Aci 351 3R PDF

Chapters 1 to 3 have been excerpted for use ACI 351.
3R-04
with the ACI CEU Online Program.
Foundations for Dynamic Equipment

Reported by ACI Committee 351
James P. Lee* Yelena S. Golod*
Chair Secretary
William L. Bounds* Fred G. Louis Abdul Hai Sheikh

William D. Brant Jack Moll Anthony J. Smalley
Shu-jin Fang Ira W. Pearce Philip A. Smith
*
Shraddhakar Harsh Andrew Rossi W. Tod Sutton†
Charles S. Hughes Robert L. Rowan, Jr.‡ F. Alan Wiley
Erick Larson William E. Rushing, Jr.
*
Members of the editorial subcommittee.
†
Chair of subcommittee that prepared this report.
‡Past chair.
This report presents to industry practitioners the various design criteria 2.2—Machine types
and methods and procedures of analysis, design, and construction applied 2.3—Foundation types
to dynamic equipment foundations.
Keywords: amplitude; concrete; foundation; reinforcement; vibration.

Chapter 3—Design criteria, p. 351.3R-7
3.1—Overview of design criteria
3.2—Foundation and equipment loads
CONTENTS
Chapter 1—Introduction, p. 351.3R-2 3.3—Dynamic soil properties
1.1—Background 3.4—Vibration performance criteria
1.2—Purpose 3.5—Concrete performance criteria
1.3—Scope 3.6—Performance criteria for machine-mounting systems
1.4—Notation 3.7—Method for estimating inertia forces from multi-
cylinder machines
Chapter 2—Foundation and machine types,
p. 351.3R-4 Chapter 4—Design methods and materials,
2.1—General considerations p. 351.3R-26
4.1—Overview of design methods
4.2—Impedance provided by the supporting media
ACI Committee Reports, Guides, Standard Practices, and 4.3—Vibration analysis
Commentaries are intended for guidance in planning, 4.4—Structural foundation design and materials
designing, executing, and inspecting construction. This
document is intended for the use of individuals who are 4.5—Use of isolation systems
competent to evaluate the significance and limitations of its 4.6—Repairing and upgrading foundations
content and recommendations and who will accept 4.7—Sample impedance calculations
responsibility for the application of the material it contains.
The American Concrete Institute disclaims any and all
responsibility for the stated principles. The Institute shall not Chapter 5—Construction considerations,
be liable for any loss or damage arising therefrom. p. 351.3R-53
Reference to this document shall not be made in contract 5.1—Subsurface preparation and improvement
documents. If items found in this document are desired by the
Architect/Engineer to be a part of the contract documents, they 5.2—Foundation placement tolerances
shall be restated in mandatory language for incorporation by 5.3—Forms and shores
the Architect/Engineer. 5.4—Sequence of construction and construction joints
5.5—Equipment installation and setting
It is the responsibility of the user of this document to 5.6—Grouting
establish health and safety practices appropriate to the specific 5.7—Concrete materials
circumstances involved with its use. ACI does not make any
representations with regard to health and safety issues and the 5.8—Quality control
use of this document. The user must determine the
applicability of all regulatory limitations before applying the ACI 351.3R-04 became effective May 3, 2004.
document and must comply with all applicable laws and Copyright © 2004, American Concrete Institute.
regulations, including but not limited to, United States All rights reserved including rights of reproduction and use in any form or by any
means, including the making of copies by any photo process, or by electronic or
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) mechanical device, printed, written, or oral, or recording for sound or visual reproduc-
health and safety standards. tion or for use in any knowledge or retrieval system or device, unless permission in
writing is obtained from the copyright proprietors.
351.3R-1
351.3R-2 ACI COMMITTEE REPORT
Chapter 6—References, p. 351.3R-57 [M] = mass matrix

6.1—Referenced standards and reports [m] = reduced mass matrix
6.2—Cited references [T] = transformation matrix for battered pile
6.3—Software sources and other references [αir] = matrix of interaction factors between any
6.4—Terminology two piles with diagonal terms αii = 1
A = displacement amplitude
CHAPTER 1—INTRODUCTION Ahead , Acrank = head and crank areas, in.2 (mm2)
1.1—Background
Heavy machinery with reciprocating, impacting, or rotating Ap = cross-sectional area of the pile
masses requires a support system that can resist dynamic a, b = plan dimensions of a rectangular foundation
forces and the resulting vibrations. When excessive, such ao = dimensionless frequency
vibrations may be detrimental to the machinery, its support Bc = cylinder bore diameter, in. (mm)
system, and any operating personnel subjected to them. Bi = mass ratio for the i-th direction
Many engineers with varying backgrounds are engaged in Br = ram weight, tons (kN)
the analysis, design, construction, maintenance, and repair of b1, b2 = 0.425 and 0.687, Eq. (4.15d)
machine foundations. Therefore, it is important that the cgi = damping of pile group in the i-th direction
owner/operator, geotechnical engineer, structural engineer, ci = damping constant for the i-th direction
and equipment supplier collaborate during the design ci*(adj) = damping in the i-th direction adjusted for
process. Each of these participants has inputs and concerns material damping
that are important and should be effectively communicated cij = equivalent viscous damping of pile j in the
with each other, especially considering that machine foundation i-th direction
design procedures and criteria are not covered in building Di = damping ratio for the i-th direction
codes and national standards. Some firms and individuals Drod = rod diameter, in. (mm)
have developed their own standards and specifications as a d = pile diameter
result of research and development activities, field studies, dn = nominal bolt diameter, in. (m)
or many years of successful engineering or construction ds = displacement of the slide, in. (mm)
practices. Unfortunately, most of these standards are not Ep = Young’s modulus of the pile
available to many practitioners. As an engineering aid to em = mass eccentricity, in. (mm)
those persons engaged in the design of foundations for ev = void ratio
machinery, the committee developed this document, which F = time varying force vector
presents many current practices for dynamic equipment F1 = correction factor
foundation engineering and construction. Fblock = the force acting outwards on the block from
which concrete stresses should be calcu-
1.2—Purpose lated, lbf (N)
The committee presents various design criteria and
(Fbolt)CHG = the force to be restrained by friction at the
methods and procedures of analysis, design, and construction
cross head guide tie-down bolts, lbf (N)
currently applied to dynamic equipment foundations by
(Fbolt)frame = the force to be restrained by friction at the
industry practitioners.
frame tie-down bolts, lbf (N)
This document provides general guidance with reference
FD = damper force
materials, rather than specifying requirements for adequate
FGMAX = maximum horizontal gas force on a throw
design. Where the document mentions multiple design
or cylinder, lbf (N)
methods and criteria in use, factors, which may influence the
FIMAX = maximum horizontal inertia force on a
choice, are presented.
throw or cylinder, lbf (N)
Fo = dynamic force amplitude (zero-to-peak),
1.3—Scope
This document is limited in scope to the engineering, lbf (N)
construction, repair, and upgrade of dynamic equipment Fr = maximum horizontal dynamic force
foundations. For the purposes of this document, dynamic Fred = a force reduction factor with suggested
equipment includes the following: value of 2, to account for the fraction of
1. Rotating machinery; individual cylinder load carried by the
2. Reciprocating machinery; and compressor frame (“frame rigidity
3. Impact or impulsive machinery. factor”)
Frod = force acting on piston rod, lbf (N)
1.4—Notation Fs = dynamic inertia force of slide, lbf (N)
[C] = damping matrix FTHROW = horizontal force to be resisted by each
[K] = stiffness matrix throw’s anchor bolts, lbf (N)
[K*] = impedance with respect to CG Funbalance = the maximum value from Eq. (3.18)
[k] = reduced stiffness matrix applied using parameters for a horizontal
[kj′ ] = battered pile stiffness matrix compressor cylinder, lbf (N)
FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT 351.3R-3
fi1, fi2 = dimensionless stiffness and damping Mr = ram mass including dies and ancillary
functions for the i-th direction, piles parts, lbm (kg)
fm = frequency of motion, Hz m = mass of the machine-foundation system
fn = system natural frequency (cycles per second) md = slide mass including the effects of any
fo = operating speed, rpm balance mechanism, lbm (kg)
G = dynamic shear modulus of the soil mr = rotating mass, lbm (kg)
Gave = the average value of shear modulus of the mrec,i = reciprocating mass for the i-th cylinder
soil over the pile length mrot,i = rotating mass of the i-th cylinder
Gc = the average value of shear modulus of the ms = effective mass of a spring
soil over the critical length (Nbolt)CHG = the number of bolts holding down one
GE = pile group efficiency crosshead guide
Gl = soil shear modulus at tip of pile (Nbolt)frame = the number of bolts holding down the
G pJ = torsional stiffness of the pile frame, per cylinder
Gs = dynamic shear modulus of the embedment NT = normal torque, ft-lbf (m-N)
(side) material Phead, Pcrank = instantaneous head and crank pressures,
Gz = the shear modulus at depth z = lc /4 psi (μPa)
H = depth of soil layer Ps = power being transmitted by the shaft at the
Ii = mass moment of inertia of the machine- connection, horsepower (kilowatts)
foundation system for the i-th direction R, Ri = equivalent foundation radius
Ip = moment of inertia of the pile cross section r = length of crank, in. (mm)
i = –1 ri = radius of the crank mechanism of the i-th
i = a directional indicator or modal indicator, cylinder
Eq. (4.48), as a subscript ro = pile radius or equivalent radius
K2 = a parameter that depends on void ratio and S = press stroke, in. (mm)
strain amplitude Sf = service factor, used to account for increasing
Keff = the effective bearing stiffness, lbf/in. (N/mm) unbalance during the service life of the
K*ij = impedance in the i-th direction with respect machine, generally greater than or equal to 2
to motion of the CG in j-th direction Si1, Si2 = dimensionless parameters (Table 4.2)
Kn = nut factor for bolt torque s = distance between piles
Kuu = horizontal spring constant T = foundation thickness, ft (m)
Kuψ = coupling spring constant Tb = bolt torque, lbf-in. (N-m)
Kψψ = rocking spring constant Tmin = minimum required anchor bolt tension
k = the dynamic stiffness provided by the t = time, s
supporting media Vmax = the maximum allowable vibration, in. (mm)
* Vs = shear wave velocity of the soil, ft/s (m/s)
kei = impedance in the i-th direction due to
embedment v = displacement amplitude
kgi = pile group stiffness in the i-th direction v′ = velocity, in./s (cm/s)
ki = stiffness for the i-th direction vh = post-impact hammer velocity, in./s (mm/s)
ki(adj) = stiffness in the i-th direction adjusted for vo = reference velocity = 18.4 ft/s (5.6 m/s)
material damping from a free fall of 5.25 ft (1.6 m)
ki* = complex impedance for the i-th direction vr = ram impact velocity, ft/s (m/s)
ki*(adj) = impedance adjusted for material damping W = strain energy
kij = stiffness of pile j in the i-th direction Wa = equipment weight at anchorage location
kj = battered pile stiffness matrix Wf = weight of the foundation, tons (kN)
kr = stiffness of individual pile considered in Wp = bolt preload, lbf (N)
isolation Wr = rotating weight, lbf (N)
kst = static stiffness constant w = soil weight density
kvj = vertical stiffness of a single pile X = vector representation of time-dependent
L = length of connecting rod, in. (mm) displacements for MDOF systems
LB = the greater plan dimension of the founda- Xi = distance along the crankshaft from the
tion block, ft (m) reference origin to the i-th cylinder
Li = length of the connecting rod of the crank x, z = the pile coordinates indicated in Fig. 4.9
mechanism at the i-th cylinder xr, zr = pile location reference distances
l = depth of embedment (effective) yc = distance from the CG to the base support
lc = critical length of a pile ye = distance from the CG to the level of
lp = pile length embedment resistance
Mh = hammer mass including any auxiliary yp = crank pin displacement in local Y-axis,
foundation, lbm (kg) in. (mm)
Zp = piston displacement, in. (mm) CHAPTER 2—FOUNDATION AND MACHINE TYPES

