Dannnnnny
Structural
- Jun 9, 2020
- 9
so there isn't any vibration criteria in code books,I wonder how others would approach to this problem.
I've got a dancing room which is supported by steel beams and wood I-joists.
Although all the members pass the design criteria, the vibration is now the problem after the construction completion.
I have come across the following statements,
1. increasing stiffness increases natural frequency
2. increasing mass lowers natural frequency
However, I have also seen other report where it states that increasing stiffness will cause the increase in fundamental frequency and that could mitigate vibration as a result. So this means both natural and fundamental frequency increase, and wouldn't this be both good and bad?
Also, in the same report, adding mass lowers vibration level at resonance (by means of lowering natural frequency I believe) but also lowers the fundamental frequency. So, isn't this both good and bad too?
On top of that, I believed reducing the "gap" between natural and fundamental frequency would mean lowering amplitude but I'm not too sure if amplitude has anything to do with vibration matter.
I know there's certain suggested frequency to avoid vibration, so would all these approaches be simply trial and error?
I've got a dancing room which is supported by steel beams and wood I-joists.
Although all the members pass the design criteria, the vibration is now the problem after the construction completion.
I have come across the following statements,
1. increasing stiffness increases natural frequency
2. increasing mass lowers natural frequency
However, I have also seen other report where it states that increasing stiffness will cause the increase in fundamental frequency and that could mitigate vibration as a result. So this means both natural and fundamental frequency increase, and wouldn't this be both good and bad?
Also, in the same report, adding mass lowers vibration level at resonance (by means of lowering natural frequency I believe) but also lowers the fundamental frequency. So, isn't this both good and bad too?
On top of that, I believed reducing the "gap" between natural and fundamental frequency would mean lowering amplitude but I'm not too sure if amplitude has anything to do with vibration matter.
I know there's certain suggested frequency to avoid vibration, so would all these approaches be simply trial and error?
