Compares shock absorption in polyurethane and spring-based isolators, indicating improved performance with polyurethane.
To address the insufficient damping and instability tendency of metal coil spring isolators subjected to intense impact loading, a multi-stage vibration isolation configuration integrating polyurethane, springs, and eddy current dampers is proposed. Dynamic models for both single-stage and multi-stage isolation systems are formulated, and a corresponding simulation model is developed in MATLAB R2023b/Simulink to investigate the peak suppression and attenuation characteristics of the multi-stage isolation under impact. To characterize the nonlinear finite deformation and time-dependent response of polyurethane, a hyperelastic-viscoelastic constitutive model is established by coupling the Ogden hyperelastic model with a generalized Maxwell viscoelastic model, with model parameters identified through quasi-static compression and stress relaxation tests. Drop impact experiments are performed to compare the displacement response, top- and bottom-plate peak accelerations, and vibration isolation rate between a polyurethane-spring-eddy-current multi-stage isolator and a spring-spring-eddy-current multi-stage isolator. The results demonstrate that the multi-stage structure enables staged dissipation of the impact energy, substantially reducing both the peak acceleration and the displacement stroke of the isolated mass. Under all drop test conditions, the polyurethane-based multi-stage isolator yields lower top-plate output peak acceleration and higher isolation rate than its all-spring counterpart, confirming its superior isolation performance. Envelope fitting of the simulation-based output acceleration with experimental inputs reveals that the all-spring multi-stage isolator exhibits a higher attenuation rate and equivalent damping ratio, whereas the polyurethane-based isolator achieves more effective suppression of the output peak level under severe impact conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wei et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: