Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Vibration Analysis of Composite Beam
Vibration Analysis of Composite Beam
ISRN: BTH-AMT-EX--2007/D-13--SE
Oluseun Adediran
Acknowledgements
This work was carried out under the supervision of Dr Ansel Berghuvud,
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden and Dr. Abdel
Wahab University of Surrey, United Kingdom
I wish to express my gratitude to a lot of people who have supported me
during the past years in one way or the other. To my major professor, Dr.
Abdel Wahab, a special thanks for giving me the opportunity to work with
him and for his patience, tolerance, understanding, and encouragement. He
was more than a professor to me; he was also a friend. It has been a great
pleasure working with him. I wish to thank Dr Ansel Berghuvud.
I am very thankful to my research group members, Prof Andrew Crocombe,
Mr Libardo, Irfan for their patience, and advice. I really appreciate their
time and effort in being part of my research group.
Thanks are also extended to Mr & Mrs Sola Olalekan, Olanrewaju, Sogo,
Opeyemi, Anuoluwapo, Ebunoluwa, Oluwole for their support and help in
many ways. I also want to thank all those that helped me through the
research. The greatest thanks go my mother for her financial support
throughout my degree programme.
A special thanks to my loving mother, for being there for me all the time of
my needs. Also, I thank my friend Babatunde Rasheed.
I am very grateful to my wife, Oluwatoyin, for her encouragement. She
brought more love and strength to my life.
Contents
1 Notations
2 Introduction
2.1Research Context
2.2Objectives
2.3Review of previous work
2.3.1 Composite Materials FRP for Bridge Applications
2.3.2 Recent Research in FRP
2.3.3 Characteristics of FRP Structural Beam
2.3.4 Problem with Composite Material
2.3.5 Advantages of Composite Beam
2.3.6 Disadvantages of FRP Composite Beam
2.3.7 Applications of FRP Composite Beam
8
8
9
10
10
12
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
17
18
19
19
20
4 Beam Structure
4.1Introduction
4.2Finite Element Method Calculations
23
23
25
5 Experimental Work
5.1Introduction
5.1.1 Measurement Preparations
5.1.2 Identification of Experimental Model
5.1.3 Position of the Accelerometer on the Beam
5.1.4 Point of Excitation
5.2FRP Composite Beam Test Descriptions
5.3Measurement Equipment
5.3.1 Data acquisition system
5.3.2 Accelerometer
5.3.3 Impact Hammer
5.3.4 Steel Support
5.3.5 PC with Software
31
31
31
31
32
32
33
35
35
36
36
37
38
5.4Experimental Specifications
5.5
38
40
40
6 Modelling in ANSYS
6.1Introduction
6.2Procedure in Modelling ANSYS
6.2.1 Requirement Specification
6.2.2 Idealization Specification
6.2.3 Mesh Generation
6.2.4 Analysis
6.2.5 Post-processing
6.3ANSYS Graphical Results
6.3.1 Simple-Simple Boundary Condition
6.3.2 Fixed-Fixed Boundary Condition
6.3.3 Fixed-Simple Boundary Condition
6.3.4 Fixed-Free Boundary Condition
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
50
50
52
53
55
7 Discussion
7.1Introduction
7.2Comparison of Method
7.3Effect of Boundary Conditions on Natural frequency
57
57
57
60
8 Conclusion
8.1Future Work
61
61
9 References
62
Appendices
1 Terminology
2 Calculation of FEM Natural frquencies of beam (1 element)
3 Calculation of FEM Natural frquencies of beam (2 element)
64
64
66
69
Notations
List of symbols
C1 , C 2 , C 3 , C 4 Constant-time function in the model
C
ai
AR matrix parameters
F(t)
frequency [Hz]
Young Modulus
fs
fD
Damping force
fI
moment of inertia
M, Cp, K
Damping ratio
Mode shapes
u&&
Acceleration
u&
Velocity
Displacement
Modes
Natural frequency
nL
Constant value
FI
external forces
Kinetic Energy
Vy
Velocity in y-direction
Uj
Ui
Mi
Mj
Fi
External forces
Strain Energy
List of operator
() T
~
()
Generalised System
() 1
matrix inverse
() *
complex conjugate
() i
Re ()
real part of
Im ()
imaginary part of
matrix transpose
List of abbreviations
DOF
Degree of Freedom
SDO
MDOF
EMA
EMT
FE
Finite Element
N/A
Not Available
FEM
FFT
FRF
PP
Peak Picking
RMS
Root.Mean Square
NDT
Non-Destructive Testing
FRP
GFRP
Introduction
This chapter contains a general introduction of the research that was carried
out within the frame work of this thesis. The research context is described
in Sec.2.1. The focus of the thesis as well as the main objectives is
discussed in Sec.2.2.
