Chapter 7

Modeling of Structural Members

7.1 Introduction

There are problems in system modeling where lumping of inertia and compliance,
with which we are comfortable in rigid body dynamics, fails to catch the essential
dynamics of the system. For example in modeling an E.O.T crane, while the carriage
can be represented by a rigid body, it will be improper to treat the girder in a similar
way. Situations like this often arise with systems consisting of long slender members
whose flexibility plays an important role in the dynamics of the system. These
members are essentially distributed parameter systems governed by partial
differential equations and are lumped in space for finite approximation.

Beams and columns are members with governing equations similar in forms and
exhibiting interesting dynamical behavior. This chapter discusses modeling of beams
through various levels of refinements followed by modal bond graph or finite mode
analysis. The concept of space reticulation and modal bond graph can be extended to
other distributed parameter systems as well.

7.2 Euler-Bernoulli beam model

In the Euler-Bernoulli beam model, rotary inertia and shear deformation of the beam
are not taken into account. Since modeling of distributed parameter systems typically
begin with finite approximation and hence space reticulation, we proceed with the
governing equations in difference form.

Fig. 7.1
 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 200
An Euler-Bernoulli beam element with density , cross-sectional area A and flexural
rigidity EI is shown in Fig. 7.1. The governing equations in difference form are as
follows, for sufficiently small length x, ignoring the influence of second and higher
powers of x.

V  x  x   V  x      x y  x, t  , (7.1)

y  x, t 
  , (7.2)
x


M  x   EI , (7.3)
x

M
and V  x    , (7.4)
x

where V is shear force and M is bending moment.

The differential equation for transverse vibration is

4
  y  x, t   EI y  x, t   0 (7.5)
x 4

To create a bond graph model we reticule a beam as shown in Fig. 7.2. The figure also
shows the interface shear forces. If we represent the interface shear forces by
corresponding 0-junctions, the bond graph model follows from equations (7.1) and
(7.2) and is shown in Fig. 7.3. The 1-junctions along the upper line of the ladder
structure represent the velocities of the mass centers of the reticules to which
corresponding inertia elements are attached. The 1-junctions along the lower line
represent reticule interface rotations. The C elements at the 0-junctions along the
lower line model the flextural stiffnesses of the reticules the values of which maybe
derived from equation (7.3).
201 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

Fig. 7.2 Beam reticulation

Fig. 7.3 Bond graph of the space reticuled Euler-Bernoulli beam.

7.2.1 Implementation of boundary conditions

We now consider implementation of boundary conditions and consequent reduction

of the model. Consider a cantilever beam as shown in Fig. 7.4(a). The bond graph
model created for three reticules is shown in Fig. 7.4(b) along with source elements
representing the end conditions of zero displacement and rotation at the left end and
zero shear force and moment at the right end. Because of zero sources several bonds
become power less and can be removed leading to a reduced model as shown in Fig.
7.4(c).

Fig. 7.4(a)
 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 202

Fig. 7.4(b)

Fig. 7.4(c)

The bond graph model of an overhanging beam with one end simply supported is
shown in Fig. 7.5. External forces acting on the beam or interaction with external
systems can be taken care of by bonds attached to the 1-junction representing
transverse motion of the lumped masses.

Fig. 7.5(a)
203 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

Fig. 7.5(b)

Fig. 7.5(c)

7.3 Rayleigh beam model

Rayleigh beam model is an improvement over the Euler-Bernoulli model in that it

accounts for rotary inertia of the beam though shear deformation is neglected. We
create the Rayleigh beam model from a different consideration rather than the
difference form of the governing equations. Finite lumping is, however, done for
both mass and rotary inertia.
 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 204

Fig. 7.6 Beam element with generalised forces and displacements.

A beam element with shear forces and moments acting on it in Eulerian as well as
Newtonian convention is shown in Fig. 7.6. The stiffness of the beam element relates
the generalized Newtonian forces to the generalized displacements at the ends of the
element as given by equation (7.6).