zp = crank pin displacement in local Z-axis, in. 2.1—General considerations
(mm) The type, configuration, and installation of a foundation or
α = the angle between a battered pile and support structure for dynamic machinery may depend on the
vertical following factors:
α′ = modified pile group interaction factor 1. Site conditions such as soil characteristics, topography,
α1 = coefficient dependent on Poisson’s ratio seismicity, climate, and other effects;
as given in Table 4.1 2. Machine base configuration such as frame size,
αh = ram rebound velocity relative to impact cylinder supports, pulsation bottles, drive mechanisms,
velocity and exhaust ducts;
αi = the phase angle for the crank radius of the 3. Process requirements such as elevation requirements
i-th cylinder, rad with respect to connected process equipment and hold-down
requirements for piping;
α*ij = complex pile group interaction factor for
the i-th pile to the j-th pile 4. Anticipated loads such as the equipment static weight,
and loads developed during erection, startup, operation,
αuf = the horizontal interaction factor for fixed-
shutdown, and maintenance;
headed piles (no head rotation)
5. Erection requirements such as limitations or constraints
αuH = the horizontal interaction factor due to
imposed by construction equipment, procedures, techniques,
horizontal force (rotation allowed)
or the sequence of erection;
αv = vertical interaction coefficient between
6. Operational requirements such as accessibility, settle-
two piles
ment limitations, temperature effects, and drainage;
αψH = the rotation due to horizontal force
7. Maintenance requirements such as temporary access,
αψM = the rotation due to moment
laydown space, in-plant crane capabilities, and machine
β = system damping ratio removal considerations;
βi = rectangular footing coefficients (Richart, 8. Regulatory factors or building code provisions such as
Hall, and Woods 1970), i = v, u, or ψ tied pile caps in seismic zones;
βj = coefficient dependent on Poisson’s ratio 9. Economic factors such as capital cost, useful or antici-
as given in Table 4.1, j = 1 to 4 pated life, and replacement or repair cost;
βm = material damping ratio of the soil 10. Environmental requirements such as secondary
βp = angle between the direction of the loading containment or special concrete coating requirements; and
and the line connecting the pile centers 11. Recognition that certain machines, particularly large
δ = loss angle reciprocating compressors, rely on the foundation to add
ΔW = area enclosed by the hysteretic loop strength and stiffness that is not inherent in the structure of
εir = the elements of the inverted matrix [αir]–1 the machine.
ψi = reduced mode shape vector for the i-th
mode 2.2—Machine types
γj = coefficient dependent on Poisson’s ratio 2.2.1 Rotating machinery—This category includes gas
as given in Table 4.1, j = 1 to 4 turbines, steam turbines, and other expanders; turbo-pumps
λ = pile-soil stiffness ratio (Ep /Gl ) and compressors; fans; motors; and centrifuges. These
μ = coefficient of friction machines are characterized by the rotating motion of impel-
ν = Poisson’s ratio of the soil lers or rotors.
νs = Poisson’s ratio of the embedment (side) Unbalanced forces in rotating machines are created when
material the mass centroid of the rotating part does not coincide with
ρ = soil mass density (soil weight density/gravi- the center of rotation (Fig. 2.1). This dynamic force is a function
tational acceleration) of the shaft mass, speed of rotation, and the magnitude of the
offset. The offset should be minor under manufactured
ρa = Gave /Gl
conditions when the machine is well balanced, clean, and
ρc = Gz /Gc
without wear or erosion. Changes in alignment, operation
σo = probable confining pressure, lbf/ft2 (Pa) near resonance, blade loss, and other malfunctions or
ωi = circular natural frequency for the i-th undesirable conditions can greatly increase the force applied
mode to its bearings by the rotor. Because rotating machines
ωm = circular frequency of motion normally trip and shut down at some vibration limit, a real-
ωn = circular natural frequencies of the system istic continuous dynamic load on the foundation is that
ωo = circular operating frequency of the resulting from vibration just below the trip level.
machine (rad/s) 2.2.2 Reciprocating machinery—For reciprocating
ωsu, ωsv = circular natural frequencies of a soil layer machinery, such as compressors and diesel engines, a piston
in u and v directions moving in a cylinder interacts with a fluid through the
kinematics of a slider crank mechanism driven by, or

driving, a rotating crankshaft.
Individual inertia forces from each cylinder and each
throw are inherently unbalanced with dominant frequencies
at one and two times the rotational frequency (Fig. 2.2).
Reciprocating machines with more than one piston require
a particular crank arrangement to minimize unbalanced
forces and moments. A mechanical design that satisfies
operating requirements should govern. This leads to piston/
cylinder assemblies and crank arrangements that do not
completely counter-oppose; therefore, unbalanced loads Fig. 2.1—Rotating machine diagram.
occur, which should be resisted by the foundation.
Individual cylinder fluid forces act outward on the
cylinder head and inward on the crankshaft (Fig. 2.2). For a
rigid cylinder and frame these forces internally balance, but
deformations of large machines can cause a significant
portion of the fluid load to be transmitted to the mounts and
into the foundation. Particularly on large reciprocating
compressors with horizontal cylinders, it is inappropriate
and unconservative to assume the compressor frame and
Fig. 2.2—Reciprocating machine diagram.
cylinder are sufficiently stiff to internally balance all forces.
Such an assumption has led to many inadequate mounts for
reciprocating machines.
2.2.3 Impulsive machinery—Equipment, such as forging
hammers and some metal-forming presses, operate with
regulated impacts or shocks between different parts of the
equipment. This shock loading is often transmitted to the
foundation system of the equipment and is a factor in the
design of the foundation.
Closed die forging hammers typically operate by dropping
a weight (ram) onto hot metal, forcing it into a predefined
shape. While the intent is to use this impact energy to form
and shape the material, there is significant energy transmission,
particularly late in the forming process. During these final
blows, the material being forged is cooling and less shaping
takes place. Thus, pre-impact kinetic energy of the ram
converts to post-impact kinetic energy of the entire forging
hammer. As the entire hammer moves downward, it
becomes a simple dynamic mass oscillating on its supporting
medium. This system should be well damped so that the Fig. 2.3—Forcing function for a forging press.
oscillations decay sufficiently before the next blow. Timing
of the blows commonly range from 40 to 100 blows per min. ment can vary greatly in size, weight, speed, and operation,
The ram weights vary from a few hundred pounds to 35,000 lb the engineer should consider the appropriate type. Speeds
(156 kN). Impact velocities in the range of 25 ft/s (7.6 m/s) can vary from 30 to 1800 strokes per min. Dynamic forces from
are common. Open die hammers operate in a similar fashion the press develop from two sources: the mechanical balance of
but are often of two-piece construction with a separate the moving parts in the equipment and the response of the
hammer frame and anvil. press frame as the material is sheared (snap-through forces).
Forging presses perform a similar manufacturing function Imbalances in the mechanics of the equipment can occur both
as forging hammers but are commonly mechanically or horizontally and vertically. Generally high-speed equipment
hydraulically driven. These presses form the material at low is well balanced. Low-speed equipment is often not balanced
velocities but with greater forces. The mechanical drive because the inertia forces at low speeds are small. The
system generates horizontal dynamic forces that the engineer dynamic forces generated by all of these presses can be
should consider in the design of the support system. Rocking significant as they are transmitted into the foundation and
stability of this construction is important. Figure 2.3 shows a propagated from there.
typical horizontal forcing function through one full stroke of 2.2.4 Other machine types—Other machinery generating
a forging press. dynamic loads include rock crushers and metal shredders.
Mechanical metal forming presses operate by squeezing While part of the dynamic load from these types of equipment
and shearing metal between two dies. Because this equip- tend to be based on rotating imbalances, there is also a
Fig. 2.4—Block-type foundation.
Fig. 2.8—Spring-mounted block formation.
difference between the machine dynamic forces and the center

of gravity of the machine-foundation system. The ability to use
such a foundation primarily depends on the quality of near
surface soils. Block foundations are nearly always designed as
rigid structures. The dynamic response of a rigid block
foundation depends only on the dynamic load, foundation’s
mass, dimensions, and soil characteristics.
2.3.2 Combined block-type foundation (Fig. 2.5)—
Fig. 2.5—Combined block foundation.
Combined blocks are used to support closely spaced
machines. Combined blocks are more difficult to design
because of the combination of forces from two or more
machines and because of a possible lack of stiffness of a
larger foundation mat.
2.3.3 Tabletop-type foundation (Fig. 2.6)—Elevated
support is common for large turbine-driven equipment such
as electric generators. Elevation allows for ducts, piping, and
ancillary items to be located below the equipment. Tabletop
structures are considered to be flexible, hence their response
to dynamic loads can be quite complex and depend both on
the motion of its discreet elements (columns, beams, and
footing) and the soil upon which it is supported.
2.3.4 Tabletop with isolators (Fig. 2.7)—Isolators (springs
Fig. 2.6—Tabletop foundation. and dampers) located at the top of supporting columns are
sometimes used to minimize the response to dynamic loading.
The effectiveness of isolators depends on the machine speed
and the natural frequency of the foundation. Details of this
type of support are provided in Section 4.5.
2.3.5 Spring-mounted equipment (Fig. 2.8)—Occasionally
pumps are mounted on springs to minimize thermal forces
from connecting piping. The springs are then supported on a
block-type foundation. This arrangement has a dynamic
effect similar to that for tabletops with vibration isolators.
Other types of equipment are spring mounted to limit the
transmission of dynamic forces.
2.3.6 Inertia block in structure (Fig. 2.9)—Dynamic equip-
Fig. 2.7—Tabletop with isolators. ment on a structure may be relatively small in comparison to the
overall size of the structure. In this situation, dynamic machines
random character to the dynamic signal that varies with the are usually designed with a supporting inertia block to alter
particular operation. natural frequencies away from machine operating speeds and
resist amplitudes by increasing the resisting inertia force.
2.3—Foundation types 2.3.7 Pile foundations (Fig. 2.10)—Any of the previously
2.3.1 Block-type foundation (Fig. 2.4)—Dynamic machines mentioned foundation types may be supported directly on soil
are preferably located close to grade to minimize the elevation or on piles. Piles are generally used where soft ground condi-
the machine. Other limiting dynamic criteria affecting the

