Engineering Integrity Issue 30

w

EIS30FEBRUARY 2011

JOURNAL OF THE ENGINEERINGINTEGRITY SOCIETY

ENGINEERING INTEGRITY

NEWS F

ROM:

SMA

RT MAT

ERIALS

,

B.S

.I., R

EFLECT

IONS

FOR

MULA S

TUDENT

TECHNI

CAL PA

PERS

INDUST

RY NEW

S, EVE

NTS

The Telescopic Cantilever Beam: Part 1 - Deflection Analysis•

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

paper on:

Roads to every testing destination

Now there is one trusted name you can turn to for

proven test and measurement solutions. For over 20

years, Data Physics has been driven by its customer

needs to develop, internally and through acquisition,

a full range of powerful technologies for noise and

vibration applications.

CorporationLing ElectronicsLE

Gearing & Watson(Electronics) Ltd.

SignalCalcDynamic Signal Analyzers

SignalStarVibration Control Systems

SignalForceShakers & Amplifiers

Solutions to Test and Measurement challenges from people who are driven by them. Powered by

INSTRUMENTATION, ANALYSIS & TESTING EXHIBITION

THE JIMMY BROWN CENTRE, SILVERSTONE RACE TRACK TUESDAY 8th MARCH 2011, 10.00-16.00

Engineering Integrity Society

Entrance to the exhibition and the technical activities are free, with complementary refreshments and buffet lunch provided.

Exhibition: This provides the opportunity for visitors to view and discuss, in an informal atmosphere, the latest developments in instrumentation, analysis and test facilities. The exhibition will be of interest to engineers from wide ranging industries.

Technical Activities:Morning: two technical presentations and several 30-minute duration instrumentation workshops.

Afternoon: an open forum entitled ‘Seven posters - Is that three too many?’ supported by F1, automotive and test equipment companies and universities.

Special Events: enjoy the atmosphere at Silverstone with potential special events planned, such as a speed trial test in a Caterham sports car, which visitors can book at modest cost.

For more information, or to pre-register for the presentations, workshops, afternoon forum, or one of the special events, please contact the EIS secretariat at: [email protected] or visit the EIS website at www.e-i-s.org.uk

INDEX TO ADVERTISEMENTS

Amber Instruments ..................................................... 2

Bruel & Kjaer ............................................... Back cover

CPD Dynamics ........................................................... 2

Data Physics ..................................... Inside front cover

Ixthus Instrumentation ............................................. 36

Kemo ................................................ Inside back cover

M+P International .............................. Inside back cover

Micro Movements ...................................................... 36

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

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

Analysing Experimental Data? PRACTICAL SIGNAL PROCESSING

Milton Keynes 16-17 March 2011This short course covers techniques, applications and avoidable pitfalls in analysis procedures. It offers a basic

practical understanding for those involved with the acquisition of

dynamic experimental data.

The course is not sponsored by, or dependent upon, any product

manufacturer. This independence enables a free and open discussion of the key features and relative merits of spectrum analysers and techniques in

an unbiased and objective way.

CPDdynamics

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

Andy Tomlinson, CPD Dynamics Ltd.Email: [email protected]

www.cpd-dynamics.co.uk

Index to Advertisements ...................................................................................................................................................... 2

Editorial ................................................................................................................................................................................ 5

Technical Paper: The Telescopic Cantilever Beam: Part 1 - Deflection Analysis ............................................................. 6

Diary of Events ...................................................................................................................................................................16

Corporate Sponsorship .....................................................................................................................................................16

Seminar/Exhibition programme: Technologies for Low Carbon Transportation in New Sound Environments ............. 17

Instrumentation, Analysis & Testing Exhibition, 8 March .................................................................................................. 18

Report on ‘EIS 3rd Durability and Fatigue Advances in Wind, Wave and Tidal Energy’ event ......................................... 20

Industry News ....................................................................................................................................................................22

Reflection ...........................................................................................................................................................................26

News on Smart Materials and Structures ......................................................................................................................... 28

News from British Standards ............................................................................................................................................ 29

“Open access” technical information ................................................................................................................................ 30

News from Formula Student ............................................................................................................................................. 31

Group News ......................................................................................................................................................................32

Personal Membership ...................................................................................................................................................... 33

Committee Members ........................................................................................................................................................34

Sponsor Companies ......................................................................................................................................................... 35

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

FORUM FOR APPLIED MECHANICS (FAM)

The EIS is a sponsor member of the Forum for Applied Mechanics (FAM), which provides an interaction between a

number of organisations in the UK where there is an interest in applied mechanics, both experimental and theoretical.

Current sponsor members of FAM are the EIS, NAFEMS, IMechE, BSSM, IoP and the BGA (British Gear Association).

The FAM website contains details of events being held by the sponsor members, together with a direct link to the

sponsor members’ websites. Some of these events may be of interest to you or your colleagues. Access to the FAM

website can be gained either directly www.appliedmechanics.org or via the EIS website ‘Links’ page.

HONORARY EDITOR:

Dr Karen Perkins

MANAGING EDITOR:

Mrs Catherine Pinder

Anchor House, Mill Road, Stokesby

Great Yarmouth, NR29 3EY

Tel: 07979 270998

E-mail: [email protected]

EDITORIAL BOARD:

Paul Armstrong

Brian Griffiths

Dr Fabrizio Scarpa

Dr Frank Sherratt

Norman Thornton

EIS Secretariat:

Engineering Integrity Society

18 Oak Close, Bedworth,

Warwickshire, CV12 9AJ

Tel & Fax: +44 (0)2476 730126

E-mail: [email protected]

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

EDITORIAL POLICY:

Engineering Integrity contains various items of

information of interest to, or directly generated by, the

Engineering Integrity Society. The items of information

can be approximately subdivided into three general

categories: technical papers, topical discussion

pieces and news items. The items labelled in the

journal as technical papers are peer reviewed by

a minimum of two reviewers in the normal manner of

academic journals, following a standard protocol.

The items of information labelled as topical

discussions and the news items have been reviewed

by the journal editorial staff and found to conform

to the legal and professional standards of the

Engineering Integrity Society.

COPYRIGHT

Copyright of the technical papers included in this issue

is held by the Engineering Integrity Society unless

otherwise stated.

Photographic contributions for the front cover

are welcomed.

ISSN 1365-4101/2011

The Engineering Integrity Society (EIS)

Incorporated under the Companies Act 1985.

Registered No. 1959979

Registered Office: 35 Wilkinson Street,

Sheffield, S10 2GB, UK

Charity No: 327121

‘Engineering Integrity’ is published twice a year

ADVERTISING RATES & DATA

Black and White

1 insert 2 inserts

Full Page £255 £460 annual

Half Page £158 £285 annual

Quarter Page £92 £175 annual

Full Colour

1 insert 2 inserts

Full Page £445 £800 annual

Half Page £278 £500 annual

Quarter Page £160 £290 annual

Type Page Size

Full Page A4 (plus 3mm bleed where required)

Half Page 255mm (depth) x 86mm (width)

or 125mm (depth) x 180mm (width)

Quarter Page 125mm (depth) x 86mm (width)

Extra charges are applicable to supplementary process work.

Cancellation - 14 days prior to copy dates.

A copy of the latest issue of ‘Engineering Integrity’ is published

on the website and includes all advertisements

Loose Inserts £150 per A4 sheet (up to 160 gsm)

PRINCIPAL ACTIVITY OF THE

ENGINEERING INTEGRITY SOCIETY

The principal activity of the Engineering Integrity Society, is

the arrangement of conferences, seminars, exhibitions and

workshops to advance the education of persons working

in the field of engineering. This is achieved by providing a

forum for the interchange of ideas and information on

engineering practice. The Society is particularly committed

to promoting projects which support professional

development and attract young people into the profession.

‘Engineering Integrity’, the Journal of the Engineering

Integrity Society is published twice a year.

I hope everyone had a good holiday and

not too many of you spent Christmas stuck

at train stations or airports looking at the

snow. The literal freeze of the pre-

Christmas weather may have eased, but

the figurative chill winds of financial

austerity are still blowing.

It has been another interesting 6 months

in the world of academia. With swinging

cuts in teaching budgets and dramatic increases in tuition

fees, it is clear that the government will be spending less

on higher education and the students considerably more,

yet the net effect on University budgets is far from certain. If

we hope to charge 9K per year for teaching our students

then we need to provide facilities that justify the student’s

investment, for both smaller and larger classes.

While expecting a high standard of provision is totally

reasonable, there is always the concern that some students

will think that they are buying the degree itself, rather than

the opportunity to study for it. Combined with the growing

influence of student satisfaction surveys it is a brave

department that doesn’t meet all the students’ demands.

Unfortunately this can make it difficult to wean students off

poor practises that prevent them from really understanding

the material. The reliance on an endless supply of model

answers to learn parrot fashion is one by-product of the

current A-level system that is particularly hard for some

student to break.

Another area that has created some discussion here recently

is the need to provide comprehensive feedback. Students

get feedback all the time, they just don’t recognize it. In my

day a tick meant you got it right and a cross meant it was

wrong. The mark at the top of the page told you how you did

overall, example classes discussed the questions and if

you wanted to know any more you could go and see the

lecturer concerned. As for examination feedback, those who

pass won’t care, there will be those who fail and don’t care

and those who fail and do care would be the ones who

would go and see the lecturer anyway. The thought that a

piece of documentation will tell future students what the

previous years’ students did wrong will be of any benefit is

optimistic. I write a list of do’s and don’ts on the board for

my students about this very topic and they still make the

same mistakes. At the end of the day the most important

message that students need feedback on is to turn up to

lectures and to take responsibility for their own effort and

performance.

Maybe it will make students think twice about what they will

study at university if paying off their student debts requires

them to take a subject that firstly gets them a job and secondly

a job that pays well: possibly a good thing for engineering

and science, not so good for media studies!

The Industry news column in this edition notes an interesting

discovery: 10am on a Tuesday is the most stressful time of

the week. I wonder if my first year tutorial group were surveyed

– we meet on Tuesdays at 10.

It is interesting to note that more than one article mentions

new postgraduate degree schemes. The well established

EngD degree schemes have proved to be a very productive

arrangement for both the students and the sponsoring

companies. They allow students to study advanced courses

and undertake cutting edge research. The students are

normally accommodated by the sponsoring company, which

not only provides them with a unique insight into the

company itself, but also allows them to partake in additional

work related to their research, all whilst producing original

research with economic and commercial impact in addition

to its fundamental scientific value.

Commercial interests aren’t always perfectly aligned with

purely scientific ones. Frank Sherratt’s column on open

access publications highlights the tension between

academic openness and the commercial interests of the

journal publishers. The commercial sensitivity of the results

of collaborative research with industry can also lead to

tensions over publication. While many companies have well

established procedures for approving journal publications,

student theses have not traditionally been a cause for

concern, scattered as they were in the vaults of University

libraries around the country. However, with the digitisation of

theses through the EThoS project, the data hidden in those

dusty corridors will soon be available at the touch of a button.

The EIS calendar is quite active again this year. We have the

annual ‘instrumentation, analysis and testing exhibition’, and

‘technologies for low carbon transportation in new sound

environments’ over the next few months. The ‘Advances in

wind, wave and tidal energy’ meeting was obviously well

attended and will provide many publications for the journal

(see report from durability and fatigue) This issue also

provides us with the first part of a lengthy technical paper on

the telescopic cantilever beam, with the second part to be

published in the next edition.

Karen Perkins

Honorary Editor

J. Abraham, S. Sivaloganathan and D. W. A. Rees, School of Engineering and Design, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex,

UB8 3PH

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

Abstract

A Tip Reaction Model is proposed to provide the

deflection of a telescopic cantilever beam. The model

uses the reactions at the tips of the overlapping portions

as the mechanism of transfer of the external loads

between sect ions. A general ised, three-sect ion,

telescopic beam is analysed in which the direct

integration method is applied repeatedly to provide

deflection. The theory is developed then adapted to a

convenient ‘C’ program listed here. The program is

applied to provide deflections under end-loading in a

model beam consisting of three hollow, thin-walled

sections. The accuracy in the model’s end-deflection is

checked from a further finite element analysis of the

beam. The fact that the two deflections compare validates

the tip reaction model of end-deflection arising from self-

weight and external loading in a telescopic cantilever. A

linear structural response between load and deflection

appears consistently from both predictions. Linearity of

telescoping structures implies that a superposition

principle may be employed to simplify tip reaction

analyses of more general loading conditions.

1.0 Introduction

In general, the application of external loads to structures is

balanced by an internal resistance offered by their chosen

materials. For example, beams when subjected to

transverse loads generate resisting moments to counter

the external moments. This method of transferring external

loading to its internal effect is fundamental to the prevailing

analytical methods [1 - 4]. However, the use of a resisting

moment to transfer the effects of external loads cannot be

used in telescopic beams because of the material

discontinuity that exists between overlapping lengths. The

problem has relevance now that telescopic cantilever beams

have increasing applications within masts, fishing rods,

palette loaders, cranes, access platforms and extendable

roofs [5, 6]. Such beams are required to support continuous

gravitational loading (self-weight) and external loading that

may be concentrated at various points or distributed over a

surface area. It is common that deflections at particular

positions are specified among the criteria adopted for

optimising design and material selection. Having available

a convenient mathematical prediction of deflection is an

effective way to assist with this design requirement.

Furthermore, a prediction of the deflected shape would allow

control over the geometry to give the stiffness required. Beam

deflections provided by the methods of Mohr and Macaulay

[1 - 3] apply to a continuous beam and not a telescopic

assembly. It will be seen that these two theories place a

different interpretation upon the successive integration

required of their common, underlying flexure equation.

