Compurersd Slrucrur~sVol. 33. No. 2. pp. 441-451. 1989 OLW-7949189s3.w + 0.

00
Printed in Great Britain. Pergamon Press plc

r~TERFACIAL FRICTION EFFECTS ON THE MECHANICS

OF STACKED BEAMS

C. W. SPRINGFIELD, JR and A. D. JOSHI

Department of Civil Engineering, Auburn Universjty, Alabama, AL 36849, U.S.A.

(Received 16 November I988)

Abstract-The mechanics of stacked beams with interfacial friction are discussed. The particular example
of two beams, simply supported and subjected to uniformly distributed loading is used to demonstrate
an algorithm for computing load~defo~ation behavior and energy loss in such systems. It is demonstrated
that the cross-sectional geometry of the beams affects the amount of energy lost to friction during loading,
and it is suggested that this fact could be utilized in the design of slipping beam damping devices.

I. ~NTRO~U~ION developed. While a quasi-static analysis procedure is

developed in this work, it is presented with a view
Early in the 1950s the interest in methods to provide toward establishing a dynamic analysis procedure.
damping to dynamically loaded beam structures led
researchers to investigate the use of Coulomb (or
2. MECHANWS OF STACKED BEAMS
friction, or slip) damping. Analytical and experimen-
tal studies of the damping provided by the slipping of Attention will be restricted to two identical beams
reinforcing spar caps riveted to cantilever beams stacked one upon the other. The ensuing discussion
loaded by concentrated end forces were performed by is readily extendable to beams of unequal cross-
Pian and Hallowell [l] and Pian [2]. Also, Goodman sectional properties, different materials and/or to
and Klumpp [3] looked into the problem of energy more than two beams; however, for the present
dissipation due to friction on the interface of two purposes the simpler problem of two identical beams
cantilever beams, also loaded by a concentrated end is sufficient. The configuration shown in Fig. 1 will be
force. Their objective was to apply their findings to used as the example of the application of the princi-
damping of turbine blade vibration. In [3] an expres- ples discussed. As can be seen in the figure, the span
sion for optimum damping clamping pressure was of the beams is 2tc, they are simply supported, and,
derived for their beam configuration and was found in addition to the applied load, u’, they are subjected
to agree very well with experiments. to a distributed clamping load, Co.
Subsequent work regarding friction damping of In Fig. 2 are displayed free body diagrams of a
beams has concentrated on the behavior of beams differential segment of each beam with the various
damped by friction sliders, as may be found in forces and moments identified by subscripts T and B
Earles and Mansoori [4], Beards [5] and Menq and in an obvious fashion. The interfacial normal and
Griffin [6]. Research with regard to the relative defor- friction forces per unit length are p andf, respectively.
mation of layered beam systems has primarily ad- Consider the equilibrium of the two segments. Force
dressed the load/deformation behavior of laminated equilibrium requires that
beams. In this regard, notable papers are those of
Goodman [7], Itani and Brito [S], Suzuki and Chang dTr
-.-.---=
[9] and Murakami [lo]. In these the primary objective -f (la)
d.u
is to establish the load/deformation behavior of
laminated beams accounting for the fact that the
interfacial bonding layer itself is defo~able. Accord-
ingly, in these it is assumed that the interlaminar
shear stress is a function of the relative slip between dv,
-=p-tv-co (24
layers or vice versa. Suzuki and Chang [9] expressed dx
the interlayer slip as a general function of the shear
stress, of which a special case is that of friction. dVa
The objective of the work reported here was to -=co-p (2b)
dx
investigate the interfacial friction force distribution
between stacked beams and to illustrate how a com- while satisfaction of moment equilibrium leads to
putational procedure for determining load/deflection
and energy dissipation behavior of such a system dMr h
subjected to an arbitrary history of loading can be -&- = vr-Tj.f @a)

441
 C. W. SPRINGFIELD, JR and A. D. JOSHI

Vr = V,, which, when utilized in eqns (2a,b), leads to

h
Note that this result is true whether or not MIand Co
are functions of X. Also, at the ends, concentrated
forces are developed between the beams of magni-
tudes equal to l/2 of the reactions; i.e. ]/2wf. Asso-
Fig. I. Stacked beam configuration. ciated with these interfacial concentrated forces are
concentrated friction forces, F.
The solution of eqn (5) used along with eqn (7) in
eqn (6) reveals that
(3b)

