
Page | 105
REFERENCE
[1] Mehta Gaurav K, “Design and Development of an Excavator Attachment” M. tech Dissertation
Thesis, Nirma University, Institute of Technology, Ahmedabad, May 2008, pp. 1.
[2] Bhaveshkumar P. Patel, Dr. J. M. Prajapati, “Soil-Tool Interaction as a Review for Digging
Operation of Mini Hydraulic Excavator”, International Journal of Engineering Science and
Technology, Vol. 3 No. 2, February 2011, 894-901.
[3] Bhargav J Gadhvi, B. P. Patel and P. M. Patel, “Development of a Controller for Mini
Hydraulic Excavator as a Review”, Proceeding of National Conference on Recent Advances in
Manufacturing, SVNIT, Surat, 19th - 21st July, 2010, pp. 198-203.
[4] Mehmet Yener, “Design of a Computer Interface for Automatic Finite Element Analysis of an
Excavator Boom”, M.S. Thesis, The Graduate School of natural and Applied Sciences of Middle
East Technical University, May 2005, pp. 1-4, 68-69.
[5] Ju-Ho Kwak, Byung-Joo Kim, Jae-Ohk Lee, Hyun-Koo Cho, ‘A study on the determination of
design load for excavator attachments from field measurement’’. 15th International Conference on
Experimental Mechanics.
[6] Nareshkumar N. Oza, “Finite Element Analysis and Optimization of an Earthmoving

Equipment Attachment – Backhoe”, M. tech Dissertation Thesis, Nirma University, Institute of
Technology, Ahmedabad, May 2006, pp. 31-68.
[7] MA Bromfield and WT Evans, “Computer modelling of microexcavator”, Computer Aided

Design, Butterworth & Co (Publishers) Ltd., Vol. 20, No. 9, November 1988, pp. 549-554.
[8] Ram Vadhe and Vrajesh Dave, “ Multi-Body Simulation of Earthmoving Equipment using
Motionview/Motionsolve”, Driving Innovations with Enterprise Simulation, L & T e-engineering
Solutions, 1993, pp. 1-5.
[9] Tadeusz Smolnicki, Damian Derlukiewicz, and Mariusz Stańco, “Evaluation of load
distribution in the superstructure rotation joint of single-bucket caterpillar excavators”,
Automation in Construction, Elsevier, 2008, pp. 218-223.
Page | 106
[10] Luigi Solazzi, “Design of aluminium boom and arm for an excavator”, Journal of
Terramechanics, Elsevier, Vol. 47, 2010, pp. 201–207.
[11] J. Mottl, “Excavator optimization using the voting method”, Computer Methods in Applied
Mechanics and Engineering, No. 98, North-Holland, 1992, pp. 227-250.
[12] Yefei Li, Xianghong Xu and Qinying Qiu, “FEM-Based Structure Optimization with Grid-
Enabled Analysis Environment”, Proceedings of the 6th World Congress on Intelligent Control
and Automation, IEEE, Dalian, China June 21 - 23, 2006, pp. 6915-6919.
[13] Bipin N. Patel, “Finite Element Analysis and Optimization of Arm and Boom of Excavator”,
M. Tech. Thesis, Institute of Technology, Nirma University of Science and Technology,
Ahmedabad, May 2007, pp. 40-72.
[14] Jakub Gottvald (2012), “Analysis of Vibrations of Bucket Wheel Excavator Schrs1320
During Mining Process”, FME Transactions, Vol. 40, pp. 165-170.
[15] Jakub Gottvald (2011), “Measuring and Comparison of Natural Frequencies of Bucket Wheel
Excavators Sch Rs. 1320 and K 2000”, ISBN: 978-1-61804-022-0.
[16] Bhaveshkumar P. PATEL, Jagdish M. PRAJAPATI, ‘‘structural optimization of mini

hydraulic backhoe excavator attachment using FEA approach’’, machine design, Vol.5(2013)
No.1, ISSN 1821-1259 pp. 43-56
[17] Anil Jadhav, Vinayak Kulkarni, Abhijit Kulkarni, Prof. Ravi. K, ‘Static, Modal and Kinematic
Analysis of Hydraulic Excavator’, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology
(IJERT) ISSN: 2278-0181, Vol. 3 Issue 5, May – 2014.
[18] Kuniaki Nakada, Kazuya Imamura, Mitsuo Yabe, ‘Research and Development of Low-noise
Bucket for Construction Machinery’, Komatsu Technical Report.
[19] Bhaveshkumar P Patel and J M Prajapati, ‘‘Static analysis of mini hydraulic backhoe
excavator attachment using FEA approach’’, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and
RoboticS Research, ISSN: 2278-0149, Vol 1, No. 3, October, 2012.
Page | 107
[20] Bhaveshkumar P Patel and Prajapati J M, “Evaluation of Bucket Capacity, Digging Force
Calculations and Static Force Analysis of Mini Hydraulic Backhoe Excavator”, Machine Design—
The Journal of Faculty of Technical Sciences, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 59-66, 2012.
[21] Ihsan Küçükrendeci, ‘‘Comparison of damping characteristics of polymer-stell and polymer-