In Mohr’s moment-area method the area of the bending

moment diagram and its moment provide the slope and

deflection of the beam. Macaulay’s method provides each

of these through a step function which admits the

discontinuities that arise in bending moments between

loads. In building further upon the underlying equation,

the present paper outlines a new, direct integration

method for supplying slope and deflection of a telescopic

cantilever beam. This method provides the deflection at

any position in the length of a 3-section, cantilever beam

carrying a concentrated load applied to its free-end in

addition to its distributed self-weight. The accuracy of

this method is proven from its application to a model, 3-

section beam in which displacement predictions are

seen to compare well with those found by the finite

element method.

2.0 Existing Theory

A beam refers to a structural member whose cross-

section dimensions are usually small in comparison to

its length. Generally, beams are supported horizontally

when carrying transverse loading but cantilevers may

also be mounted vertically to bear horizontal forces. The

loading is often idealised within concentrated forces

whereas in practice they would bear upon a certain

surface area. For example, the end-load considered here

would represent, say, the platform which carries two men

and the equipment that they require to work upon

overhead cables. The safety required of the crane dictates

that steel is the chosen material for its telescoping tubes.

Consequently, the influence of its weight upon the

deflection must also be considered. Reasonably, this

weight is assumed to be uniformly distributed, allowing

for the changes to the section area within each length

and in the overlaps. The method of determining the

deflection (in this Part 1 study) and stress (in Part 2)

under the combined loading begins with the construction

of its bending moment and shear force diagrams [1 - 4].

These diagrams express the internal reaction of a beam

to its external loading by the following scheme.

2.1 Resisting Moments and Forces

Firstly, it is explained how the material in a continuous beam

resists the external transverse loads applied to it [4].

Consider the simply supported beam with negligible weight,

subjected to four transverse loads, shown in Figure 1.

ISSN 1365-4101/2011

Figure 1: Moment of resistance for a beam [4]

The applied loads bend the beam creating a compressive

resistance in the top part of the cross-section and tensile

resistance in its bottom part. In Figure 1, MN represents the

unstressed neutral plane dividing the two parts, i.e.

compression above and tension below. The equivalent

compressive force acting on the upper half-area MEFN is

given by ‘C’. Similarly the equivalent tensile force acting on

the lower half-area MHGN is given by ‘T’. The external loads

applied and the effective shear force ‘S’ acting on the section

EFGH are assumed to be concentrated on the vertical plane

of symmetry, as shown in Figure 1. The forces that act over

the length AX of the beam are, therefore:

i. Vertical reaction RA at A

ii. External loads W1and W

2

iii. Shear force S offered by section EFGH

iv. Compressive resistance C and

v. Tensile resistance T

The magnitudes of C and T are equal and since they act in

the opposite directions and with a separation h, they form

the beam’s moment of resistance:

MR= Ch = Th (1)

Now, taking moments about O gives the moment applied to

the transverse section EFGH from the external loading

)()( 21 baxWaxWxRMAR

−−−−−= (2)

For the beam to be in equilibrium it follows that the moments

in Eqs 1 and 2 are equal. In general, this moment

equilibrium condition holds under any external loading when:

‘Bending moment at a section = Moment of resistance at

that section’. The well-known equation of bending is based

on this principle [1 - 3]:

y

f

R

E

I

M== (3)

where I is the second moment of area for the section and E

is the elasticity modulus for the beam material. The first two

parts of Eq. 3 lead to the flexure equation given that the

radius of curvature is inversely proportional to the second

displacement derivative d2y/dx2 [1, 2]. In what follows the

flexure equation will be seen to underlie all within this Part 1

investigation into displacements. The remaining, third part

of Eq. 1 will be used to estimate the bending stress f in a

telescopic beam in an accompanying (Part 2) investigation [7].

While such investigations are routine in engineering design

it should be emphasised here that they would normally be

applied to continuous beams. However, an entirely similar

approach cannot be applied to telescopic beams where

there are discontinuities within the overlaps. The effect is

likely to be most pronounced where a gap exists along the

overlapping lengths. Section 3 describes the modifications

that the telescopic design imposes upon the deflection

theory.

2.2 Deflection Analyses

Design of cantilever beams for their many applications often

requires estimates of deflections at various length positions.

The development of analytical methods for estimating

deflection and stress for beams in bending were developed

in the 18th century by Euler and Bernouli and are described

in many textbooks [1-4]. The beam deflection y is found by

four common methods: (i) direct integration [1-4], (ii)

Macaulay’s step function [8, 9], (iii) Mohr’s theorems [1-4]

and (iv) strain energy [10]. Both (i) and (ii) are based on the

flexure equation, which follows from Eq. 3 as:

2

2

)(dx

ydEIxM ±= (4)

The product EI is the flexural rigidity which is constant in a

uniform cross-section. The sign in Eq. 4 refers to the sign

convention for moments: sagging positive and hogging

negative. The moment function, M(x) in Eq. 4, is the bending

moment expressed in term of the length position x. The

direct integration method (i) adopts successive integrations

of Eq. 4 leading to the slope dy/dx and then the displacement

y. Method (i) is restricted to relatively simple loading,

including that considered here, which does not lead to

discontinuous M(x) expressions. Macaulay’s technique (ii)

is used where moment discontinuities do arise at span

positions where additional concentrated load are applied

and also, for a uniform loading that does not extend to the

full length. Mohr placed a geometrical interpretation upon

the bending-moment diagram when integrating Eq. 4 for

slope and deflection. When A and B are separate points on

the deflection curve y = y(x), for which B is a point of zero

slope, then Mohr’s two theorems (iii) state:

Slope at A ×=EI

1Area of the M-diagram between A and B


Deflection of A relative to B ×=EI

1First moment of area

the M-diagram between B and A about A.

When strain energy methods (iv) are used to estimate beam

deflection the energy stored through an internal stress and

strain is equated to the work done by external forces and

moments. Two useful interpretations of this approach,

adopted in FE analyses, lie in the theorems of Castigliano

and the principle of virtual work [2].

Despite uniform section beams being well-served by the

classical theory they are less often used for deflection

analyses of variable section beams including tapered,

stepped and telescopic designs [11, 12]. Here, it is more

likely that FE is adopted to ensue that a given deflection

allowance is not exceeded.

3.0 Telescopic Beam Theory

In a telescopic cantilever beam one or more beams are

stacked inside an outer beam which is fixed at one end to

support the entire beam assembly. The inner pieces move

out when application needs the full span. Generally, the

assembly will have three types of beam: (a) one with end

fixed, (b) one with end free and (c) those connecting (a) and

(b). It follows that a beam of three lengths (see Fig. 2a),

which includes (a), (b) and (c), is sufficiently general for the

present analysis. Thus, Figure 2b shows, schematically, a

telescoping cantilever with overlapping lengths a1 and a

2

between beams with lengths l1, l

2 and l

3.The loading shown

is a combination of the beams’ self-weights w1, w

2 and w

3

and a concentrated, applied end-load W.

3.1 Tip Reactions

The tip reactions identified here facilitate the load transfer

between the three beams. To show this, consider the beam

assembly shown in Figure 2b. Since a part of beam CD lies

inside beam AB it will produce an upward reaction at C in

beam AB and a downward reaction at B in beam AB. The

applied forces and moments acting upon the fixed-end beam

AB are as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Fixed-end beam loading

These include: the tip forces RB and R

C, the self-weight

loading w1, the fixing reaction R

D and its moment M. Similarly,

when beam CD is considered, at C there will be a downward

reaction and at B there will be an upward reaction, due to its

contacts with beam AB. Moreover, beam EF will impose

reactions on CD. There will be an upward reaction at E and

a downward reaction at D. Thus the forces upon CD will be

those shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Middle beam loading

The tip reactions RD and R

E follow from applying moment

and force equilibrium equations Fig. 4. Taking moment

about C gives

)(2

3222

22221 llRl

lwlRlR EDB αα −−×+×=×

And from force balance

22lwRRRR DEBC −−+=

Correspondingly the loads acting upon the end length EF

are shown in Figure 5.


Figure 2: Three-section, telescopic cantilever

Figure 5: Free-end beam loading

Taking moments about E gives

2

33332

llwlWaRD ×+×=×

But 322 la α=

From the above equations

2

33

2α

lwW

RD

+

=

Finally, taking moments about D gives

)2

()1( 323

333223 ll

lwlWlRE ααα −×+−×=×

Hence

−+−

=2

2332

2

)21()1(

α

αα lwW

RE

Thus, in the proposed ‘Tip Reaction Model’ the internal

reactions are used to transmit the forces. The effects of the

external loads applied to the telescopic cantilever beam can

then be calculated using tip reactions instead of the bending

moment or, moment of resistance, used in the continuous

beam, as described in section 2.1. This technique allows

the equilibrium and compatibility requirements for each

beam to be considered separately as the free-body diagrams

given in Figs 3 - 5. In this way the normal tip reactions at the

beginning and end of each overlap, are established. Once

the reactions are known, the deflection of each beam can

be calculated in the following way.

3.2 Deflection Analysis

The deflected shape of each portion of the beam is then

provided by successive integration of Eq. 4. The first

integration gives the slope dy/dx and the second integration

provides the deflection expression y = y(x). Constants of

integration are introduced to ensure compatibility within the

overlapping lengths as a similar integration process is

applied to each separately and in sequence. The full analysis

is lengthy for which full details are given elsewhere [7]. The

sample analysis given in Appendix A2 applies to fixed-end

portion AC in Fig. 3. This shows that the deflected shape of

AC (not including the overlap BC) may be expressed as a

polynomial:

1011

2

12

3

13

4

141 txtxtxtxty ++++= (5)

in which the coefficients t10

. . t14

are required to match the

boundary conditions. Here, as both the slope and deflection

are zero at the fixing, where x = 0, then t10

and t11

are both

zero. The remaining coefficients are seen to depend upon

the length, the loading, and the flexural rigidity EI. A further

polynomial describes the deflection for the portion of this

beam which extends into the overlap CB

2021

2

22

3

23

4


Equation 6 must match the slope and deflection imposed

by the adjacent beam before it (AC). This requirement also

applies to a further polynomial that describes the deflection

in the same overlap CB from within the middle beam

3031

2

32

3

33

4


The appended sections A.2.2, A.2.3 and A.2.4 show how

such compatibility is ensured between the t-coefficients in

Eqs (5) – (7) for these three portions of the length ACB. This

leads to the respective equation sets 1, 2 and 3 which

contribute to the eventual determination of the overall tip

deflection. The complete analysis requires additional

equation sets given in [7] for the remaining beam sections.

The sample set of Eqs (5) - (7) given here are sufficient to

show how they are programmed to admit a specific geometry

and material. The program is then applied to predict the

end-deflection of a model telescopic cantilever.

3.3 The ‘C’ Program

The ‘C’ programme marries each polynomial description of

deflection within the three beam sections. Table 1 shows

the steps leading to the overall tip deflection. The program

is able to calculate tip deflection under various applied

loadings with different combinations of overlaps. To do this

it requires the geometric parameters of the telescopic beam

assembly entered interactively to find specific solutions

defined by the seven sets of equations defined in Appendix

A2. Specifically, it applies the acquired parameters to

equation set (1) to obtain the tip reactions. The shape of AC

is provided by equation set (2) from which it calculates

boundary conditions to define the shape of overlap CB

between beams AB and CD. This recursive process

continues until the deflected shape of every portion is

defined. Finally, the shape of DF is used to estimate the

value for the tip deflection.


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

deflection

3.5 Finite Element Analysis Using ABAQUS

The geometric model submitted to ABAQUS for a FE analysis

shown in Figure 6. Four wear pads were introduced to make

the tip reaction model comparable to the FEA.

Wear pad 1 of 0.5 mm thickness and 5 mm wide is glued to

the inner side of the free end of beam 1 as shown in Figure

6. Similarly wear pad 2 of thickness 0.5 mm and 5 mm wide

is glued to the outside of beam 2. Wear pad 3 is glued to the

inner end of beam 2 and wear pad 4 is glued to outside of

beam 3 as shown in Figure 6. The beam assembly slides

on these wear pads. Table 2 shows the finite element

analysis process carried out by ABAQUS. The left-hand side

shows the flow chart and the right-hand side gives detailed

explanations.

This FEA procedure was applied repeatedly to each tip load

thereby providing the end displacement required. Note that

while both the analytical model and FEA are capable of

providing respective predictions to the deflected shape in

full, here only the end-deflection was taken as the validation

measure for the analytical technique.

3.6. Case Study

In this study a model telescopic cantilever beam assembly

is used. It consists of three, 1 mm thick square tubes, with

outer dimensions 25 mm, 22 mm and 19 mm, having

respective fixed, middle and end lengths of 1 m, 1.2 m and

1.2 m. Referring the model to Fig. 2, beam CD and AB have

an overlap of 400 mm and beams CD and EF have an overlap

of 300 mm. The second moment of area about the neutral

axis for the beams AB, CD and EF are 9232 mm4, 6188 mm4

and 3900 mm4 respectively. The self-weight per unit length:

w = W/L = A for the beams AB, CD and EF are: w1 = 0.007488

N/mm, w2 = 0.006594 N/mm and w

3 = 0.005652 N/mm

respectively [7]. In addition, the model beam assembly was

subjected to an increasing, concentrated tip loading.

4.0 Results and Discussion

Table 3 gives the tip theory predictions to the end-deflection

from the C-program. Also shown are the end deflections

provided by applying the FEA procedure repeatedly to each

tip load.