Equilibrium of the two segments restacked is stated (9)

as
which integrated twice yields
dT dT, dT,
-=z+x=o (4)
dx

dV dV, dV,
---+d.=-M (5)
dx Y
-h fdx’+M,x-2EI0,. (10)
ss
dM dM, dM,
-=d?r+dx=V-tlf: (6)
d.u In this, M,, and 8, are the constants of integration 1and
represent the moment and slope, respectively, at
The determination of p requires compatibility con- x = 0. The condition that the slope at x = / must be
siderations. In the beam theory, in order for the zero (from symmetry) allows the determination of&,.
beams to remain in contact, their deflections, slopes The moment MO is a result of the concentrated
and curvatures must be the same everywhere. Utiliz- friction force at x = 0, so that M,, = -hF.
ing the well known relationship between moment and The expression for the deflection curve is obtained
curvature, this requires that by integration of eqn (IO) as

MT M, d’c
-=-=-7
EI El d.u-

for which it is clear that M, = M, = M/2 for the

present work. Then, from eqns (3a,b), it must be that

The deflection curve is completely established once f

and F are determined.
The relative axial displacement is that on which the
friction forces do work, so an expression for this
quantity, designated ure,, is derived. The axial dis-
placements of the two beams may be written as:

u~(.~,~~~)=U~(.~)-~,~, K= T or B. (12)

In this ui is the displacement of the kth beam’s

centroid (not necessarily its neutral surface), and
dt7/dx is the slope of the beams. The centroidal
displacements are determined from the axial forces,
TK; i.e.

Fig. 2. Beam segment free-body diagrams.

 Interfacial friction effects on the mechanics of stacked beams 443

where the (+) signs are taken for K = B and the (-) The statement of the rate of complementary virtual
signs used for K = T. work is
Due to the antisymmetry of the axial displacement
with respect to the beam interface it must be that
(19)
ut = -MO,, which leads to 6; = - 8;. Then the condi-
tion that ut (x = /) = 0 (another result of symmetry)
requires that For the problem at hand the prescribed rates of
displacement, C,, are all zero so that the surface
6”,=-;E (14)
integral vanishes, leaving only the volume integral.
Equation (19) then reduces to

The relative displacement at the beam interface is I

defined as (C@;+i$r;)dA dx =O, (20)
ss0 A

in which the superscripts T and B refer to the top and

bottom beams, respectively. The stress in each beam
is given by

MKYK TK K=T
u:=-+~ or B, (21)
I

while the strain rate is simply i(’ = tit/E. Integration

+;E(x-l)+h$ (16) of eqns (I a,b) reveals that

Obtaining an expression for du /dx from eqn (I I) and T, = - f dx + TO,. (224

utilizing it in eqn (16) yields I

T,= f dx + T:. (22b)

j

The constants of integration To8= - TT = F.

Similarly, from eqns (3a,b) it is found that

M,= jY,dx -;(j./dx .p) GW

3. DETERMINATION OF FRICTION FORCES M,=[V,dx -;(S/dx +F) WI

As will be shown presently, for initial loading and
for each subsequent load reversal the loading may be or
conveniently considered to occur in three chronolog-
ical increments. This division is associated with the (244
limiting values of the friction forces which may be
written as
M,= V,dx +;T*. (24b)
s
(184
It is clear, then, that

(18b)
(254
In these, p is the coefficient of friction. The principle
of complementary virtual work is utilized in the
(25b)
determination of the friction forces. Inasmuch as this
is known to be a dissipative problem, the principle
involving rates of strain and displacement as given with
by Washizu, is used. (It should be noted that these
rates are with respect to a fictitious time variable, t, 6T,= Sf dx + 6F. (26)
since this is a quasi-static analysis.)
 444 C. W. SPRINGFIELD, JR and A. D. JOSHI

