Simultaneous Inertia Force/Moment Balancing and

Torque Compensation of Slider-Crank Mechanisms

Vigen Arakelian, Sébastien Briot

To cite this version:

Vigen Arakelian, Sébastien Briot. Simultaneous Inertia Force/Moment Balancing and Torque Com-
pensation of Slider-Crank Mechanisms. Mechanics Research Communications, 2010, 37 (2), pp.265-
269. �10.1016/j.mechrescom.2009.11.007�. �hal-00465641�

HAL Id: hal-00465641

https://hal.science/hal-00465641
Submitted on 26 Jun 2019

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est

archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de
teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés.
Simultaneous Inertia Force/Moment Balancing and Torque Compensation
of Slider-Crank Mechanisms
Vigen Arakelian1 Sébastien Briot2
1
Département de Génie Mécanique et Automatique
Institut National des Sciences Appliquées (I.N.S.A.)
20 avenue des buttes de Coësmes – CS 14315
F-35043 Rennes, France
[email protected]
2
Institut de Recherches en Communications et Cybernétique
de Nantes (IRCCyN), UMR CNRS 6597
1 rue de la Noë, BP 92101, 44321 Nantes Cedex 3 France
[email protected]

Keywords: Slider-crank mechanism, shaking force balancing, shaking moment balancing torque
compensation.

Abstract

This paper proposes a design concept which allows the simultaneous shaking force/shaking
moment balancing and torque compensation in slider-crank mechanisms. At first, the shaking force
and shaking moment are cancelled via a cam mechanism carrying a counterweight. Then, the spring
designed for maintaining contact in this balancing cam mechanism is used for torque minimization.
For this purpose, the spring is jointed with a second cam mounted on the input crank. The proposed
design concept allows the development of only one device for solving the both mentioned problems.
The suggested solution is illustrated by numerical example carried out by using ADAMS software.

1. Introduction

The slider-crank mechanisms are common elements in high-speed machines and many methods
(Arakelian et al. 2000; Arakelian and Smith 2005; Lowen et al. 1983) have been developed for their
balancing. The known methods can be arranged into the following groups:
a) Balancing by counterweights mounted on the links (Artobolevskii 1968; Campbell 1979; Berkof
1979a; Gheronimus 1968). The balancing methods based on the redistribution of mass of the
mechanism by adding counterweights to links are well known. However, in the case of complete
shaking force balancing, this approach is generally limited to simple mechanisms having only revolute
joints. It is difficult to apply to mechanisms with a slider because the conditions for complete shaking
force balancing bring about serious increase in the total mass of the balanced mechanism.
b) Harmonic balancing by counter-rotating masses (Artobolevskii 1968; Lanchester 1914;
Shchepetilnikov 1982). These solutions are based on harmonic analysis. The reduction of inertia
effects is primarily accomplished by the balancing of certain harmonics of the shaking forces and
shaking moments. Unbalanced forces and moments are approximated by Fourier series (or Gaussian
least-square formulation) and then each frequency component is studied. This solution has found wide
application as it may be accomplished by attaching balancing elements to the crank. This approach has
been used successfully for engine balancing. However, it is not applied on the off-set slider-crank
mechanisms.
c) Self-balancing via a double mechanism (Artobolevskii 1968; Arakelian 1998; Arakelian 2006;
Davies 1968; Dresig and Holzweißig 2004; Filonov and Petrikovetz 1987; Koropetz 1979; Turbin et
al. 1978). The addition of an axially symmetric duplicate mechanism to any given mechanism will
make the new combined center of mass stationary and thus balances the shaking force. This approach
involves building self-balanced mechanical systems, in which two identical mechanisms execute