 F1N   y1 
   
 M 1N  1 
 F   K   (7.6)
 2N   y2 
M 2N  
 2 

 

The stiffness matrix can be modeled as a 4 -port C- field storing energy due to the
four generalized displacements shown in Fig. 7.7.

Fig. 7.7 C - field representing the beam element stiffness matrix.

Any column of the stiffness matrix can be determined by assigning unit value to the
corresponding row element of the displacement vector all other elements being zero
and then evaluating the equilibrium forces and moments on an element satisfying
the equation (7.7) to the elastic line.

2
M  x   EI y x  (7.7)
x 2
205 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

In terms of flexural rigidity EI and element length l the stiffness matrix is given by
equation (7.8).

 12 6l 12 6l 
 
6l 4l 2  6l 2l 2 
 K   EI3  (7.8)
l  12  6l 12  6l 
 
 6l 2l 2  6l 4l 2 

A bond graph model of the beam element can now be created by lumping the
element inertias at the ends of the element and appending them to the 1-junctions
representing displacements and rotations at the ends of the element. Cascading of
several element bond graph modules leads to the space reticuled beam model.

A cantilever beam with reticulation and lumping of inertia is shown in Fig. 7.8 and
the bond graph model is shown in Fig. 7.9(a).

Fig.7.8 Cantilever beam with space reticulation and inertia lumping.

Fixed end lumped inertias are in differential causality since the flows are determined
by the sources satisfying the boundary conditions. These can, therefore, be removed.

Fig. 7.9(a) Differentially causalled model.

The integrally causalled bond graph is shown in Fig. 7.9(b).

 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 206

Fig. 7.9(b) Integrally causalled model.

Lumped linear inertias may be obtained as

  l1  l2     l 2  l3    l3
m2  , m3  and m4  ,
2 2 2

Where  is the density of the material and A is the cross-sectional area.

Estimation of lumped rotary inertia may be arrived at as follows.

Fig. 7.10

For a beam element of length x, width b and height h, shown in Fig. 7.10, the
moment equation in difference form is given by

M
x
 x V  x 
V x 2
x

2
  bh   x  2
 
 12
 h  x 2

  3
xt 2
y  x, t 

. (7.9)

Dividing both sides of equation (7.9) by x and taking the limit x → 0

M  bh 3 3
V  y  x, t  , (7.10)
x 12 x t 2
207 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

M 3
or V   I y  x, t  (7.11)
x x t 2
where I is the second moment of the beam cross-sectional area about the neutral axis.

Taking cue from equation (7.11) rotary inertia may be lumped as follows.

J2   I
 l1  l 2  , J3   I
 l 2  l3  J4   I
l3
and .
2 2 2

7.4 Modeling of a beam column

The governing equation of a beam column may be written as

2 y
EI  M  x   Fy (7.12)
x 2

where M (x) is the moment of the transverse forces and F is the axial load. The model
of the beam column follows from the beam model with a transformer structure to
apply the moments due to the axial load at the 1-junctions representing the rotation
of the beam elements. Figure 7.11(a) and Fig. 7.11(b) shows a beam column and the
corresponding bond graph. The 0-junction with the SE element is a distributor for the
axial load. The transformer structure originating from this junction models the
moments due to the axial load at the reticule interfaces. Moment due to F at the
interface between the i th and (i+1) reticule can be given as, - F {yi+ψi+1 (xi/2)}. The
corresponding transformer modulus is - {Qi + Q (i+1)r (xi/2)} where Qi is the
displacement of the mass centre of the i th reticule and Q(i+1)r is the rotation at the
interface of the i th and (i+1) reticule.

Fig. 7.11(a)
 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 208

Fig. 7.11(b)

7.5 Timoshenko beam model

The effect of shear is considered in this model. Infact, it may be treated as a Rayleigh
beam considering additional deformation of the element due to shear force (see Vaz
[72]).