Substitution of these quantities into eqn (20), utilizing The value of wN may be determined by equating the
the relationship between shear and distributed load, right hand side of eqn (30a) evaluated at x = 0, to the
the definition I = sy2 dA, and the fact that TT = - TB limiting value off; i.e.
yields the expression

from which it is found that

In eqn (27) the quantity Ic/= Ah/(41 + Ah’).
For arbitrary 6T, it must be that the portion of the ,,,,~_L(~Lw”+~(~Co)-f”l,=,)
I- (33)
integrand in square brackets is zero, which leads to 2*/-p
the conclusions that
In eqns (32) and (33), + Co is used iff;” is positive and
-Co is used if f;” is negative.
Continued loading beyond n!*yproduces a distribu-
tion off given by

(28b)
f=f”+$+.‘)[I -;-(;-;)I, (34)
These equations govern the rate off and F at any
times during the loading that fand F are below the in which ( ) indicates a singularity function, and i is
limits set by eqns (18a,b). This will be the case at the the value of x that divides the beams into a region in
onset of loading and upon each load reversal. which f has a uniform distribution and is equal to its
It should be noted that the rate of distributed limiting value and a region in which f has a linear
friction given by eqn (28a) is simply the rate of shear distribution as given in eqn (28a). Specifically,
flow that would occur at the interface of the two
beams if they were bonded together. If eqns (28a,b)
are utilized in the rate version of eqn (I 7) (which can
be obtained simply by replacing u,,,,,$ F and u’ by
ti,,,.f: P and k) then it is found that ti,, is identically for O<.u<.f (35a)
zero. Thus, the initial value of u,,, (which is generally
.x
zero) and its value at each load reversal are main-
tained as long as eqns (28a,b) apply. The effective
rigidity of the beams corresponding to this deforma-
f=f”+II,P(n*-n”‘)
( >
l--
/

for .U< .Y<f. (35b)

tion behavior can be shown to be EI,,,,, =
E(2I + Ah’/2), which is that of the two beams
Equation (35a) may be solved for S// to reveal
bonded together.

1
The distributed friction force will reach its limiting + co
value, given by eqn (15a). at x = 0 before the concen- f&L M‘ +a
lj/P [ 2(M’- MN) (IV - M”)
trated friction force reaches its limit, since the latter
simply remains constant during this time. Consider f”l \=o
then, that eqns (28a,b) are applied at the Nth load + $/(w _ &Q’ (36)
reversal and over the interval of time in which f
changes fromfV to its limiting value, designated as,f;Y. Equation (36) is valid for w 2 w;“. When < wr, then
Thus, 2 = 0. The rate of the distributed friction now is given
by the time derivative of eqn (34):

,f;“=f”+ “fdr (294

s I’
1:
F,; zz FN + (0) dt = F”. (29b)
s I\ +$P(M’-G)[($_ ,I;. (37)

No generality is lost if it is assumed that i is constant,

so eqns (29a,b) become Obtaining k/t by differentiating eqn (36) and substi-
tuting into eqn (37) yields:
,f;“=f”+$e(w;“-MJN) l-3 (30a)
( >

F;Y=FN (3Ob)
+;)+$(, +)o)]. (38)
n,;” = )p + k(fy - r”).
(31)
 Interfacial friction effects on the mechanics of stacked beams 445

Equations (34)-(38) will govern the distributed In general, loading will continue beyond wf.
friction force until the next load reversal. Designating the load at which the next load reversal
In order to determine the rate of F during this occurs as w;” ( = w N+’ ), the concentrated friction will
portion of the loading, appeal is made once again to at that time be
the complementary virtual work principle as stated in
eqn (27). The distributed friction, f, already having
(45)
been determined, the virtual force, ST,, is simply 6F.
This being so, 6F may be factored out of the integral
and the integration performed to give in which the rate of concentrated friction is simply

Thus,
+&(l -(1 -;)‘)]++F=O, (39)

FN=gw’.
3
from which, for arbitrary 6F, it follows that 2 ’