2.2 Objectives
The main objective of this thesis is to study and compare the analytical and
experimental result in vertical forces on the composite Fibre Reinforced
Polymer (FRP) beam. The beam assumed as prototype of bridge in which
pedestrians impart to the model. Special attention is given to the responses
of a structure due to dynamic test (impact excitation) results compare with
theoretical results.
The GFRP (Glass Fibre Reinforced Polymer) composite beam was used to
carry out good experimental research, for comparison of the results, and to
be able to relate to the reality of the footbridge built with composite beam.
10
11
2.3.2
Research studies and results of the composite technology and its durability
should be published in civil, mechanical and structural engineering
journals. Technical papers should be presented in conferences and
workshops where civil and structural engineers participate. Until recently,
most of the papers have been published in the materials science and testing,
manufacturing and trade journals, which are not read by bridge designers.
Information and knowledge must be openly shared with civil engineers,
bridge designers, and owners. Professional organizations should be
dedicated and/or established to direct the technical advancement of the
composite technology if it is to have a future.
Composite material bridges have become increasingly popular in structural
applications around the world. This is partly due to their excellent
12
13
Nagaraj and Rao [7] have characterized the behaviour of protruded FRP
box beams under static and fatigue or cyclic bending loads. The author
showed that the shear and interfacial slip between adjacent layers had
significant influence on deflection and strain measurements. Davalos and
Qiao [8] conducted a combined analytical and experimental evaluation of
flexural-torsional and lateral-distortional buckling of FRP composite wideflange beams. They also showed that in general buckling and deflections
limits tend to be the governing design criteria for current FRP shapes. The
structural efficiency of protruded FRP (Fibre Reinforced Polymer)
components and systems in terms of joint efficiency, transverse load
distribution, composite action between FRP components, and maximum
deflections and stresses was analyzed by Sotiropoulos, Gangarao, and
Allison [9] by conducting experiments at the coupon level. Structural
performance of individual FRP components was established through threeand four-point bending tests. Barbero, Fu, and Raftoyiannis [10] gave a
theoretical determination of the ultimate bending strength of GFRP beams
produced by protrusion process. Several I-beams and box beams were
tested under bending and the failure modes have been described. The
researchers do attempt to accelerate fatigue damage by testing at loads
much higher than the service load. And there are possibilities for different
damage to occur at different load levels.
FRP (Fibre Reinforced Polymer) beam involves testing the beam in either
three-or-four-point bending using a simply supported geometry, where steel
structural beams are used as supports. Load is applied using hydraulic
actuator to representative wheel patches. The test usually runs in various
span lengths to determine the shear stiffness, since the percentage of shear
deformation increases with decreasing span length.
Bank and Mosallam [11] has characterized creep response of composite
structural element.
14
15
2.3.6
16
f
where
= f (t )
(3.1)
..
= mu ,
is the
= cu
m u + c u + ku = f (t )
(3.2)
3.1.1
SDOF model
Equation of motion
(3.3)
~ , c~, k~ , and ~
where m
f (t ) are defined as the generalized mass, generalized
damping, generalized stiffness and generalized force of the system.
Generalized mass and stiffness can be calculated using the following
expressions
17
~ =
m
m ( x ) [
( x ) ] dx
2
(3.4)
~
2
k = EI ( x)[ ( x)] dx
(3.5)
where m(x) is mass of the structure per unit length, EI(x) is the stiffness of
the structure per unit length and L is the length of the structure [6].
The generalized damping can then be calculated from the expression
~ )
c~ = (2m
(3.6)
where is the natural frequency of the structure.
~ , c~, k~ , and ~
Once the generalized properties m
f (t ) are determined, the
equation of motion (Equation. 3.3) can be solved for z(t) using a numerical
integration method.
3.1.2
MDOF model
The equation of motion of a MDOF system can now be written on the form:
Mu&& + Cu& + Ku = f (t )
(3.7)
18
Introduction
19
Theoretical Derivation
When performing modal analysis, the free vibrations of the structure are of
interest. Free vibration is when no external forces are applied and damping
of the structure is neglected. When damping is neglected the eigenvalues
are real numbers.
The solution for the undamped natural frequencies and mode shapes is
called real eigenvalue analysis or normal modes analysis. The equation of
motion of a free vibration is:
Mu&& + Ku = 0
(3.8)
20
u = n sin n t and
u&& = 2n n sin n t
(3.9)
(3.10)
[K M ]
2
n
(3.11)
det K n2 M = 0
(3.12)
(3.13)
Then, the contributions of all the modes can be combined to determine the
total dynamic response of the structure
N
u (t ) = n q n (t )
(3.14)
n =1
21
and they depend only on the n th-mode n , and not on other modes. Thus,
there are N uncoupled equations like Equ. 3.13, one for each natural mode.
In practice, modal analysis is almost always carried out by implementing
the finite element method (FEM). If the geometry and the material
properties of the structure are known, an FE model of the structure can be
built. The mass, stiffness and damping properties of the structure are
represented by the left hand side of the equation of motion (E.q. 3.7), can
then be established using the FE method. All that now remains, in order to
solve the equation of motion, is to quantify and then to model
mathematically the applied forces F (t ) .
22
4 Beam Structure
4.1 Introduction
Since beam is continuous structure, it can be modelled using three basics
one dimensional element types are: (a) String element - for vibration in
cables and wires, (b) Bar element- for transverse, (c) Beam element - for
lateral vibration
This formula being used to calculate the natural frequency developed from
equation of motion of the beam. It has stated below
n = ( n L )2
c
L2
(4.1)
Where ( i L ) and table below 4.1 can be used to verify n L , constant value.
c=
EI
A
(4.2
23
Table 4.1: Angular frequencies and mode shapes for a beam in transversal
vibration
End
Values of
Condition
( iL)
Free-Free
( 0L) = 0 (rigid
Body)
(1L) = 4.730
(2L) = 7.853
(3L) =10.995
(4L) =14.137
FixedFixed
Simply
Supported
FixedSimply
Supported
Fixed
Free
Mode Shapes
cosh n L cos n L
(1L) =4.730
(2L) =7.853
(3L) =10.99
(4L) =14.13
(1L) =
(2L) = 2
(3L) = 3
(4L) = 4
(1L) = 3.926
(2 L) = 7.068
(3L) = 10.210
(4 L) = 13.351
(1L) = 1.875
(2 L) = 4.694
(3 L) = 7.854
(4 L) = 10.995
sinh n L sin n L
where ... n =
cos n L cosh n L
U n = Cn sin n x
sin n L sinh n L
where ... n =
cos n L cosh n L
sin n L sinh n L
where ... n =
cos n L cosh n L
24
(4.3)
Where the constant C1 , C2 , C3 and C4 are in general function of time and can
be determined from the boundary conditions. The boundary conditions in
general forms are:
25
x = 0 u x = ui , =
u y
x
= i
(4.4)
x = L uy = u j , =
u y
x
= j
Equation (4.1) should satisfy the conditions in equation (4.2) so that C1 and
C2 can be found as
C1 = U I
C2 = I
1
( 3U I 2I L + 3U J J L )
L2
1
C4 = 3 (2U I + I L 2U J + J L )
L
C3 =
(4.5)
Substituting equation (4.3) into equation (4.1), the below is obtained which
equation (4.4)
3x2 2x3
2x2 x3 3x2 2x3
x2 x3
+ 2 i + 2 3 U j + + 2 j
uy = 1 2 + 3 Ui + x
L
L L L
L
L
L L
(4.6)
Or
U y = N iU i + N 'ii + N jU j + N 'j j
26
3x 2 2 x3
Ni = 1 2 + 3
L
L
2
2x
x3
N i' = x
+ 2
L
L
2
3
3x
2x
Nj = 2 3
L
L
2
x
x3
N 'j = + 2
L L
(4.7)
T =
1 ' 2
Vy dx
2 0
(4.8)
27
Where ' is the mass per unit length and Vy is the velocity in the ydirection. Substituting by ' = A and Vy =
u y
t
l
u y
1
T = A
.dx
2 0 x
2
(4.9)
L
3 x 2 2 x 3
3x 2 2 x3
x 2 x3
1
2 x 2 x3
+ 2 i + 2 3 U j +
+ 3 j dx
T = A1 2 + 3 U j + x
L
L
L
L
L
2 0
L
L L
(4.10)
Where
.