1
similar but opposite movements. In this case the shaking force is cancelled together with the shaking
moment. A partial balancing is also possible by this approach.
d) Balancing by added dyad (Arakelian 1998; Arakelian and Smith 1999; Doronin and Pospelov
1991; Frolov 1987). The parallelogram loop, consisting of the initial links of the mechanism and the
added dyad, transfers the motion of the coupler link to a shaft on the frame, where it is connected to a
counterweight of considerably reduced mass. Partial balancing may be achieved by the generation of
an approximate straight-line movement of a counterweight mounted on the added dyad. Among
several works may be distinguished also the studies in which pantograph mechanism properties are
used. The aim of this approach is to balance the mechanism by using the copying properties of the
pantograph formed from the links of the initial mechanism and added links. The pantograph carries a
counterweight that achieves the condition necessary for shaking force and shaking moment balancing.
e) Balancing by planetary systems (Arakelian and Smith 1999; Berestov 1978; Gao 1990; Ye and
Smith 1994). The application of planetary systems allows the cancellation of the shaking moment of
mechanisms. However, such a balancing can only be reached by a considerably complicated design of
the initial mechanism.
f) Balancing by using a cable and pulley arrangement (Berkof 1979b). In this case the opposite
motions of the balancing counterweight and the slider is achieved via a cable and pulley arrangement.
g) Balancing by using a cam mechanism (Kamenski 1968; Kato 1995; Kato 1997; Krause 1987;
Schrick and Hanula 1995). In this approach the reduction of inertia forces has been performed by
means of a cam carrying a counterweight and it was shown how cam-driven masses may be used to
keep the total center of mass of a mechanism stationary.
It is known that the inertia force balancing can be only achieved by adding complementary masses
and it brings an increase in the input torque. The input torque may be reduced by optimal
redistribution of moving masses (Arakelian 2007; Berkof 1979b; Chaudhary 2007; Soong 2001; Yan
and Soong 2001) or by using non-circular gears (Yao and Yan 2003). One of the more efficient
methods used to solve the problem of input torque balancing is creating a cam-spring mechanism, in
which the spring is used to absorb the energy from the system when the torque is low, and release
energy to the system when the required torque is high. It allows reducing the fluctuation of the
periodic torque in the high-speed mechanical systems (Angeles and Wu 2001; Arakawa et al. 1997;
Benedict et al. 1971; Benedict and Tesar 1970; Funk and Han 1996; Guilan et al. 1999; Nishioka
1999; Nishioka and Yoshizawa 1995; Poludov 1979).
In mechanical design, these two problems are considered separately, i.e. the mechanism can be
balanced by mentioned methods and, after, its input torque can be compensated by a cam-spring
mechanism.
In this paper, a new design approach is developed, which proposes simultaneous inertia force
balancing and torque compensation in slider-crank mechanisms.

2. Design of the inertia force/moment balanced and torque compensated slider-crank

mechanism

Fig. 1 shows an off-set slider crank mechanism, which contains an initial slider-mechanism OAB
with crank 1 mounted on the frame, rod 2 and slider 3, as well as cams 4, 5 with followers 6, 7 and a
compression spring 8.
Let us first consider the inertia force and moment balancing of the slider-crank mechanism. For
this purpose, we consider that rod 2 is a “physical pendulum” link (Berkof 1973) (see also (Arakelian
2007)), i.e. its mass distribution allows the dynamic substitution of the rod’s mass by two point
masses, also,
 1 1 1   m A   m2 
l    
 AS 2 0  l BS 2   0    0  (1)
l AS 2 0 l BS 2  mB   I S 2 
2 2

where, mA and mB are point masses; m2 is the mass of rod 2; IS2 is the axial moment inertia of the rod
about the centre of mass S2 of the link; lAS2 and lBS2 are the distances between the centres of the joints A
and B and the centre of mass S2 of link 2, respectively.