4. LOAD/DEFLECTION BEHAVIOR

These equations form the basis for a computational

procedure to determine, for example, the
load/deflection curves for any prescribed history of
uniform distributed loading. Consider a loading
This rate of concentrated friction force will exist until history in which loading begins at w = 0 and then
F reaches its limiting value given by eqn (18b). The cycles between w = k d. Figure 3 shows the resulting
time at which the limiting value is reached is desig- load/deflection curve, where the deflection is of any
nated tt. Thus, cross-section of the beams, e.g. at the midspan.
Loading begins at N = 0. At point t;” ( = ty) the
distributed friction reaches its limiting value at x = 0
(41) and the concentrated friction begins to build. Load-
ing continues to point t,” (= t$ at which the concen-
with Fr = 0 and P given by eqn (40). The integrand trated friction has reached its limiting value. Loading
is somewhat involved but it can be integrated analyt- continues until the maximum applied load is reached
ically to yield at N = 1. The loading reverses and the distributed
friction is once again sufficient to prevent further
w2 relative motion between the beams. This continues
f+
( >
l -*
4+/
(ty- t;“) until the load reduces to the next point designated as
t;” ( = tf) at which time the distributed friction has

1
L once again reached its limiting value at x = 0 (this
g’(tzN) s3(t;Y)
+(j(lj,# (w;_w”)‘-(w~_i+‘h.)2 (42) time the friction is acting in the direction opposite to

wN+
ti(t
-P)
[

g(t)
=P
( 2
_t co
>
-f”l r=O. (43)
l.O-

Recognizing that tf - t;Y= (WY- wr)/tip, eqn (42)

0.5-
may be substituted into eqn (41) to produce a non-
linear equation to solve for WY,

-PCw;(wy - wN) $
f
o-
2

-0.5-

I I
-I 0 -0.5 0 0.5 1.0

Fig. 3. Typical load/deflection curve.

446 C. W. SPRINGFIELD, JR and A. D. JOSHI

I 5
r (a)
sponding to 1 = ty, ti and tt ( = t I). In Fig. 4b are
shown the distributions associated with unloading,
t = t’, tt, t: and t: (= f2), as well as the distribution
which exists when w has been unloaded completely.
Finally, in Fig. 4c are shown the distributions off
when loading again reverses and t = t2, ti, t: and t:,
the distribution corresponding to w = 0 being shown
also. It is seen that Fig. 4c is the mirror image of
Fig. 4b. In these it is also seen that each plot offhas
a discontinuity at a certain value of X. This value is
the maximum value that 2 reaches during loading
to a given G. For beam cross-sections in the region
.U< x < e the friction is simply the shearflow which
would occur at the beam interface if the two were,
in fact, one.

5. COMPUTATIONALPROCEDUREFOR
LOAD/DEFLECTION
CURVES
The lateral deflection of any cross-section of the
beams is computed by accumulating the increments
of deflection for each loading increment. Thus,

In eqn (48) ti is obtained from eqn (11) by replacing,

j; F and w by f, P and ci and by utilizing the
appropriate expressions for f and p. Furthermore,
-’ 5010 because bc is taken as a constant over the loading
history the ‘time’ integral of eqn (48), which provides
x/l
the increment of L’, may be replaced by a ‘load’
I 5
r Cc) integral:

The expressions
s1%:&
-
,,; , dH
dw.

for dr/dir (which are ti/ti) for each

(49)

- f loading increment are:

,($+4

-’ 50---10
X/l
Fig. 4. (a) Friction distribution before first load reversal; (b)
friction distribution between first and second load reversals;
(c) friction distribution between second and third load
reversals.

that which it had at t’!), so once again the concen-

trated friction begins to build (also in the direction
which is opposite of that before). At tt ( = 1:) the
concentrated friction has reached its limiting
value, and loading continues until w = - Wat N = 2.
Loading again reverses with the behavior of the
friction forces following the pattern which has been
explained. +(Yz(,-;)-~)(;-~)‘],
Figure 4a-c shows the distribution off during this
loading. In Fig. 4a are shown the distributions corre- w;” + w + w; (50b)
 Interfacial friction effects cm the mechanics of stacked beams 447