Table 3: End load versus deflection predictions


Figure 6: Telescope beam assembly for FEA

ρ

Table 2: FEA procedure using ABAQUS

It appears that the agreement between the analytical and

numerical solutions is acceptable. Both techniques reveal

a comparable stiffness for this beam, which is identified

with the gradients in Fig. 7, these having a mean value

0.26 kN/m. A graphical plot between these results reveals

an interesting feature of the beam’s behaviour by either

approach. Thus Figure 7 shows each load versus deflection

prediction graphically for the model beam assembly

considered here.

When each plot is extrapolated to a zero end-load they both

reveal a significant, initial, 26 mm end-deflection due to

self-weight. The linear response

of the structure to increasing end-

loading, as revealed by both the

analytical solution and FE is

consistent with the principle of

superposition [2]. Thus, for an

elastic loading of a telescopic

cantilever the end-deflection may

be taken as the sum of the

deflections that arise when the

distributed load and the

concentrated load act separately.

This important observation offers

a means of extending the theory

to complex loading patterns

applied to telescoping structures

that do not facilitate a successive

integration so readily. Here the

tip-reaction concept may be

extended conveniently by

isolating each load in turn to find

the deflection. Superimposing

the loads, allows the deflection

to be found as a sum when all

loads act together upon the

structure.

5.0 Conclusions

The underlying principle of

bending cantilever beams has

been revisited in which the

moment of resistance is

identified as the mechanism for

transferring the effects of external

loads within continuous beams.

Since this cannot be used as the

mechanism for discontinuous

telescopic beams an alternative

‘Tip Reaction Model’ is proposed

in which the external loading is

reacted at the tips of the overlaps.

The model enables a deflection

Figure 7: Tip load versus deflection from theory and FEA


analysis using direct integration method. The latter provides

polynomial expressions for the deflected shape of a three-

section cantilever which are convenient for programming.

The deflections predicted analytically are accurate according

to a validation provided by an alternative numerical finite

element solution. Both predictions revealed that the

telescopic structure was Hookean in which the end-load

versus deflection plot was linear. The latter reveals that the

deflection contributions to the end-deflection from self-weight

and external loading may be separated. Consequently, when

finding deflection of telescoping structures in general under

complex loading, a load separation is proposed to simplify

analyses. A load superposition would allow the required

deflection to be found as a sum of contributing deflections

from each load acting alone. In this way the tip reaction

analysis may be applied to loadings that do not facilitate the

successive integration method adopted here quite so readily.

References

1. Benham, P. P. and Crawford, R. J. Mechanics of

Engineering Materials, English Language Book Society/

Longman Group Limited, Essex,

England, 1987.

2. Rees, D. W. A. Mechanics of Solids and

Structures, World Scientific, 2000.

3. Gere, J. M. and Timoshenko, S. P.

Mechanics of Materials, Van Nostrand,

1984.

4. Ramamrutham, S. and Narayan, R.

Strength of Materials, Eleventh Edition,

Dhanpatrai & Sons, Dehli, 1992.

5. ESAB Welding Products, TELBO - The

Telescopic Boom Brochure, 322 High

Holborn, London WC1V 7PB.

6. Niftylift, Access Platform Catalogue,

2010, Milton Keynes, MK40, UK.

7. Abraham, J. Estimating deflection and

stress in a telescopic cantilever beam

using the tip reaction model, Ph.D.

Interim Report, School of Engineering and Design,

Brunel University, November, 2010.

8. Stephen, N. S. Macaulay’s Method for Timoshenko

Beam, Int Jl of Mechanical Engineering Education,

Volume 35, No 4, 2007, pp. 285-292

9. Punmia, B. C., Jain, Ashok Kumar and Jain, Arun Kumar,

Mechanics of Materials, Laxmi Publications, New Delhi,

India, 2005.

10. Rhodes, J. Virtual Work and Energy Concepts, Chatto

and Windus Ltd, London, 1975.

11. Gaafar, M. L. A. Large deflection analysis of a thin-walled

channel section cantilever beam, Int Jl Mech Sci, 22(12),

1980, pp. 755-766.

12. Tatham, R. and Price, H. L. Deflection of tapered beams,

Aircraft Eng, 17 (201), 1945, pp. 312-316.

APPENDIX A – Deflection Analyses

Deflection of the assembly is considered as the combination

of deflection in the three beams AB, CD and EF in a three-

section, telescopic cantilever beam. The deflected shapes

of the different beams however are assumed to be the same

in the overlapped regions. Consider the beams shown in

Figure 6. Beam AB has two deflected portions AC’ and C’B’.

Beam CD has three deflected portions C’B’, B’E’ and E’D’.

Similarly, beam EF has two deflected portions E’D’ and D’F’.

The equations of the deflected shapes of the beams can be

derived by integrating the flexure equation twice. There are

seven different lengths having different bending moments

in this assembly. They are identified within Fig. A1 as follows

i. AC in beam AB

ii. CB in beam AB

iii. CB in beam CD

iv. BE in beam CD

v. ED in beam CD

vi. ED in beam EF

vii. DF in beam EF

The reactions at points C, B, E, D and F have been

established earlier using static equilibrium conditions.

Equations describing the bent shape equations of the seven

segments are derived by integrating Mdx

ydEI −=

2

2

twice,

where M is the sagging bending moment. The integration

starts with AC with integration constants found from the

known boundary condition at A. Using the equation so

derived the slope and deflection at C are calculated. These

then become the boundary conditions for the overlap CB in

beam AB. This process of matching the individual equations

to the boundary conditions calculated from the adjoining

section is continued to establish the full beam’s deflection

curve AC’B’E’D’F’ in Fig. A1.

Figure A.1: Deflected shapes of the telescoping beams


A.1 Boundary Conditions

Here we restrict the analysis to beam lengths listed in i – iii

above, for which the following relationships refer to both the

slope and deflection:

Those at C estimated from AC in AB

= Those at C estimated from CB in AB

= Those at C estimated from CB in CD

Those at B estimated from CB in AB

= Those at B estimated from CB in CD

= Those at B estimated from BE in CD

A.2 Deflection of AC within beam AB

for )(0 11 alx −≤≤ where sagging moments are positive.

Now Mdx

ydEI −=

2

2

1 for the beam portion AC in which

1I is its uniform second moment of area. Integrating this

twice gives

++−

= 21

1

. CxCdxdxEI

My

To find 1C and

2C substitute the boundary conditions at A:

when 0,0 == yx and also the slope 0=dx

dy

Figure A.2: Reference position x in AC

Consider the length AC as shown in Figure A.2. The bending

moment at distance x from A is

2

)()()()( 1

11111

xlxlwxalRxlRM CB

−×−×−−−×+−×−=

C1 = 0 because when 0=x the slope 0=

dx

dy. Integrating

again

21

43

1

22

11

32

11

2

1

1 1232(

2]

62

)([)

6

3

2(

1CxC

xxl

xl

wxxalR

xxlR

EIy cB +++

+−+−

−×−−×=

Here C2

= 0 since 0=y when 0=x . Thus, if the

deflection equation for the length AC in the beam AB is written

as

1011

2

12

3

13

4

141 txtxtxtxty ++++=

It follows that the coefficients t10

- t14

are

24

1

666

1

4

1(

2

1

0

0

1

14

11

1

13

2

11

1

1

2

1

1

1

12

111

210

=

−+

−=

+

−

−×

=

==

==

w

EIt

lwRR

EIt

lwl

llR

lR

EIt

Ct

Ct

CB

C

B

α

Let 1gdx

dyAC

C

=

where

AC

Cdx

dy

means the slope of

section AC at C and )( 11 alx −=∴

Also let 1dy AC

C = where AC

Cy means the deflection of

section AC at C.

112

2

113

3

1141 234 ktktktg ××+××+××=

2

112

3

113

4

1141 ktktktd ×+×+×=

A.3 Deflection curve for the overlap CB in AB

Consider the length CB shown in Figure A.3. The slope

and deflection are found in a similar manner to AC

except that the boundary conditions must match those

at C, these having provided 1g and

1d earlier in section

A.2.

dxdxxl

xlwxalRxlREI

y CB −

×−×+−−×−−×=2

)()()()(

1 111111

1

1

32

1

2

11

2

11

2

1

1

)3

(2

]2

)[()2

(1

Cx

xlxlwx

xalRx

xlREIdx

dycB +

+−+−−×−−×=


Equation

set (1)

Figure A.3: Reference position x in CB

The bending moment at position x from A in Figure A.3

becomes.

2

)()()( 1

111

xlxlwxlRM B

−×−×−−×−= for

11 lxal ≤≤−

But Mdx

ydEI −=

2

2

1

Integrating this twice gives

++−

= 43

1

. CxCdxdxEI

My

Where111 kalx =−= slope 1g

dx

dy=

+−+

−×

−=

]3

[2

]2

[1

3

12

111

2

11

2

111

1

13k

klklw

kklR

EIgC

B

Integrating again

43

43

1

22

11

32

1

1

)1232

(2

)62

(1

CxCxx

lx

lwxxl

REI

y B ++

+−+−×=

When111 )( kalx =−= 1dy =

134

1

3

11

2

1

2

11

3

1

2

11

1

14

)1232

(2

)62

(1

kCkklklw

kklR

EIdC

B

−

+−+

−×

−=

3

32

1

2

11

2

1

1

)3

(2

)2

(1

Cx

xlxlwx

xlREIdx

dyB +

+−+−×=

Thus, the deflection equation for CB is given by

2021

2

22

3

23

4


Where the coefficients t20

- t24

are

(2)set Equation

24

1

46

1

42

1

11

24

11

1

23

2

111

1

22

321

420

=

−−

=

+

×=

=

=

wEI

t

lwR

EIt

lwlR

EIt

Ct

Ct

B

B

A.4 Deflection curve for the overlap CB in CD

Figure A.4: Deflection of beams AB and CD

When in Fig. A4a, the same overlap CB, lying within both AB

and CD is considered, the known slope and deflection

(1g and

1d ) must again apply to C. The bending moment is

from Figure A.5b:

2

)()()( 11

11211

alxalxwalxRM C

+−×+−×−+−×−=

for111 lxal ≤≤−

Substituting111 )( kal =− gives the range for

x:11 lxk ≤≤ . Here M

dx

ydEI −=

2

2

2 where2I is the

uniform second moment of area of beam CBD. Integrating

once gives the slope


When111 )( kalx =−= , 1g

dx

dy= , which give:

5

3

12

2

1

2

1322

1C

kwkR

EIg C +

+

−×=

+

−×−=

322

1 3

12

2

1

2

15

kwkR

EIgC C

When111 )( kalx =−= 1dy = and when

1lx =

2dy = (see Figure A4a).

615

4

1

4

1

4

12

3

1

3

1

2

1 ]1232

[2

]62

[1

CkCkkkwkk

REI

d C ++

+−++

−×=

15

4

12

3

1

2

16423

1kC

kwkR

EIdC C −

+

−×−=

Thus, the deflection equation for CB is

65

43

1

22

12

32

1

2 1232[

2]

62[

1CxC

xxkxkwxxkR

EIy C ++

+−++−×=

which is written as

3031

2

32

3

33

4


where the coefficients t30

– t34

are

(3)set Equation

24

1

66

1

42

1

1

2

34

12

2

33

2

121

2

32

531

630

=

−=

+

×−=

=

=

w

EIt

kwR

EIt

kwkR

EIt

Ct

Ct

C

C

5

32

1

2

12

2

1

2 3[

2]

2[

1C

xxkxk

wxxkR

EIdx

dyC +

+−++−×=

Integrating again gives the deflection

65

43

1

22

12

32

1

2 1232[

2]

62[

1CxC

xxkxkwxxkR

EIy C ++

+−++−×=

Setting1lx = gives the deflection

2d at B:

30131

2

132

3

133

4

1342 tltltltltd ++++=

Differentiating this gives the slope g2 at B:

31132

2

133

3

1342 234 tltltltg +++=

In turn, d2 and g

2 become the boundary conditions

for the free-end length remaining [7]

Part 2 of this study will be published in the

September edition of ‘Engineering Integrity’.


Are you just starting out on an engineering

career or currently studying for a

postgraduate degree. Would you like to tell

us about your research? What is the hot

topic at the moment?

We have many industrial readers who

would be extremely interested in hearing

about your research, both what it involves

and its background. Articles of up to 850

words (approx 1 A4 page) can be published

under our new ‘Research of the Younger

Engineer’ in the journal, presenting a great

opportunity to make industry aware of your

work.

Send your articles to the Editor:

Dr Karen Perkins

Materials Research Centre

School of Engineering

Swansea University

SA2 8PP

Tuesday 8 March 2011

Instrumentation, Analysis & Testing Exhibition

Jimmy Brown Centre

Silverstone Race Track


Technologies for low Carbon Transportation

in New Sound Environments

University of Warwick

Future Events:

Events the EIS are planning for the future:

Cost Benefit Through Failure Avoidance

Living with Ageing Plant

Thermo Mechanical Fatigue

Corrosion Fatigue in Nuclear Power

Aerospace Materials in Rapid Prototyping

If you are interested in receiving information on any of

these events please email:

[email protected]

ENGINEERING INTEGRITY SOCIETY

CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP APPLICATION FORM

Corporate Sponsorship for 2011 is £400+VAT (pro rata). All Corporate members receive discounts at seminars,

training course and exhibitions and advance notice where booking is required. They receive FREE copies of the

EIS Journal and get priority booking in Exhibitions when space is limited.

We would like to join the EIS as a Corporate Sponsor.