From variational principles, the Timoshenko model can be written as

     2
 kGA  y  x, t        2 y  x, t 
x   x  t
      2
x  EI x    kGA  x y  x, t       I  . (7.13)
    t 2

where ψ is the angular deformation due to bending, G is the shear modulus, k is a

factor depending on the beam cross-sectional shape and is used for averaging the
relation between the shear force and shear angle for the cross-section. Figure 7.12
shows Timoshenko model of a beam element with bending deformation ψ and shear
deformation. The total angular deflection at a section may be written as
209 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS


y  x, t      . (7.14)
x

Fig. 7.12: Bending and shear effects in Timoshenko beam element.

The shear force and bending moment equations are given as

V  x   kG A  . (7.15)


M  x   EI  . (7.16)
x

The unloaded static equations may be written from equation (7.13) as

    
kG A y  x, t      0 . (7.17)
x   x 

      
x  EI x    kG A x y  x, t      0 . (7.18)
   

In order to find a C - field relationship, we introduce an intermediate deformation

variable z (having no physical significance in particular) such that

z  y  x, t    , (7.19)

 
and z y  x, t      . (7.20)
x x

It may be remembered that an unloaded beam element has same value of shear force
and thus the same  all along.

Hence, from equations (7.14), (7.15), (7.18) and (7.20).

  3
V  x   kG A y  x, t       EI z . (7.21)
 x  x 3
 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 210
From equations (7.16) and (7.20)
 2
M  x  E I  EI z . (7.22)
x x 2

The expressions for shear force V (x) and M (x) in the variable z (x) are similar to those
of Euler-Bernoulli beam in real displacement y (x).

From (7.21) and (7.22), the elements of a C - field can be worked out as in the case of
the Rayleigh beam. The C - field relates the forces and moments to the corresponding
deformations as
 F1   z1 
   
 M1   1 
   K   (7.23)
 F2   z2 
M 2   2 

This C - field can be used to model individual elements of a reticuled beam as shown
in Fig. 7.13. However, these must be cascaded to arrive at the integrated model.
Further this model must have representation for actual deformation y (x, t) while the
C - field is defined by equation (7.23). Once unloaded beam element has been
considered we may proceed to bring in the reticulations in finite length elements. We
introduce local coordinates s(i) for each element which may be related to global
coordinate as follows.

x  xi  s  i  for xi  x  xi 1 ,

where xi is the distance of the i th element from the global origin. The limits for s(i)
are 0  s(i)  li, where li is the length of the i th element.

The values of z at the interfaces of the elements may now be related to the real
displacements y (x, t) as follows.

From equation (7.19)

z 2,i  y1,i , since s  i   0 (at the left interface of i th element) (7.24)

and z 2 ,i 1  y 2.i 1   l i 1

(at the right interface of (i–1) the element),

211 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

since s
 i 1  l
i 1 ,

or y 2,i 1  y1.i  z 2.i 1   l i 1 .

Implementation of equations (7.24) and (7.25) leads to the Timoshenko beam model
as shown in Fig. 7.13(a), (b) and (c). It may be observed from Fig. 7.13(c) that the shear
compliance with stiffness kG A is in differential causality. This can be removed by
considering inertia associated with shear deformation as shown in Fig. 7.14.

Fig. 7.13(a)

Fig. 7.13(b)
 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 212

Fig. 7.13(c)

7.14 Integrally causalled Timoshenko beam model with shear inertia.

The shear inertia can be estimated by considering the kinetic energy of the element
due to shear deformation as shown in Fig. 7.15.
213 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

7.15 Shear deformation of a beam element.

2
li   

1
   d s    i s   1 mi  12 .
0 2  li  2

 A
Thus lumped shear inertia mi = li .
3

Incorporation of this inertia associated with shear deformation is a refinement of

original Timoshenko beam dynamics which has appeared entirely from causality
considerations. Bond graph model has revealed or at least reminded us of its
existence.

There is yet another way to circumvent the problem of differential causality on the
shear compliance. This compliance with differential causality does not add to the
order of the system beyond that of the Rayleigh beam. Consequently, the compliance
can be collapsed and added to the compliance of the C - field given by equation
(7.23). The modified C - field would then relate the forces and moments to the
corresponding deformations  y1 , 1 , y 2 , 2  T . The corresponding Timoshenko
beam model would be morphologically identical to the Rayleigh beam bond graph.
 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 214

7.16 Differentially causalled compliance referred to the

0-junction side of the transformer.

