Mass–Spring–Damper System — Final Report & Figures

A concise repository for our Mass–Spring–Damper design study. It hosts the final report and a figure gallery (ANSYS simulations, mechanism schematics, and literature tables) so reviewers can understand the project without needing code.

📄 Report: report/Mass-Spring-Damper-System-report.pdf
🖼️ Figures: see the gallery below

ℹ️ If you use different filenames or folders, update the paths in this README accordingly.

---

Overview

• Goal: design and evaluate a spring–mass–damper for vibration mitigation and isolation.
• Process: informed-design workflow → literature review → alternative concepts (Alpha, Kai, Phi) → selection → calculations → ANSYS FEA → redesign.
• Chosen design: Kai (ϗ) using high‑carbon steel; selected for higher wear resistance and affordability relative to the alternatives.
• Key parameter highlights:
  • Damping coefficient C = 80 N·s/m, mass M = 1 kg
  • Critical damping (design target) K = C²/(4M) = 1600 N/m
  • Representative model equation: x¨ + 80 x˙ + 1600 x = F(t)
• Prototype geometry (for FEA): ~60 mm max height; wire Ø ≈ 3 mm; 10 coils; coil center radius ≈ 15 mm.

---

Methods (short)

• Pre-analysis: hand calculations from standard texts (e.g., Shigley) to size stiffness/damping.
• Simulation: ANSYS R16.x static & fatigue checks; mesh‑sensitivity with total deformation as reference (optimal element size ≈ 3 mm).
• Evaluation: stress/strain/deformation fields; fatigue life/damage; safety factor across loads; qualitative redesign based on hot‑spots.

---

Key findings (selected)

• Highest deformation appears under the loaded top plate and along outer spring turns; extreme shear bands align with load path.
• Fatigue/safety‑factor maps indicate adequate margins within simulated load cases; redesign focuses on stress concentration at end coils.
• From literature (context for our design choices):
  • Time period increases with exponential/energy‑dissipating dampers (e.g., +18–21% in lower modes).
  • Response reduction with dampers: moments ↓ ~65–74% and shears ↓ ~49–74% depending on device type and excitation.

The literature tables supporting these bullets are included in the gallery below.

---

Figure gallery

Literature tables (for context):

---

Repository layout

.
├─ report/
│  └─ Mass-Spring-Damper-System-report.pdf
├─ images/
│  ├─ deformation-ansys.jpeg
│  ├─ shear-stress-ansys.jpeg
│  ├─ isolator-configuration.png
│  ├─ isolator-model.png
│  ├─ table-time-periods.png
│  └─ table-moment-shear-reduction.png
└─ README.md

---

How to cite

If you reference this work, please cite the report:

@misc{group3_msd_2025,
  title        = {Mass–Spring–Damper System — Final Report},
  author       = {Group 3},
  year         = {2025},
  howpublished = {\url{https://github.com/<your-username>/<your-repo>}},
  note         = {Final report and figures}
}

---

License

Choose and add a LICENSE file (e.g., CC BY‑NC 4.0, MIT for docs, or All rights reserved).

---

Acknowledgement (optional)

Course: ME_3202, Dept. of Mechanical & Production Engineering, AUST (3rd year / 2nd semester).
Add team member names here if you’d like them public.