design may include avoiding resonance and excessive trans-
missibility to the supporting soil or structure. Thus, a key
ingredient to a successful design is the careful engineering
analysis of the soil-foundation response to dynamic loads
from the machine operation.
The foundation’s response to dynamic loads can be signif-
icantly influenced by the soil on which it is constructed.
Consequently, critical soil parameters, such as the dynamic
soil shear modulus, are preferably determined from a field
investigation and laboratory tests rather than relying on
Fig. 2.9—Inertia block in structure. generalized correlations based on broad soil classifications.
Due to the inherent variability of soil, the dynamic response
of machine foundations is often evaluated using a range of
values for the critical soil properties.
Furthermore, a machinery support structure or foundation is
designed with adequate structural strength to resist the worst
possible combination of loads occurring over its service life.
This often includes limiting soil-bearing pressures to well
within allowable limits to ensure a more predictable dynamic
response and prevent excessive settlements and soil failures.
Additionally, concrete members are designed and detailed to
prevent cracking due to fatigue and stress reversals caused by
dynamic loads, and the machine’s mounting system is designed
and detailed to transmit loads from the machine into the
Fig. 2.10—Pile-supported foundation.
foundation, according to the criteria in Section 3.6.
tions result in low allowable contact pressures and excessive
settlement for a mat-type foundation. Piles use end bearing, 3.2—Foundation and equipment loads
frictional side adhesion, or a combination of both to transfer Foundations supporting reciprocating or rotating compressors,
axial loads into the underlying soil. Transverse loads are turbines, generators and motors, presses, and other machinery
resisted by soil pressure bearing against the side of the pile should withstand all the forces that may be imposed on them
cap or against the side of the piles. Various types of piles are during their service life. Machine foundations are unique
used including drilled piers, auger cast piles, and driven piles. because they may be subjected to significant dynamic loads
during operation in addition to normal design loads of
CHAPTER 3—DESIGN CRITERIA gravity, wind, and earthquake. The magnitude and charac-
3.1—Overview of design criteria teristics of the operating loads depend on the type, size,
The main issues in the design of concrete foundations that speed, and layout of the machine.
support machinery are defining the anticipated loads, estab- Generally, the weight of the machine, center of gravity,
lishing the performance criteria, and providing for these surface areas, and operating speeds are readily available
through proper proportioning and detailing of structural from the manufacturer of the machine. Establishing appro-
members. Yet, behind this straightforward definition lies the priate values for dynamic loads is best accomplished through
need for careful attention to the interfaces between machine, careful communication and clear understanding between the
mounting system, and concrete foundation. machine manufacturer and foundation design engineer as to
The loads on machine foundations may be both static and the purpose, and planned use for the requested information,
dynamic. Static loads are principally a function of the and the definition of the information provided. It is in the best
weights of the machine and all its auxiliary equipment. interests of all parties (machine manufacturer, foundation
Dynamic loads, which occur during the operation of the design engineer, installer, and operator) to ensure effective
machine, result from forces generated by unbalance, inertia definition and communication of data and its appropriate use.
of moving parts, or both, and by the flow of fluid and gases Machines always experience some level of unbalance, vibra-
for some machines. The magnitude of these dynamic loads tion, and force transmitted through the bearings. Under some
primarily depends upon the machine’s operating speed and off-design conditions, such as wear, the forces may increase
the type, size, weight, and arrangement (position) of moving significantly. The machine manufacturer and foundation
parts within the casing. design engineer should work together so that their combined
The basic goal in the design of a machine foundation is to knowledge achieves an integrated system structure which
limit its motion to amplitudes that neither endanger the satis- robustly serves the needs of its owner and operator and with-
factory operation of the machine nor disturb people working in stands all expected loads.
the immediate vicinity (Gazetas 1983). Allowable amplitudes Sections 3.2.1 to 3.2.6 provide commonly used methods
depend on the speed, location, and criticality or function of for determining machine-induced forces and other design
loads for foundations supporting machinery. They include codes (such as the UBC, the SBC, or the NBC) and standards
definitions and other information on dynamic loads to be such as ASCE 7 and SEAOC Blue Book.
requested from the machine manufacturer and alternative The publication of the IBC 2000 provides building officials
assumptions to apply when such data are unavailable or are with the opportunity to replace the former regional codes
under-predicted. with a code that has nationwide applicability. The seismic
3.2.1 Static loads requirements in IBC 2000 and ASCE 7-98 are essentially
3.2.1.1 Dead loads—A major function of the foundation identical, as both are based on the 1997 NEHRP (FEMA 302)
is to support gravity (dead) loads due to the weight of the provisions.
machine, auxiliary equipment, pipe, valves, and deadweight The IBC and its reference documents contain provisions
of the foundation structure. The weights of the machine compo- for design of nonstructural components, including dynamic
nents are normally supplied by the machine manufacturer. The machinery, for seismic loads. For machinery supported
distribution of the weight of the machine on the foundation above grade or on more flexible elevated pedestals, seismic
depends on the location of support points (chocks, soleplates) amplification factors are also specified.
and on the flexibility of the machine frame. Typically, there 3.2.1.5 Static operating loads—Static operating loads
are multiple support points, and, thus, the distribution is include the weight of gas or liquid in the machinery equipment
statically indeterminate. In many cases, the machine manufac- during normal operation and forces, such as the drive torque
turer provides a loading diagram showing the vertical loads at developed by some machines at the connection between the
each support point. When this information is not available, it is drive mechanism and driven machinery. Static operating
common to assume the machine frame is rigid and that its loads can also include forces caused by thermal growth of
weight is appropriately distributed between support points. the machinery equipment and connecting piping. Time-
3.2.1.2 Live loads—Live loads are produced by personnel, varying (dynamic) loads generated by machines during
tools, and maintenance equipment and materials. The live loads operation are covered elsewhere in this report.
used in design should be the maximum loads expected during Machines such as compressors and generators require
the service life of the machine. For most designs, live loads are some form of drive mechanism, either integral with the
uniformly distributed over the floor areas of platforms of machine or separate from it. When the drive mechanism is
elevated support structures or to the access areas around at- nonintegral, such as a separate electric motor, reciprocating
grade foundations. Typical live loads vary from 60 lbf/ft2 engine, and gas or steam turbine, it produces a net external
(2.9 kPa) for personnel to as much as 150 lbf/ft2 (7.2 kPa) for drive torque on the driven machine. The torque is equal in
maintenance equipment and materials. magnitude and opposite in direction on the driver and driven
3.2.1.3 Wind loads—Loads due to wind on the surface machine. The normal torque (sometimes called drive torque)
areas of the machine, auxiliary equipment, and the support is generally applied to the foundation as a static force couple
foundation are based on the design wind speed for the partic- in the vertical direction acting about the centerline of the
ular site and are normally calculated in accordance with the shaft of the machine. The magnitude of the normal torque is
governing local code or standard. Wind loads rarely govern often computed from the following formula
the design of machine foundations except, perhaps, when the
machine is located in an enclosure that is also supported by ( 5250 ) ( P s )
the foundation. NT = --------------------------
- lbf-ft (3-1)
fo
When designing machine foundations and support structures,
most practitioners use the wind load provisions of ASCE 7. The
analytical procedure of ASCE 7 provides wind pressures and ( 9550 ) ( P s )
NT = --------------------------
- N-m
forces for use in the design of the main wind-force resisting fo
systems and anchorage of machine components.
Most structural systems involving machines and machine where
foundations are relatively stiff (natural frequency in the NT = normal torque, ft-lbf (m-N);
lateral direction greater than 1 Hz). Consequently, the Ps = power being transmitted by the shaft at the
systems can be treated as rigid with respect to the wind gust connection, horsepower (kilowatts); and
effect factor, and simplified procedures can be used. If the fo = operating speed, rpm.
machine is supported on flexible isolators and is exposed to The torque load is generally resolved into a vertical force
the wind, the rigid assumption may not be reasonable, and couple by dividing it by the center-to-center distance between
more elaborate treatment of the gust effects is necessary as longitudinal soleplates or anchor points (Fig. 3.1(a)). When the
described in ASCE 7 for flexible structural systems. machine is supported by transverse soleplates only, the
Appropriate consideration of the exposure conditions and torque is applied along the width of the soleplate assuming a
importance factors is also required to be consistent with the straight line variation of force (Fig. 3.1(b)). Normal torque
facilities requirements. can also be caused by jet forces on turbine blades. In this case
3.2.1.4 Seismic loads—Machinery foundations located it is applied to the foundation in the opposite direction from
in seismically active regions are analyzed for seismic loads. the rotation of the rotor.
Before 2000, these loads were determined in accordance The torque on a generator stator is applied in the same
with methods prescribed in one of various regional building direction as the rotation of the rotor and can be high due to
startup or an electrical short circuit. Startup torque, a property

of electric motors, should be obtained from the motor
manufacturer. The torque created by an electrical short
circuit is considered a malfunction, emergency, or accidental
load and is generally reported separately by the machinery
manufacturer. Often in the design for this phenomenon, the
magnitude of the emergency drive torque is determined by
applying a magnification factor to the normal torque.
Consultation with the generator manufacturer is necessary to
establish the appropriate magnification factor.
3.2.1.6 Special loads for elevated-type foundations—To
ensure adequate strength and deflection control, the
following special static loading conditions are recommended
in some proprietary standards for large equipment on
elevated-type foundations:
1. Vertical force equal to 50% of the total weight of each
machine;
2. Horizontal force (in the transverse direction) equal to
25% of the total weight of each machine; and
3. Horizontal force (in the longitudinal direction) equal to
25% of the total weight of each machine.
These forces are additive to normal gravity loads and are
considered to act at the centerline of the machine shaft.
Loads 1, 2, and 3 are not considered to act concurrently with
one another.
3.2.1.7 Erection and maintenance loads—Erection and Fig. 3.1—Equivalent forces for torque loads.
maintenance loads are temporary loads from equipment,
such as cranes and forklifts, required for installing or
dismantling machine components during erection or mainte- Force = (friction coefficient)(load acting through soleplate) (3-2)
nance. Erection loads are usually furnished in the manufac-
turer’s foundation load drawing and should be used in The friction coefficient generally varies from 0.2 to 0.5.
conjunction with other specified dead, live, and environmental Loads acting through the soleplate include: machine dead
loads. Maintenance loads occur any time the equipment is load, normal torque load, anchor bolt load, and piping loads.
being drained, cleaned, repaired, and realigned or when the Heat transfer to the foundation can be by convection across an
components are being removed or replaced. Loads may air gap (for example, gap between sump and block) and by
result from maintenance equipment, davits, and hoists. Envi- conduction through points of physical contact. The resultant
ronmental loads, such as full wind and earthquake, are not temperature gradients induce deformations, strains, and stresses.
usually assumed to act with maintenance loads, which gener- When evaluating thermal stress, the calculations are
ally occur for only a relatively short duration. strongly influenced by the stiffness and restraint against
3.2.1.8 Thermal loads—Changing temperatures of deformation for the structural member in question. There-
machines and their foundations cause expansions and fore, it is important to consider the self-relieving nature of
contractions, and distortions, causing the various parts to try thermal stress due to deformation to prevent being overly
to slide on the support surfaces. The magnitude of the conservative in the analysis. As the thermal forces are
resulting frictional forces depends on the magnitude of the applied to the foundation member by the machine, the foun-
temperature change, the location of the supports, and on the dation member changes length and thereby provides reduced
condition of the support surfaces. The thermal forces do not resistance to the machine forces. This phenomenon can have
impose a net force on the foundation to be resisted by soil or the effect of reducing the thermal forces from the machine.
piles because the forces on any surface are balanced by equal Accurate determinations of concrete surface temperatures
and opposite forces on other support surfaces. Thermal and thermal gradients are also important. Under steady-state
forces, however, may govern the design of the grout system, normal operating conditions, temperature distributions
pedestals, and hold downs. across structural sections are usually linear. The air gap
Calculation of the exact thermal loading is very difficult between the machine casing and foundation provides a
because it depends on a number of factors, including significant means for dissipating heat, and its effect should
distance between anchor points, magnitude of temperature be included when establishing surface temperatures.
change, the material and condition of the sliding surface, and Normally, the expected thermal deflection at various
the magnitude of the vertical load on each soleplate. Lacking bearings is estimated by the manufacturer, based on past
a rigorous analysis, the magnitude of the frictional load may field measurements on existing units. The machine erector
be calculated as follows then compensates for the thermal deflection during installation.
Reports are available (Mandke and Smalley 1992; d) Under the maximum level of upset condition the
Mandke and Smalley 1989; and Smalley 1985) that illustrate machine is designed to survive (for example, loss of one or
the effects of thermal loads and deflections in the concrete more blades).
foundation of a large reciprocating compressor and their Items a and b document the predicted dynamic forces
influence on the machine. resulting from levels of unbalance assumed in design for
3.2.2 Rotating machine loads—Typical heavy rotating normal operation. Using these forces, it is possible to predict
machinery include centrifugal air and gas compressors, hori- the normal dynamic vibration of the machine on its foundation.
zontal and vertical fluid pumps, generators, rotating steam and Item c identifies a maximum level of transmitted force
gas turbine drivers, centrifuges, electric motor drivers, fans, with which the machine could operate continuously without
and blowers. These types of machinery are characterized by tripping; the foundation should have the strength to tolerate
the rotating motion of one or more impellers or rotors. such a dynamic force on a continuous basis.
3.2.2.1 Dynamic loads due to unbalanced masses— Item d identifies the higher level of dynamic force, which
Unbalanced forces in rotating machines are created when the could occur under occasional upset conditions over a short
mass centroid of the rotating part does not coincide with the period of time. If the machine is designed to tolerate this
axis of rotation. In theory, it is possible to precisely balance level of dynamic force for a short period of time, then the
the rotating elements of rotating machinery. In practice, this foundation should also be able to tolerate it for a similar
is never achieved; slight mass eccentricities always remain. period of time.
During operation, the eccentric rotating mass produces If an independent dynamic analysis of the rotor-bearing
centrifugal forces that are proportional to the square of system is performed by the end user or by a third party, such
machine speed. Centrifugal forces generally increase during an analysis can provide some or all of the above dynamic
the service life of the machine due to conditions such as forces transmitted to the foundation.
machine wear, rotor play, and dirt accumulation. By assuming that the dynamic force transmitted to the
A rotating machine transmits dynamic force to the foundation bearings equals the rotating unbalanced force generated by
predominantly through its bearings (with small, generally the rotor, information on unbalance can provide an estimate
unimportant exceptions such as seals and the air gap in a of the transmitted force.
motor). The forces acting at the bearings are a function of the 3.2.2.1b Machine unbalance provided by the manufac-
level and axial distribution of unbalance, the geometry of the turer—When the mass unbalance (eccentricity) is known or
rotor and its bearings, the speed of rotation, and the detailed stated by the manufacturer, the resulting dynamic force
dynamic characteristics of the rotor-bearing system. At or near amplitude is
a critical speed, the force from rotating unbalance can be
substantially amplified, sometimes by a factor of five or more. Fo = mr emωo2Sf /12 lbf (3-3)
Ideally, the determination of the transmitted force under
different conditions of unbalance and at different speeds Fo = mr emωo2Sf /1000 N
results from a dynamic analysis of the rotor-bearing system,
using an appropriate combination of computer programs for where
calculating bearing dynamic characteristics and the response Fo = dynamic force amplitude (zero-to-peak), lbf (N);
to unbalance of a flexible rotor in its bearings. Such an analysis mr = rotating mass, lbm (kg);
would usually be performed by the machine manufacturer. em = mass eccentricity, in. (mm);
Results of such analyses, especially values for transmitted ωo = circular operating frequency of the machine (rad/s);
bearing forces, represent the best source of information for and
use by the foundation design engineer. This and other Sf = service factor, used to account for increased
approaches used in practice to quantify the magnitude of unbalance during the service life of the machine,
dynamic force transmitted to the foundation are discussed in generally greater than or equal to 2.
Sections 3.2.2.1a to 3.2.2.1.3e. 3.2.2.1c Machine unbalance meeting industry
criteria—Many rotating machines are balanced to an initial
3.2.2.1a Dynamic load provided by the manufac-
balance quality either in accordance with the manufacturer’s
turer—The engineer should request and the machine manu-
procedures or as specified by the purchaser. ISO 1940 and
facturer should provide the following information:
ASA/ANSI S2.19 define balance quality in terms of a constant
Design levels of unbalance and basis—This information emωo. For example, the normal balance quality Q for parts of
documents the unbalance level the subsequent transmitted process-plant machinery is 0.25 in./s (6.3 mm/s). Other typical
forces are based on. balance quality grade examples are shown in Table 3.1. To
Dynamic forces transmitted to the bearing pedestals meet these criteria a rotor intended for faster speeds should be
under the following conditions— better balanced than one operating at a slower speed. Using
a) Under design unbalance levels over operating speed this approach, Eq. (3-3) can be rewritten as
range;
b) At highest vibration when negotiating critical speeds; Fo = mrQωoSf /12 lbf (3-4)
c) At a vibration level where the machine is just short of
tripping on high vibration; and Fo = mrQωoSf /1000 N
Table 3.1—Balance quality grades for selected