The elements of the modified C- field may be computed from energy consideration.
After referring to the other side of the transformer, the shear stiffness becomes
kG A / l2i as shown in Fig. 7.16. The potential energy of the element may be written as

1
V   y1  1 z1  2   K   y1  1 z1  2  T  1 kG A 2 . (7.26)
2 2

Our objective is to have a relationship between {F1 M1 F2 M2}T and {y1 ψ1 y2 ψ2}T for the
modified C- field. Hence z2 and β must be eliminated.

From equation (7.19)

z 2   li  y 2 . (7.27)

where li is the length of the i th beam element.

At the 0-junction in the bond graph of Fig. 7.16, since efforts in all bonds are identical,

kG A
F2  . (7.28)
li2

The C- field equation in terms of {y1 ψ1 z2 ψ2}T may be written as

215 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

 F1   y1 
   
 M1   1 
    K    (7.29)
 F2   z2 
M 2   2 

From equations (7.28) and (7.29)

K 33 z 2  kG A / li2   K 31 y1  K 32 1  K 34 2 . (7.30)

Solving equations (7.27) and (7.30) we obtain z2 and β in the form

z 2  a1 y1  a 2 1  a3 y 2  a 4 2 . (7.31)

  b1 y1  b2 1  b3 y 2  b4 2 . (7.32)

Equation (7.31) can be used to write

 y1   1 0 0 0   y1 
    
 1   0 1 0 0   1 
     . (7.33)
 z 2  a1 a 2 a3 a 4   y 2 
 2   0 0 0 1   2 

Hence from equations (7.26) and (7.31), the potential energy can be written as

1
V   y1  1 y 2  2  T  T  K  T   y1  1 y 2  2  T  1 kG A b1 y1  b2  1  b3 y 2  b4  2  2
2 2
1
  y1  1 y 2  2   K   y1  1 y 2  2  T , (7.34)
2

1 0 0 0
 
0 1 0 0
where T    .
a1 a2 a3 a4 
 
 0 0 0 1 
 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 216
The elements of [K] are obtained by partial differentiation of V given by equation in
(7.34) as

 2V
K ij   K ji . (7.35)
xi x j

7.6 Consistent inertia field

Lumping of linear and rotary inertia at the ends of beam elements as done in the
Rayleigh and Timoshenko beam models are rather arbitrary. It does not take into
cognizance the shape of the elastic curve. A more refined model can be arrived at by
replacing the lumped inertias by a consistent I - field. The inertia matrix can be
derived as follows.

Integrating the equation of unloaded Euler-Bernoulli beam

 4 y x 
EI 0, (7.36)
x 4

C1 3 C 2 2
y x   x  x  C3 x  C 4 , (7.37)
6 2

y  x  C1 2
and  x  C 2 x  C3 . (7.38)
x 2

Considering a beam element (Fig. 7.6) and using the boundary conditions

y  x 
y  x   y1 ,  1 at x  0
x
y  x 
 
and y x  y 2 ,   2 at x  l
x

the general expression for beam deflection and slope in terms of end values may be
written as
217 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

 2 3 2   1 3 2 2 
y  x    x 3  x  1 y1   x  x  x  1
3 2 2
l l  l l 
(7.39)
 2 3 3 2  1 1 2
   x  x  y 2   x 3  x   2 .
3 2 2
 l l  l l 

 y x   6 3 6   3 4 
  3 x  2 x  y1   2 x 2  x  1 1
x l l  l l 
(7.40)
 6 6   3 2 
   3 x 2  2 x  y 2   2 x 2  x   2 .
 l l  l l 

In a reduced form these may be written as

y  x   F1  x  1  F2  x   2  F3  x   3  F4  x   4

4
or y  x  
i 1
Fi  x   i , (7.41)

 y  x
and  F1  x  1  F2  x   2  F3  x   3  F4  x   4
x

 y  x
4
or
x
 i 1
Fi  x   i ,

(7.42)

where 1  y1 ,  2  1 ,  3  y2 , 4  2 ,

 Fi  x 
and Fi  x   .
x

Rotary inertia of an infinitesimal beam element is  I d x as seen from equation (7.11).