dP t4 number of load reversals required to describe the

dn
-=%z
Equations (50a,b,c) are seen to be functions of x
and IV(recall from eqn (36) that .2/t is a function of
w). Therefore, computation of the increments of u at
a particular cross-section becomes a matter of sub-
stituting eqns (5Oa-c) into eqn (49) and integrating
between the appropriate limits. This is a trivial
exercise when dtl/dtt* is given by eqn (SOa), but
otherwise the integral must be performed numeri-
cally.
The computational algorithm for the load/
deflection curve is given in Fig. 5. For the most part
this figure is self-explanatory. However, it should be
noted that in the first block N,,, is the maximum
loading history and N = 0 corresponds to w = 0.
Also, in the second block the cross-section(s) at which
the defiection is desired is (are) identified by the x
coordinate.
The contribution of F to the deformation of the
beams is, in fact, very small compared to that of J
This can be seen from eqns (18a,b) if it is realized that
for most damping applications Co/w will be very
large. Consequently, essentially the same load/
deformation behavior will be computed if F is simply
set equal to zero and blocks six and seven are omitted
from the algorithm. This is a computationally
desirable thing to do because bfock six involves
finding the proper root of a nonlinear equation which
adds to the computation time for each load reversal.
6. DISSIPATED ENERGY
The hysteresis loop of a cross-section of the beams,
such as is illustrated in Fig. 3, represents the deriva-
tive of the dissipated energy per loading cycle with
respect to cross-section, i.e. with respect to X. Thus,
if hysteresis loop area were known as a function of x,
say A(X), then the dissipated energy would be ob-
tained by integrating A(x) over the length of the
beam. A typical A(x) for the uniformly loaded
stacked beams is shown in Fig. 6. Examination of

I. Input , h,I,A,E,p, Co..N,,,.WN. (N=ItoN,,,)and

compute I/J =A/~/(41 t Ah’)

I
2. Begin loop on values of x to be used and initialize
- v(x)=0

I
Begin loop on load reversals (N= 0 to Mm,1

1
4. Calculate w: using eqn (33)
I
1
5. Calculate Av from eqns (5Oa and 49) and update Y (x1
1

6, Calcutate w,” using eqn (44)

I
7. Calculate Av from eqns (50b and 49) and update V(X)

I
8. Calculate Av from eqns (50~ and 49) and update V(X)
I

I
9. End of both loops

Fig. 5. Computation algorithm for load/deflection curves.

448 C. W. SPRINGFIELD, JR and A. D.
I o-
0.6 -
Fig. 6. Typical hysteresis loop area variation with x
eqns (50a-c) shows that it will be a fourth
polynomial; i.e.
A(x) = [a+ + u$ + a$ + &x4].
order
(51)
The coefficients in this equation may be obtained
simply by choosing four ordered pairs of x and A(x)
distributed over the half-span of the beams to provide
four equations to solve for a,, a*, u, and u4. Once the
hysteresis loop areas are established for four cross-
sections, then it is a simple matter to fit the fourth
order polynomial to them. Then the dissipated energy
per cycle is simply given by
7. PARAMETER STUDY
The stacked beam problems being investigated here
may be characterized by the dimensionless parame-
ters p, h/2d, Co/G and $h. The coefficient of friction,
the beam depth-to-span ratio and the clamping pres-
sure-to-maximum applied load ratio need no elabora-
tion, but the quantity tjh does. The definition of $ is
(53)
where Q,,, is the first moment of the area of one
beam about the beams’ interface and I,,. is the
moment of inertia of the cross-section if the beams
were perfectly bonded together. Therefore, $ is seen
to be a property of the beam cross-sections having
dimensions of l/length and being related to the
interfacial shear flow. Multiplying both sides of eqn
(53) by h provides the nondimensional quantity
(54)
JOSHI
!p=o.so qsO.82
I!==!”
u u,u t-szh
JI=O.83 q=o.ss
Fig. 7. The cl/h parameter for various cross-sections.
with r being the radius of gyration of one beam. The
ratio r/h is a constant for a given cross-sectional
shape (circle, rectangle, triangle, etc.). Thus, an inves-
tigation of the effect of various $h values on the
load/deformation behavior is an investigation of the
importance of the cross-sectional shape of the beams.
Examination of eqn (54) reveals that when
2r/h -B I, Ii/h -+ 0.5 and when 2r/h -B 0, Ii/h -+ 1.O. The
former corresponds to maximizing the I/A ratio of
the beam cross-section, such as is attempted by the
common wide flange sections, while the latter repre-
sents a minimizing of I/A. For wide flange sections
t+bhis typically on the order of 0.6. Cruciform shapes
give minimum radii of gyration. If both legs have
equal dimensions then Jlh = 0.86. Higher values may
be obtained if the horizontal leg is longer than the
vertical and also if the thickness of the vertical leg is
decreased. Several example shapes and their corre-
sponding Ii/h values are given in Fig. 7.
To investigate the effects of Ii/h on load/
deformation behavior and energy dissipation, several
values of $h were used to compute the load versus
midspan deflection for cyclic loading between + D for
beams having p = 0.05, h/2/ = 0.10 and Co/G =
10.5. These are displayed in Fig. 8a-e. The deflection
has been normalized by 3 which is the midspan
deflection which would occur if the beam interface
were frictionless. The maximum deflection is
s/F = 0.81 for all values of tjih. Surprisingly, then,
Ii/h has no effect on the maximum deflection. Com-
parison of the hysteresis loop areas, however, shows
a significant increase in area as $h is varied over its
range, Thus, if in a particular situation it is desirable
to minimize the dissipated energy, wide flange type
 lnterfacial friction effects on the mechanics of stacked beams 449

