PSN-L Email List Message
Subject: Re: Morrisey's seismometer
From: ChrisAtUpw@.......
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2005 10:33:48 EDT
In a message dated 05/09/2005, alexmirabal2000@........ writes:
I got from the web some drawings and explanations related to this design,
but I would like to get a better knowledge (maybe a more detailed explanation)
of the mechanic part: Transfer Function and its mathematical components, how
to calculate free period experimentally, etc...
Dear Alexander,
The principles of the STM-8 are essentially similar as those of the La
Coste vertical seismometer published in 1935.
You have an ~horizontal arm with a seismic mass on the end. You need to
support it in such a way that the forces are nearly, but not quite,
compensated out as the beam angle changes. La Coste wound his spring so that the whole
assembly had 'zero length'. This means that the load / length graph goes
through the point zero force / zero length. Most coil springs have a minimum
physical length, so they require a 'pre tension' type winding. (You can also
wind flat spiral springs.)
In the STM-8 setup, you use a flat strip bent into about 3/4 circle and
positioned at an angle under the beam, with low torque foil suspensions. This
extreme bend gives a load /extension graph which you can match up to the
torque / angle graph due to the seismic mass. If they matched identically, you
would have no net torque as the angle changed and hence an infinite period.
The problem with this is that steel spring constants are temperature sensitive,
but don't match those of the mass + arm, so it is only 'stable' over a few C
deg range. The more precise the balance and the longer the period, the
greater the influence of the temperature variations. However, you can get a very
considerable improvement by using the spring material Ni-SpanC, which has a
very low temperature coefficient. Two leaf springs are sometimes used to
provide a greater compensation accuracy. The position of the arm needs to be
critically damped to give stable operation - as does any oscillatory system.
The alternative Sean uses is to provide electronic position sensing down
to maybe 1 nano metre and force feedback, usually electro-magnetic, to
stabilise the mechanical system and to define it's period. The damping may be
purely feedback or magnet / plate inductive type. (Don't ever try to use oil
damping!) The electronic constants and feedback gain override the mechanical
properties. Electronic feedback damping gives more noise on the signal and a more
complicated circuit, but it is widely used.
I hope that this provides some background knowledge for you.
Regards,
Chris Chapman
In a message dated 05/09/2005, alexmirabal2000@........ writes:
<=
FONT=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000=20
size=3D2>I got from the web some drawings and explanations relat=
ed to=20
this design, but I would like to get a better knowledge (maybe a more deta=
iled=20
explanation) of the mechanic part: Transfer Function and its mathemat=
ical=20
components, how to calculate free period experimentally, etc...=20
Dear Alexander,
The principles of the STM-8 are=20
essentially similar as those of the La Coste vertical seismometer publi=
shed=20
in 1935.
You have an ~horizontal arm with a seismic mass=
on=20
the end. You need to support it in such a way that the forces are nearly, bu=
t=20
not quite, compensated out as the beam angle changes. La Coste wound his spr=
ing=20
so that the whole assembly had 'zero length'. This means that the load / len=
gth=20
graph goes through the point zero force / zero length. Most coil spring=
s=20
have a minimum physical length, so they require a 'pre tension' type=20
winding. (You can also wind flat spiral springs.)
In the STM-8 setup, you use a flat strip bent i=
nto=20
about 3/4 circle and positioned at an angle under the beam, with low torque=20=
foil=20
suspensions. This extreme bend gives a load /extension graph which you can m=
atch=20
up to the torque / angle graph due to the seismic mass. If they matched=
=20
identically, you would have no net torque as the angle changed and henc=
e an=20
infinite period. The problem with this is that steel spring constants are=20
temperature sensitive, but don't match those of the mass + arm, so it is onl=
y=20
'stable' over a few C deg range. The more precise the balance and the longer=
the=20
period, the greater the influence of the temperature variations. Howeve=
r,=20
you can get a very considerable improvement by using the spring material=20
Ni-SpanC, which has a very low temperature coefficient. Two leaf springs are=
=20
sometimes used to provide a greater compensation accuracy. The position of t=
he=20
arm needs to be critically damped to give stable operation - as does any=20
oscillatory system.
The alternative Sean uses is to provide=20
electronic position sensing down to maybe 1 nano metre and force feedba=
ck,=20
usually electro-magnetic, to stabilise the mechanical system and to define i=
t's=20
period. The damping may be purely feedback or magnet / plate inductive=20
type. (Don't ever try to use oil damping!) The electronic constants and=
=20
feedback gain override the mechanical properties. Electronic feedback dampin=
g=20
gives more noise on the signal and a more complicated circuit, but it is wid=
ely=20
used.
I hope that this provides some background knowl=
edge=20
for you.
Regards,
Chris Chapman
[ Top ]
[ Back ]
[ Home Page ]