2
 Fig. 1. Balanced and torque compensated off-set slider-crank mechanism.

Thus, the dynamic model of the rod represents a weightless link with two point masses mA and mB
situated in the centres of corresponding joints. This dynamic model is fully equivalent to the real rod.
We now require rotating masses to be balanced about point O. Therefore, the displacement of the
counterweight mounted on follower 6 is selected in such a manner that the inertia force of the follower
6 with counterweight will be opposite to the inertia force of the masses m3 and mB carried out
reciprocating motion:
m  m3
xS 6   B xB . (2)
m6
where m3 is the mass of the slider 3, m6 the mass of follower 6 with counterweight, xS 6 the
acceleration of the follower 6 and xB the acceleration of the slider.
Therefore, in order to generate a prescribed reciprocating motion of follower 6 with acceleration
xS 6 , the cam 4 is used. Then, by means of a counterweight, the centre of mass of crank 1 plus the cam
4 and point mass mA is brought to the centre of the pivot O.
After such a redistribution of moving masses, the shaking force and shaking moment are cancelled
and the slider-crank mechanism transmits no inertia loads to surrounding. However, it is known that
the added masses destined to balance the inertia force increase the input torque of the mechanism. For
minimisation of the input torque of mechanism, one uses another technique which consists in adding a
cam-spring compensation device.
The above-mentioned literature review shows that these two problems, i.e. inertia force balancing
and torque compensations, are studied separately and it is considered that they are not coupled. Thus,
according with the known design approaches, two devices will be developed and coupled with the
slider-crank mechanism.
It will be show that the design of these two problems can be considered together and the spring
used for maintaining the contact between the counterweight and the cam may also be used for
balancing the input torque. For this purpose, we use the elastic force of spring 8 designed for
maintaining contact between follower 6 and cam 4. In other words, we will use the spring 8 for the
generation of a complementary moment on the input crank.
Let us now consider the input torque compensation.
The input torque  of the dynamically balanced mechanism with the spring can be written under
the form:
d  L  L
    , (3)
dt    
where L = T – V is the Lagrangian of the system, T is kinetic energy and V its potential energy.
Neglecting the mass of the spring and follower 7, T and V can be written as:
T  0.5 ( I S 1 2  m1 x S21  mcp xcp2 )  0.5 ( I S 222  m2 x S2 2 )  0.5 m3 x B2  0.5 m6 x S2 6
m  m3 2 , (4)
 0.5 ( I S 1  (mcp rcp2  m1 r12  m A ) L2OA )  2  0.5 (mB  m3 )(1  B ) x B
m6
V  0.5 k  2 , (5)
where
-    is a constant for steady-state conditions,

3
- x S 2 is the velocity of the centre of masses of element 2 and 2 its angular velocity
- k is the spring constant,
-  is the displacement of the end of the spring from its equilibrium position,
- LOA is the distance between joint centres O and A,
- mcp is the mass of the counterweight mounted on the element 1,
- rcp is the dimensionless position of this counterweight ( rcp  (m1lOS1 / lOA  m A ) / mcp ),
- m1 is the mass of the element 1 plus the cam 4 and IS1 their global axial moment of inertia,
- r1 is the dimensionless position of the global mass centre of these elements ( r1  lOS1 / lOA ).
Thus, the first and second terms of the Lagrange equation (3) become:
d  L   mB  m3   x B    2 x B  2
   2 ( m  m ) 
3 1 
   (6)
dt    m6       2 
B

L  m  m3   x B    xB
2
 2 
 (mB  m3 ) 1  B       k  (7)
  m6      
2
 
taking into account that
xB  LOA cos  L2AB  (a  LOA sin  ) 2 (8)
LAB being the distance between joint centres A and B.
Therefore, the input torque can be deduced:
 m  m3   x B    2 x B  2 
  (mB  m3 ) 1  B     2 
  k  (9)
 m6        
In order to avoid torque fluctuation, the spring has to create a force that makes the input torque
constant. In many cases, when a mean value of the torque moment is equal to zero, as in the case of
unloaded slider-crank mechanism, this constant is equal to zero. Thus, in such a case, the
compensation of the input torque is equivalent to its cancellation. From the point of view of the energy
fluctuation, after such a compensation, the periodic variations of the input torque is cancelled and the
required input torque is equal to zero, i.e. in the stationary operating mode, the generation of motion
may be accomplished by only a very small input torque, which is needed for overcoming friction.
Thus, under the condition that the input torque is equal to zero with the cam-follower system,
equation (9) admits the integral:
 m B  m3   x B  2
2

(m B  m3 ) 1       k  2  A, (10)
 m 6    
where A is an integration constant. Note that the value of A represents two times the sum of the kinetic
energy stored in the mechanism (without rod 1 and the cam 5) plus the potential energy in the spring.
For the continuity of contact between the cam and the follower, the force created by the spring has
to be always superior to the inertia force of the follower 6 with the counterweight, i.e.
k   (m3  m B ) xB (11)
Also,
(m  m ) 2
 2  3 2 B xB2 (12)
k
From expression (8), the value of  may also be computed:
 m B  m3   x B  2
2


A  ( m B  m3 ) 1     
 m6    
 
2
(13)
k
Combining equations (12) and (13) leads to,
  m  m3   x B  2 m3  m B  2 x B  2
A  (m B  m3 )  1  B      (14)
 m     k  2 
 6 
In order equation (17) to be valuable for any value of , constant A should be equal to:

4
    m B  m3   x B  2 m3  mB  2 x B  2 

A  max (m B  m3 )  1        (15)
 [ 0 , 2 ]  m     k  2 

  6  
To avoid resonance, the spring should be stiff enough so that the lowest natural frequency of the
system is considerably higher than the highest significant harmonic of the output motion of the
follower (Angeles and Wu 2001). After the appropriate spring constant is selected, the displacement of
the spring can be determined from equations (13) and (15), namely:
 m  m3   x B  2
2

A  (mB  m3 ) 1  B   
 m6    
 . (16)
k
Thus here we find the cam profile for torque compensation.
The next part presents an illustrative example of the proposed approach. The simulations have
been carried out by using ADAMS software.

3. Illustrative example

3.1. Shaking force and shaking moment balancing

The following parameters of mechanism’s links are specified for the simulations: LOA = 0.292 m;
LAB = 0.427 m; r1 = 0.5; y B = 0.1 m; m1 = 2 kg; m2 = 3 kg; m3 = 4 kg; IS1 = 0.03 kg/m2, IS2 = 0.14
kg/m2. The period of the mechanism is fixed to 1 s.
The shaking forces and shaking moment of the above-mentioned mechanism are represented in
Fig. 2 (full line).
By selecting Lcp  rcp LOA  0.2 m, we obtain mcp  3.25 kg. This counterweight will be mounted on
the input crank. The second counterweight is carried out the reciprocating motion. In order to reduce
the size of the cam, the displacement of the centre of mass S6 of link 6 is three times smaller than the
displacement of point B. Therefore m6=13.5kg. Fig. 3 shows the obtained cam profile. The variations
of the shaking forces and shaking moment of the mechanisms with redistributed moving masses are
given in Fig. 2 by dashed lines. The simulation results show that after balancing the shaking forces and
moment are cancelled.

3.2. Input torque compensation

The parameters are identical to those used in the previous part. The constant spring is fixed to k =
10 kN/m. The joint between the cam and the follower has been modeled by a contact between two
solid bodies. The linear spring 8 is designed in such a manner that it ensures a permanent contact in
the cam mechanisms. Thus, the displacements of the follower 7 are determined from equation (16) and
the obtained cam profile is shown in Fig. 4.
The input torques before and after compensation are shown in Fig. 5.
Thus we can note that the suggested approach allows not only to carry out complete shaking force
and shaking moment balancing of the of-set slider crank mechanism but also it assumes its input
torque compensation.

4. Conclusions

Fast-moving machinery with rotating and reciprocating masses is a significant source of variable
dynamic loads. A major theme in machine dynamics and machine design is seeking to minimize the
fluctuating forces that such machinery applies to its environment via its mount. Another theme, which
is also very important in machine dynamics, is the minimization of the input torque fluctuation caused
by the variable dynamic loads. These two problems are known and many methods have been
developed and documented. However, these themes are considered separately, as two decoupled
problems.

5
 In this paper, for the first time, simultaneous shaking force/shaking moment balancing and torque
compensation in slider-crank mechanisms is considered. The shaking force and shaking moment are
cancelled via a cam mechanism carrying a counterweight. Then, the spring designed for maintaining
contact in this balancing cam mechanism is used for torque compensation. For this purpose, the spring
is jointed with a second cam mounted on the input crank. The proposed design concept allows the
development only one devise for solution of the both mentioned problems.
The suggested solution is illustrated by simulations carried out for an off-set slider-crank
mechanism.

(a) Fx : Shaking force with respect to the x axis. (b) Fy : Shaking force with respect to the y axis.

(c) M : Shaking moment

Fig. 2. Variations of the shaking forces and shaking moment before (full line) and after (dashed line)
balancing.

Fig. 3. Profile of the cam for the displacement of link 6 assuming the inertia forces balancing.

6
 Fig. 4. Profile of the cam for the displacement of link 7 assuming the torque compensation.

Fig. 5. Input torque before (full line) and after (dashed line) compensation.

References

Arakawa, M., Nishioka, M., Morita, N., 1997. Torque compensation cam mechanism. Proc. Joint
International Conf. on Advanced Science and Technology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou,
China, 302-305.
Angeles, J., Wu, C.-J., 2001. The optimum synthesis of en elastic torque-compensating cam
mechanism. Mechanism and Machine Theory 36, 245-259.
Arakelian, V., 1998. Equilibrage dynamique complet des mécanismes. Mech. and Mach. Theory 33
(4), 425-436.
Arakelian, V. 2006. Shaking moment cancellation of self-balanced slider-crank mechanical systems by
means of optimum mass redistribution. Journal of Mechanics Research Communications 33, 846-
850.
Arakelian, V., 2007. Complete shaking force and shaking moment balancing of RSS'R spatial
linkages. Multi-body Dynamics Part K 221, 303-310.
Arakelian, V., Dahan, M., Smith, M.R., 2000. A historical review of the evolution of the theory on
balancing of mechanisms. International Symposium on History of Machines and Mechanisms -
Proceedings HMM2000, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht / Boston / London, 291-300.
Arakelian, V., Smith, M., 1999. Complete shaking force and shaking moment balancing of linkages.
Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (8), 1141-1153.

