Vibration Mount Candidate Screening Calculator
Evaluate a documented candidate mounting system with the classical linear single-degree-of-freedom model. Enter total dynamic stiffness and damping at the actual evaluation condition. This page does not select, rate or approve a mount.
Not evaluated
Equations and interpretation
These are classical linear SDOF relations, not formulas issued by ISO 2017-1 or ISO 10846. For total supported mass m, total directional dynamic stiffness Kdyn, harmonic frequency f and viscous damping ratio zeta:
For force excitation, T is transmitted harmonic force divided by applied harmonic force. For base excitation, the same expression is the absolute motion of the mass divided by base motion in this model. The isolation region begins only above r = √2; damping lowers resonance amplification but increases high-frequency transmissibility.
Published cross-check: Parker LORD catalog PC6116 lists the MAA004-1 candidate at 140 N/mm dynamic axial stiffness, 0.91 kg rated load and 63 Hz natural frequency. The relation above gives approximately 62.4 Hz; the difference is consistent with the rounded catalog data. This is a formula verification example, not a recommendation for that product.
Source and standards boundary
| ID | Nguồn | Verified public information | Use on this page |
|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | ISO 2017-1:2005, Edition 1 | Published standard for technical information exchange between users, manufacturers and suppliers when applying isolation systems. | Application-data boundary; not cited as the source of the calculator equations. |
| S2 | ISO 10846-1:2008, Edition 2 | Current, confirmed in 2022; principles and guidance for laboratory measurement of vibro-acoustic transfer properties of resilient elements. | Measurement context only. |
| S3 | ISO 10846-3:2002, Edition 1 | Current, confirmed in 2022; indirect method for dynamic transfer stiffness of resilient supports under a specified preload. | Reason for requiring condition-specific dynamic stiffness. |
| S4 | Parker LORD PC6116, Vibration & Shock Theory | Classical SDOF relations, selection considerations, load distribution, nonlinear property cautions, and the distinction between static and dynamic stiffness. | Public formula, limitations and product cross-check. |
Corrections made in this audit
Target percentage was not a mount-selection method
The former page inverted an undamped transmissibility equation and called the result required stiffness. It did not evaluate an actual part, dynamic property data, capacity, environment, center of gravity or support interaction. Target-isolation presets and automatic selection wording were removed.
Static and dynamic stiffness are now separate
The former page calculated static deflection from its derived dynamic stiffness. Parker LORD explicitly warns that this relation does not hold for real elastomeric vibration/shock isolators. Static deflection now remains unavailable unless separate static stiffness is entered.
Damping and resonance are represented
The former engine was undamped but marketed the result as a mount selection. The candidate screen now uses the damped classical transmissibility equation and identifies amplification, unity transmission or attenuation without issuing a pass/fail decision.
Equal-load division was removed
A mount count alone does not establish individual reactions. The revised input is total directional dynamic stiffness assembled from support properties at their actual loads, with center-of-gravity and reaction documentation required as evidence.
Input and unit integrity was rebuilt
Decimal point and decimal comma are accepted separately; mixed separators, zero, negative, non-finite and incomplete inputs are rejected. Unit changes are explicit conversions. Defaults, presets, URL mutation, browser storage, clipboard export, external formula rendering and unrelated balancing-standard wording were removed.