Ui =
U i
,
t
i
,
t
.
U j
,
Uj =
dt
.
j = j
t
.
(4.11)
1
{U }T [m].{U }
2
(4.12)
.
where the superscript T indicates the transpose. The velocity vector, U ,
is given by:
28
.
U i
.
.
i
U = .
U j
.
j
(4.13)
2
2
13L 3L 22 L 4 L
(4.14)
Using the Euler-Bernoulli beam theory, the strain energy of the beam
element can be expressed as:
L
2U Y
1
W EI
2 0 x 2
.dx
(4.15)
W =
1
{U }T [k ].{U }
2
(4.16)
29
U i
{} = Ui
j
j
(4.17)
2
2
6L 2L 6L 4L
The equation of motion is derived using Netwons second law and is
defined as:
([k ] [m]){Um} = 0
2
(4.18)
The mass and stiffness matrices increases along with increasing element of
the beam and more nodes and more degree of freedom will be involved.
30
5 Experimental Work
5.1 Introduction
The experimental work was carried at University of Surrey, Dynamics
Research Laboratory. The dynamic test was conducted using an intact FRP
composite beam with different boundary conditions. The main aim of this
experimental work is investigate the modal parameters (frequency, mode
shapes and modal damping) of the FRP composite beam. This test beam
was supplied by STRONGWELL Company and the manual (contain both
mechanical and physical properties) provided by the same company being
used during the course of this research.
5.1.1
Measurement Preparations
5.1.2
31
Point of Excitation
32
33
For each case the response will plot in order to see the behaviour i.e. modal
analysis behaviour of the FRP composite beam. All the vibration data
acquired are imported to SPICE to process to acquired modal parameters
are frequencies, damping ratio and mode shapes. We have two different
technique in SPICE, Stochastic subspace identification technique and peakpicking technique. These methods are being used to process the acquired
data, the sampling frequency, 3000Hz. These acquisition data were
collected in Time-Domain and its being process with Stochastic Subspace
identification
The modal parameters (eigenfrequncies and mode shapes only) are
extracted first using frequency-domain i.e., peak-picking technique, in
order to give a quick look at the dynamic performance of the beam. Then
the modal parameters of the beam i.e., natural frequencies, damping ratios
and mode shapes are extracted from the measured data using time-domain
technique i.e. the stochastic subspace identification technique, with
sampling frequency 3000 Hz. The stochastic method works directly with
the recorded time signals and it is based on linear calculations therefore it is
considered to be more robust and faster than other methods. The
experimental set-up is illustrated in figure 5.5.
34
(2)
Accelerometer
(3)
Impact hammer
(4)
Steel support
(5)
PC with Software
5.3.1
Phaser Analyzer (FFT analyzer), figure 5.6 was used as data acquisition
system and has 4 input channels
35
5.3.2
Accelerometer
Impact Hammer
The impact hammer is of type figure 5.8 and used to determine component
or system response to impacts of varying amplitude and duration. The
impact has Sensitivity: (15%) 1 mV/lbf (0.23 mV/N), Measurement
Range: 5000 lbf pk (22000 N pk), Hammer Mass: 0.32 kg, Tip Diameter:
0.63 cm, Hammer Length: 22.7 cm, Head Diameter: 2.5 cm.
36
Steel Support
The steel support, see figure 5.10 with 0.25m height, the length is 0.12m
and the breadth 0.09m. These support used at both edges used to impose
boundary conditions on the beam except free-free. The two support sides
have bolts and nuts at the screw thread area.
37
5.3.5
PC with Software
38
39
The experimental apparatus will allow the beam will be clamped in four
different boundary conditions as shown figure 5.14.
Results
The dynamic test was carried out in laboratory with four different boundary
conditions. The measured modal parameters are served as a reference for
further comparison with analytical solution agreement. Using ANSYS
software, an initial finite element model containing 9 elements is
constructed using beam4 element type. The beam supports are simulated as
three translation and rotational stiffness from each side using damper
element. Only the first three bending modes are considered in the vertical
direction. The sensitivity matrix of the stiffness supports in the FE model is
40
calculated. In tables 5.1 and 5.2, the measured natural frequencies for the
first three bending modes are given and compared to the finite element
model.