groups of representative rigid rotors (excerpted
from ANSI/ASA S2.19)
Balance
quality Product of eω,
guide in./s (mm/s) Rotor types—general examples
G1600 63 (1600) Crankshaft/drives of rigidly mounted, large,

two-cycle engines
G630 2.5 (630) Crankshaft/drives of rigidly mounted, large,

four-cycle engines
G250 10 (250) Crankshaft/drives of rigidly mounted, fast,

four-cylinder diesel engines
Crankshaft/drives of fast diesel engines with six
G100 4 (100) or more cylinders
Crankshaft/drives of elastically mounted, fast Fig. 3.2—Comparison of effective eccentricity.
G40 1.6 (40) four-cycle engines (gasoline or diesel) with six or
more cylinders
Parts of crushing machines; drive shafts (propeller
G16 0.6 (16) shafts, cardan shafts) with special requirements;
crankshaft/drives of engines with six or more W r f o1.5
cylinders under special requirements F o = ------------------
- (3-6)
322,000
Parts of process plant machines; centrifuge
drums, paper machinery rolls, print rolls; fans;
flywheels; pump impellers; machine tool and gen- where Wr = rotating weight, lbf (N).
G6.3 0.25 (6.3) eral machinery parts; medium and large electric
armatures (of electric motors having at least 3.2.2.1d Dynamic load determined from an empirical
80 mm shaft height) without special requirement formula—Rotating machine manufacturers often do not
Gas and steam turbines, including marine main report the unbalance that remains after balancing. Conse-
turbines; rigid turbo-generator rotors; turbo-
G2.5 0.1 (2.5) compressors; machine tool drives; medium and quently, empirical formulas are frequently used to ensure
large electric armatures with special requirements; that foundations are designed for some minimum unbalance,
turbine driven pumps
which generally includes some allowance for increasing
G1 0.04 (1) Grinding machine drives
unbalance over time. One general purpose empirical method
G0.4 0.015 (0.4) Spindles, discs, and armatures of precision assumes that balancing improves with machine speed and
grinders
that there is a linear relationship between the unbalanced
forces and the machine speed. The zero-to-peak centrifugal
force amplitude from one such commonly used expression is
API 617 and API 684 work with maximum residual unbal-
ance Umax criteria for petroleum processing applications. The Wr fo
mass eccentricity is determined by dividing Umax by the rotor F o = -----------
- (3-7)
6000
weight. For axial and centrifugal compressors with maximum
continuous operating speeds greater than 25,000 rpm, API 617 Equations (3-3), (3-4), (3-6), and (3-7) appear to be very
establishes a maximum allowable mass eccentricity of 10 × different: the exponents on the speed of rotation vary from 1
10–6 in. (250 nm). For compressors operating at slower speeds, to 1.5 to 2, constants vary widely, and different variables
the maximum allowable mass eccentricity is appear. Some equations use mass, others use weight. In
reality, the equations are more similar than they appear.
em = 0.25/fo in. (3-5) Given the right understanding of Q as a replacement for eω,
Eq. (3-3), (3-4), and (3-7) take on the same character. These
em = 6.35/fo mm equations then indicate that the design force at operating
speed varies linearly with both the mass of the rotating body
where and the operating rotational speed. Once that state is identified,
fo = operating speed, rpm ≤ 25,000 rpm. Eq. (3-3) can be adjusted to reflect the actual speed of rotation,
This permitted initial mass eccentricity is tighter than ISO and the dynamic centrifugal force is seen to vary with the
balance quality grade G2.5, which would be applied to this square of the speed. Restating Eq. (3-6) and (3-7) in the form
type of equipment (Table 3.1, turbo-compressors) under ISO of Eq. (3-3) allows for the development of an effective eccen-
1940. As such, the dynamic force computed from this API tricity implied within these equations with the comparison
consideration will be quite small and a larger service factor shown in Fig. 3.2. Equation (3-7) produces the same result as
might be used to have a realistic design force. Eq. (3-4) using Q = 0.25 in./s (6.3 mm/s), and Sf = 2.5.
API 617 also identifies a limitation on the peak-to-peak The centrifugal forces due to mass unbalance are considered
vibration amplitude during mechanical testing of the to act at the center of gravity of the rotating part and vary
compressor with the equipment operating at its maximum harmonically at the speed of the machine in the two orthogonal
continuous speed ((12,000/fo)0.5 in. [25.4(12,000/fo)0.5 mm]). directions perpendicular to the shaft. The forces in the two
Some design firms use this criterion and a service factor Sf orthogonal directions are equal in magnitude and 90 degrees
of 2.0 to compute the dynamic force amplitude as out of phase and are transmitted to the foundation through the
3.2.3 Reciprocating machine loads—Internal-combustion

engines, piston-type compressors and pumps, some metal
forming presses, steam engines, and other machinery are
characterized by the rotating motion of a master crankshaft
and the linear reciprocating motion of connected pistons or
sliders. The motion of these components cause cyclically
varying forces, often called reciprocating forces.
3.2.3.1 Primary and secondary reciprocating loads—
The simplest type of reciprocating machine uses a single
crank mechanism as shown in Fig. 3.3. The idealization of
this mechanism consists of a piston that moves within a
guiding cylinder, a crank of length r that rotates about a
crank shaft, and a connecting rod of length L. The connecting
rod is attached to the piston at point P and to the crank at
Fig. 3.3—Crack mechanism. point C. The wrist pin P oscillates while the crank pin C
follows a circular path. This idealized single cylinder illus-
trates the concept of a machine producing both primary and
bearings. Schenck (1990) provides useful information about secondary reciprocating forces.
balance quality for various classes of machinery. If the crank is assumed to rotate at a constant angular
3.2.2.1e Machine unbalance determined from trip velocity ωo, the translational acceleration of the piston along
vibration level and effective bearing stiffness—Because a its axis may be evaluated. If Zp is defined as the piston
rotor is often set to trip on high vibration, it can be expected displacement toward the crankshaft (local Z-axis), an
to operate continuously at any vibration level up to the trip expression can be written for Zp at any time t. Further, the
limit. Given the effective bearing stiffness, it is possible to velocity and acceleration can also be obtained by taking the first
calculate the maximum dynamic force amplitude as and second derivatives of the displacement expression with
respect to time. The displacement, velocity, and acceleration
Fo = Vmax Keff (3-8) expressions for the motion of the piston are as follows
where 2
Z p = ⎛ r + ------⎞ – r ⎛ cos ω o t + ------ cos 2ω o t⎞
Vmax = the maximum allowable vibration, in. (mm); and r r
(3-9)
⎝ 4L⎠ ⎝ 4L ⎠
Keff = the effective bearing stiffness, lbf/in. (N/mm).
To use this approach, the manufacturer should provide
effective bearing stiffness or the engineer should calculate it
Z· p = rω o ⎛ sin ω o t + -----
r - sin 2ω t⎞
(3-10)
from the bearing geometry and operating conditions (such as ⎝ 2L o ⎠
viscosity and speed).
3.2.2.2 Loads from multiple rotating machines—If a
..
Zp = rω o ⎛ cos ω o t --- cos 2ω o t⎞
foundation supports multiple rotating machines, the engineer 2 r
(3-11)
should compute unbalanced force based on the mass, unbal- ⎝ L ⎠
ance, and operating speed of each rotating component. The
response to each rotating mass is then combined to determine where
the total response. Some practitioners, depending on the Zp = piston displacement, in. (mm);
specific situation of machine size and criticality, find it
r = length of crank, in. (mm);
advantageous to combine the unbalanced forces from each
rotating component into a single resultant unbalanced force. L = length of connecting rod, in. (mm);
The method of combining two dynamic forces is up to indi- ωo = circular operating frequency of the machine (rad/s); and
vidual judgment and often involves some approximations. In t = time, s.
some cases, loads or responses can be added absolutely. In Note that the expressions contain two terms each with a
other cases, the loads are treated as out-of-phase so that sine or cosine; the term that varies with the frequency of the
twisting effects are increased. Often, the operating speed of rotation, ωo, is referred to as the primary term while the term
the equipment should be considered. Even if operating that varies at twice the frequency of rotation, 2ωo, is called
speeds are nominally the same, the design engineer should the secondary term.
recognize that during normal operation, the speed of the Similar expressions can be developed for the local Z-axis
machines will vary and beating effects can develop. Beating (parallel to piston movement) and local Y-axis (perpendic-
effects develop as two machines operate at close to the same ular to piston movement) motion of the rotating parts of the
speed. At one point in time, responses to the two machines are crank. If any unbalance in the crankshaft is replaced by a
additive and motions are maximized. A short time later, the mass concentrated at the crank pin C, such that the inertia
responses cancel each other and the motions are minimized. forces are the same as in the original system, the following
The net effect is a continual cyclic rising and falling of motion. terms for motion at point C can be written
yp = –r sinωot (3-12)
·
y p = –r ωcosωot (3-13)
··
y p = r ωo2sinωot (3-14)
zp = r(1 – cosωot) (3-15)
· Fig. 3.4—Schematic of double-acting compressor cylinder

z p = rωosinωot (3-16)
and piston.
·· The gas force contributed to the piston rod equals the
z p = r ωo2cosωot (3-17)
instantaneous difference between the pressure force acting
on the head and crank end of the piston as shown in Fig. 3.4.
where The following formulation can be used to estimate the
yp = crank pin displacement in local Y-axis, in. (mm); and maximum force acting on the piston rod of an individual
zp = crank pin displacement in local Z-axis, in. (mm). double-acting cylinder
Identifying a part of the connecting rod (usually 1/3 of its
mass) plus the piston as the reciprocating mass mrec concen- Frod = [(Phead)(Ahead) – (Pcrank)(Acrank)] F1 (3-22)
trated at point P and designating the remainder of the
connecting rod plus the crank as the rotating mass mrot
concentrated at point C, expressions for the unbalanced Ahead = (π/4)Bc2 (3-23)
forces are as follows
Acrank = (π/4)(Bc2 – Drod2) (3-24)
Parallel to piston movement
where
2 2
2 r ω Frod = force acting on piston rod, lbf (N);
F z = ( m rec + m rot )rω o cos ω o t + m rec ----------o- cos 2ω o t (3-18) Ahead,
L
Acrank = head and crank areas, in.2 (mm2);
Perpendicular to piston movement Bc = cylinder bore diameter, in. (mm);
Drod = rod diameter, in. (mm);
2 Phead,
F Y = m rot rω o sin ω o t (3-19)
Pcrank = instantaneous head and crank pressures, psi,
(MPa); and
Note that Eq. (3.18) consists of two terms, a primary force F1 = correction factor.
The head and crank end pressures vary continuously and
(mrec + mrot )rωo2cosωo t (3-20) the differential force takes both positive and negative net
values during each cycle of piston motion. The normal
and a secondary force approach is to establish the head and crank pressures using
the maximum and minimum suction and discharge pressures.
2 2 For design purposes, it is common to multiply Eq. (3-22) by a
r ω factor F1 to help account for the natural tendency of gas forces
m rec = ----------o- cos 2ω o t (3-21)
L to exceed the values based directly on suction and discharge
pressures due to flow resistances and pulsations. Machines
whereas Eq. (3-19) has only a primary component. with good pulsation control and low external flow resistance
3.2.3.2 Compressor gas loads—A reciprocating may achieve F1 as small as 1.1; for machines with low
compressor raises the pressure of a certain flow of gas by compression ratio, high pulsations, or highly resistive flow
imparting reciprocating motion on a piston within a cylinder. through piping and nozzles, F1 can approach 1.5 or even
The piston normally compresses gas during both directions higher. A reasonable working value for F1 is 1.15 to 1.2.
of reciprocating motion. As gas flows to and from each end, Preferably, the maximum rod force resulting from gas
the pressure of the gas increases as it is compressed by each pressures is based on knowledge of the continuous variation of
stroke of the piston. The increase in pressure within the pressure in the cylinder (measured or predicted). In a repair
cylinder creates reaction forces on the head and crank ends situation, measured cylinder pressure variation using a cylinder
of the piston which alternate as gas flows to and from each analyzer provides the most accurate value of gas forces. Even
end of the cylinder. without cylinder pressure analysis, extreme operating values of
suction and discharge pressure for each stage should be anchor bolts and the foundation block. The mechanics
recorded before the repair and used in the Eq. (3-22). involved in transmitting loads are complex and cannot easily
On new compressors, the engineer should ask the machine be reduced to a simple relationship between a few parameters
manufacturer to provide values for maximum compressive beyond the given load equations. A detailed finite-element
and tensile gas loads on each cylinder rod and, if these are analysis of metal compressor frame, chock mounts, concrete
based on suction and discharge pressures, to recommend a block, and grout will account for the relative flexibility of the
value of F1. frame and its foundation in determining individual anchor
Gas forces act on the crankshaft with an equal and opposite bolt loads and implicitly provide a value for Fred. If the
reaction on the cylinder. Thus, crankshaft and cylinder frame is very stiff relative to the foundation, the value for
forces globally balance each other. Between the crankshaft Fred will be higher, implying more of the transmitted loads
and the cylinder, however, the compressor frame stretches or are carried by the frame and less by the anchor bolts and
contracts in tension or compression under the action of the foundation block. Based on experience, a value of 2 for this
gas forces. The forces due to frame deflections are trans- factor is conservatively low; however, higher values have
mitted to the foundation through connections with the been seen with frames designed to be especially stiff.
compressor frame. When acting without slippage, the frame Simplifying this approach, one report (Smalley and
and foundation become an integral structure and together Harrell 1997) suggests using a finite element analysis to
stretch or contract under the gas loads. calculate forces transmitted to the anchor bolts. If a finite
The magnitude of gas force transferred into the foundation element analysis is not possible, the engineer should get
depends on the relative flexibility of the compressor frame. from the machine manufacturer or calculate the maximum
A very stiff frame transmits only a small fraction of the gas horizontal gas force and maximum horizontal inertia force
force while a very flexible frame transmits most or all of the for any throw or cylinder. The mounts, anchor bolts, and
force. Similar comments apply to the transfer of individual blocks are then designed for
cylinder inertia forces.
Based on limited comparisons using finite element analysis FTHROW = (greater of FGMAX or FIMAX)/2 (3-28)
(Smalley 1988), the following guideline is suggested for gas
and inertia force loads transmitted to the foundation by a where
typical compressor
FGMAX = maximum horizontal gas force on a throw or
cylinder, lbf (N);
Fblock = Frod /Fred (3-25)
FIMAX = maximum horizontal inertia force on a throw or
cylinder, lbf (N); and
(Fbolt)CHG = [(Frod)/(Nbolt)CHG]/Fred (3-26)
FTHROW = horizontal force to be resisted by each throw’s
anchor bolts, lbf (N).
(Fbolt)frame = [(Funbalance/(Nbolt)]/Fred (3-27) 3.2.3.3 Reciprocating inertia loads for multicylinder
machines—As a practical matter, most reciprocating
where machines have more than one cylinder, and manufacturers
Fblock = the force acting outward on the block from arrange the machine components in a manner that minimizes
which concrete stresses should be calcu- the net unbalanced forces. For example, rotating parts like
lated, lbf (N); the crankshaft can be balanced by adding or removing
(Fbolt)CHG = the force to be restrained by friction at the correcting weights. Translating parts like pistons and those
cross head guide tie-down bolts, lbf (N); that exhibit both rotation and translation, like connecting
(Fbolt)frame = the force to be restrained by friction at the rods, can be arranged in such a way as to minimize the unbal-
frame tie-down bolts, lbf (N); anced forces and moments generated. Seldom, if ever, is it
Fred = a force reduction factor with suggested possible to perfectly balance reciprocating machines.
value of 2, to account for the fraction of The forces generated by reciprocating mechanisms are
individual cylinder load carried by the functions of the mass, stroke, piston arrangement,
compressor frame (“frame rigidity factor”); connecting rod size, crank throw orientation (phase angle),
(Nbolt)CHG = the number of bolts holding down one and the mass and arrangement of counterweights on the
crosshead guide; crankshaft. For this reason, calculating the reciprocating
(Nbolt)frame = the number of bolts holding down the forces for multicylinder machines can be quite complex and
frame, per cylinder; are therefore normally provided by the machine manufac-
Frod = force acting on piston rod, from Eq. (3-22), turer. If the machine is an integral engine compressor, it can
lbf (N); and include, in one frame, cylinders oriented horizontally, verti-
Funbalance = the maximum value from Eq. (3-18) applied cally, or in between, all with reciprocating inertias.
using parameters for a horizontal Some machine manufacturers place displacement transducers
compressor cylinder, lbf (N). and accelerometers on strategic points on the machinery. They
The factor Fred is used to simplify a complex problem, thus can then measure displacements and accelerations at those
avoiding the application of unrealistically high loads on the points for several operational frequencies to determine the
magnitude of the unbalanced forces and couples for multi- S