Contact Information:

Company: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mailing Address: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Phone: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fax: -------------------------------------------------

Email: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sponsor’s Representative: Name: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Title: ------------------

Please keep our representative informed of the activities of the:

(i) DURABILITYAND FATIGUE GROUP

(ii) SIMULATION, TEST AND MEASUREMENT GROUP

(iii) NOISE, VIBRATION AND PRODUCT PERCEPTION GROUP

We enclose a cheque for £....................................... made payable to ‘Engineering Integrity Society’.

Please invoice us using purchase order number .............................................. (Terms 30 days).

We further authorise that information declared on this document may be stored on the EIS Data Retrieval System.

Signed: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: ---------------------------------------------

How to join: You can email [email protected] for further information or mail the above form with a cheque

to: Engineering Integrity Society, 18 Oak Close, Bedworth, Warwickshire, CV12 9AJ.

Registered in England No. 1959979 Registered Office: 18 Oak Close, Bedworth, CV12 9AJ VAT No. GB 443 7696 18 Registered Charity No. 327121

Technologies for Low Carbon Transportation in New Sound Environments

Tuesday, 29 March 2011

International Digital Laboratory, WMG, University of Warwick

A joint EIS & Warwick WMG seminar & exhibition.

Many automotive manufactures have launched new low carbon Hybrid and Electric Vehicles. Although these quieter

powertrains offer the prospect for enhanced vehicle refinement, problems concerning the driver experience and pedestrian

safety have been also introduced. Resolving these issues will therefore call for new skills to be developed and new

knowledge to be explored. This year’s EIS seminar will provide opportunity to discuss these new concerns. Here the most

recent research by academia and industry will be presented, whilst the latest technological developments will be on show

during the exhibition.

Programme:

08:30 - 09:20 Registration & Coffee

09:20—09:30 Opening Address

09:30—10:00 “Green Noise: Electric Vehicle Sound Quality”

Mr Sebastiano Giudice—Warwick Innovative Manufacturing Research Centre (Host)

10:00—10:30 “Using an Exterior Sound Simulator to develop appropriate Warning Sounds for a

Luxury Electric vehicle”

Mr Ashley Gilllibrand - Jaguar Land Rover, Mr Roger Williams—Sound Evaluations Limited

10:30—11:00 “Moulding the Modal Map: Opportunities For a Rethink in Low Frequency Strategy

Afforded by In-Wheel Motors”

Mr Damian Harty & Mr Andy Watts - Protean Electric Ltd

11:00—11:30 Coffee in Exhibition Area

11:30—12:00

Dr Jez Smith - ESI

12:00—12:30 Applications of Electronic Sound Synthesis in Hybrid and Electric Vehicles

Mr Colin Peachey – Lotus Engineering

12:30—14:00 Lunch & Exhibition

14:00—14:30 NVH development of a range extender module integrated in a pure electric vehicle

Mr Bernhard Graf, Dr. Alfred Rust, Dr. Franz Brandl , AVL List GmbH

14:30 - 15.00 Enhancing noise and vibration comfort of hybrid/electric vehicles using transfer path models

Mr Philipp Sellerbeck, Dr. Christian Nettelbeck HEAD acoustics GmbH

15:00 - 15:30 Electric vehicle sound design – Just wishful thinking?

Dr. Georg Eisele, Dr. Peter Genender, Mr Klaus Wolff FEV Motoren technik GmbH

15:30—15:45 Coffee Break

15:45—16:30 “Expert Panel Session”

Delegates have a chance to raise topical issues related to the seminar theme, led by an

Expert Panel, which will include the presenters.

16:30 Close

TARIFF (All prices include parking tariif)

EIS Member Non Member

Delegate £100+VAT £140+VAT

Students £25+VAT £25+VAT

Leaflet Insert in delegate pack £35+VAT £50+VAT

Sponsorship of Event £250+VAT £250+VAT

Personal membership of EIS £25 (UK) £30(Overseas)

For reservations please contact: Engineering Integrity Society, 18 Oak Close, Bedworth, Warwickshire, CV12 9AJ

Tel: (0)2476 730 126 Email: [email protected]

NVH Simulation Solutions for Lightweight Vehicles and Novel Powertrain Concepts”“

Instrumentation, Analysis & Testing Exhibition


Silverstone Race Track

10:00 to 16:00

Entrance to the exhibition, parking, and the technical activities throughout the day are free to visitors, with

complementary refreshments and buffet lunch.

Exhibition:

Now in its 28th year, the exhibition continues to grow and provides the opportunity for visitors to network, and view and

discuss in an informal atmosphere the latest developments in instrumentation, analysis and test facilities. The exhibition

will be of interest to engineers in the automotive, transport, aerospace, off-highway vehicles, power generation, medical

and research industries.

List of Current Exhibitors:

AcSoft Adept Scientific Bruel & Kjaer

Carl Zeiss Group Dantec Dynamics Data Acquisition & Testing Services

Data Physics Dewetron Doosan Babcock

GE Sensing GOM UK HBM

Instrumentation Direct Interface Force Measurements Kemo

Kistler Lake Image Systems Laser Optical Engineering

LMS m + p International UK Meggitt Sensing Systems

Michell Instruments Moog National Instruments

PC Environmental PhotoSonics Polytec

Product Assessment & Reliability Centre Safe Technology ServoTest

Society of Environmental Engineers Strainsense Techni Measure

TIAB TRaC Vaisala

Variohm Zwick Roell

Technical Activities:

There will be three technical presentations during the morning:

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

Transmission Dynamics)

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

3) MIRA CarDur Update European Car Durability Schedule & Target – MIRA Updated VPG. (D Ensor, MIRA)

(Title to be confirmed)

together with a number of free one hour hands-on training courses: Measurement Fundamentals for Computer-Based

Data Acquisition. This is a one hour introductory session that covers some of the fundamental issues in signal and data

acquisition that any scientist or engineer needs to understand if they are using or building computer-based measurement

systems. These issues include range, resolution, sampling rate, aliasing, noise reduction and filtering. Attendees will

explore these concepts with actual signals via hands-on exercises using USB-based data acquisition hardware and

ready-to-run software examples. Attendees need to have a basic understanding of measurement and be able to operate

PC running Windows. No programming experience is required.

Afternoon:

Of major interest during the afternoon will be an open forum supported by F1 teams, automotive companies, test equipment

manufacturers and universities entitled:

Seven Poster Rigs – Is that three too many?

“Free body“ six, seven and eight post vehicle test rigs have been experimented with and are a deviation from the fixed body

rigs of sixteen to twenty four axes. What are the pros and cons of these different variations and what direction is this

technology moving today?

Our Guest panel is: Dave Hamer Lotus Renault GP

Bruce Oliver Lola Cars International

Dr David Purdy Defence Academy

Bernard Steeples Ford

TBA Simulation

Subjects covered will include: • What are the advantages of the different fixed and free body rigs?

• Have six, seven or eight poster free body rigs made a significant cost-effective impact?

• What part are computer simulations playing?

• Is it valid to use a non-rolling tyre?

• Can free body rigs achieve realistic inertia and aeroloading?

• What direction is the full vehicle laboratory testing taking today?

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

Formula1 Willams F1

Renault F1

Mercedes GP

Force India

Virgin Racing

Test House MIRA

Millbrook

GKN

Consultancy Lola Cars International

Automotive Lotus Cars

Bentley Motors

Nissan Ford

University University of Bath

Defence Academy of the UK

Oxford Brookes

University of Huddersfield

Supplier Tiab Ltd

MTS

Instron

Servotest

There will be two short presentations:

• N Posters in the UK by Colin Dodds, Dodds Associates

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

All attendees will get a chance to ask questions either during the forum or in the exhibition hall afterwards.

The forum will have limited places. A free lunch and refreshments are provided, so please ensure you register.

Please go to the EIS website for further details: http://www.e-i-s.org.uk

or e-mail: [email protected]

‘EIS 3rd Durability and Fatigue

Advances in Wind, Wave and Tidal

Energy’

BAWA Bristol, UK – 30th September

2010

Event report

This third EIS biannual meeting brought

together technical experts to discuss

and share recent advances in fatigue

and durability assessment for

renewable structures, building on the

success of the previous two events held

in 2006 and 2008. The relevance of this

event has been highlighted in a recent

economic valuation for offshore

renewable energy (May 2010), which

claimed that sufficient resources exist

to meet UK demands and generate the

same amount of electricity as is

currently achieved by North Sea oil and

gas production. It postulates that by

2050 the UK could export some of its

renewable electricity and produce

clean electricity equivalent to one billion

barrels of oil annually through the

installation of 169GW of capacity. This

may seem ambitious compared to the

current plan for 30GW offshore

windfarms. Nonetheless, the current

accelerated plan requires new

objectives for the implementation of an

integrated structural integrity approach

to be used in future far-offshore

technologies. This includes the

development of reliable advanced and

modern lifing tools for offshore

renewable energy. There is a need to

develop an integrated validation

process which involves maintenance

and includes health monitoring, testing

of coupons, components and systems,

and which correlates with

comprehensive analytical analysis.

Finally, there is a need for fast track

innovation in areas of damage

detection, smart materials and design

optimization.

The event had 11 presentations drawn

from a wide variety of expertise in this

field: 4 academics, 2 from research

institutes and 5 from specialised

companies including speakers from

Germany. The presentations were on

advances in different aspects of this

fast developing field and included some

innovative ideas in terms of concept

technology, monitoring and design. The

event was sponsored by 6 exhibitions

from the following companies: Data

Physics, Dantec Dynamic, HBM, Safe

Technology and Moog.

The opening speaker was Lewis Lack

from Xanthus

energy who

presented the

concept of a

reliable cost

e f f e c t i v e

‘farshore’ wind

farm foundation

(Fig 1),

highlighting pro

and cons of the

current structure

used in

‘ n e a r s h o r e ’

farms. The next

presenter was

Jarek Rosinski

f r o m

T r a n s m i s s i o n

Dynamics: He

challenged the

current type testing for large turbines

gearboxes. Showing that the reliability

of future wind turbines can be improved

through a better understanding of

dynamic system behaviour, to be

gained by a proposed systematic

approach to the measurement of key

parameters relating to rotating

components during comprehensive

type testing. Adding to this issue,

Graham Penning from David Brown

commented that the failure of bearings

account for a significant proportion of

current wind turbine down time, which

results in poor efficiency and increased

operating costs. These costs are much

more substantial with offshore

systems. He detailed a plan to build a

test rig that can be configured in either

a three or four bearing test

configuration, running at variable loads

and at a fixed speed.

The next presenter was Feargal

Brennan from Cranfield. He illustrated

very clearly the limitations of current

welded structures in offshore wind

farms and the lack of structural integrity

knowledge in the offshore gas and oil

industries. He concluded that the

offshore wind

industry cannot

afford “over

design” and

needs to use up to

date materials

and structural

analysis with

inspections and

i m p r o v e d

methods. Philip

Thies from the

University of

Exeter described

the details of

PRIMaRE Marine

c o m p o n e n t

testing facility for

marine energy

converters. He

has shown

details for a new Dynamic Marine

Component test rig (DMaC) and has

concluded that large uncertainties due

to lack of data for new application

require early failure rate identification

based on sea trials. The diversity

between wave energy concepts was

presented by Jamie Grimwade from

NAREC. He specified the challenges

regarding forces, properties,

irregularities, survivability and

operation with typical wave energy

conversion types.

Moving on to the aspect of advanced

Fig 1

monitoring, Holger Huhn and Karl-

Heinz Haase from Germany’s

Franhaufer Institute and HBM covered

in detail the benefits of fiber optical

sensor technology in structural testing

and monitoring explaining the current

nearshore monitoring in the North sea.

A finite element model of composite

failure applied to tidal turbine

blade design was presented by Paul

Harper from Bristol University. This

involves combining a Paris Law crack

growth model with interface elements

to simulate crack growth between

composite plies (Fig 2). It was

concluded that a similar approach

could be used for wind turbine

blades.

Next, Seamus Garvey from the

University of Nottingham delivered an

intriguing presentation arguing that

from several different perspectives it

was clearly time to

contemplate radical changes

in the design of offshore wind

turbines. The rationale was

based on assessments of

the total ‘Structural Capacity’

required per MW rated and on

the considerable emerging

need for mass energy storage

to complement wind power.

He proposed a completely

new type of turbine (Fig 3) and

opined that only an

engineering leap such as this can both

generate a major UK wind turbine

industry and deliver secure low-cost

energy to the UK consumer. Back to

the advanced monitoring topic, Nick

Hudson from Moog Insensys

presented an approach that uses fibre

optics real time monitoring to optimise

wind turbine performance loads and

power efficiency. This has been applied

to main components such as blades-

pitch control and drive-train torque. The

programme ended with a presentation

from Ian Godfrey from IT power on how

to avoid fatigue in tidal energy systems.

He has shown practical solutions for

several tidal design systems and

suggested several.

The day ended with a lively

discussion regarding the

possible direction and trends

of renewable systems and

whether or not, for example, the

wind energy turbine capacity

has reached its limit or if larger

diameter are still a potential in

the future.

It was a very successful full day

and the organisers wish to

thank the presenters and all

the participants for their

contributions.

Event Convenors: Robert Cawte

Giora Shatil

Prof. S. D. Garvey presented on the

subject of “Structural Capacity and

Scaling Up Renewables”.