Therefore, total kinetic energy of the beam element

   y  x  
l 2
1  
    y  x    I 
2
T    dx ,
2 0 
  x t  

 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 218
4

M
1
ij  i  j
T   
or ,
2
i , j 1
(7.43)

   dx .
l
where M ij   Fi  x F j  x   I Fi  x  F j  x 
0

It is obvious that Mij = Mji , i = 1,4, j = 1,4, Mij > 0, and [Mij] is a positive definite
matrix. [Mij] is the consistent inertia matrix of the I - field. The corresponding bond
graph of the beam element is shown in Fig. 7.17.

Fig. 7.17

7.7 Modal bond graph for continuous systems

The idea of modal bond graph proposed by Margolis [42] is elaborated in this
section. The equation of motion of continuous system for linear vibrations takes the
following form for one dimensional spacial domain and one dimensional amplitude
of oscillation.

 2 y  x, t 
m
L  y  x, t     
 t2
 F  x, t   
i 1
f  xi , t    x  xi  , (7.44)

where L is a linear operator of the form

n  n 1
L  a n  x, t   a n 1  x, t        a 0  x, t  , n  0.
 xn  x n 1

The expanse of the domain could be a < x < b. To solve equation (7.44) the boundary
condition at x = a and at x = b ought to be prescribed along with the initial value of
the function y(x,0). The operator is said to be self-adjoint over a space of functions G
219 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

over the domain (a, b) with definite boundary condition at a and b if the following is
satisfied.

b b
 g  x, t  L 
a
y  x, t   dx  
a
y  x, t  L  g  x, t   dx .

with both g  x, t  , y  x, y   G .

For autonomous systems the coefficient ai(x,t) would only be functions of space
coordinate i.e.,

n  n1
L  an  x   a n 1  x        a0  x  .
x n x n 1
Free vibration of the system would be represented by the following equation.

 2 y  x, t 
L  y  x, t     . (7.45)
 t2

One may assume a solution of the form

y  x, t   Y  x  sin   t    .

The resulting eigen value problem would then be

L  Y  x     2 Y  x  . (7.46)

Substituting  2   ,

L  Y  x    Y  x . (7.47)
Now if,
i , i  1,2,3,.........,  are the eigen values and

Yi  x  , i  1,2,3,........,  are the corresponding eigen

functions

then,
L  Yi  x    i Yi  x  . (7.48)

 
L Y j  x   j Y j  x . (7.49)
 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 220

Multipying equation (7.48) by Yj(x) and integrating from a to b

  dx .
b b
 a
Y j  x  L  Yi  x   dx  i
 a
Yi  x  L Y j  x  (7.50)

Likewise multiplying equation (7.49) by Yi (x) and integrating from a to b

  dx   dx .
b b
 a
Yi  x  L Y j  x   j
 a
Y j  x L Y j  x (7.51)

Subtracting equation (7.51) from equation (7.50) and using the property of self-
adjointness of operator L we get

 i   j  a Yi  x 
b
Yj  x  dx  0 .
b
If i   j , then  a
Yi  x Yj  x  dx  0 when i  j . (7.52)

Thus eigen functions of a self-adjoint operator are orthogonal for which eigen values
are not equal.

One may obtain an orthonormal set of functions as follows.