Table 5.1 Eigenfrequencies (Hz) of fixed-fixed boundary conditions
Mode
FRP Beam
Measured
241.318
638.778
950.979
Analytical
318.79
879.24
17010.91
% Difference
24.33
27.35
94.40
41
42
FRP Beam
Mode
Measured
N/A
N/A
N/A
Analytical
50.0952
313.964
879.466
% Difference
Measured
187.606
670.906
891.746
Analytical
219.75
712.25
14668.60
% Difference
14.63
5.80
93.92
43
44
FRP Beam
Mode
Measured
132.660
420.746
870.00
Analytical
140.71
562.86
1266.427
% Difference
5.72
25.25
31.30
45
46
6 Modelling in ANSYS
6.1 Introduction
The finite element simulation was done by FEA package known as
ANSYS. The FEA software package offerings include time-tested,
industry-leading applications for structural, thermal, mechanical,
computational fluid dynamics, and electromagnetic analyses, as well as
solutions for transient impact analysis. ANSYS software solves for the
combined effects of multiple forces, accurately modelling combined
behaviours resulting from "multiphysics" interactions.
This is used to perform the modelling of the beam and calculation of
natural frequencies with relevant mode shapes.This is used to simulate both
the linear & nonlinear effects of structural models in a static or dynamic
environment. Advanced nonlinear structural analysis includes large strain,
numerous nonlinear material models, nonlinear buckling, post-buckling,
and general contact. Also includes the ANSYS Parametric Design
Language (APDL) for building and controlling user-defined parametric and
customized models.
The purpose of the finite element package was utilised to model the Fibre
reinforced polymer (FRP) beam in 3-D as SHELL93 (8node93). This
package enables the user to investigate the physical and mechanical
behaviour of the beam.
The FE-model parameters extracted from the Strongwell manual [19]
provided with the composite beam specimen. The FE-model constructed
along vertical direction only which made it applicable to the real bridge
model. The load applied from pedestrian used to come in vertical directions
during the walking or movement along the bridge that is why the analysis is
being done toward vertical directions. Though, the specimen has anisotropy
properties but we have only considering the vertical direction that is why
the linear isotropic parameter only used.
47
Requirement Specification
48
Values
Thickness
3e-3m
Young modulus
17.926e9
Density
1827
Width
0.05m
0.82m
Poisson Ratio
0.3
The parameter specified in the table above indicated that only vertical
direction analysis was carried on the beam. This is also applicable to the
modal analysis experiment in the previous section.
6.2.2
Idealization Specification
Mesh Generation
49
6.2.4
Analysis
This is a stage where solution was conducted. It was the step to preprocessing and different stages of analysis took place. The load is applied
to edges of beam, this was easier to implement in SHELL model. And the
other entire complex algorithm in FEM solved.
6.2.5
Post-processing
The results shown below are the graphical solution of deformed and undeformed shape for first 2 modes.
50
51
Table 6.2: the table shows the mode frequencies in Hz predicted theory and
ANSYS
6.3.2
Mode
Theory
ANSYS
Percent Error
140.710
199.790
29.55
562.860
532.007
5.50
The results shown below are the graphical solution of deformed and undeformed shape for first 2 modes.
52
Table 6.3: the table shown the mode frequencies in Hz predicted theory and
ANSYS
6.3.3
Mode Theory
ANSYS
Percent Error
318.890
327.671
2.70
878.240
813.552
7.42
The results shown below are the graphical solution of deformed and undeformed shape for first 2 modes
53
54
Table 6.4: the table shown the mode frequencies in Hz predicted theory and
ANSYS
6.3.4
Mode Theory
ANSYS
Percent Error
219.750
233.851
6.08
711.250
745.298
4.49
The results shown below are the graphical solution of deformed shape for
first 2 modes
55
ANSYS
Percent Error
50.0952
51.704
1.45
313.964
307.094
2.19
The ANSYS results also show small relative errors compared with the
analytical solution as shown in table 6.2, 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5.
56
7 Discussion
7.1 Introduction
With the completion of experimental, analytical and ANSYS section of this
research work, it is now possible to analyse result found in chapter 5 of this
work. This section will focus on the findings of the studys, the comparisons
which can be made between the different methods, and most importantly,
the effect that frequency has on the FRP composite beam.