al composite structure’’, Scientific Research and Essays, ISSN 1992-2248, Vol. 6(23), pp. 4870-
4884, 16 October, 2011.
[22] Wikipedia the free encyclopedia.
Page | 108
APPENDIX A
Validation of the simulation for Static Structure Analysis
A.1. Results from Published Paper [16]
Fig A.1.1 Von Mises stress developed in the bucket. [16]
Fig A.1.2. Total deformation developed in the bucket. [16]
Page | 109
A.2. Results from FEA of this thesis:
Fig A.2.1. Von Mises stress developed in the bucket.
Fig A.2.2. Total deformation developed in the bucket.
The boundary conditions, forces and material properties are same for the A1 and A2. However
slight changes in the results observed as the dimensions are not exactly identical.
Page | 110
APPENDIX B
Mode Shapes of Case 3
4.1.3.1. 1st mode Shapes
(a) (b)
(c)
Fig. 4.1.3.1 1st mode shapes for case 3.
Page | 111
(a) (b)
(c)
Fig. 4.1.3.2. 2nd mode shapes for case 3.
Page | 112
(a) (b)
(c)
Fig. 4.1.3.3. 3rd mode shapes for case 3.
Page | 113
(a) (b)
(c)
Fig. 4.1.3.4 4th mode shapes for case 3.
Page | 114
(a) (b)
(c)
Page | 115
APPENDIX C
Mode shapes for Case 4
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Fig. 4.1.4.1. 1st mode shapes for case 4.
Page | 116
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Page | 117
(a)
(b)
(c) (d)
Page | 118
APPENDIX D
Fig. 4.1.5.1 1st mode shapes for case 5.
Fig. 4.1.5.2 2nd mode shapes for case 5.
Page | 119
Fig. 4.1.5.3 3rd mode shapes for case 5.
Page | 120
APPENDIX E
Fig. 4.1.6.1. 1st mode shapes for case 6.
Page | 121
Page | 122
Page | 123

Stress and Vibration Analysis of A MDOF Excavator Bucket

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Stress and Vibration Analysis of A MDOF Excavator Bucket

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Stress and Vibration Analysis of A MDOF Excavator Bucket

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Stress and Vibration Analysis of a MDOF

A thesis submitted to the Department of Mechanical and Chemical

Department of Mechanical and Chemical Engineering (MCE)

Islamic University of Technology (IUT)

Signature of the Candidate

Department of Mechanical and Chemical Engineering (MCE)

Islamic University of Technology (IUT)

Board Bazar, Gazipur

Signature of the Supervisor

Prof. Dr. Md. Zahid Hossain

Department of Mechanical and Chemical Engineering (MCE)

Islamic University of Technology (IUT)

Board Bazar, Gazipur

This thesis is dedicated to my parents and adorable wife.

1.1.1. Excavator attachments and configuration………………..………………………………3

1.1.2 Excavator Bucket……………………………………........................................................4

1.3. Von Mises Stress ……………………......................................................................................7

1.4. The importance of vibration analysis and reduction…………………………………………09

1.5. Research Objective………………………………………………………………………….10

1.6. Possible outcomes………………………………………………….......................................10

1.7. Outline of methodology……………………………………………………………………..11

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.2. Utility of FEA and optimization for backhoe attachment …………………………………..15

2.5. Summary of the literature review……….……………………………………………………19

Chapter 3: Problem specification and numerical Simulation

3.2. Modeling of the Bucket ……………………………………………………..........................21

3.3. Numerical Analysis Procedure....……………........................................................................22

3.4. Boundary Conditions and Input Force……………………………………………………….23

3.6. Definition of Cases…………………………………………………………………………..25

Chapter 4: Result of Numerical Simulation and Discussion

4.1. Modal Analysis …………………………………………………..…………………………31

4.1.1. Mode Shapes and Natural Frequencies for Case 1……………………………………..31

4.1.2. Mode Shapes and Natural Frequencies for Case 2……………………………………..35

4.1.3. Mode Shapes and Natural Frequencies for Case 3…………………………………......38

4.1.4. Mode Shapes and Natural Frequencies for Case 4..........................................................39

4.1.5. Mode Shapes and Natural Frequencies for Case 5...........................................................42

4.1.6. Mode Shapes and Natural Frequencies for Case 6……………………………………...44

4.2. Harmonic Analysis…………………………………………………………………………..46

4.2.2. Harmonic Response of Case 2……………………………...............................................46

4.2.3. Harmonic Response of Case 3…………………………………………………………..53

4.2.4. Harmonic Response of Case 4…………………………………………………………..59

4.2.5. Harmonic Response of Case 5…………………………………………………………..66

4.2.6. Harmonic Response of Case 6…………………………………………………………..73

4.3. Static Structure Analysis ……………………………………………………………………79

Chapter 5: Experimental Results and Validation

5.2. Experimental Set-up…………………………………………………………………………93

5.3. Experiment and Simulation Case……………………………………………………………97

5.4. Experimental Procedure……………………………………………………………………..98

5.5. Experiment and Simulation Results………………………………………………………..100

Chapter 6: Conclusion and Recommendation

Chapter 4: Result of Numerical analysis and Discussion Page Number

Table 4.1.1. Natural Frequency (Hz) at Case 1 32

Table 4.1.2. Natural Frequency (Hz) at Case 2 35

Table 4.1.3. Natural Frequency (Hz) at Case 3 39

Table 4.1.4. Natural Frequency (Hz) at Case 4 40

Table 4.1.5. Natural Frequency (Hz) at Case 5 43

Table 4.1.6. Natural Frequency (Hz) at Case 6 45

Table 4.3.1. Von-mises stress and Total Deformation at case 1 79

Table 4.3.2. Von-mises stress and Total Deformation comparison at case 2 81