Engineering with Computers

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-023-01799-7

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Physics‑informed neural network for bending and free vibration

analysis of three‑dimensional functionally graded porous beam
resting on elastic foundation
Ali Fallah1,3 · Mohammad Mohammadi Aghdam2

Received: 10 May 2022 / Accepted: 17 February 2023

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

Abstract
This study investigates the application of physics-informed neural networks (PINN) for bending and free vibration analysis of
three-dimensional functionally graded (TDFG) porous beams. The beam material properties are assumed to vary continuously
in three dimensions according to an arbitrary function. The governing equations of motion are obtained using Hamilton's
principle and solved by a PINN computational approach. The beam deflection is approximated with a deep feedforward
neural network which its input is the spatial coordinate. The network parameters are trained by minimizing a loss function
comprised of the governing differential equation and the boundary conditions. The beam natural frequency is considered as
an unknown parameter in the governing equation; thus, it has to be obtained by solving an inverse problem. This procedure
makes it possible to find higher modes’ natural frequencies, which is impossible according to the previous PINN methods.
A systematic procedure for tuning the network's hyperparameters is done based on the Taguchi design of the experiment
and the grey relational analysis. The PINN results are validated with analytical and numerical reference solutions. Effects
of material distribution, elastic foundation and porosity factor, and porosity distribution type on the bending behavior and
natural frequencies of TDFG beams are investigated.

Keywords Physics-informed neural network · Free vibration analysis · Three-dimensional functionally graded material ·
Porous beam

1 Introduction advantage of FGMs is that they can be designed to serve

Remarkable progress in material engineering resulted in
the emergence of a new type of nonhomogeneous materi-
als called Functionally Graded Materials (FGMs), whose
mechanical properties continuously vary throughout the
domain [1]. This continuous variation diminishes the pos-
sibility of stress and strain concentration which is very com-
mon in conventional laminated composites [2]. One more
* Ali Fallah
ali.fallah@sabanciuniv.edu; ali.fallah.66@gmail.com
1 Most of the available researches are focused on function-
Integrated Manufacturing Technologies Research
and Application Center, Sabanci University, Istanbul 34906,
Turkey
2
Mechanical Engineering Department, AmirKabir University
of Technology, Tehran 15875‑4413, Iran
3
Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Sabanci
University, Istanbul 34956, Turkey
specific purposes depending on the served condition; for
example, they can be generated to resist high temperature
and corrosion [3, 4]. FGMs also play an essential role in var-
ious engineering fields and applications aerospace, marine,
and automotive industries [5, 6].
Owing to the huge usage of beams in a wide variety of
fields, such as civil, marine, military, and aeronautical indus-
tries, with developing consumer demand [7], it is crucial
to investigate the mechanical behavior of beams under the
influence of different parameters. Several studies can be
found in the literature about the mechanical analysis of FG
beams, for instance [8–10].
ally graded (FG) beams with properties varying through
thickness [11]. However, FG structures with material prop-
erties varying in two or three dimensions have more effective
performances than conventional one-directional FG struc-
tures, because their material properties can be tailored in
three/two different directions to achieve the desired goal.