57
obtained for the natural frequencies are in a similar, there are some issues
with inaccuracy. This is because finite element method is an approximate
solution which is intended to be use when analytical solution is difficult to
obtain. Significant improvement may be seen when the number of elements
considered is increased from one to two in Appendix 4. by comparing
results and calculating the relative errors between the analytical method and
the finite method at the first natural frequency, table 7.1 below was
constructed.
Table 7.1: % Error between FEM & Analytical Solution for Mode 1
Boundary
Condition
Fixed-Fixed
N/A
1.76
Simple-Simple
9.945
0.33
Fixed-Simple
24.82
0.96
Fixed-Free
N/A
N/A
From the table above, it can be seen that the relative errors between the
finite element method and the analytical solution are significant reduced
when the number of elements is increased, there will be a greater number of
nodes in the structure which means that a better idea of the displacement
and deformation of the structure can be found. This will lead to mode
shapes of the system becoming more similar to the analytical mode shape.
In a similar manner, the ANSYS results also show small relative errors with
the analytical solution as found in table 6.2, 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5.
When considering the natural frequency, further observation about the
errors between these methods may be made. The increase in number of
elements reducues the errors. By referring to mode shapes provided from
ANSYS in chapter 6 of this work, it can be seen that a relatively smooth
curves is produce with increase in number of elements.
Some observations were also made in experimental results as indicated in
figure 5.15 5.21, the natural frequency may be determined by the peak on
the Frequency-Amplitude graphs. In theory, the maximum displacement of
the beam should be at the point 5 (that is the centre of the beam) and in
58
most cases this has been achieved. If this is not case then either point 4 or
point 6, just off the centre line of the beam has had the maximum
displacement.
From the result in table 5.1 5.4, there are discrepancy with the first
natural frequency recorded during the experimental study to that of the
analytical solution, finite element and ANSYS. Initially it was thought that
it was partially due to the fact the density value of the beam was different to
that used in the calculation but it was then decided that since the density
does not vary to a great extent compared to the value of the natural
frequency then this couldnt be the case. A more likely cause of these
discrepancies could be due the way that the boundary conditions are
applied to the beam during the experiment. In the analytical, finite element
and ANSYS methods, all boundary conditions are considered to be ideal,
i.e perfectly for a fixed end and perfectly simply supported for a simply
supported end. In experimental setup, a fixed end is achieved by combining
two simply supported setups as shown in figure 7.1.
59
n =
k
m
(7.1)
60
8 Conclusion
In this section of the report, series of reasonable observations were made
and discussed below.
The dynamic investigation of a fibre reinforced polymer beam was carried
out in this work. The modal analysis was performed to the natural
frequencies and mode shapes. The fundamental vertical frequencies for four
boundary conditions were estimated in experimental and analytical ways.
When comparing the experimental results (frequencies, mode shapes etc)
with analytical results, there are some discrepancies with the error between
the two values. It was likely that this is connected with the manner in which
boundary conditions are applied in the beams. It seems that the fixed
boundary conditions allows for too much movement at the end and that
simply supported end is much stiffer than would be experienced under the
analytical solution. It is advisable to redesign the experimental apparatus to
give better results with different boundary conditions.
The finite element method results compared to the analytical solution, it can
be observed that the accuracy of the finite element method increases as the
number of the element is increased. It has been seen that when comparing
the results of second mode from the finite element method with analytical
solution, that a greater number of elements is required to adequately
reproduce the more complex mode shapes
Finally, there are fair agreements between experimental results and
analytical which was the target of this research work. The reason for the
discrepancies has been discussed in previous section.
61
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
62
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
63
Appendix 1, Terminogoly
Several definitions of the terminology critical to this study are contained
within this section.
Dynamic Force - a force that changes with respect to time (not static).
Vibration - Oscillation of a system in alternately opposite directions from
its position of equilibrium, when that equilibrium position has been
disturbed. Two types are free vibration and forced vibration. Forced
vibration takes place when a dynamic force disturbs equilibrium in the
system. Free vibration takes place after the dynamic force becomes static
(or zero).
Amplitude - The offset of equilibrium of the system at a given time, also
known as the magnitude of the wave when plotting displacement, velocity,
or acceleration against time.
Period- The amount of time it takes for one cycle.