d s ( t ) = --- sin ( ω o t ) (3-30)
cylinder machines. 2
3.2.3.4 Estimating reciprocating inertia forces from
multicylinder machines—In cases where the manufacturer’s where
data are unavailable or components are being replaced, the ds = displacement of the slide, in. (mm);
engineer should use hand calculations to estimate the recip- S = press stroke, in. (mm); and
rocating forces from a multicylinder machine. One such ωo = circular operating frequency of the machine (rad/s).
procedure for a machine having n number of cylinders is This leads to a dynamic inertia force from the slide of
discussed by Mandke and Troxler (1992). Section 3.7
summarizes this method. 2S
3.2.4 Impulsive machine loads—The impulsive load F s ( t ) = m d ω o --- sin ( ω o t ) ⁄ 12 lbf (3-31)
2
generated by a forging hammer is caused by the impact of the
hammer ram onto the hammer anvil. This impact process
2S
transfers the kinetic energy of the ram into kinetic energy of F s ( t ) = m d ω o --- sin ( ω o t ) ⁄ 1000 N
the entire hammer assembly. The post-impact velocity of the 2
hammer is represented by
where
Fs = dynamic inertia force of slide, lbf (N); and
M
v h = -------r ( 1 + α h )v r (3-29) md = slide mass including the effects of any balance mech-
Mh anism, lbm (kg).
This assumption is based on simple circular motions and
where simple linkages. Other systems may be in-place to increase
vh = post-impact hammer velocity, ft/s (m/s); the press force and improve the timing. These other systems
Mr = ram mass including dies and ancillary parts, lbm (kg); may increase the acceleration of the unbalanced weights and
thus alter the magnitude and frequency components of the
Mh = hammer mass including any auxiliary foundation, lbm
dynamic force transmitted to the foundation.
(kg);
3.2.5 Loading conditions—During their lives, machinery
αh = ram rebound velocity relative to impact velocity; and
equipment support structures and foundations undergo
vr = ram impact velocity, ft/s (m/s). different loading conditions including erection, testing, shut-
General experience indicates that αh is approximately down, maintenance, and normal and abnormal operation. For
60% for many forging hammer installations. From that point, each loading condition, there can be one or more combinations
the hammer foundation performance can be assessed as a of loads that apply to the structure or foundation. The following
rigid body oscillating as a single degree-of-freedom system loading conditions are generally considered in design:
with an initial velocity of vh. • Erection condition represents the design loads that act
For metal-forming presses, the dynamic forces develop on the structure/foundation during its construction;
from two sources: the mechanical movement of the press • Testing condition represents the design loads that act on
components and material-forming process. Each of these the structure/foundation while the equipment being
forces is unique to the press design and application and needs supported is undergoing testing, such as hydrotest;
to be evaluated with proper information from the press • Empty (shutdown) represents the design loads that act
manufacturer and the owner. on the structure when the supported equipment is at its
The press mechanics often include rotating and recipro- least weight due to removal of process fluids, applicable
cating components. The dynamic forces from these indi- internals, or both as a result of maintenance or other
vidual pieces follow the rules established in earlier sections out-of-service disruption;
of this document for rotating and reciprocating components. • Normal operating condition represents the design loading
Only the press manufacturer familiar with all the internal during periods of normal equipment operation; and
components can knowledgeably calculate the specific • Abnormal operating condition represents the design
forces. Figure 2.3 presents a horizontal force time-history for loading during periods when unusual or extreme operating
a forging press. Similar presses can be expected to have loads act on the structure/foundation.
similar characteristics; however, the particular values and 3.2.6 Load combinations—Table 3.2 shows the general
timing data differ. classification of loads for use in determining the applicable
The press drive mechanisms include geared and direct- load factors in strength design (ACI 318). In considering soil
drive systems. Depending on the design, these drives may or stresses, the normal approach is working stress design
may not be balanced. The press slide travels vertically without load factors and with overall factors of safety iden-
through a set stroke of 1/2 in. (12 mm) to several inches at a tified as appropriate by geotechnical engineers. The load
given speed. Some small presses may have inclinable beds combinations frequently used for the various load conditions
so that the slide is not moving vertically. It is often adequate are as follows:
to assume that the slide moves in a vertical path defined by a 1. Erection
circularly rotating crankshaft, that is a) Dead load + erection forces
Table 3.2—Load classifications for ultimate stability of a cohesive soil, frost heave, or any other relevant
strength design soils concern.
Load In general, problems involving the dynamic properties of
Design loads classification
soils are divided into small and large strain amplitude
Weight of structure, equipment, internals, insulation, and
platforms responses. For machine foundations, the amplitudes of
Temporary loads and forces caused by erection Dead dynamic motion, and consequently the strains in the soil, are
Fluid loads during testing and operation
Thermal loads usually low (strains less than10–3%). A foundation that is
Anchor and guide loads subjected to an earthquake or blast loading is likely to
Platform and walkway loads undergo large deformations and, therefore, induce large
Materials to be temporarily stored during maintenance
Materials normally stored during operation such as tools strains in the soil. The information in this report is only
Live
and maintenance equipment applicable for typical machine foundation strains. Refer to
Vibrating equipment forces
Impact loads for hoist and equipment handling utilities Seed and Idriss (1970) for information on strain-related
Earthquake loads effects on shear modulus and material damping.
Transportation loads Environmental The key soil properties, Poisson’s ratio and dynamic shear
Snow, ice, or rain loads
Wind loads modulus, may be significantly affected by water table vari-
ations. Prudence suggests that in determining these properties,
b) Dead load + erection forces + reduced wind + snow, such variations be considered and assessed, usually in
ice, or rain conjunction with the geotechnical engineers. This approach
c) Dead load + erection forces + seismic + snow, ice, or rain often results in expanding the range of properties to be
2. Testing considered in the design phase.
a) Dead load + test loads 3.3.1 Poisson’s ratio—Poisson’s ratio ν, which is the ratio
b) Dead load + test loads + live + snow, ice, or rain of the strain in the direction perpendicular to loading to the
c) Dead load + test loads + reduced wind + snow, ice, strain in the direction of loading, is used to calculate both the
or rain soil stiffness and damping. Poisson’s ratio can be computed
3. Empty (shutdown) from the measured values of wave velocities traveling through
a) Dead load + maintenance forces + live load + snow, the soil. These computations, however, are difficult. The
ice, or rain stiffness and damping of a foundation system are generally
4. Normal operation insensitive to variations of Poisson’s ratio common in soils.
a) Dead load Generally, Poisson’s ratio varies from 0.25 to 0.35 for
b) Dead load + thermal load + machine forces + live cohesionless soils and from 0.35 to 0.45 for cohesive soils. If
loads + wind + snow, ice, or rain no specific values of Poisson’s ratio are available, then, for
c) Dead load + thermal load + machine forces + seismic design purposes, the engineer may take Poisson’s ratio as
+ snow, ice, or rain 0.33 for cohesionless soils and 0.40 for cohesive soils.
5) Abnormal operation 3.3.2 Dynamic shear modulus—Dynamic shear modulus
a) Dead load + upset (abnormal) machine loads + live + G is the most important soil parameter influencing the
reduced wind dynamic behavior of the soil-foundation system. Together
It is common to only use some fraction of full wind, such as with Poisson’s ratio, it is used to calculate soil impedance.
80% in combination with erection loads and 33% for test Refer to Section 4.2 for the discussion on soil impedance.
loads, due to the short duration of these conditions (ASCE 7). The dynamic shear modulus represents the slope of the
shear stress versus shear strain curve. Most soils do not
3.3—Dynamic soil properties respond elastically to shear strains; they respond with a
Soil dynamics deals with engineering properties and combination of elastic and plastic strain. For that reason,
behavior of soil under dynamic stress. For the dynamic analysis plotting shear stress versus shear strain results in a curve not
of machine foundations, soil properties, such as Poisson’s a straight line. The value of G varies based on the strain
ratio, dynamic shear modulus, and damping of soil, are considered. The lower the strain, the higher the dynamic
generally required. shear modulus.
Though this work is typically completed by a geotechnical Several methods are available for obtaining useful values
engineer, this section provides a general overview of of dynamic shear modulus:
methods used to determine the various soil properties. Many • Field measurements of stress wave velocities of in-place
references are available that provide a greater level of detail soils;
on both theory and standard practice, including Das (1993), • Laboratory tests on soil samples; and
Bowles (1996), Fang (1991), and Arya, O’Neill, and Pincus • Correlation to other soil properties.
(1979). Seed and Idriss (1970) provide greater detail on Due to variations inherent in the determination of dynamic
items that influence different soil properties. shear modulus values, it may be appropriate to complete more
This section does not cover considerations that affect the than one foundation analysis. One analysis could be
suitability of a given soil to support a dynamic machine completed with the minimum possible value, one could be
foundation. Problems could include excessive settlement completed using the maximum possible value, and then addi-
caused by dynamic or static loads, liquefaction, dimensional tional analyses could be completed with intermediate values.
3.3.2.1 Field determination—Field measurements are