(d)

Fig. 8. (a) Load/deflection curve for $h = 0.5; (b) load/deflection curve for $h = 0.6; (c) load/deflection
curve for Ii/h = 0.7; (d) load/deflection curve for Ii/h = 0.8; (e) load/deflection curve for $h = 0.9.

sections should be used, whereas if the goal is maxi-
mum damping in the system a cruciform shape would
be best.
It seems strange that different beam cross-sectional
geometries cause different amounts of energy loss yet
produce the same maximum deflection at their
midspans. The answer to this is that it is only at their
midspan that their deflections are the same-not their
entire deflection curves. The differing $h values pro-
duce differing friction distributions, thus yielding
different deflection curves. A comparison of Fig. 8a
and e illustrates this most clearly. It is seen that the
higher Ii/h value (Fig. 8e) causes a higher stiffness for
the first loading increment. But this higher tjh value
also causes the f,,, value to be reached at lower
loading than occurs for the lower tjh value. Thus, for
450 C. W. SPRINGFIELD, JR and A.D. JOSHI

I.Or

05-
Co/K=21

F o-
f

-05-

1
-I 0 -05 0 05 IO

I o-

05-

'\‘ o-
f

-0.5-

I I
-I 0 -0.5 0 05 I.0

S/6
Fig. 9. (a) Load/deflection curve for Co/@ = 0; (b) load/deflection curve for Co/Z = 10; (c) load/deflection
curve for Co/a = 21; (d) load/deflection curve for Co/t? = 50; (e) load/deflection curve for Co/Z = 90.

the higher r//h value more of the loading occurs while
the effective stiffness is at its minimum. The result is
that the maximum midspan deflections are the same,
but the corresponding hysteresis loop areas are not.
The effect of clamping load on the energy dissipa-
tion capability was investigated by varying the Co/l?,
ratio for a configuration in which p = 0.05, h/2/ =
0.10 and t,bh = 0.75. Figure 9a-e shows load versus
midspan deflection curves for the range of CO/~?.
ratios. In Fig. 9a it is seen that with no clamping load
there is very little energy dissipation, and the appar-
ent flexural rigidity is approximately El,,,,” ( = 2EI).
In Fig. 9e the clamping load was large enough to
preclude any slipping between the beams at all, so no
energy is dissipated and the flexural rigidity is El,,,,,.
Figure 9c shows the largest hysteresis loop area of
 lnterfacial friction effects on the mechanics of stacked beams 451

