Language
English English Vietnamese (Tiếng Việt) Vietnamese (Tiếng Việt) Chinese (简体中文) Chinese (简体中文) Portuguese (Brazil) (Português do Brasil) Portuguese (Brazil) (Português do Brasil) Spanish (Español) Spanish (Español) Indonesian (Bahasa Indonesia) Indonesian (Bahasa Indonesia)
Radians per Second to Hertz

Radians per Second to Hertz

Isolation design in the unit catalogues use: a natural frequency computed as √(k/m) arrives in rad/s, and mounts, air springs and inertia bases are all rated in hertz.

From a Calculated ωn to an Isolator You Can Order

Vibration isolation design begins with one square root. Idealise the machine and its mounts as a single mass on a spring, and the undamped natural frequency is ωn = √(k/m), with stiffness in newtons per metre and mass in kilograms. That expression hands back radians per second, because it comes straight out of the equation of motion. Nothing you can buy is specified that way: isolator catalogues, mount selection charts, floor-vibration criteria and shaker specifications all quote a natural frequency in hertz. Converting the calculated ωn is the first thing that happens between the sketch and the purchase order.

Conversion factor: f = ω / 2π, so radians per second are multiplied by 1/2π ≈ 0.159154943. A 100 kg skid on mounts totalling 1 MN/m gives ωn = √(1 000 000 / 100) = 100 rad/s, which is 100 × 0.159154943 = 15.9155 Hz — the number the catalogue page is organised by.

What the design hinges on

The Square Root Comes Out Angular

√(k/m) has units of √(N·m⁻¹ / kg) = s⁻¹, and by convention that result is read as radians per second. Halving stiffness only drops ωn by 29%, which is why softening a mount buys far less than designers expect.

Catalogues Are Organised by Hertz

Elastomer mounts, wire rope isolators, air springs and inertia bases are all listed against a rated load and the natural frequency in hertz that the mount reaches at that load. Comparing candidates means converting first.

The √2 Threshold Decides Everything

A mount only attenuates once the disturbance sits above √2 times the natural frequency; below that it amplifies. So the design target is not a natural frequency in isolation, but a natural frequency far enough beneath the lowest forcing frequency.

Sizing a Mount from a Computed Natural Frequency

Stiffness values get iterated a dozen times before a mount is chosen, so keep the conversion open beside the spreadsheet rather than folding a 2π into each formula.

1

Enter the ωn your stiffness and mass produced

Work out √(k/m) for the supported mass and the total stiffness of all mounts in parallel, then type that figure into the rad/s field. The hertz side resolves as you type, and a comma typed instead of a decimal point is understood.

2

Check the result against the forcing frequency

Compare the hertz value with the lowest excitation the machine will produce. If the ratio is under 1.414 the mounts make matters worse, and softer stiffness or added mass has to go back into the calculation.

3

Turn a catalogue figure back into ωn

When a supplier answers with a rated natural frequency in hertz, press the swap button (↔) or type into the hertz field to recover ωn, which is what the transmissibility and static-deflection expressions want.

4

Copy the clean value into the design sheet

Each field has its own copy button that hands over the bare number, without unit symbols or thousands spacing, so a natural frequency drops straight into a spreadsheet cell or a mount-selection form.

Natural Frequency, Static Deflection and Where Isolation Begins

For a linear spring carrying its own load, the natural frequency depends only on how far that load pushes the spring down: ωn = √(g/δ). This makes static deflection an excellent first sanity check on a proposed mount, and it explains why genuinely low natural frequencies demand mounts that visibly sink under the machine. Because deflection appears under a square root, doubling the sag lowers the natural frequency by only a factor of √2.

Static deflection under loadωn (rad/s)fn (Hz)Attenuation begins above
0.5 mm — steel shim / rigid pad140.07 rad/s22.29 Hz31.53 Hz
1 mm — hard elastomer pad99.05 rad/s15.76 Hz22.29 Hz
2.5 mm — bonded rubber mount62.64 rad/s9.97 Hz14.10 Hz
5 mm — soft rubber mount44.29 rad/s7.05 Hz9.97 Hz
10 mm — coil spring mount31.32 rad/s4.98 Hz7.05 Hz
25 mm — soft spring / air mount19.81 rad/s3.15 Hz4.46 Hz
50 mm — low-frequency air spring14.01 rad/s2.23 Hz3.15 Hz

Notice how the rows chain together: doubling the deflection divides the natural frequency by √2, so each row's isolation threshold lands almost exactly on the previous row's natural frequency. That relationship is the quickest way to judge whether a proposed mount is a real improvement or merely a softer version of the same problem.

Stiffness Sweeps Without Retyping

Candidate stiffnesses are usually tried in a row. Each new ωn replaces the last and resolves immediately, so a shortlist of four mounts is compared in hertz in under a minute.

Deflection Targets in Buyable Units

A target sag translates through √(g/δ) into rad/s, and the hertz answer is what a mount supplier will confirm or reject. Both numbers stay visible while the load case is adjusted.

Frequency-Ratio Checks

Divide the lowest forcing frequency by the converted fn to get the ratio r that drives transmissibility. Anything under 1.414 is amplification, and the fix belongs back in the stiffness column.