He put forward the provocative view that

future offshore wind turbine designs

are likely to look very different from the

current machines and based this view

on the premise that with the present

designs, many major components of

cost now scale with the third (or higher)

powers of blade tip diameter, D, whilst

the power output scales only with D-

squared. The wind turbine

manufacturers know this already and

yet have strong motivations to develop

even larger machines. Garvey argues

that the optimum design for any

machine does depend on scale and

that when some critical scale limit is

reached, it will be time to consider a

radical redesign of the offshore wind

turbine. His particular suggestion is for

machines of 232m in diameter (and

larger) in which power is converted

internally within the rotor by allowing

gravity to move masses relative to the

rotor. The power emerges as

compressed air – a form intrinsically

compatible with energy storage.

The questions to this presentation

were both many and animated. Several

felt that we should regard the existing

designs for offshore wind turbines as

“mature”. However there was broad

acceptance that (a) individual offshore

wind turbines will indeed become

significantly larger than they are at

present and that (b) optimum design

does indeed depend on scale.

Readers wishing to respond may send

their comments by email to:

[email protected]

Fig 3

Fig 2

Welcome to the Industry News section

of the journal. Thank you to everyone

for their submissions, of which we

received nearly 700 press releases.

The nominal limit for entry is 200 words,

which should be sent to

[email protected] or posted

to EIS, c/o Amber Instruments Ltd,

Dunston House, Dunston Road,

Chesterfield, S41 9QD. We would

appreciate you not sending entries by

fax.

Paul Armstrong

EIC partners with EDT to support

Business/Education links

The EIC, the leading trade association

for UK companies supplying goods

and services to the energy industries

worldwide is teaming up with

educational charity EDT in recognition

that more needs to be done to

encourage students to move into

science, technology, engineering and

maths (STEM) careers.

Alarmed by the skills gaps which have

opened in these skills in the UK, EIC is

convinced by the EDT approach of

building business/education links

which enable students to see the

possibilities of STEM careers and

therefore to make better informed

career choices.

The partnership will see EIC working

with EDT to build links between its

members and schools and other

educational institutions. EDT is hopeful

that it will be able to establish similar

arrangements with other associations

in STEM based industries.

To contact EDT for more information,

go to www.etrust.org.uk or contact

Penny Tysoe on 01707 871 528 or

[email protected].

Shock GDP contraction reinforces

need for investment in growth

The Association for Consultancy and

Engineering responded to the recent

shock GDP growth estimate by calling

for a renewed focus on encouraging

investment in infrastructure.

GDP growth for the entire economy

shrank by 0.5% in the fourth quarter of

2010. However, GDP for the

construction sector shrank by 3.3%,

compared with growth of 3.9% in the

previous quarter.

Nelson Ogunshakin OBE, ACE chief

executive, said: “While the unusually

cold weather in December inevitably

had an effect on the economy, today’s

news reinforces the fragile nature of the

recovery. We would encourage the

Chancellor to use his forthcoming

Budget to place an urgent focus on

driving greater private sector

investment and in supporting

businesses, particularly small

businesses.

Transport, water and energy

infrastructure are all crucial to the

economic, environmental and social

health of the UK. Facilitating greater

private sector investment in these

areas should be a top priority for

government, particularly as we seek to

rebalance the economy.”

AMRC launches Industrial Doctorate

Centre

A new Industrial Doctorate Centre (IDC)

aimed at helping the brightest

engineering postgraduates work with

industry to develop new technologies

and skills, has been launched by the

University of Sheffield Advanced

Manufacturing Research Centre

(AMRC) with Boeing.

The new centre, to be operated jointly

by the AMRC and the University’s

Department of Mechanical Engineering,

will provide engineering doctorate

(EngD) training with a focus on

machining science. EngD is a well-

established programme for talented

postgraduate engineers who want a

career in industry, providing a

vocationally-oriented alternative to the

traditional PhD.

The industrial doctorate combines

taught modules to bring students up to

best industrial practice, with original

research based on real business

problems, brought together under a

common theme.

The Sheffield IDC will be based at the

AMRC’s facilities on the Advanced

Manufacturing Park. It will take in an

initial five postgraduate students per

year for four years, with each studying

for four years of fully-funded research.

Once the centre is established, it will

be able to take up to 20 students per

year.

The Sheffield centre is one of five

nationwide to secure stimulus funding

from the Engineering and Physical

Sciences Research Council (EPSRC).

The research council is providing £1.25

million towards launch costs, with the

remainder coming from the

universities and industrial partners.

Don’t talk to me at 10am on a

Tuesday– I can’t handle it!

According to a new survey by Michael

Page we hit melting point on a Tuesday.

The survey reveals not only what day of

the week us Brits find most stressful,

but that it is at 10am exactly that we

reach our stress limit.

A third of Engineering and

Manufacturing professionals are

finding a heavy workload as the biggest

contributor to stress in their jobs and

as a result, 1 in 3 have shouted at a

colleague. Furthermore, it’s starting to

have an effect outside the work place

with 40% of Engineering and

Manufacturing professionals feeling so

stressed from their jobs, they go home

and have a drink every now and then,

or worse, 1 in 5 have called in sick to

work, just to avoid going in.

The research also revealed that if they

felt they had something better to go to,

42% of employees would walk out the

door today. That’s not to say they have

not been trying with a third of

Engineering and Manufacturing

professionals planning to leave their

job within the next 1-3 months.

The results come as Michael Page

launch their new iPhone app to support

ongoing career progression and take

the stress out of finding a job. Just like

the online service, the Michael Page

Jobs app includes a small but perfectly

formed version of the job search

function. Significantly, and perhaps

most importantly, unlike similar apps

the Michael Page Jobs app allows you

to apply for jobs wherever and whenever

you are, straight from your iPhone.

Another unique feature includes ‘Face

the Panel’ where you can spin a panel

of experts to get some interview practice

before the big day. There are over 70

questions broken down into three key

competencies: managing business,

managing others and managing

yourself.

The Michael Page Jobs app is

available for download via the App Store.

Aston Martin joins top companies at

design conference

Aston Martin design director, Marek

Reichman, is the latest name to sign

up for national design conference

‘Design Means Business’ to be staged

on March 15th and 16th.

Held at The Sage Gateshead, he will

join Sir Richard Needham from Dyson

and other key speakers on design

from, Herman Miller, King of Shaves,

Hasbro, and Nissan.

Over 250 people from industry and the

design community are expected at the

two day conference, which is being

organised by Design Network North

and business services firm RTC North.

Supported by The Design Council,

Design Means Business is an

opportunity to listen, learn and be

inspired by experts from leading

companies, design led businesses

and design agencies.

Covering a range of design topics,

delegates will also be able to take part

in interactive workshops, meet

exhibiting companies and network with

industry leaders and designers from

across the UK.

The ERDF programme is bringing over

£250m into the North East to support

innovation, enterprise and business

support across the region.

To see the full conference programme

and find out more about Design Means

Business visit:

www.designnetworknorth.org, email

[email protected] or

call 0191 5164400.

NAFEMS World Congress 2011

The NAFEMS World Congress 2011,

being held in Boston, MA, USA from May

23rd-26th 2011, will be the only

independent, international conference

focusing on all aspects of simulation

technology and their impacts on society

and industry as a whole.

Visit the Congress website at

www.nafems.org/congress

Bosch tackles skills crisis with

search for future engineers

The Bosch Technology Horizons

Award, which aims to help close the

engineering skills gap by encouraging

young people to opt for a career in

engineering is open for entries.

The essay writing competition is split

into two age groups with cash prizes

for the winners and paid work

placements at a Bosch site in the UK.

In the 14-18 age group, the first prize is

£700 and two weeks of paid work

experience. In the 18-24 age group,

the first prize is £1,000 and the

opportunity to undertake six months’

paid work experience at a Bosch site in

the UK. Winners in both age groups

will receive an invitation for two people

to attend the Royal Academy of

Engineering Awards Dinner in June 2011.

Entries can be submitted online at http:/

/ w w w. b o s c h . c o . u k / t e c h n o l o g y

horizons/ and the closing date is March

18th 2011.

New centre will train industrial

research leaders of tomorrow

A new specialist training centre at The

University of Nottingham will help to

keep the UK at the forefront of

engineering excellence.

The Engineering Doctoral Centre will

train dozens of the brightest

postgraduate students to address key

challenges in advanced manufacturing

engineering.

An intensive four-year research

programme, in partnership with

industry, will ensure students are well

placed to become the industrial

research leaders of tomorrow.

The Centre has funding of £1.25m from

the Engineering and Physical Sciences

Research Council (EPSRC). The

University of Nottingham was selected

by EPSRC because of its reputation for

excellence in manufacturing

engineering, and its strong track record

of working in partnership with industry.

The Engineering Doctorate (EngD) is

an alternative to the traditional PhD,

being more closely related to the needs

of industry and providing a more

vocationally orientated doctorate

degree, with the student spending a

significant proportion of their time

working in industry.

The four-year award provides

postgraduate engineers with an

intensive, broad-based research

programme incorporating a taught

component undertaken in partnership

with industry.

The Nottingham centre is one of five

Industrial Doctorate Training Centres

announced by the Government. The

other four are based at the Universities

of Strathclyde, Swansea, Sheffield and

Warwick.

EPSRC will provide a quarter of the

costs for each training centre —

£1.25m of ‘stimulus’ funding — with the

remainder coming from industry and

from the universities themselves.

SWIGZ® Electric Superbike makes

history on its global racing debut

Chip Yates and his SWIGZ Racing team

have achieved the seemingly

impossible, with two podium finishes

for their electric superbike on its global

racing debut, competing against a

competitive field of highly-developed

gasoline-powered race machines.

The privately owned and developed

machine recently exceeded all

expectations at Auto Club Speedway in

California. Yates achieved third place

in the premier WERA Heavyweight

Twins Superbike race having started on

the third row of the grid, and went one

better in the WERA Heavyweight Twins

Superstock race to finish second and

post the fastest lap of the race at a

1:39.792. The all-electric machine was

recorded at 158 mph on the straight

and appeared visibly quicker to

spectators, compared to even the

1,000cc Japanese superbikes from the

other top WERA superbike classes.

Yates said: “The bike has been

developed with all new technology and

software, in less than one year, and

after extensive simulation testing,

worked right out of the box from day one

to beat bikes made by the world’s best

known Italian and Japanese

manufacturers.“

“We have to thank WERA Motorcycle

Roadracing and Evelyne Clarke for their

graciousness and vision in welcoming

our electric superbike to their

nationwide gasoline race series. Out

of courtesy to the regular WERA racers,

we forfeited the championship points

we accumulated today so as not to

interfere with the gasoline bike season

results and a lot of those racers visited

our pits to voice their support of our

program!”

Independent Lab Simulations Indicate

Scuderi Engine Consumes up to 36

Percent Less Fuel Than a Conventional

Engine

West Springfield, Mass. - Jan. 17, 2011

– Scuderi Group, an engine

development company that is re-

engineering the conventional four-

stroke engine to advance fuel-efficient

engine design, today announced strong

preliminary results from vehicle

simulations conducted on the

Scuderi™ split-cycle engine at

Southwest Research Institute (SwRI).

Computer models showed that a base,

naturally aspirated Scuderi™ engine

operating in a 2004 Chevrolet Cavalier

consumes 25 percent less fuel, and

that a naturally aspirated Scuderi™ Air-

Hybrid consumes 30-36 percent less

fuel under similar drive conditions.

Findings are based on projections

generated from simulations of the

Scuderi engine by the independent

laboratory. The Scuderi split-cycle is

the first engine design in over 130

years to apply a new thermodynamic

process to the internal combustion

engine. Using the unique combustion

process of firing after top dead center,

Scuderi’s engine maximizes power

output while minimizing fuel

consumption.

The preliminary projections from the

Chevy Cavalier simulation is evidence

that Scuderi’s unique cycle holds

significant promise. A report that

outlines the findings of the engine’s

simulation program is expected to be

available later this year.

U.S. policy makers have made

landmark decisions recently to help

tighten fuel efficiency mandates. Cars

produced and sold in the U.S.

automotive market by 2016 model year

are expected to average about 39 MPG

while trucks are expected to get an

average of 30 MPG – nearly a 30 percent

increase from current standards. The

Scuderi engine is a viable option for

automakers to meet these impending

new rules because of its significant

efficiency. And because the complexity

of the engine is low, minimal retooling

is needed to produce vehicles based

on a Scuderi engine design.

A fascinating podcast on these new

findings can be heard here: http://

www.scuderiengine.com/a-scuderi-in-

a-chevy/

Cambridge launches Nuclear Energy

MPhil

A masters degree course designed to

train the next generation of nuclear

scientists both in the UK and abroad

has been announced by the University

of Cambridge. The MPhil degree

course in Nuclear Energy will be based

in the University’s Department of

Engineering, and will commence in

October 2011.

In the UK, three groups are planning to

invest, collectively, at least £30 billion

in new reactors over the next 15 years,

which could supply 30% of the country’s

electricity demand per annum by 2030.

Though based in the Department of

Engineering, it will be run in partnership

with the Judge Business School and

the Departments of Materials Science

and Metallurgy, and Earth Sciences, at

the University of Cambridge.

The core topics covered will include

reactor physics, reactor engineering

and thermo-hydraulics, the fuel cycle,

waste and decommissioning, nuclear

fuels and materials, systems, and

safety. The Judge Business School will

also provide teaching on nuclear policy

and business. There will be an option

to continue research training on

completion of the course by entering a

follow-on PhD programme.

Potential students will need a good

degree in engineering or a related

science subject and be aiming to build

their career in the energy and nuclear

sectors. More information, including

application details, can be found by

writing to:

[email protected]

Engineers Working in the .NET

Environment Can Now Incorporate

Rigorously Tested Numerical Routines

—NAG Library for .NET

(www.nag.com, www.nag.co.uk,

www.nag-gc.com, www.nag-j.co.jp )

Engineers who develop applications

in the Microsoft® .NET environment and

program in C#, Visual Basic, Visual C++

or F# can now incorporate the methods

from one of the most extensively tested

and comprehensively documented

numerical libraries in the world, the

NAG Library, by using a new version

developed specifically for that

environment (http://www.nag.com/

numeric/DT/DTdescription.asp)

The NAG Library for .NET provides the

algorithms developed by the Numerical

Algorithm Group (NAG) in areas such

as optimization, curve and surface

fitting, FFTs, interpolation, linear

algebra, wavelet transforms,

quadrature, correlation and regression

analysis, random number generators

and time series analysis. The Library

also incorporates extensive

documentation and references, and

makes this available from the Visual

Studio help systems, to enable users

to fully understand the usage of the

methods and to guide them to the most

appropriate method for the solution of

their problem.

For a complete listing of methods

included in the NAG Library for .NET

see (http://www.nag.com/numeric/DT/

DTdescription.asp )

NAG Library for .NET is available for

Microsoft Windows 32-bit and 64-bit

systems.

Trials of the NAG Library are available

from http://www.nag.com/downloads/

trial_request.asp

EAL Managing Director questions

depth of the Government’s

commitment to the skills sector

Ann Watson, Managing Director of

specialist awarding organisation EAL

(EMTA Awards Limited) has applauded

the commitment to skills following the

announcement of a joint initiative

between BIS and the Department of

Work and Pensions (DWP) but voices

her concerns that this commitment may

be a short sighted.

Watson said: “On the surface of the

issue, the Government is appearing to

boost the skills sector, but scratch a bit

deeper and it is offering vague

promises of putting unemployed

people on training courses. While this

may go some way to counteract the

unemployment crisis, this not going to

boost our economy in the long term.

Instead, or perhaps in addition, the

Government should be supporting

businesses in the skilled industries to

enable them to take on and train

apprentices.

We need to look at apprenticeship

funding in more detail – there is still

nothing available for people over the

age of 25 who want change career or

get back into employment and

undertake an apprenticeship. We need

to see a concrete commitment and

coherent strategy from the Government

towards apprenticeships, not vague

soundbites about the importance of

skills. Yes, skills have a huge role to

play in economic recovery, but it’s about

quality skills for industries that will drive

the UK forward.”

EAL (EMTA Awards Limited) is a leading

UK Awarding Organisation for

vocational qualifications in the

Engineering, Manufacturing and

Building Services Engineering Sectors.

With more than 40 years experience,

EAL’s qualifications are recognised as

representing the highest standard of

practical achievement. For more

information, visit the website at:

www.eal.org.uk.

Business owners so frustrated by tax

laws, they would pay to have them

simplified

Some small business owners are so

frustrated with the complexity of the UK

tax system that they would pay more

just to see it simplified, new research

has found.

Well over half (57%) of business

owners surveyed by the Forum of

Private Business said they would be

willing to pay more tax in exchange for

a simplified system – providing the

system led to greater rewards.

Meanwhile, 50% said they would be

prepared to pay more under a

simplified system if that system cut

down on tax avoidance among their

competitors. Tax avoidance is typically

carried out by bigger businesses with

the resources to exploit geographic

loopholes.

And 45% of business owners on the

Forum’s Tax and Budget member

panel said they would tolerate a higher

tax bill under a simplified system if it

was accompanied by a general

reduction in legislative red tape.

These and other key findings come

after the Coalition Government

announced the creation of the Office for

Tax Simplification last summer. The

Office is a Treasury department which

is currently working on tax simplification

proposals ahead of the March budget.

In response to the panel findings, the

Forum plans to investigate the

possibility of a radical overhaul to the

tax system.

The following article outlines a process

used globally by companies that have the

necessary equipment and resources to

implement it. We invite you to discuss what

is required to validate and improve the

process, and also the need to develop

simple, affordable economic tests. Please

send your comments and a description of

what you would like to discuss to:

[email protected]

Fatigue in Automotive Structures

Dr. Andrew Halfpenny

Chief Technologist, HBM-nCode Products

Summary

Automotive components typically suffer vibration from two

sources, these are:

1. terrain-induced vibration – which influences the low

frequency range between 0 – 32Hz

2. powertrain-induced vibration – which influences the mid

frequency range between 10 – 500Hz.

Terrain-induced vibration is effected by the ground surface

profile, the tyre (or caterpillar track) profile, wheel imbalance

and the suspension system. These vibration levels give rise

to fatigue damage on various components on the vehicle.

Fatigue and durability qualification is assessed by proving

ground test or a lab-based road simulator rig. This article

discusses these two test methods and describes how the

tests can be accelerated and calibrated to real vehicle usage.

It also discusses how virtual tests can be simulated using

the Finite Element Method (FEM) to ensure that components

pass the qualification tests first time.

Powertrain-induced vibration is typically Gaussian random

in nature with evidence of strong sinusoidal harmonics in

some components sited close to the gearbox or rotating

shafts. Fatigue and durability qualification of structural

powertrain components is assessed using dynamometers,

whereas electro-dynamic shaker tables are used to qualify

other non-structural components which are affected by the

vibrations. This article discusses the shaker tests and

describes how tests can be accelerated and damage

calibrated to real vehicle usage. It also describes a relatively

new technique to determine the fatigue damage directly from

PSD which are suitable for FEM simulation of the test.

1 Terrain-induced vibration

1.1 Accelerated testing using an optimized Proving

Ground schedule

Proving grounds accelerate damage accumulation by

concentrating on the most extreme loading events and then

concatenating them one after the other. A typical proving

ground is divided into several terrain surfaces. For example:

asphalt, washboard, gravel, Belgium block, potholes, off-

road, cross-country, etc. Each surface represents a portion

of the real road; however, the severity is increased so damage

can be accumulated much more quickly than under ordinary

usage.

The engineer must determine the optimal mix of surfaces,

vehicle weight conditions and vehicle speed, to best

represent the real usage profile of the customer. An analysis

technique known as ‘proving ground optimization’ (or ‘end-

customer correlation’) uses advanced non-linear

optimization routines to determine this optimal mix.

The most common question arising from proving ground

optimization is: “what is the acceleration factor of the proving

ground schedule”, or “what’s the ratio of proving ground

miles to equivalent road miles?” This is not an easy question

to answer because the rate of damage accumulation is

different for different components. Therefore, some

components are under-tested by the proving ground while

others are over-tested. In most cases the engineers tend to

optimize the schedule using generic acceleration inputs,

such as 3-axis wheel spindle acceleration or centre-of-gravity

acceleration values. The question therefore demanded is:

to what extent is any particular component over- or under-

represented by the proving ground test? Information on these

issues is given by Halfpenny (1).

1.2 Accelerated testing using road simulator rigs

Road simulator rigs include 4-post servo-hydraulic rigs, 12/

16 channel spindle couple rigs, or 4-channel rigs operating

on one corner of the vehicle. These rigs are perfectly adept

at replaying proving ground data through a full (or partial)

vehicle in the laboratory.

If wheel spindle loads are measured directly on the proving

ground then these can be replayed directly on the rig. The

rig determines an appropriate input signal based on an

iterative control loop such as the popular ‘RPC (Remote

Parameter Control)’ algorithm offered by MTS. This algorithm

takes the multi-channel responses measured on the

proving ground and determines an appropriate set of inputs

which yield the same (or very similar) responses. This

algorithm allows other proving ground measurements such

as vehicle accelerations or even specific strain

measurements to be included in the iterative control loop.

Tests are optimized initially by using the optimized proving

ground schedule discussed in section 1.1. Further

significant optimization is also possible by processing the

recorded proving ground measurements to remove any non-

damaging segments. These algorithms calculate the fatigue

damage based on the measured response and remove

segments which contribute low (or no) damage. The

remaining segments are then spliced back together to

create a much shorter time signal which maintains the same

damage content. Care is needed to maintain amplitude,

frequency and phase interaction between the channels.

Edited drive signals run more quickly and also offer greater

reliability against convergence failure of the control loop.

The approach is described in some detail by Halfpenny (2).

1.3 Virtual proving ground simulation using FEM

Terrain-induced damage sources can be split into two

categories, these are: stochastic and deterministic.

Stochastic events include most continuous road surfaces

like asphalt, Belgium block and gravel. The load profile for

these can be described in terms of a steady state time signal

or a PSD. This leads to highly efficient FE simulation using

modal superposition or modal frequency response.

Deterministic events include potholes, curb strikes and

cross-country surfaces. Most critical load events are

transient in nature and require a full transient dynamic

analysis. However, in some cases the low frequency of the

loading coupled with the relatively stiff nature of the

component will allow a very efficient quasi-static FEM

solution. If a full transient analysis is required then the input

signal needs to be edited very aggressively to consider the

very smallest representative segment. Halfpenny (2)

considers this type of fatigue editing.

2 Powertrain-induced vibration

2.1 Dynamometer test and FEM simulation

Structural powertrain components are usually very stiff and

vibration-induced resonance is not usually an issue. Failure

is usually attributable to: fatigue, wear and high amplitude

impulsive shock loads. Structural tests are performed using

dynamometers which simulate the torque cycles on the

powertrain system. FEM simulation is possible for most

failure modes, but fatigue analysis of gear teeth is usually

performed by simple empirically-derived SN (or TN [torque-

cycle]) curves. A good account of this analysis is given by

Yung-Li (3).

2.2 Accelerated component testing using electro-

dynamic shakers

Many ancillary components are affected by powertrain-

induced vibration – e.g. engine management control

systems, sensors, actuators, pipe work, etc. These can be

tested using electro-dynamic shaker tables. The

acceleration input is usually specified as; Sine sweep and

dwell, PSD random, Sine on random, or Sine-sweep on

random. Modern vibration controllers also offer ‘kurtosis’

simulation which allows more realistic simulation of ground

vehicle loading.

Test profiles are determined based on ‘Fatigue Damage

Spectra (FDS)’. These represent a plot of fatigue damage

vs. frequency. The aim of accelerated testing is to derive test

vibration spectra with the same FDS as the real usage profile.

Whereas fatigue editing of signals for structural components

relies on removing non-damaging segments from a time

history of response, vibration fatigue editing increases the

amplitude content of the random signal to just below the

maximum design levels. This ensures that the test runs at

the maximum permitted levels for most of the time. The

damage rate of the test is therefore accelerated because

real-life vibrations only reach these design levels

occasionally. This topic is discussed in more detail by

Halfpenny (4).

2.3 Virtual shaker simulation using FEM

Recent advances in PSD-based rainflow cycle counting

algorithms have led to very accurate FEM simulation of

shaker table tests. These use a highly efficient modal

frequency (or harmonic) response analysis. The approach

is discussed by Halfpenny (5).

REFERENCES

1. Halfpenny A, Pompetzki M. Proving Ground Optimization

and Damage Correlation with Customer Usage. SAE

Technical Paper 2011-01-0359, 2011.

2. Halfpenny, A. Accelerated Loading for Fatigue Analysis

and Rig Testing. Fatigue 2007 Conference. Cambridge,

UK : s.n., 2007.

3. Yung-Li Lee, Jwo Pan, Richard Hathaway, Mark Barkey.

Fatigue Testing and Analysis - Theory and Practice. s.l. :

Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, 2005. ISBN 0-7506-

7719-8.

4. Halfpenny, A, Kihm, F. Mission Profiling and Test Synthesis

Based on Fatigue Damage Spectrum. Fatigue 2006

Conference. Atlanta, USA : Elsevier, 2006. Oral/Poster

Reference: FT 342.

5. Halfpenny, A. Kihm, F. Rainflow Cycle Counting and

Acoustic Fatigue Analysis Techniques for Random

Loading. Recent Advances in Structural Dynamics.

Southampton, UK : s.n., 2010. Paper 005.

PLEASE SEND YOUR VIEWS TO:

[email protected]

Welcome to our

column on Smart

Mater ials and

structures. I wi l l

focus (as usual) on

some of the major

t e c h n i c a l

developments that I

have observed in the

f ield dur ing the

latest months.

Smart materials and miniaturised

sensors have found a natural

appl icat ion case in Micro Aerial

Vehicles (MAVs). According to the

Defence Advanced Research Project

Agency (DARPA), a MAV is a small

aircraft with maximum 15 cm of

wingspan, or equivalent rotor disk in

case of micro helicopters. However,

the actual dimensions may vary from

different manufacturers and mission

prof i les. Aside for mi l i tary

applications, MAVs are increasingly

popular also for optical inspection of

rai lways and transport/structural

infrastructure, because of their small

dimensions and manoeuvrability. A

noteworthy new MAV prototype with

on-board art i f ic ial intel l igence

capabilities for vision recognition is

the PIXHAWK developed by Lorenz

Meier, Friedrich Fraundorfer, and

Marc Pol lefeys at ETH Zurich

( h t t p : / / s p i e . o r g / x 4 3 6 5 3 . x m l ?

A r t i c l e I D = x 4 3 6 5 3 ) .

The novelty of this micro-helicopter-

integrated sensor is the fusion of

optical and inertial data which allows

the aircraft to always know i ts

posi t ion, and to see and avoid

potential barriers in its path, with no

need of intervention from a ground

operator. Human staff is only needed

to postprocess the data acquired

during the mission profile – be them

optical, or IR images. A significant

piece of engineering, which in its first

prototype has won the 2009

European Micro Air Vehicle

Conference and Flight Competition.