I 50 presented. This procedure allows for the determina-

I I h
rl is W 55 =si tion of the energy loss due to friction for cyclic
loading. Because it is an incremental procedure it can
easily be made to distinguish between static and
sliding friction and to treat other variations in the
friction coefficient, such as those known to result
from wear, temperature variation, etc.
The derivations presented should provide clear
guidance in the development of equations which
govern multiple layers of slipping beams, dissimilar
- qh=0.6
beams, or different loading and boundary conditions.
0 25 Also, a logical extension of this work would be to the
I treatment of dynamic beam problems. This would
0
r I
50
I
100
I
150
I
200
I
250
I
300
require not only the addition of inertia terms in the
CO/i? equilibrium equations, but also the treatment of
Fig. IO. Optimum damping Co/M’ ratios.
multiple discontinuities in the friction distributions.
It was discovered that the cross-section parameter,
$h, while having no effect on the midspan deflection,
any of the conditions represented in this set of figures, influenced the amount of energy dissipated by the
so it is clear that the computational procedure used interfacial friction appreciably. Specifically, the
here also predicts an optimum damping Co/W ratio amount of energy dissipated during cyclic loading
for a given set of beam conditions. was found to increase as the radius of gyration of the
Figure IO shows plots of dissipated energy versus beams decreased. Thus, beams with small r/h ratios
Co/+? for three different values of h/2! and two values would be most effective in damping or other energy
of Jlh corresponding to rectangular cross-sections and dissipation applications.
wide flange cross-sections. The dissipated energy has
REFERENCES
been normalized by the strain energy associated with
loading the beams to w = G with p = 0. The optimum I. T. H. H. Pian and F. C. Hallowell Jr, Structural
damping Co/M’is seen to be a decreasing function of damping in a simple built-up beam. Proc. First National
h/2/ with the optimum values being affected only Congress of Applied Mech., pp. 97-102 (1951).
2. T. H. H. Pian. Structural damping of a simple built-up
slightly by Ii/h. The figure indicates that the rectangu-
beam with riveted joints in bending. J. uppl. Mech. 24,
lar shapes will dissipate approximately 11% more 35538 (1957).
energy than the wide flange shapes, and in general it 3. L. E. Goodman and J. H. Klumpp, Analysis of slip
may be concluded that larger Ii/h values produce more damping with reference to turbine-blade vibration.
energy dissipation. The peak value of 1.3 for the J. appl. Mech. 23, 42 1429 (1956).
4. S. W. E. Earles and F. S. Mansoori. Frictional damping
rectangular shapes can be compared directly with a
applied to a cantilever-beam structure: a theoretical and
value of 1.5 observed in Fig. 8 of Goodman and experimental response comparison. Inr. J. Mach. Tool
Klumpp [3]. The difference is, most likely, due to the Des. Res. 14, I I I-124 (1974).
fact that a concentrated applied load was used in [3] 5. C. F. Beards, The damping of structural vibration by
controlled interfacial slip in joints. J. V&r. Acousl. 105,
while a distributed loading is treated here. This
369-373 (1983).
probably also explains why in their work the opti- 6. C-H. Menq and J. H. Griffin, A comparison of transient
mum clamping pressure is approximately half the and steady state finite element analysis of the forced
pressure necessary to prevent slipping whereas in this response of a frictionally damped beam. J. Vibr. Acousr.
work the optimum is 3 I % of the slipping prevention Srr. Rel. Des. 107. 19-25 (19851.
I. J. R. Goodman, Layered wood’systems with interlayer
value.
slip. Wood Sci. l/3, 148-158 (1969).
8. R. Y. ltani and F. A. Brito, Layered beam systems with
8. CONCLUSIONS interlayer slip. J. .FIW~I. Dir., ASCE 24/STIO,
159551609 (1978).
A procedure for computing the load/deflection of 9. H. Suzuki and T.-Y P. Chang, Bending of laminated
cantilever beams with interlayer slip. J. sfruct. Dir.,
two stacked beams, simply supported, subjected to
AXE 105iST3, 269-28 I (1979).
varying uniform distributed loading and having Cou- 10. H. Murakami, A laminated beam theory with interlayer
lomb friction active on their interface has been slip. J. appl. Med. 51, 551-559 (1984).