Isolation Design Questions

How do I get ωn from stiffness and mass, and what is it in hertz?

Add the stiffness of every mount that carries the load in parallel, divide by the supported mass, and take the square root. A 100 kg unit on four mounts of 250 kN/m each has k = 1 MN/m, so ωn = √10 000 = 100 rad/s, which is 15.9155 Hz. Two cautions: use the mass actually resting on the mounts rather than the shipping weight, and take the dynamic stiffness from the datasheet, since elastomers are commonly 1.2 to 1.6 times stiffer dynamically than the static curve suggests.

Why does isolation only begin above √2 times the natural frequency?

Undamped transmissibility is T = 1/|1 − r²| with r the ratio of forcing frequency to natural frequency. Setting T = 1 gives r² = 2, so at r = 1.414 the mount passes the disturbance through unchanged and everything below that ratio is amplified. Real benefit needs distance: r = 2 gives T = 0.333, about 67% reduction; r = 3 gives 0.125, roughly 87.5%; r = 5 gives 0.042, close to 96%. The usual design aim is r of 3 or better at the lowest significant forcing frequency.

How far apart are the damped and undamped natural frequencies?

They differ by fd = fn√(1 − ζ²), and for the damping ratios that mounts actually deliver the gap is negligible. At ζ = 0.05 the damped value is 0.13% lower, at ζ = 0.10 it is 0.5% lower, and even at ζ = 0.15 it is only 1.1% lower. Damping earns its keep elsewhere: it caps the peak while the machine runs up through resonance, but it also degrades attenuation well above the corner, so heavily damped mounts trade high-frequency isolation for survivability at start-up.

Can static deflection alone predict a mount's natural frequency?

For a linear spring it can, because substituting k = mg/δ into √(k/m) cancels the mass and leaves ωn = √(g/δ). In millimetres that reduces to the shop-floor rule fn ≈ 15.76/√δ, so 5 mm of sag implies about 7.05 Hz and 25 mm implies about 3.15 Hz. It fails where the spring is not linear — air springs hold their height regardless of load, and elastomers stiffen as they compress — so treat it as a first estimate and confirm against the supplier's rated frequency at your actual load.

What happens if a forcing frequency lands exactly on fn?

At r = 1 nothing limits the response except damping, and transmissibility rises to roughly 1/(2ζ): about 10× at ζ = 0.05 and about 5× at ζ = 0.10. Motion an order of magnitude larger than the input tears mounts, fatigues brackets and destroys any precision the machine was supposed to hold. If the excitation is fixed, move the natural frequency instead — add mass to the base, soften the mounts, or split the difference with an inertia block — and re-run the conversion until the ratio is comfortably clear of that peak.

rad/s
Hz

Isolator Natural Frequencies by Mount Type

14.01 rad/s=2.23 Hz
19.81 rad/s=3.15 Hz
31.32 rad/s=4.98 Hz
44.29 rad/s=7.05 Hz
62.64 rad/s=9.97 Hz
100 rad/s=15.92 Hz

Radians per Second (rad/s)

What √(k/m) hands back, and the unit that transmissibility, damping and static-deflection expressions are derived in. Halving mount stiffness lowers it by only 29%, which is why soft mounts disappoint.

Hertz (Hz)

How isolator catalogues, air-spring charts and floor-vibration criteria rate a mount, always at a stated load. Compare it against the lowest forcing frequency: a ratio under 1.414 amplifies instead of isolating.

Enter the ωn from √(k/m) in the rad/s field and read the catalogue frequency beside it
Swap direction (↔) to turn a supplier's rated fn back into the ωn that transmissibility formulas need
Each field's copy button returns a bare number that drops straight into a mount-selection sheet
Both fields stay live, so a shortlist of candidate stiffnesses can be compared one after another
Want to learn more? Read documentation →
1/5

Frequency Converter

BPM to FPS BPM to Hertz BPM to RPM Cycles per Hour to Hertz Cycles per Minute to Hertz Cycles per Second to Hertz Degrees per Second to RPM Degrees per Second to Radians per Second FPS to BPM FPS to Hertz Gigahertz to Hertz Gigahertz to Kilohertz Gigahertz to Megahertz Gigahertz to Terahertz Hertz to BPM Hertz to Cycles per Hour Hertz to Cycles per Minute Hertz to Cycles per Second Hertz to FPS Hertz to Gigahertz Hertz to Kilohertz Hertz to Megahertz Hertz to Microhertz Hertz to Millihertz Hertz to RPM Hertz to Radians per Second Kilohertz to Gigahertz Kilohertz to Hertz Kilohertz to Megahertz Kilohertz to RPM Megahertz to Gigahertz Megahertz to Hertz Megahertz to Kilohertz Megahertz to Terahertz Microhertz to Hertz Millihertz to Hertz RPM to BPM RPM to Degrees per Second RPM to Hertz RPM to Kilohertz RPM to RPS RPM to Radians per Second RPS to RPM Radians per Second to Degrees per Second Radians per Second to Hertz (current page) Radians per Second to RPM Terahertz to Gigahertz Terahertz to Megahertz
Start typing to search...
Searching...
No results found
Try searching with different keywords