Cycle - A complete motion of a system starting at any given point of
magnitude and direction that ends with the same magnitude and direction
(i.e., the motion over a full period).
Frequency- Number of cycles over a given time, usually cycles per second
(also called Hz).
Natural Frequency - a frequency at which the system will vibrate freely
when excited by a sudden force.
Fundamental Natural Frequency - The lowest natural frequency for the
system at which a system will vibrate.
Resonance - a condition where a system is excited at one of its natural
frequencies.
Damping - a property of energy dissipation within the system. More
damping results in a quicker decay of amplitude in free vibration. When
less damping is present, the system retains its energy for a longer amount of
time.
64
relative
Node - The point location on a mode shape that undergoes zero relative
displacement.
65
4 L2
AL 22 L
Mass Matrix: [m] =
13L
420 54
2
13L 3L
54
13L
13L 3L2
156 22 L
22 L 4 L2
6 L 12 6 L
12
6 L 4 L2 6 L 2 L2
EI
Stiffness Matrix: [k ] = 3
L 12 6 L 12 6 L
2
6 L 4 L2
6L 2L
Equation of Motion:
12 6L 12 6L
54
13L Umi
156 22L
2
2
2
13L 3L2 mi
EI 6L 4L 6L 2L 2 AL 22L 4L
L3 12 6L 12 6L 420 54 13L 156 22L Um = 0
j
2
2
2
2
13L 3L 22L 4L mj
6L 2L 6L 4L
Where:
AL4 2
420 EI
66
Fixed-Fixed
(4 L
2 L2 + 3L2 mi
=0
4 L2 4 L2 m j
1 =
4496.95
420 17.926 10 9 2.085 6
= 4496.95rad / s f 2 =
4
4
2
1827 5.64 10 0.82
f 2 = 715.7 Hz
2 =
67
Fixed-Simple
[4L
1 =
4 L2 {m j } = 0 = 1
1835.87
420 17.926 2.085 10 7 1
= 1835.87rad / s f1 =
= 292.19 Hz
4
4
2
1827 5.64 10 0.82
68
22L
54
13L
AL
Globa Mass Matrix: [m] =
0
420
0
54 13L
13L 3L2
22L
4L
13L
3L
0
312 0
0 8L2
54 13L
13L 3L2
12
6L
12
6L
EI
[k] = 3 0
Global Stiffness Matrix:
L
0
0
13L
54
13L 3L2
156 22L
22L 4L2
2L2
0
0
0 8L2 6L 2L2
12 6L 12 6L
6L 2L2 6L 4L2
12 6L
4L2 6L 2L2
6L 24 0
6L
0
0
0
0
12
0
0
6L
69
Fixed-Fixed
Equation of motion:
EI
3
L
0 Um j
24 0
2 AL 312
0 8 L2 420 0 8L2 m = 0
24 0
312 0 Um j
0 8L2 m = 0
0 8L2
Where: =
AL4 2
420 EI
0
24 312
Um j
Thus:
=0
2
2
0
8 L 8 L m j
To resolve , = 0.077 or = 1
1 = 2036rad / s,
f 1 = 318.89 Hz
2 = 7343rad / s
f 2 = 879.24 Hz
70
Simple-Simple
Equation of Motion
EI
3
L
4 L2 6 L
24
6 L
2
2L
0
6L
0
2 L2
0
8 L2
2 L2
4 L2
0
6L
2 AL 13L
420 13L2
2 L2
4 L2
0
13L 13L
.0 mi
13L Um j
312
0
3L n j
0
8L2
13L 3L2 4 L2 nk
1 = 887.32rad / s
f 1 = 140.72
2 = 3550.0rad / s
f 2 = 562.86 Hz
Fixed-Simple
Equation of Motion:
EI
3
L
24 0
0 8L2
6 L 2 L2
6L
0
312
2
2 AL
2L
0
8L2
420
13L 3L2
4 L2
13L Um j
3L2 m j = 0
4 L2 mk
Using equation solving program, the first two eigenvalues were found to
be.
The natural frequencies were calculated as follows:
1 = 1393rad / s
f 1 = 219.75 Hz
2 = 5234rad / s
712.25 Hz
71
Fixed-free
72
Telephone:
Fax:
E-mail:
+46 455-38 55 10
+46 455-38 55 07
ansel.berghuvud@bth.se