Yi  x 
i  x  
b

Let (7.53)
Yi  x  Yi  x  dx
a

for all i  1,2,3,.......,  .

b
Then  a
i  x   j  x  dx   ij (7.54)

for all j , i  1,2,3,.......,  ,

1 if i  j
where  ij  
0 if i  j

7.8 Transverse vibration of a uniform beam under transverse loads and

moments

Let us consider a beam subjected to distributed and concentrated transverse loads

and moments as shown in Fig. 7.18.
221 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

Fig. 7.18
The equation of motion for Euler - Bernoulli beam may be written as

 4 y  x, t   2 y  x, t 
EI   a  F  x, t 
x 4 t 2
n
 f
k 1
k  xk , t    x  xk 
n
  x  
 m  x , t   x   x
1 x     (7.55)
 p p p      x   x p    ,
x 2    2  
p 1

where EI is the flexural rigidity of the beam,  the mass density of the beam material
and a the area of cross-section of the beam.

The equation of motion of a free beam may be written as

 4 y  x, t   2 y  x, t 
EI   a . (7.56)
x 4 t 2

Now assuming y  x, t   Y  x  sin   t    the eigen value problem takes the

following form.

 4Y  x , t 
EI 4
  a  2Y  x  . (7.57)
x

Denoting  a ω2 by λ we get
 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 222

 4 y  x, t 
EI   Y  x
x 4

 4 y  x, t 
or   Y  x ,
x 4

where    a  2 / EI . (7.58)

The operator  4 / x 4 is self-adjoint for the following set of end conditions.

 2Y  x 
(i) Y  0  0 , 0 and Y  L  0 ,
x 2 x 0

 2Y  x 
0.
x 2 x L

Both ends pinned as shown below.

Fig. 7.19

Y  x 
(ii) Y  0   0 , 0 and Y  L  0 ,
x x 0
Y  x 
0.
x xL

Both ends fixed as shown below.

Fig. 7.20
223 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

 2Y  x   3Y  x   2Y  x 
(iii) 0, 0 and 0,
x 2 x 0
x 3 x 0
x 2 x L

 3Y  x 
0,
x 3 x L

Both ends free as shown below.

Fig. 7.21

Y  x   3Y  x  Y  x 
(iv) 0, 0 and 0,
x x 0 x 3 x 0
x xL

 3Y  x 
0.
x 3 x L

Both ends guided as shown below.

Fig. 7.22
The operator is also self-adjoint for the combinations like,

(v) Pinned - fixed or fixed - pinned.

(vi) Pinned -free or free - pinned.
(vii) Pinned - guided or guided - pinned.
(viii) Fixed - free or free - fixed.
(ix) Fixed - guided or guided - fixed.

Let K 4     a 2 / EI and let L be the length of the beam then the values KL for
various eigen values for different end conditions along with eigen functions and
normalizing integrations are given in the Table 7.1. In the Table 7.1 chx  cosh  x 
, shx  sinh  x  , cx  cos  x  , sx  sin  x  and ri  K i L for
i  1,2,3,........., .
 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 224

Dividing the eigen functions given in column (2) of Table 7.1 by the values in column
(6) one may obtain orthonormalized functions i (x ) . Now without any loss of
generality of the procedure any one of the end condition may be selected. Say we
select a simply supported beam (Fig. 7.23) as an example.
225 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

Fig. 7.23

The equation of motion would be

 4 y  x, t   2 y  x, t 
n
EI
x 4
  a
t 2
 F  x, t   f
k 1
k  x k , t    x  xk 
n
  x 
 m  x , t    x   x
1 x   
 p p p      x   x p    .
x 2    2 
p 1
(7.59)

Now let us assume a solution like

y  x, t    Z t    x ,
i 1
i i (7.60)

where i  x  are orthonormalized eigen functions for pinned-pinned end

conditions. Each i  x  satisfies following equation

 4i  x 
  i i  x  , (7.61)
x 4

 a i 2
where i   K i4 .
EI
MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 226
227 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

Substituting the expansion (7.60) in equation (7.59) and multiplying the resulting
equation by  j  x  and integrating both the sides with respect to x from 0 to L using
the conditions of orthonormality we obtain an infinite set of ordinary equations.

L
  a  Z j  t   EI K 4j Z j  t    F  x, t   j  x  dx
0
n n
 j  x 
 f k  x k , t   j  xk    m p  x p , t  ,
x x x p
k 1 p 1
j  1,2,3,........,  .