In past editions of this column, we

have described some exciting cutting

edge technologies using smart and

nanomater ials to increase the

soundproofing capabilities of panels

and linings. However, Ford is taking

a quite different approach, planning

to line up the 2012 edition of the

Focus with 100 % post-consumer

recycled cotton – including also your

discarded jeans. Well, that puts

technology in perspective I suppose

… For more detai ls see

http://www.ecouterre.com/2012-ford-

f o c u s - t o - u s e - p o s t - c o n s u m e r -

recycled-jeans-for-soundproofing/.

Shape memory plastics (SMP) has

been hailed during these years as a

potential breakthrough in the field of

smart mater ials. Recent ly, 3D

morphing touchscreens have been

patented by Microsoft (ht tp: / /

preview.tinyurl.com/22t83f8). Their

design are based on SMP patches

having pixel sizes, which can be

placed over a large touchscreen that

“morphs” based on the ultraviolet

scatter ing between the user’s

fingertips and back light from the

screen. The different UV wavelengths

induce variable stiffness states in the

SMP pixels, giving also a texture

effect. A most interest ing

development in the field of shape

memory polymers.

For more structural-or iented

applications, Fraunhofer IFAM in

Bremen, Germany has recent ly

developed a new polymer-metal

mater ial wi th sel f-monitor ing

capabilities (http://preview.tinyurl.

com/5uo5xyf) . The Fraunhofer

researchers have developed a

particular plastic-metal blend (with

up to 90 % of metal filler in case),

that changes significantly its electric

conduct iv i ty under mechanical

loading. The polymer-metal

composite can be processed using

normal thermoplast ics

manufactur ing tools (extruders,

injection moulding), and has been

designed for large surface panels

and components. Possible

applications for energy harvesting

should be on the horizon.

Much has been written in the press

about the Manchester Nobel Prizes

Geim and Novoselov, and their

wonder mater ial named as

graphene. Just to highl ight the

potential that this one-atom thick

layer of carbon can have for next

generat ions of sensors, a new

concept of strain gauge is being

currently developed in Berkeley (http:/

/physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/

43367). The design is based on

graphene nanobubbles, where the

electrons inhabit discrete energy

levels that would be present only if

the electrons were moving in circles

in extremely high magnetic field (300

T …). When the nanobubble is

mechanical ly deformed, the

electronic state would have a very

significant and remarkable change,

making it an ideal material for strain

gauges (but also for “straintronics”,

electronics which is strain-

dependent). In a recent speech at

Exeter University, Kostia Novoselov

has also announced simi lar

initiatives in developing graphene-

based strain gauges in Manchester.

We shall see.

Fabrizio Scarpa

The University of Bristol

Raising the

Standards

Brian Griffiths has

written, in this

journal, about the

development of the

current Technical

P r o d u c t

S p e c i f i c a t i o n

s t a n d a r d s ,

expressed in BS8888, and the ways in

which these can be linked to the whole

life cycles of products and their recovery

and re-use in further product cycles, in

the BS8887 series. As this series was

evolving, it became clear that there

were wider issues to be considered in

the use of TPS documents. I chair a

new committee, Documentation

Management, which has been

established to explore these issues

and produce some guidance.

The catalyst for this was a conversation

Brian and I had with another colleague

with considerable experience in

standards work. He had been asked to

design a new attachment for an existing

piece of equipment, which had been

manufactured for some years but had

recently gone out of production. The

design department hadn’t worked on it

for a long time, so their records were

lost. The works had stopped making it,

so their drawings had been binned. The

equipment had to be reverse

engineered to get the information

needed to design the new attachment.

We realized that there was a case for

keeping a selected archive of TPS for a

variety of reasons.

The manufacturing documents,

particularly drawings, are effectively the

“end product” of the design process,

but they are not a complete record of

that process. Other records of analysis,

prototype testing and certification are

usually kept for a while, but eventually

“weeded” from the files to make room

for the next set. Electronic copies are

kept until the software to read them has

been superseded. Even the people

who worked on a design project are

soon scattered to other projects or

move on. It is very rare to find a record

of the reasons why design decisions

were made, other options were

rejected, or plan B never saw the light

of day.

Each design represents a learning

process and an investment of time

money and effort. Although it has an

immediate effect on the product in

question, the longer term value of the

exploration of materials, processes

and alternative options can only be

realized if the information is retained.

In Japan, it has long been the policy to

catalogue these learning experiences.

Rejected, but still promising design

options are often followed up to

complete the learning process. Later

projects benefit from the tried and

tested ideas from earlier work saving

considerable effort in not having to

repeat the same processes, provided

appropriate records have been kept.

We put forward a case to BSI to explore

the need for a guidance document, and

the new committee was formed.

We live in a changing world. More than

twenty years ago, consumer protection

legislation made designers personally

responsible for any safety related

consequences of their design

decisions. This could theoretically

include a charge of manslaughter

should a design fault result in a death.

This could even happen after a product

had been in service for some years,

provided it had been used and

maintained appropriately. More recently,

other legislation has given similar

definition to corporate responsibility for

faulty products. Neither of these pieces

of legislation has yet been fully tested

in court, but the need to keep full records

of the design process would seem

prudent. Less onerous requirements,

such as guarantee/warrantee

problems and insurance claims,

reinforce that need. Add on to that, the

potential for a new version of an older

product, or add-on equipment, as in the

case above, give more reasons.

We hope to provide some guidance to

the records which should be made and

kept for future benefit. So far we are only

exploring to get a better feel for the scale

of the challenge. It is clear that many

documents are produced such as

records of meetings, reports with

analytical calculations, and computer

records of 3-D modelling and

simulations. Once the design is

complete, most of these records are

rarely kept for long. However, if new

uses for the product are proposed or

new versions are needed, much of that

work will have to be repeated. This can

be particularly important if the product

has to go through some form of

certification or testing when a new

overseas market requires the product

to meet different standards.

A major change will be the need to

record the reasoning, which leads to

any design decisions, as they are

made. Historically, the premier

engineers of the nineteenth century

routinely kept daybooks, diaries of their

meetings, the decisions made and

perhaps their expenses and other

details. At a time when product cycles

were measured in decades, such

records allowed later decisions to be

made in confidence with a full

knowledge of the decisions taken at

earlier stages. We have fallen out of

the habit. With short product cycles,

much design information may be lost

before the first products even reach

their market.

Our committee will benefit from the

work already done by Brian’s

committee, where the options for end-

of-life processing have revealed some

of the paths a product might take, and

the need for information to make

appropriate decisions. With a huge

range of engineering activity to cover, it

is impossible for us to produce more

than general guidance, but it is an

investment we can only hope will pay

off in the long term.

Colin Ledsome

Vice President of the Institute of

Industrial Designers

In the last decade or so there have been

substantial changes in the way

professional people access

information. For example, in 2007 we

published an article giving information

about how to download high quality

teaching material to a workstation,

without membership of any

organisation and without payment. The

copyright conditions were liberal

enough to make the downloaded items

useful. That was only one indication of

large-scale changes which are taking

place in publishing practices. I am

going to try in the next few issues to

write a series of short notes about

these changes, drawn from my own

experience. That experience is made

up of a career as a university teacher,

followed by more recent use of on-line

searches using free public-domain

sources.

I’ll start with a short piece about

“Repositories”. Go to

www.opendoar.org and you will find a

list of about one thousand eight

hundred institutions, located in many

countries, which now maintain on-line

repositories. The list includes many

universities and research

establishments. Go to the home page

of one of these repositories and you

will be offered a search facility which

leads to details of items which have

mostly been produced by employees

of the institution. These include many

reports which have either been

published in one of the recognised

scholarly journals or have been sent to

one with a request for publication. The

role of the item in the repository then

needs to be clarified. By including it the

institution maintaining the website is

presumably implying that certain

conventions have been observed about

the integrity of the information it

contains. If the item reports research,

these conventions are very precise, for

reasons which are quite logical.

Different institutions have adopted

different policies about repositories

though, and this affects the service any

particular site provides.

Taking an arbitrary sample, I know that

Sheffield University are active in fatigue

research so I went to Google and typed

in “Sheffield University Repository”. The

screen became the home page of the

White Rose Repository, with a box for a

“Quick Search”. Entering “materials

fatigue” gave me 93 hits, covering

activities at Sheffield, Leeds and York

Universities. This was, though, only a

list of references. My objective in this

case was to find out what followed, so

I clicked on each reference in turn,

expecting to be given one of the

following:-

(a) An abstract indicating the content.

(b) An abstract followed by referral to a

site which offered to registered

users an immediate electronic

download of the full text, and to non-

registered users the same service

for a fee.

(c) An abstract followed by an offer to

all users of an immediate

download of the full text, without

charge.

All 93 of the references gave an

abstract immediately. All except one

gave the full text immediately (option

(c)), The single exception used option

(b), the fee being $42.

Some of the documents were

published by units within the

universities, who presumably owned

the copyright and could choose how to

control the distribution. Many, though,

were linked to papers in journals

managed by commercial publishers.

The text downloaded was then usually

described as ‘Author provided’. This is

where differences between the sites

become significant.

A lot of work has been put into

developing agreed practices in this field

since electronic transmission became

dominant. If you want to read about this

go to Google and type “Sherpa

Romeo.” This leads to a database

which classifies publishers according

to the conditions they lay down for

authors when they use facilities like

institution repositories. The authors will

normally have been required to assign

some form of copyright authority to the

publishers before any link could be

claimed. The categories are then

based on the use of pre-prints and

post-prints. The most significant

difference is that post-prints will have

been submitted by the publisher to

referees, who will only advise

publication if they approve of the

content. Classes are:-

• Green publishers - allow archiving

of both pre-prints and post-prints

• Blue publishers - allow archiving of

post-prints but not pre-prints

(the EIS is a blue publisher)

• Yellow publishers - allow archiving

of pre-prints but not post-prints

• White publishers – allow no

archiving

One consequence is that an item listed

as ‘Author provided’ which also gives a

journal reference may not be exactly the

version which was approved by

referees for inclusion in the journal. The

general content, though, will normally

be the same. The ‘Author provided’

version may be adequate for your

objectives, and may be a convenient

option.

If you were not aware of the existence

of the site www.opendoar.org and you

do sometimes need specialist

information, I recommend you to find

time to look at it. Using it to superficially

sample other sites, though, I generally

found a lower proportion of author

provided texts than I did in the example

above.

Frank Sherratt

Engineering Consultant

Are electric cars

the cars of the

future?

Low carbon

transport is

probably the most

exciting challenge

that the current

and next

generat ion of

engineers and scientists have ever

faced. The rewards for success will

be enormous.

Reduct ions in transport CO2

emissions however, represent tough

technical challenges, but they are not

impossible. In our Low Carbon

Vehicle Report we urge Government

to lead the nation by example as it is

itself a major purchaser of vehicles.

We would l ike to see the new

Government adopt a pol icy of

purchasing low carbon vehicles

where there are clear emission gains

to be had and this purchasing power

could well help stimulate demand for

these technologies and encourage

further research and development.

What is the bigger picture?

The existing UK Government target

is for new fleet emissions to be down

to 100g/km average by 2020, but that

is not enough. We have to strive for

larger reductions, particularly as we

do not know how much natural CO2

absorption will increase as levels in

the atmosphere rise. If we take into

account population growth, and 50%

more people worldwide seeking

affordable and comfortable personal

transport, we need to get to an overall

level of even less than 30g/km; in

itself an 80% reduction in car CO2

emissions from 1990. I t wi l l be

possible only i f the chosen

powertrain technology makes

appropriate use of biofuels and our

national energy supply comes from

more renewable sources or

nuclear.Taking a step back in time to

1904 when there were more battery

vehicles in Detroit than internal

combustion engines. It was the

development of effective clutches,

transmissions and starters that led

to the change we see today. I t

continues to be the case however that

multiple technologies will compete

across a market that has different

demands for different applications.

In 2008 Teslar launched an electric

sports car that uses 6,800 Li-ion

laptop batteries. It is an expensive

vehicle at £89,000 (over three times

the price of an equivalent petrol

sports car) and is over 500kg heavier.

The Teslar has a range of 220 miles

per charge and a battery life of five

years/100,000 miles, but at such a

price i t is unl ikely to become a

serious high-volume vehicle. The

facts are that whilst the recession

has caused a drop in overall car

sales of 30%, there has been a drop

of 50% in sales of electric cars in the

UK, mainly due to the cost difference.

The main weaknesses of battery

technology are their limited energy

storage capacity and their long

recharging times. They can also be

heavy. There are however already

tried and tested examples of plug in

charging infrastructures based on the

national grid, but these systems still

require significant investment. They

are designed to operate at relatively

low power levels and hence

enshrine the need for long charging

times. An alternative is to have a

network of battery changing stations.

Standardising batter ies and

connections would not be difficult and

re-charging could be co-ordinated

with the energy companies. There

is also the potential for the charging

stations, with their banks of charged

batteries, to act as suppliers back to

the Grid when demand is high or

renewable generation is in short

supply.

Overall, battery technology is still in

its infancy and most countries are

engaged in research. This research

is driven by the great attraction of

electric traction in that it uses existing

grids and hence becomes zero

carbon as the gr ids themselves

become zero carbon. The potential

reward for being first to market with

breakthrough battery technology is

clear. The USA for example has

recently announced a new molecular

technology that claims a full recharge

in five minutes – on a par with the

time taken to re-fuel a car.

Competing Technologies

There is not a single dominant

technology or solution to the problem

of reducing carbon emissions from

transport. There are a range of

technologies that can meet the

Institution of Mechanical Engineers

30g/km ‘well to wheel’ emission

target. The most promising existing

technologies are vehicle

lightweighting, advances in petrol

and diesel engines, hybrid drive

systems, fuel cells and hydrogen.