7
Arakelian, V., Smith, M.R., 2005. Shaking force and shaking moment balancing of mechanisms: an
historical review with new examples. Transactions of the ASME. Journal of Mechanical Design
127, 334-339.
Artobolevskii I.I., 1968. Theory of mechanisms and machines. Moscow, Ed. Nauka, 644p.
Berestov, L. V., 1978. Shaking force and shaking moment balancing in planar mechanisms. Ph.D.
Thesis, State University of Kazakhstan, Alma-Ata, 203p.
Benedict, C.E., Matthew, G.K., Tesar, D., 1971. Torque balancing of machines by sub-unit cam
systems. 2nd Applied Mechanism Conference, paper No. 15, Oklahoma State University,
Stillwater, Oklahoma.
Benedict, C.E., Tesar, D., 1970. Optimal torque balance for a complex stamping and indexing
machine. Mechanisms Conference, Paper No. 70-Mech-82, Columbus, Ohio.
Berkof, R. S., 1973. Complete force and moment balancing of inline four-bar linkages. Mechanism
and Machine Theory 8, 397-410.
Berkof, R.S., 1979a. Force balancing of a six-bar linkage. Proceedings of the Fifth World Congress on
Theory of Machines and Mechanisms, 1082-1085.
Berkof, R.S., 1979b. The input torque in linkages. Mechanism and Machine Theory 14, 61-73.
Campbell, D.N., 1979. Balanced slider-crank mechanism. Patent FR 2421301.
Chaudhary, H., 2007. Balancing of four-bar linkages using maximum recursive dynamic algorithm.
Mechanism and Machine Theory 42, 216–232.
Davies, T.H., 1968. The kinematics and design of linkages, balancing mechanisms and machines.
Machine Design Eng., 40, 40-51.
Doronin, V.I., Pospelov, A.I., 1991. Balanced slider-crank mechanism. Patent SU1627769.
Dresig, H. and Holzweißig, F. 2004. Maschinendynamik. Springer, 526p.
Filonov, I.P., Petrikovetz, I.P., 1987. Balancing device of lever mechanisms. Patent SU1296762.
Frolov, K.V., 1987. Theory of mechanisms and machines. Moscow, Ed. “Vishaya shkola”, 496p.
Funk, W., Han, J., 1996 On the complete balancing of the inertia-caused input torque for plane
mechanisms. Proceedings of the Design Engineering Technical conference, Irvine, California.
Gao, F., 1990. Complete shaking force and shaking moment balancing of 26 types of four-, five-
and six-bar linkages with prismatic pairs. Mechanism and Machine Theory 23 (2), 183-192.
Gheronimus Y.L., 1968. An approximate method of calculating a counterweight for the balancing of
vertical inertia forces. Mechanisms 3 (4), 283-288.
Guilan, T., Haibo, F., Weiyi, Z., 1999. A new method of torque compensation for high speed
indexing cam mechanisms, ASME Journal of Mechanical Design 121, 319-323.
Kamenski, V.A., 1968. On the question of the balancing of plane linkages. Mechanisms 3 (4), 303-
322.
Kato H., 1995. Mechanical press. Patent DE4430244.
Kato H., 1997. Mechanical pressing machine with dynamic balancing device. Patent US5605096.
Koropetz, A.A, 1979. Shaking force and shaking moment balancing of the mechanisms of machines
for the scouring grain. Moscow, Ed. NTVIM 13, 62-71.
Krause, H.H., 1987. Device for balancing inertia forces and mass moments of inertia, Patent
DE3607133.
Lanchester, F.M., 1914. Engine balancing. Horseless Age, 33 (12-16), March 25, April 1, 8, 15, 22,
494-498, 536-538, 571-572, 608-610, 644-646.
Lowen, G.G., Tepper., F.R., Berkof, R.S., 1983. Balancing of linkages - an update. Mech. and Mach.
Theory 18 (3), 213-230.
Nishioka, M., 1999. Design of torque compensation cam using measured torque distribution.
Proceedings of the 10th World Congress on the Theory of Machines and Mechanisms, 20-24
June, Oulu, Finland, pp.1471-1476.
Nishioka, M., Yoshizawa, M., 1995. Direct torque compensation cam mechanisms. Transactions of
the Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers 61 (585), 2020-2024.
Poludov, A.N., 1979. Systèmes de décharge programmables des mécanismes cycliques. Ed.: "Bischa
Chkola", Lvov.
Schrick, P., Hanula B., 1995. Free inertia forces balancing piston engine. Patent WO9526474.
Shchepetilnikov, V.A., 1982. Balancing of mechanisms. Moscow, Ed. Mashinostroenie, 256p.

8
Soong, R.C., 2001. Minimization of the driving torque of full force balanced four-bar linkages.
Journal of Kao Yuan Institute of Technology, 591-594.
Turbin, B.I, Koropetz, A.A., Koropetz, Z.A., 1978. The possibility of the shaking force balancing in
the system with oscillating links. Russian Journal Mechanism and Machine Theory 7, Moscow,
87-90.
Yan, H.S., and Soong, R.C., 2001. Kinematic and dynamic design of four-bar linkages by links
counterweighing with variable input speed. Mechanism and Machine Theory 36 (9), 1051-1071.
Yao, Y.A., Yan, H.S., 2003. A new method for torque balancing of planar linkages using non-
circular gears. Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science Part C 217 (5), 495-503.
Ye, Z., Smith, M., 1994. Complete balancing of planar linkages by an equivalent method. Mechanism
and Machine Theory 29 (5), 701-712.