Now say we restrict our finite mode analysis to incorporate N modes, then the above
set of equation may be represented by a bond graph as shown in Fig. 7.24.

Example: Consider a cantilever beam resting on an elastic foundation represented by

spring - dashpot combinations carrying a motor driving a pulley, which in turn pulls
a carriage on elastic supports with an extensible cord as shown in Fig. 7.25. A model
of the system for small amplitude vibrations of beam and carriage rocking is shown
in Fig. 7.26.

Fig. 7.25
MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 228
229 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

7.9 A note on structural modeling

We have presented several models for distributed parameter system based on two
methods, finite lumping and modal analysis. In using finite lumping a large number
of reticulations are necessary even for accurate low frequency response. Increase in
the number of reticulation on the other hand produces inaccuracies in higher
frequencies and also increases the number of states. Such models can, however, be
easily incorporated in the overall system model. Implementation of boundary
conditions is also easy.

Modal bond graph approach is accurate but the transformer moduli for modal
participations are to be formulated separately for the various boundary conditions
listed in Table 7.1. For the same reason extension to overall system model is not so
straightforward.

All the models were created without structural damping which is generally small.
This can be incorporated by attaching R elements to the 1-junctions representing
motions of lumped or modal masses. Damping of rotational motions in Euler-
Bernoulli model can be achieved by appending C-1-R structure to the 0-junctions to
which the C elements representing flexural stiffnesses are attached. In Timoshenko
beam model R elements should be attached to the 1-junctions representing beam
rotation.

Problems

P1. Make a bond graph model of

the beam shown in Fig. P7.1.
The beam segments are
uniform with cross-sectional
areas, flexural rigidities, and
mass per unit length shown in
the figure. Consider at least
two beam elements for each
Fig. P7.1
segment.

P2. Make a bond graph model of the uniform strut subjected to a follower force
as shown in Fig. P7.2.

P3. Figure P7.3 shows the chassis of a vehicle on four suspensions. The four
sides of the frame have the same cross-section. The suspensions do not
restrain torsion of the beams. F1 and F2 are the loads supported by the
frame. Make a bond graph model to study vehicle response due to ground
excitation.
 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 230

Fig. P7.2 Fig. P7.3

P4. Make a bond graph model of the uniform beam shown in Fig. P7.4.

Fig. P7.4

P5. Figure P7.5 shows an idealized mobile crane. The boom, assumed to be
uniform, is actuated by a hydraulic cylinder and carries a tip load W. The
mass of the vehicle is Mv and rotary inertia is Jv. Make a model of the system.

Fig. P7.5
231 MODELING AND SIMULATION OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS THROUGH BOND GRAPHS

P6. Figure P7.6 shows a two degree of freedom manipulator. The ground motor
applies a torque  1 on link L1 and the motor on L1 applies a torque  2 on
link L2. The manipulator carries a tip load W. The links are uniform with
flexural rigidities EI1 and EI2 and cross-sectional areas A1 and A2 respectively.
The mass of the motor driving L2 is m2. Make a model of the manipulator.

Fig. P7.6

Project type problem

Pr1. Fig. Pr7.1 shows the tubular chassis of a three wheeler. Make a bond graph
model of the structure.

Fig. Pr7.1
 MODELING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS 232

Pr2. Make a model of the mobile crane of Fig. P7.5 with the crane boom portion
in modal form.

Pr3. Fig. Pr7.2 shows the trolley of an E.O.T crane moving along the girder. The
girder is supported by carriages moving on rails. Make a model of the
structure to find the dynamic stresses in the girder due to load hoisting,
trolley motion and carriage motion over rail joints.

Fig. P7.2

Pr4. Fig. 6.13 shows a flexible rotor with a heavy disk at midspan supported by
hydrodynamic bearings. Make a bond graph model of the rotor including
the gyroscopic effect of the disk. Expressions for fluid film forces and
stiffness of hydrodynamic bearings are given in Chapter- 6