the most common method for determining the dynamic shear
modulus of a given soil. These methods involve measuring
the soil characteristics, in-place, as close as possible to the
actual foundation location(s).
Because field determinations are an indirect determination
of shear modulus, the specific property measured is the shear
wave velocity. There are three different types of stress waves
that can be transmitted through soil or any other elastic body.
• Compression (primary P) waves;
• Shear (secondary S) waves; and
• Rayleigh (surface) waves.
Compression waves are transmitted through soil by a
volume change associated with compressive and tensile Fig. 3.5—Schematic of cross-hole technique.
stresses. Compression waves are the fastest of the three
stress waves.
Shear waves are transmitted through soil by distortion
associated with shear stresses in the soil and are slower than
compression waves. No volume change occurs in the soil.
Rayleigh waves occur at the free surface of an elastic body;
typically, this is the ground surface. Rayleigh waves have
components that are both perpendicular to the free surface
and parallel to the free surface and are slightly slower than
shear waves.
Several methods are available for measuring wave veloci-
ties of the in-place soil:
• The cross-hole method;
• The down-hole method;
• The up-hole method; and
• Seismic reflection (or refraction). Fig. 3.6—Equipment and instrumentation for down-hole
survey.
In the cross-hole method, two vertical boreholes are
drilled. A signal generator is placed in one hole and a sensor
is placed in the other hole. An impulse signal is generated in where
one hole, and then the time the shear wave takes to travel G = dynamic shear modulus of the soil, lbf/ft2 (Pa);
from the signal generator to the sensor is measured. The Vs = shear wave velocity of the soil, ft/s (m/s); and
travel time divided by the distance yields the shear wave
ρ = soil mass density, lbm/ft3 (kg/m3).
velocity. The cross-hole method can be used to determine G
An alternative field method is to use reflection or refraction
at different depths (Fig. 3.5).
of elastic stress waves. These methods are based on the
In the down-hole method, only one vertical borehole is
principle that when elastic waves hit a boundary between
drilled. A signal generator is placed at the ground surface
dissimilar layers, the wave is reflected or refracted. This
some distance away from the borehole, and a sensor is placed
method should only be used at locations where the soils are
in the bottom of the borehole. An impulse signal is generated,
deposited in discrete horizontal, or nearly horizontal layers,
and then the time the shear wave takes to travel from the
or at locations where soil exists over top of bedrock. This
signal generator to the sensor is measured. The travel time
method consists of generating a stress wave at one location
divided by the distance yields the shear wave velocity. This
at the ground surface and measuring the time it takes for the
method can be run several different times, with the signal
stress wave to reach a second location at the ground surface.
generator located at different distances from the borehole
The wave travels from the ground surface to the interface
each time. This permits the measuring of soil properties at
between differing soils layers, travels along the interface,
several different locations, which can then be averaged to
then back to the ground surface. The time the wave takes to
determine an average shear wave velocity (Fig. 3.6).
travel from the signal generator to the sensor is a function of
The up-hole method is similar to the down-hole method. the soils properties and the depth of the soil interface. One
The difference is that the signal generator is placed in the advantage of this method is that no boreholes are required.
borehole and the sensor is placed at the ground surface. Also, this method yields an estimated depth to differing soil
Dynamic shear modulus and measured-in-field shear layers. One disadvantage is that this method cannot be used
wave velocity are related as follows when the groundwater table is near the ground surface.
3.3.2.2 Laboratory determination—Laboratory tests are
G = ρ(Vs)2 (3-32) considered less accurate than field measurements due to the
Table 3.3—Values of K2 versus relative density In the previous equations,

(Seed and Idriss 1970) ev = void ratio; and
Relative density, % K2 σo = probable confining pressure, lbf/ft2 (Pa).
90 70 In general, relative density in sand is proportional to the
75 61 void ratio. Seed and Idriss (1970) provide guidance for
60 52 correlating the dynamic shear modulus to relative density in
45 43 sand, along with the confining pressure
40 40
30 34 G = 1000K 2 σ o lb/ft2 (3-35)
possibility of sample disturbance. Sometimes laboratory

tests are used to validate field measurements when a high G = 6920K 2 σ o Pa
level of scrutiny is required, for instance, when soil properties
are required for a nuclear energy facility. where K2 = a parameter that depends on void ratio and strain
The most common laboratory test is the Resonant-Column amplitude. Table 3.3 provides values of K2 with respect to
method, where a cylindrical sample of soil is placed in a relative density.
device capable of generating forced vibrations. The soil 3.3.3 Damping of soil—Damping is a phenomenon of
sample is exited at different frequencies until the resonant energy dissipation that opposes free vibrations of a system.
frequency is determined. The dynamic soil modulus can be Like the restoring forces, the damping forces oppose the
calculated based on the frequency, the length of the soil motion, but the energy dissipated through damping cannot
sample, the end conditions of the soil sample, and the density be recovered. A characteristic feature of damping forces is
of the soil sample. ASTM D 4015 defines the Resonant- that they lag the displacement and are out of phase with the
Column method. motion. Damping of soil includes two effects—geometric
3.3.2.3 Correlation to other soil properties—Correlation and material damping.
is another method for determining dynamic soils properties. Geometric, or radiation, damping reflects energy dissipation
The engineer should be careful when using any correlation through propagation of elastic waves away from the immediate
method because these are generally the least-accurate vicinity of a foundation and inelastic deformation of soil. It
methods. The most appropriate time to consider using these results from the practical infinity of the soil medium, and it
methods is for preliminary design or for small noncritical is close to viscous in character. Refer to Chapter 4 for
applications with small dynamic loads. Correlation to other methods of computing geometric damping.
soil properties should be considered as providing a range of Material, or hysteretic, damping reflects energy dissipation
possible values, not providing a single exact value. within the soil itself due to the imperfect elasticity of real
Hardin and Richart (1963) determined that soil void ratio materials, which exhibit a hysteric loop effect under cyclic
ev and the probable confining pressure σo had the most loading (Fig. 3.7). The amount of dissipated energy is given
impact on the dynamic shear modulus. Hardin and Black by the area of the hysteretic loop. The hysteretic loop implies
(1968) developed the following relationships: a phase shift between the stress and strain because there is a
stress at zero strain and vice versa, as can be seen from Fig. 3.7.
For round-grained sands with e < 0.8, dynamic shear The amount of dissipated energy depends on strain
modulus can be estimated from (displacement) but is essentially independent of frequency,
as shown on Fig. 3.8.
2
31,530 ( 2.17 – e v ) σ o The magnitude of material damping can be established
G = ------------------------------------------------------- lbf/ft2 (3-33)
1 + ev experimentally using the hysteretic loop and the relation
218,200 ( 2.17 – e v ) σ o
2 1 ΔW
G = ---------------------------------------------------------- Pa β m = ------ --------- (3-36)
1 + ev 4π W
For angular-grained materials with e > 0.6 and normally where

consolidated clays with low surface activity, dynamic shear βm = material damping ratio;
modulus can be estimated from ΔW = area enclosed by the hysteretic loop; and
W = strain energy.
2
14,760 ( 2.97 – e v ) σ o Instead of an experimental determination, many practitioners
G = ------------------------------------------------------- lbf/ft2 (3-34) use a material damping ratio of 0.05, or 5%. The material
1 + ev
damping ratio is fairly constant for small strains but increases
2 with strain due to the nonlinear behavior of soils.
102,140 ( 2.97 – e v ) σ o
G = ---------------------------------------------------------- Pa The term material or hysteretic damping implies
1 + ev frequency independent damping. Experiments indicate that
frequency independent hysteretic damping is much more
typical of soils than viscous damping because the area of the

hysteretic loop does not grow in proportion to the frequency.
3.4—Vibration performance criteria

The main purposes of the foundation system with respect
to dynamic loads include limiting vibrations, internal loads,
and stresses within the equipment. The foundation system
also limits vibrations in the areas around the equipment
where other vibration-sensitive equipment may be installed,
personnel may have to work on a regular basis, or damage to Fig. 3.7—Hysteretic loop.
the surrounding structures may occur. These performance
criteria are usually established based on vibration amplitudes
at key points on or around the equipment and foundation
system. These amplitudes may be based on displacement,
velocity, or acceleration units. Displacement limitations are
commonly based on peak-to-peak amplitudes measured in
mils (0.001 in.) or microns (10–6 m). Velocity limitations are
typically based on either peak velocities or root-mean-square
(rms) velocities in units of inch per second or millimeter per
second. Displacement criteria are almost always frequency
dependent with greater motions tolerated at slower speeds. Fig. 3.8—Comparison of viscous and hysteretic damping.
Velocity criteria may depend on frequency but are often
independent. Acceleration criteria may be constant with accelerations and stresses that are unrelated to the stiffness,
frequency or dependent. mass, or other design aspect of the foundation system. Thus,
Some types of equipment operate at a constant speed while monitoring accelerations in particular on an equipment frame
other types operate across a range of speeds. The foundation may not be indicative of foundation suitability or adequacy.
engineer should consider the effect of these speed variations Researchers have presented various studies and papers
during the foundation design. addressing the issues of machinery vibration limits. This
3.4.1 Machine limits—The vibration limits applicable to variety is reflected in the standards of engineering companies,
the machine are normally set by the equipment manufacturer plant owners, and industry standards. When the equipment
or are specified by the equipment operator or owner. The manufacturer does not establish limits, recommendation from
limits are usually predicated on either limiting damage to the ISO 10816-1, Blake (1964), and Baxter and Bernhard (1967)
equipment or ensuring proper performance of the equipment. are often followed. Most of these studies relate directly to
Limits specified by operators of the machinery and design
rotating equipment. In many cases they are also applicable to
engineers are usually based on such factors as experience or
reciprocating equipment. Rarely do these studies apply to
the installation of additional vibration monitoring equipment.
impulsive equipment.
For rotating equipment (fans, pumps, and turbines), the
normal criterion limits vibration displacements or velocities at ISO publishes ISO 10816 in a series of six parts to address
the bearings of the rotating shaft. Excessive vibrations of the evaluation of machinery vibration by measurements on the
bearings increase maintenance requirements and lead to nonrotating parts. Part 1 provides general guidelines and sets
premature failure of the bearings. Often, rotating equipment the overall rules with the subsequent parts providing specific
has vibration switches to stop the equipment if vibrations values for specific machinery types. These standards are
become excessive. primarily directed toward in-place measurements for the
Reciprocating equipment (diesel generators, compressors, assessment of machinery operation. They are not intended to
and similar machinery) tends to be more dynamically rugged identify design standards. Design engineers, however, have
than rotating equipment. At the same time, it often generates used predecessor documents to ISO 10816 as a baseline for
greater dynamic forces. While the limits may be higher, design calculations and can be expected to do similarly with
motions are measured at bearing locations. In addition, opera- these more recent standards.
tors of reciprocating compressors often monitor vibrations of The document presents vibration criteria in terms of rms
the compressor base relative to the foundation (sometimes velocity. Where there is complexity in the vibration signal
called “frame movement”) as a measure of the foundation and (beyond simple rotor unbalance), the rms velocity basis
machine-mounting condition and integrity. provides the broad measure of vibration severity and can be
Impulsive machines (presses, forging hammers) tend not to correlated to likely machine damage. For situations where
have specific vibration limitations as controllable by the foun- the pattern of motion is fairly characterized by one simple
dation design. With these machines, it is important to recognize harmonic, such as simple rotor unbalance, the rms velocities
the difference between the inertial forces and equipment can be multiplied by √2 to determine corresponding peak
dynamics as contrasted with the foundation system dynamics. velocity criteria. For these same cases, displacements can be
The forces with the equipment can generate significant calculated as
Table 3.4—Service factors from Blake (Richart, value. If the motion is not a simple pure harmonic motion, a
Hall, and Woods 1970) simple relationship among the rms displacement, rms velocity,
Not peak velocity, zero-to-peak displacement, and peak-to-peak
Bolted bolted displacement does not exist.
Item down down
Single-stage centrifugal pump, electric motor, fan 1.0 0.4
ISO 10816-1 identifies four areas of interest with respect
Typical chemical processing equipment, noncritical 1.0 0.4
to the magnitude of vibration measured:
Turbine, turbo-generator, centrifugal compressor 1.6 0.6
• Zone A: vibration typical of new equipment;
Centrifugal, stiff-shaft (at basket housing), multi-stage • Zone B: vibration normally considered acceptable for
2.0 0.8
centrifugal pump long-term operation;
Miscellaneous equipment, characteristics unknown 2.0 0.8 • Zone C: vibration normally considered unsatisfactory
Centrifuge, shaft-suspended, on shaft near basket 0.5 0.2 for long-term operation; and
Centrifuge, link-suspended, slung 0.3 0.1 • Zone D: vibration normally considered severe enough
Notes: 1. Vibration is measured at the bearing housing except as noted; 2. Machine to damage the machine.
tools are excluded; and 3) Compared or measured displacements are multiplied by the
appropriate service factor before comparing with Fig. 3.9. The subsequent parts of ISO 10816 establish the boundaries
between these zones as applicable to specific equipment.
Part 2, ISO 10816-2, establishes criteria for large, land-
based, steam-turbine generator sets rated over 67,000 horse-
power (50 MW). The most general of the standards is Part 3,
ISO 10816-3, which addresses in-place evaluation of general
industrial machinery nominally more than 15 kW and operating
between 120 and 15,000 rpm. Within ISO 10816-3, criteria are
established for four different groups of machinery, and
provisions include either flexible or rigid support conditions.
Criteria are also established based on both rms velocity and rms
displacement. Part 4, ISO 10816-4, identifies evaluation criteria
for gas-turbine-driven power generation units (excluding
aircraft derivatives) operating between 3000 and 20,000 rpm.
Part 5 (ISO 10816-5) applies to machine sets in hydro-power
facilities and pumping plants. Part 6, ISO 10816-6, provides
evaluation criteria for reciprocating machines with power
ratings over 134 horsepower (100 kW). The scope of Part 5 is
not applicable to general equipment foundations and the
criteria of Part 6 are not sufficiently substantiated and defined
to be currently useful.
Another document available for establishing vibration
limitation is from Lifshits (Lifshits, Simmons, and Smalley
1986). This document follows Blake’s approach of identi-
fying five different categories from No Faults to Danger of
Immediate Failure. In addition, a series of correction factors
are established to broaden the applicability to a wider range
of equipment and measurement data.
Blake’s paper (Blake 1964) has become a common basis
for some industries and firms. His work presented a standard
vibration chart for process equipment with performance
Fig. 3.9—Vibration criteria for rotating machinery (Blake rated from “No Faults (typical of new equipment)” to
1964, as modified by Arya, O’Neill, and Pincus 1979). “Dangerous (shut it down now to avoid danger).” The chart
was primarily intended to aid plant personnel in assessing field
v′ v′ installations and determining maintenance plans. Service
v = ------- = ----------- (3-37)
ωm 2πf m factors for different types of equipment are used to allow
widespread use of the basic chart. This tool uses vibration
where displacement (in. or mm) rather than velocity and covers speed
v = displacement amplitude, in. (cm); ranges from 100 to 10,000 rpm. Figure 3.9 and Table 3.4
v′ = velocity, in./s (cm/s); present the basic chart and service factors established by Blake.
ωm = circular frequency of motion, rad/s; and Baxter and Bernhard (1967) offered more general vibration
fm = frequency of motion, Hz. tolerances in a paper that has also become widely referenced.
The rms velocity yields an rms displacement, and a peak Again with primary interest to the plant maintenance operations,
velocity results in a zero-to-peak displacement value, which they established the General Machinery Vibration Severity
can be doubled to determine a peak-to-peak displacement Chart, shown in Fig. 3.10, with severity ranging from extremely
smooth to very rough. These are plotted as displacement versus