Each will have its place.

The Institution believes affordable

technology will be the key driver. If the

industry is to get to below even 70g/

km, we need all the technologies

available and utilised in the next

generation of vehicles. In the short

term we are likely to be driving stop/

start hybr id vehicles with the

increased use of biofuels to

minimise the CO2 emissions. Part of

the challenge will be demonstrating

to consumers the advantage of low

CO2 vehicles, so that CO

2 becomes

a major part of the purchasing

decision, just as NCAP did for safety

ten years ago.

Stephen Tetlow

Chief Executive, The Institution of

Mechanical Engineers

A great deal of work

by the STMG group members has been

put into the annual Instrumentation

Exhibition to be held at Silverstone on

Tuesday 8 March this year. The

exhibition will have the now well-

established 30 minute training

workshops available during the

morning together with two technical

presentations. In the afternoon a forum

to discuss the merits of four versus 7

post simulators will be held, which is

being supported widely by the F1,

automotive industries, equipment

suppliers and academia. Entrance to

the exhibition, workshops, technical

presentations and the afternoon forum

remains free to visitors.

We are developing the training

workshops following the success of

the ‘Basis of Instrumentation Data

Collection’ workshops. The planned

workshops and seminars include the

fundamentals of hydraulic test systems

and the use of transducers to obtain

product service data and the factors

that affect the validity of the data

obtained. The work on developing the

seminars to cover the use of digital

data available on vehicles of various

types also continues.

The group has established links with

the DVM in Germany to broaden the

activities of the EIS within Europe, with

plans for presentations by members

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

The September 2010 Journal has

already included a paper from

members of the DVM.

The STMG group provides a friendly

resource. We draw on members and

contacts in all industries to assist with

any engineering queries – if you have

any, then contact us. We help solve

problems by providing the environment

for engineers to talk informally, face-to-

face with people of diverse expertise

and from many industries. Our

particularly interest is to assist in the

solution of product structural integrity

problems, in conjunction with the other

EIS groups.

Conway Young

Group Chairman

The D&FG

ran another

seminar in

our bi-

annual series on renewable energy

generation. In the last two years there

has been an increase in the size of

wind turbines, in particular as they move

off-shore, and a significant increase in

activity for the wave and tidal flow

devices. The topics ranged from

fundamentals of what loading do we

have to contend with in the new

environment, to scaling up existing

technology for the larger devices off

shore. David Brown Gear Systems are

making a return to the wind turbine

industry now that larger devices are

needed, having been one of the early

pioneers. Just to prove that nothing is

really new, some comparisons were

drawn to off-shore oil platforms and

lessons learnt in the North Sea over

the last forty or so years; while the latter

have a large number of people on board

unlike energy convertors, they do have

to survive in the same conditions. Prof

Brennan encouraged engineers to look

further than the simple design

standards and consider fracture

mechanics in conjunction with NDT,

while Prof Garvey threw down the

gauntlet to suggest that much much

bigger devices should be possible if

we think laterally (more of that

elsewhere in this journal) although

sadly there are many patents out there

waiting for someone to work out how to

achieve them, which does spoil the fun

a bit. I hope we can generate some

wider discussion on some of the topics

raised. Topics for the future include

corrosion fatigue in the nuclear industry,

now that the future trends seem clearer

and we will be revisiting some case

study orientated seminars before long

as it is never too late to learn from

other’s misfortune.

Robert Cawte

Group Chairman

The Engineering Integrity Society is an independent charitable organisation, supported and sponsored by industry.The Society is committed to promoting events and publications, providing a forum for experienced engineers andnew graduates to discuss current issues and new technologies. We aim for both company and personaldevelopment and to inspire newly qualified engineers to develop their chosen profession.

Events run provide an ideal opportunity for engineers to meet others who operate in similar fields of activity overcoffee and lunch. All of our events enable engineers to establish and renew an excellent ‘contact’ base whilekeeping up to date with new technology and developments in their field of interest.

We are involved in a wide range of Industrial sectors including Automotive, Aerospace, Civil, Petrochemical etcand continue to be interested in new members from all sectors.

None of the above can be done without your continued support!

Act now and become an EIS Member today.

Benefits:EIS members receive a subscription to ‘Engineering Integrity’, mailed direct to your office or private address.Discounts to EIS events. CDs with all the information the Society holds on file of presentations and overheadsfrom conferences past to present. Plus access to Task Groups, to take part, or to receive information andrecommendations.

I would like to join the EIS for an annual fee of £25

I am already a Society member and would like to give the following additional amount to support theSociety’s activities (Please specify amount) _____________

If you are a UK tax payer we are able to reclaim approximately 28% of your subscription if you check the box

(Remember to notify us if you no longer pay an amount of income tax and/or capital gains tax equal to the tax we

reclaim on your donations)

Your Contact Information:

Name: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Company: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Address: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Phone: ---------------------------------------------- Fax: -------------------------------------------- Email: ------------------------------------------------------

How to join:

You can email [email protected] or mail the above form with a cheque made payable to ‘Engineering Integrity Society’ to:

Engineering Integrity Society, 18 Oak Close, Bedworth, Warwickshire, CV12 9AJ.

If your membership has expired or you are unsure if your membership is current, contact: [email protected]

Thank you for becoming a member of the Engineering Integrity Society.

Registered in England No. 1959979 Registered Office: 18 Oak Close, Bedworth, CV12 9AJ VAT No. GB 443 7696 18 Registered Charity No. 327121

Chairman

Peter Blackmore, Jaguar Land Rover ........................................................................................................... 01926 646757

Vice Chairman

Trevor Margereson, Engineering Consultant ............................................................................................... 07881 802410

Treasurer

Khaled Owais, TRaC Environmental & Analysis .......................................................................................... 01926 478614

Company Secretary

Trevor Margereson, Engineering Consultant ............................................................................................... 07881 802410

EIS Secretariat

Lisa Mansfield ............................................................................................................................................... 02476 730126

Communications Sub Committee – ‘Engineering Integrity’ Journal of the EIS

Honorary Editor

Karen Perkins, Swansea University ............................................................................................................. 01792 295666

Managing Editor

Catherine Pinder ........................................................................................................................................... 07979 270998

Chairman

Robert Cawte, HBM United Kingdom .......................................................................................................... 0121 733 1837

Secretary

Khaled Owais, TRaC Environmental & Analysis .......................................................................................... 01926 478614

Members

John Atkinson, Sheffield Hallam University .................................................................................................. 0114 2252014

Martin Bache, Swansea University ................................................................................................................ 01792 295287

Peter Blackmore, Jaguar Land Rover ........................................................................................................... 01926 646757

Feargal Brennan, Cranfield University .......................................................................................................... 01234 758249

Emanuele Cannizzaro, Atkins Aerospace ..................................................................................................... 01454 284242

John Draper, Safe Technology ..................................................................................................................... 0114 255 5919

Steve Hughes, Bodycote ............................................................................................................................... 01524 841070

Karl Johnson, Zwick Roell Group ................................................................................................................. 0777957 8913

Davood Sarchamy, British Aerospace Airbus ................................................................................................. 0117 936 861

Giora Shatil, Darwind ........................................................................................................................... +31 (0)30 6623987Frank Sherratt, Engineering Consultant ....................................................................................................... 01788 832059

James Trainor, TRW Conekt Engineering Services ................................................................................... 0121 627 4244

John Yates, University of Sheffield ............................................................................................................... 0114 222 7748

Acting Chairman

John Wilkinson, Millbrook Proving Ground ................................................................................................... 01525 408239

Members

Marco Ajovalasit, Brunel University ............................................................................................................... 01895 267 134

Alan Bennetts, Bay Systems ......................................................................................................................... 01458 860393

Dave Boast, Avon Rubber .............................................................................................................................. 01373 863064

Peter Clark, Proscon Environmental ............................................................................................................. 01489 891853

Gary Dunne, Jaguar Land Rover ...................................................................................................................02476 206573

Raymond Farnell, Perkins Engines Company ............................................................................................. 01733 583441

Maria Franco Jorge, MIRA ............................................................................................................................ 024 7635 5000

Joe Giacomin, Brunel University ................................................................................................................... 01895 265340

Henrietta Howarth, Southampton University ................................................................................... 023 8059 4963/2277

Paul Jennings, Warwick University ..............................................................................................................02476 523646

Rick Johnson, Sound & Vibration Technology .............................................................................................01525 408502

Chris Knowles, JCB .................................................................................................................................... 01889 59 3900

Colin Mercer, Prosig ...................................................................................................................................... 01329 239925

Jon Richards, Honda UK ..............................................................................................................................01793 417238

Nick Pattie, Ford ....................................................................................................................................................................

Chairman

Conway Young, Tiab .....................................................................................................................................01295 714046

Members

Paul Armstrong, Amber Instruments ............................................................................................................. 01246 260250

Ian Bell, National Instruments ......................................................................................................................01635 572409

Steve Coe, Data Physics (UK) .......................................................................................................................01323 846464Colin Dodds, Dodds & Associates ............................................................................................................... 07880 554590Dave Ensor, MIRA .......................................................................................................................................... 02476 355295Graham Hemmings, Engineering Consultant ............................................................................................ 0121 520 3838Neil Hay, Napier University ........................................................................................................................... 0131 455 2200Richard Hobson, Serco Technical & Assurance Services ............................................................................ 01332 263534Trevor Margereson, Engineering Consultant ............................................................................................... 07881 802410Ray Pountney, Engineering Consultant ........................................................................................................ 01245 320751Tim Powell, MTS Systems ............................................................................................................................ 01285 648800

Mike Reeves, Engineering Consultant ......................................................................................................... 01189 691870

Gordon Reid, Engineering Consultant .........................................................................................................01634 230400

Nick Richardson, Servotest ...........................................................................................................................01784 274428

Paul Roberts, HBM United Kingdom ............................................................................................................0785 2945988

Jarek Rosinski, Transmission Dynamics .................................................................................................... 0191 5800058

Geoff Rowlands, Product Life Associates ....................................................................................................01543 304233

Frank Sherratt, Engineering Consultant ....................................................................................................... 01788 832059Bernard Steeples, Engineering Consultant .................................................................................................. 01621 828312

Marcus Teague, LDS Test & Measurement ................................................................................................. 01763 255 255

Norman Thornton, Engineering Consultant ................................................................................................. 07866 815200

Jeremy Yarnall, Consultant Engineer ........................................................................................................... 01332 875450

The following companies are SPONSORS of the Engineering Integrity Society. We thank them for their continued support

which helps the Society to run its wide-ranging events throughout the year.

Adept Scientific

AWE Aldermaston

Bruel & Kjaer

GOM UK Ltd

HBM United Kingdom

Instron

Kemo

Kistler Instrumemts

LMS UK

Millbrook Proving Ground

MIRA

MOOG

MTS Systems

Mueller BBM

National Instruments

Polytec

Rutherford Appleton Laboratory

ServoTest

TechniMeasure

TRaC Environmental & Analysis

Transmissions Dynamics

1N to 20,000KN•Custom Designs (Undertaken)•Full Calibration •Fatigue Rated •Down Hole Straingauged•Proof Load Testing•Ampli er and Interfaces•Excellent Environmental Protection•Subsea to Space•

IXTHUS have the solution!!! 1N to 20,000KN•C t D i (U d t k )

IXTHUS have the solution!!!

Force Measurement

Tel: 01327 353437E: [email protected]: www.ixthus.co.uk

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

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

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

� General data acquisition and Spectrum analysis

� Time history recording

� Structural dynamics including full Modal analysis

� Rotational dynamics

� Acoustics and Sound Quality

� Environmental noise and vibration testing

� Vehicle pass-by-noise

m+p international (UK) LtdMead HouseBentley, HampshireGU10 5HY, United KingdomPhone: (+44) (0)1420 521222Fax: (+44) (0)1420 [email protected]

Multiple units can

be synchronized

for more channels

AZ m+p #1 5-09.indd 1 27.05.2009 8:56:03 Uhr

United Kingdom: Bruel & Kjaer UK Ltd. · Jarman Way · Royston · Herts · SG8 5BQTel: +44 (0) 1763 255 780 · Fax: +44 (0) 1763 255 789 · Web: www.bksv.co.uk · Email: [email protected]

HEADQUARTERS: Brüel & Kjær Sound & Vibration Measurement A/S · DK-2850 Nærum · DenmarkTelephone: +45 77 41 20 00 · Fax: +45 45 80 14 05 · www.bksv.com · [email protected]

Local representatives and service organisations worldwide

BN

093

4 –

11www.bksv.com/nsiArray

PULSE ARRAY ACOUSTICS FOR NOISE SOURCE IDENTIFICATION

LOCATE, QUANTIFY AND RANK NOISE SOURCES ACCURATELY AND RAPIDLY

Noise source identification (NSI) solutions for every applicationWhether you deal with hearing aids, trains or wind turbines, the Array Acoustics Suite from Brüel & Kjær can provide you with all the tools necessary for accurate, rapid and reliable noise source identification, outdoors, indoors, and in wind tunnels.

The Array Acoustics Suite offers all the main NSI applications such as acoustic holography (STSF, SONAH*), beamforming and spherical beamforming, together with a broad range of options (transient, conformal and sound quality metrics calculations). * patent pending

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

All FRoM oNE PARTNERBrüel & Kjær has the world’s most comprehensive range of sound and vibration test and measurement systems

10-068_BN0934-11_Array Acoustics for NSI_A4.indd 1 10-12-2010 13:12:08

Engineering Integrity Issue 30

Documents

Transcript of Engineering Integrity Issue 30