vibration frequency so that the various categories are differenti-
ated along lines of constant peak velocity.
The American Petroleum Institute (API) also has a series
of standards for equipment common in the petrochemical
industry (541, 610, 612, 613, 617, 618, and 619). ISO 10816-3
can be applied for some large electrical motors; however,
most design offices do not generally perform rigorous analyses
for these items.
Figure 3.11 provides a comparison of five generic standards
against four corporate standards. To the extent possible, the
comparisons are presented on a common basis. In particular,
the comparison is based on equipment that is in service,
perhaps with minor faults, but which could continue in
service indefinitely. The Blake line is at the upper limit of the
zone identifying operation with minor faults with a service
factor of one applicable for fans, some pumps, and similar
equipment. The Lifshits line separates the acceptable and
marginal zones and includes a K of 0.7, reflecting equipment
with rigid rotors. The ISO lines are drawn at the upper level
of Zone B, normally considered acceptable for long-term
operation. The ISO 10816-3 line is for large machines
between 400 and 67,000 horsepower (300 kW and 50 MW)
on rigid support systems. The ISO 10816-2 is for large Fig. 3.10—General Machinery Vibration Severity Chart
turbines over 67,000 horsepower (50 MW). (Baxter and Bernhard 1967).
The company standards are used for comparison to calculate
motions at the design stage. For these calculations, the compa-
nies prescribe rotor unbalance conditions worse than those
expected during delivery and installation. These load defini-
tions are consistent with those presented in Section 3.2.2.1.
Thus, there is a level of commonality. Company G’s criteria
are for large turbine applications and, thus, most comparable
to the ISO 10816-2 criteria. The other company standards are
for general rotating equipment. Company F permits higher
motions for reciprocating equipment. In all cases the design
companies standards reflect that the manufacturer may
establish equipment-specific criteria that could be more
limiting than their internal criteria.
Figure 3.11 shows that the corporate standards are generally
below the generic standards because the generic standards are
intended for in-place service checks and maintenance decisions
rather than offering initial design criteria. One company is
clearly more lenient for very low-speed equipment, but the
corporate standards tend to be similar.
The Shock and Vibration Handbook (Harris 1996)
contains further general information on such standards.
3.4.2 Physiological limits—Human perception and sensi-
Fig. 3.11—Comparison of permissible displacements.
tivity to vibration is ambiguous and subjective. Researchers
have studied and investigated this topic, but there are no clear
uniform U.S. standards. In Germany, VDI 2057 provides standing person). This figure reflects the time of exposure and
guidance for the engineer. Important issues are the personnel frequency consideration for fatigue-decreased proficiency.
expectations and needs and the surrounding environment. The figure shows that people exhibit fatigue and reduced profi-
ISO 2631 provides guidance for human exposure to ciency when subjected to small accelerations for long periods or
whole-body vibration and considers different comfort levels greater accelerations for shorter periods. The frequency of the
and duration of exposure. This document does not address accelerations also impact fatigue and proficiency.
the extensive complexities identified in ISO 2631. Figure 3.12 The modified Reiher-Meister figure (barely perceptible,
presents the basic suggested acceleration limits from ISO noticeable, and troublesome) is also used to establish limits
2631 applicable to longitudinal vibrations (vertical for a with respect to personnel sensitivity, shown in Fig. 3.13.
Table 3.5—Short-term permissible values

(DIN 4150-3)
Top complete
Type Foundation Foundation Foundation floor (all
of building (1 to 10 Hz) (10 to 50 Hz) (50 to 100 Hz) frequencies)
Industrial and 0.8 in./s 0.8 to 1.6 in./s 1.6 to 2.0 in.s 1.6 in./s
commercial (20 mm/s) (20 to 40 mm/s) (40 to 50 mm/s) (40 mm/s)
Residential 0.2 in./s 0.2 to 0.6 in./s 0.6 to 0.8 in./s 0.6 in./s
(5 mm/s) (5 to 15 mm/s) (15 to 20 mm/s) (15 mm/s)
Special or 0.1 in./s 0.1 to 0.3 in./s 0.3 to 0.4 in./s 0.3 in./s
sensitive (3 mm/s) (3 to mm/s) (8 to 10 mm/s) (8 mm/s)
levels of vibration from mining operations that have

damaged structures.
3.4.3 Frequency ratios—The frequency ratio is a term that
relates the operating speed of the equipment to the natural
frequencies of the foundation. Engineers or manufacturers
require that the frequency of the foundation differ from the
Fig. 3.12—Longitudinal acceleration limits (adapted from operating speed of the equipment by certain margins. This
ISO 2631-1). limitation is applied to prevent resonance conditions from
developing within the dynamic soil-foundation-equipment.
The formulation or presentation of frequency ratios may be
based around either fo/fn or fn/fo (operating frequency to
natural frequency or its inverse), and engineers or manufac-
turers should exercise caution to prevent misunderstandings.
A common practice among engineering firms is to
compute the natural frequencies of the basic equipment-
foundation and compare the values with the dynamic excitation
frequency. Many companies require that the natural
frequency be 20 to 33% removed from the operating speed.
Some firms have used factors as low as 10% or as high as
50%. If the frequencies are well separated, no further evaluation
is needed. If there is a potential for resonance, the engineer
should either adjust to the foundation size or perform more
refined calculations. Refined calculations may include an
analysis with a deliberately reduced level of damping. The
size and type of equipment play an important role in this
decision process.
Frequency ratio is a reasonable design criterion, but one
single limiting value does not fit all situations. Where there
is greater uncertainty in other design parameters (soil stiffness,
for example), more conservatism in the frequency ratio may
be appropriate. Similarly, vibration problems can exist even
though resonance is not a problem.
3.4.4 Transmissibility—A common tool for the assessment
Fig. 3.13—Reiher-Meister Chart (Richart, Hall, and of vibrations at the design stage is a transmissibility ratio, as
Woods 1970). shown in Fig. 3.14, which is based on a single degree-of-
freedom (SDOF) system with a constant speed fo excitation
DIN 4150 is another standard used internationally. Part 3 force. This ratio identifies the force transmitted through the
defines permissible velocities suitable for assessment of short- spring-damper system with the supporting system as
term vibrations on structures, which are given in Table 3.5. compared with the dynamic force generated by the equip-
Furthermore, Part 2 of this German standard defines limitations ment. This ratio should be as low as possible, that is, only
for allowable vibrations based on perception as a function of transmit 20% of the equipment dynamic force into the
location (residential, light industrial) and either daytime or supporting system. Low transmissibility implies low vibra-
nighttime. Most engineering offices do not consider human tions in the surroundings, but this is not an absolute truth.
perception to vibrations, unless there are extenuating circum- This transmissibility figure assumes that the damping force is
stances (proximity to office or residential areas). directly and linearly proportional to the velocity of the SDOF.
There are no conclusive limitations on the effects of vibration Where the system characteristics are such that the damping
of surrounding buildings. The Reiher-Meister figure identifies force is frequency dependent, the aforementioned represen-
tation is not accurate. When the damping resistance

decreases at higher frequencies, the deleterious effect of
damping on force transmissibility can be mitigated.
For soil or pile-supported systems, the transmissibility
ratio may not be meaningful. In SDOF models of these
systems, the spring and damper are provided by the soil and,
while the transmissibility of the design may be low, the
energy worked through these system components is motion
in the surroundings that may not be acceptable.
3.5—Concrete performance criteria

The design of the foundation should withstand all applied Fig. 3.14—Force transmissibility.
loads, both static and dynamic. The foundation should act in
unison with the equipment and supporting soil or structure to
meet the deflection limits specified by the machinery manu- the foundation engineer and machinery engineer because it
facturer or equipment owner. falls between their areas of responsibility. Anchorage-type
The service life of a concrete foundation should meet or machine-mounting systems integrate the foundation and the
exceed the anticipated service life of the equipment installed machine into a single structure. Isolator-type machine-
and resist the cyclic stresses from dynamic loads. Cracking mounting systems separate the machine and the foundation
should be minimized to ensure protection of reinforcing steel. into two separate systems that may still dynamically interact
The structural design of all reinforced concrete foundations with each other. In the processes of design, installation, and
should be in accordance with ACI 318. The engineer may use operation, the critical role of both types needs advocacy and
allowable stress methods for nonprestressed reinforced concrete. the assurance that interface issues receive attention. The
In foundations thicker than 4 ft (1.2 m), the engineer may research and development of information on machine-
use the minimum reinforcing steel suggested in ACI 207.2R. mounting system technology by the Gas Machinery
API and the Construction Industry Institute published API Research Council (GMRC) during the 1990s reflects the
Recommended Practice 686/PIP REIE 686, “Recommended importance that this group attaches to the anchorage-type
Practice for Machinery Installation and Installation Design.” machine-mounting system. This research produced a series
Chapter 4 of 686/PIP REIE 686 includes design criteria for of reports on machine-mounting topics (Pantermuehl and
soil-supported reinforced concrete foundations that supports Smalley 1997a,b; Smalley and Pantermuehl 1997; Smalley
general and special purpose machinery. The concrete used in 1997). These reports, readily retrievable from www.gmrc.org,
the foundation should tolerate its environment during place- are essential for those responsible for dynamic machines and
ment, curing, and service. The engineer should consider their foundations.
various exposures such as freezing and thawing, salts of Most large machines, in spite of careful design for integrity
chlorides and sulfates, sulfate soils, acids, carbonation, and function by their manufacturers, can internally absorb no
repeated wetting and drying, oils, and high temperatures. more than a fraction of the forces or thermal growth inherent
In addition to conventional concrete, there are many tech- in their function.
nologies available—such as admixtures, additives, specialty Those responsible for the machine-foundation interface
cements, and preblended products—to help improve place- should provide an attachment that transmits the remaining
ment, durability, and performance properties. These addi- forces for dynamic integrity of the structure yet accommo-
tives include water reducers, set-controlling mixtures, dates anticipated differential thermal expansion between
shrinkage-compensating admixtures, polymers, silica fumes, machine and foundation. They should recognize the inherent
fly ash, and fibers. conflicts in these requirements, the physical processes that
Many foundations, whether new or repaired, require a fast can inhibit performance of these functions, and the lifetime
turnaround to increase production by reducing downtime constraints (such as limited maintenance and contaminating
without compromising durability and required strength. materials) from which any dynamic machine can suffer as it
These systems may use a combination of preblended or contributes to profitable, productive plant operation.
field-mixed concrete and polymer concrete or grout to A dynamic machine may tend to get hotter and grow more
reduce downtime to 12 to 72 h, depending on foundation than its foundation (in the horizontal plane). The growth can
volume and start-up strength requirements. reach several tenths of an inch (0.1 in. = 2.54 mm); combustion
turbine casings grow so much that they have to include deliber-
3.6—Performance criteria for machine- ately installed flexibility between hotter and cooler elements
mounting systems of their own metallic structure. Most machines—such as
The machine-mounting system (broadly categorized as compressors, steam turbines, motors, and generators—do
either an anchorage-type or an isolator-type) attaches the not internally relieve their own thermal growth, so the
dynamic machine to its foundation. It represents a vital mounting system should allow for thermal growth. Thermal
interface between the machine and the foundation; however, growth can exert millions of pounds of force (1,000,000 lbf
it can suffer from insufficient attention to critical detail by = 4500 kN), a level that cannot be effectively restrained.
Heat is transferred between the machine and foundation 9. The mounting system should provide a stable platform
through convection, radiation, and conduction. While from which to align the machine. Any deflections of the
convection and radiation dominate in the regions where an mounting system that occur should remain sufficiently
air gap separates the machine base from the foundation, the uniform at different points to preserve acceptable alignment
mounting system provides the primary path for conduction. of the machine. The specifications and use of adjustable
Ten critical performance criteria can be identified as chock mounts has become increasingly widespread to
generally applicable to isolator and anchorage-type compensate for loss of alignment resulting from creep and
mounting systems: other permanent deformations; and
1. A machine-mounting system should tolerate expected 10. The mounting system should impose tolerable loads,
differential thermal growth across the interface. This can stresses, and deformations on the foundation itself. Appro-
occur by combining strength to resist expansion forces and priate foundation design to make the loads, stresses, and
stresses, flexibility to accommodate the deflections, and deformations tolerable remains an essential part of this
tolerance for relative sliding across the interface (as the performance criterion. Some of the loads and stresses to
machine grows relative to the foundation); consider include:
2. A machine-mounting system should either absorb or • Tensile stresses in the concrete at the anchor bolt termi-
transmit, across the mounting interface, those internally nation point, which may cause cracks;
generated dynamic forces, resulting from the machine’s • Shear stresses in concrete above anchor bolt termination
operation not absorbed within the machine structure itself. points, which, if high enough, might result in pullout;
These forces include both vertical and horizontal compo- • Interface shear stresses between a grout layer and the
nents. Flexible mounts that deflect rather than restrain the concrete resulting from the typically higher expansion
forces become an option only in cases where the machine of polymer grout than concrete (best accommodated
and any rigidly attached structure have the structural rigidity with expansion joints); and
needed to avoid damaging internal stresses and deflections. • Hogging or sagging deformation of the concrete block
Large machinery may not meet this criterion; produced by heat conduction through the mounting
3. A nominally rigid mount should transmit dynamic system. Air gaps and low conductivity epoxy chocks
forces with only microlevel elastic deformation and negligible help minimize such deformation.
dynamic slippage across the interface. The dynamic forces Potential conflicts requiring attention and management in
should include local forces, such as forces from each individual these performance criteria include:
cylinder, which large machines transmit to the foundation • Requirements to accommodate thermal expansion
because of their flexibility. For reciprocating compressors, while transmitting dynamic forces; and
this criterion helps ensure that the foundation and machine • Requirements to provide a large anchor bolt clamping
form an integrated structure; force (so that slippage is controlled during transfer of
4. A machine-mounting system should perform its function high lateral loads) while stresses and deflections in bolt,
for a long life—typically 25 years or more. Specifications foundation, chocks, and grout remain acceptably low.
from the operator should include required life; Physical processes that can influence the ability of the
5. Any maintenance and inspection required to sustain mount to meet its performance criteria include:
integrity of the machine-mounting system should have a • Creep—Creep of all polymeric materials under compres-
frequency acceptable to the operator of the machine, for sive load. (Creep means time-dependent deflection
example, once per year. Engineers, installers, and operators of under load. Deflection increases with time—sometimes
the machine and its foundation should agree to this mainte- doubling or tripling the initial deflection);
nance requirement because the design integrity relies on the • Differential thermal expansion—This can occur when
execution of these maintenance functions with this frequency; two adjacent components at similar temperatures have
6. The bolts that tie the machine to the mounting system, different coefficients of thermal expansion, when two
and which form an integral part of the mounting system, adjacent components of similar coefficients have different
should have sufficient stretch and create enough normal temperatures or a combination of both. Machine
force across all interfaces to meet the force transmission and mounts with epoxy materials can experience both types
deflection performance stated above; of differential thermal expansion;
7. The anchor bolt material strength should tolerate the • Friction—Friction is limited by a friction coefficient.
resultant bolt tensile stresses. The mounts, soleplates, and Friction defines the maximum force parallel to an
grout layers compressed by the anchor bolt should tolerate interface that the interface can resist before sliding for a
the compressive stresses imposed on them; given normal force between the two interfacing materials;
8. Any polymeric material (grout or chocks) compressed • Limits on friction—The presence of oil in the interface
by the anchor bolts should exhibit a tolerably low amount of (typically cutting the dry friction coefficient in half)
creep to maintain bolt stretch over the time period between causes further limits on friction;
maintenance actions performed to inspect and tighten anchor • Yield strength—Yield strength of anchor bolts limits the
bolts. Indeed, the machine mount should perform its func- tension available from an anchor bolt and encourages
tion, accounting for expected creep, even if maintenance the use of high-strength anchor bolts for all critical
occurs less frequently; applications;
• Cracks—Concrete can crack under tensile loads, and 2 2

ri ωo
these cracks can grow with time; and ′′ = (mrot,i )ri ----------
Fzi - cos2(ωot + αi) (3-42)
Li
• Oil—Oil can pool around many machinery installations.
Oil aggravates cracks in concrete, particularly under
alternating stresses where it induces a hydraulic action. In If the i-th cylinder is oriented at angle θi to a global horizontal
many cases, oil, its additives, or the ambient materials it z-axis, then the primary and secondary force components,
transports react with concrete to reduce its strength, par- with respect to the global axis, can be rewritten as follows
ticularly in cracks where stresses tend to be high. (primary)
Those responsible for machine mounts, as part of a founda-
tion, should consider the aforementioned performance criteria, GP
the conflicts that complicate the process of meeting those F zi = F′zi cos θ i = F′yi sin θ i (3-43)
criteria, and the physical processes that inhibit the ability of any
installation to meet the performance criteria. Other sections of GP
F yi = F′zi sin θ i = F′yi cos θ i (3-44)
this document address the calculation of loads, stresses, deflec-
tions, and the specific limits of strength implicit in different
materials. The GMRC reports referred to address all these (secondary)
issues as they pertain to reciprocating compressors.
GS
zi cos θ i
F zi = F′′ (3-45)
3.7—Method for estimating inertia forces
from multicylinder machines
The local horizontal Fzi and vertical Fyi unbalanced forces GS
zi sin θ i
F yi = F′′ (3-46)
for the i-th cylinder located in the horizontal plane can be
written as
The resultant forces due to n cylinders in global coordinates
can be calculated as follows
Fzi = (mrec,i + mrot,i )riωo2 cos(ωot + αi) (3-38)
n
∑ Fzi
2 2 GP GP
ri ωo Fz = (3-47)
- cos2(ωot + αi )
+ mrot,i ----------
Li i=1
n
and
∑ Fzi
GS GS
Fz = (3-48)
i=1
2
F yi = m rec, i r i ω o sin ( ω o t + α i ) (3-39)
n
∑ Fyi
GP GP
where Fy = (3-49)
mrec,i = reciprocating mass for the i-th cylinder; i=1
mrot,i = rotating mass of the i-th cylinder;

n
ri = radius of the crank mechanism of the i-th cylinder;
∑ Fyi
GS GS
Fy = (3-50)
Li = length of the connecting rod of the crank mecha-
i=1
nism at the i-th cylinder;
ωo = circular operating frequency of the machine (rad/s);
The resultant moments due to n cylinders in global coordi-
t = time, s; and
nates can be determined as follows
αi = the phase angle for the crank radius of the i-th
cylinder, rad.
n
The primary and secondary force components are as
∑ ( Fzi
GP GP
My = X i ) (moment about y [vertical] axis) (3-51)
follows
i=1
(primary)
n
∑ ( Fzi Xi )
2 GS GS
′ = (mrec,i + mrot,i )ri ω o cos(ωot + αi)
Fzi (3-40) My = (3-52)
i=1
2
′ = mrec,i ri ω o sin(ωot + αi)
Fyi (3-41) n
∑ ( Fyi
GP GP
Mz = X i )(moment about z [horizontal] axis) (3-53)
(secondary) i=1
n GS GS 2 GS 2 1 ⁄ 2
( F Y ) max = [ ( F Y0 ) + ( F Y45 ) ] (3-58)
∑
GS GS
Mz = ( F yi X i ) (3-54)
i=1
GS GS
at tan–1 ( F Y45 ⁄ F Y0 )
where Xi = distance along the crankshaft from the reference
origin to the i-th cylinder.
Equation (3-43) to (3-54) provide instantaneous values of Maximum global horizontal primary moment:
time-varying inertia (shaking) forces and four time varying
shaking moments for an n cylinder reciprocating machine. GP GP 2 GP 2 1 ⁄ 2
( M Z ) max = [ ( M Z0 ) + ( M Z90 ) ] (3-59)
To visualize the time variation of these forces and moments
over a revolution of the crankshaft, they can be computed at
a series of crank angle values and plotted against crank GP GP
at tan–1 ( M Z90 ⁄ M Z0 )
angle. To obtain maximum values of the primary and
secondary forces and moments (and the phase angle at which
the maxima occur), they are computed at two orthogonal Maximum global horizontal secondary moment:
angles and vectorially combined as shown as follows
Maximum global horizontal primary force: GS GS 2 GS 2 1 ⁄ 2
( M Z ) max = [ ( M Z0 ) + ( M Z45 ) ] (3-60)
GP GP 2 GP 2 1 ⁄ 2
( F Z ) max = [ ( F Z0 ) + ( F Z90 ) ] (3-55) GS GS
at tan–1 ( M Z45 ⁄ M Z0 )
GP GP
at tan–1 ( F Z90 ⁄ F Z0 ) Maximum global vertical primary moment:
Maximum global horizontal secondary force:

GP GP 2 GP 2 1 ⁄ 2
( M Y ) max = [ ( M Y0 ) + ( M Y90 ) ] (3-61)
GS GS 2 GS 2 1 ⁄ 2
( F Z ) max = [ ( F Z0 ) + ( F Z45 ) ] (3-56)
GP GP
at tan–1 ( M Y90 ⁄ M Z0 )
GS GS
at tan–1 ( F Z45 ⁄ F Z0 )
Maximum global vertical secondary moment:
Maximum global vertical primary force:
GS GS 2 GS 2 1 ⁄ 2
( M Y ) max = [ ( M Y0 ) + ( M Y45 ) ] (3-62)
GP GP 2 GP 2 1 ⁄ 2
( F Y ) max = [ ( F Y0 ) + ( F Y90 ) ] (3-57)
GS GS
at tan–1 ( M Y45 ⁄ F Y0 )
GP GP
at tan–1 ( F Y90 ⁄ F Y0 )
where subscripts 0, 45, and 90 represent the value of ωot used to
Maximum global vertical secondary force: calculate the force values listed in Eq. (3-55) to (3-62).

Aci 351 3R PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aci 351 3R PDF

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

Aci 351 3R PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapters 1 to 3 have been excerpted for use ACI 351.

Foundations for Dynamic Equipment

William L. Bounds* Fred G. Louis Abdul Hai Sheikh

Keywords: amplitude; concrete; foundation; reinforcement; vibration.

Chapter 6—References, p. 351.3R-57 [M] = mass matrix

Zp = piston displacement, in. (mm) CHAPTER 2—FOUNDATION AND MACHINE TYPES

kinematics of a slider crank mechanism driven by, or

Fig. 2.4—Block-type foundation.

Fig. 2.8—Spring-mounted block formation.

difference between the machine dynamic forces and the center

the machine. Other limiting dynamic criteria affecting the

startup or an electrical short circuit. Startup torque, a property

Table 3.1—Balance quality grades for selected

G1600 63 (1600) Crankshaft/drives of rigidly mounted, large,

G630 2.5 (630) Crankshaft/drives of rigidly mounted, large,

G250 10 (250) Crankshaft/drives of rigidly mounted, fast,

3.2.3 Reciprocating machine loads—Internal-combustion

zp = r(1 – cosωot) (3-15)

· Fig. 3.4—Schematic of double-acting compressor cylinder

magnitude of the unbalanced forces and couples for multi- S

3.3.2.1 Field determination—Field measurements are

Table 3.3—Values of K2 versus relative density In the previous equations,

possibility of sample disturbance. Sometimes laboratory

For angular-grained materials with e > 0.6 and normally where

typical of soils than viscous damping because the area of the

3.4—Vibration performance criteria

smooth to very rough. These are plotted as displacement versus

Table 3.5—Short-term permissible values

levels of vibration from mining operations that have

tation is not accurate. When the damping resistance

3.5—Concrete performance criteria

• Cracks—Concrete can crack under tensile loads, and 2 2

mrot,i = rotating mass of the i-th cylinder;

Maximum global horizontal secondary force:

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.