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

Recently, mechanical behavior of FG beams with material
properties varying in three dimensions, i.e., TDFG beams,
has received the researcher's attention. For example, Hadi
et al. [12] studied free vibration analysis of TDFG nano-
beams. They extracted the governing equation based on
the Euler–Bernoulli, and nonlocal-strain gradient theories.
They used the generalized differential quadrature method
(GDQM) to solve the governing equations. Tang et al. [13]
studied the large amplitude free vibration and buckling of
TDFG beams. They have combined the GDQM with an
iterative method to solve the governing equations.
Moreover, porosity is an unavoidable factor that appears
during the manufacturing process and remarkably affects
the mechanical properties of FG structures. Hence, the
importance of porosity on the behavior of FG beams has
taken researchers' attention; for instance, Zghal et al. [14]
presented the effect of even and uneven porosity on bending
static analysis of FG porous beams. They concluded that
the porosity parameter is a decisive factor that must be con-
sidered when producing a new structure. Additionally, they
mentioned that the volume fraction of porosity is another
effective parameter on the behavior and proficiency of FG
porous beams. Some studies in the literature considered the
effect of porosity on the mechanical behavior of one-dimen-
sional or two-dimensional FG beams, for instance [15, 16].
However, with the authors' best knowledge, there is no study
in the literature about the mechanical behavior of TDFG
beams considering the porosity effects.
It is worth mentioning that it is not easy, if not impossi-
ble, to find a closed-form solution for the governing equation
of motion of TDFG porous beam because they are differen-
tial equation with variable coefficients. Thus, the application
of different numerical techniques such as GDQM [17], finite
difference method [18], and finite element method [19] is
mandatory for the solution of TDFG governing equations.
On the other hand, in recent years, neural networks
and especially deep learning have played an essential role
in numerous applications, such as image processing [20],
agriculture [21], drug discovery [22], civil engineering
[23], natural language processing [24]. In recent years, neu-
ral networks have been used in different fields of engineer-
ing such as material science [25], fluid mechanics [26], and
fault detection and condition monitoring [27, 28]. In the
mentioned studies, a data-driven approach is used, which
means that the model parameters are trained by minimiz-
ing the norm of deviation of the network prediction from
the available true data (training data) [29, 30]. Although
the data-driven approach showed an outstanding perfor-
mance in the different problems in the field of engineering,
it does not consider the underlying physics of the problem,
and it needs a large enough database as training data. Most
recently, a class of neural networks that can consider the
underlying physics of the problem was introduced which
13
Engineering with Computers
are called Physics-Informed Neural Networks (PINN) [30,
31]. In PINN, solution of governing equation which is either
ordinary differential equation (ODE) or partial differential
equation (PDE), is approximated by a neural network. The
network parameters are obtained by minimizing a loss
function that includes the governing equation and the cor-
responding boundary and initial conditions. Until now, the
PINN has been successfully employed for the solution of
different well-known PDEs and ODEs such as Burger's equa-
tion, Korteweg–de Vries equation, Navier–Stokes equation
[30], Cahn–Hilliard and Allen–Cahn equation [32], and dif-
fusion equation [29]. Successful implementation of PINN in
the fields like fluid dynamics and mass and heat transfer has
attracted researchers from other engineering fields such as
solid and structural mechanics. For instance, Haghighat et al.
[33] employed PINN to solve two-dimensional linear elastic-
ity problems. Their results show a good agreement with the
finite element solutions. Wu et al. [34] employed PINN to
solve the elastoplasticity problem in a heterogeneous media
subjected to random cyclic and non-proportional loading
paths. Nguyen-Thanh et al. [35] employed PINN for large
deformation analysis of hyperelastic materials. Samaniego
et al. [36] combined the PINN and energy approach for solv-
ing governing PDEs in solid mechanics. Zhuang et al. [37]
also employed the energy-based PINN method for bending,
vibration, and buckling analysis of Kirchhoff plates. Li et al.
[38] employed PINN for bending and buckling analysis of
Kirchhoff plates. They compared the PDE-based and energy-
based loss functions. Their result showed that PINN is appli-
cable for the solution of higher order ODEs and PDEs that
governs structural elements like beams and plates and the
PINN predictions were in good agreement with FE results.
They also concluded that the energy-based loss function has
advantage in terms of the simplicity of hyperparameter tun-
ing and computational efficiency. However, the approaches
proposed by Zhuang et al. [37] and Li et. al. [38] can only
predict the fundamental natural frequency and first critical
buckling load and it is not possible to find the higher modes
frequencies and buckling loads using these methods. This is
a critical disadvantage for these methods which decreases
their applicability for free vibration and buckling analysis.
Besides that, the differential equation solved in these studies
was linear ODEs/PDEs with constant variable.
In this study, the bending and free vibration analysis of the
TDFG porous beams resting on a Winkler-Pasternak founda-
tion is performed using the physics-informed neural network.
The governing equation, which is a variable coefficient ODE
and the corresponding boundary conditions are obtained using
Hamilton's principle. Then, the beam deflection is approxi-
mated with a deep feedforward neural network. The network
parameters are trained by minimizing a loss function com-
prised of the governing ODE and the boundary conditions. For
the first time in this study, a systematic procedure for tuning
Engineering with Computers

[ ) n2 ]
the network hyperparameter is presented. To do that, Taguchi's (
2z + h
)n2 (
2z + h
design of the experiment method is combined with the GRA 𝛾P (z) = PC + PM 1− , (4)
2h 2h
to find the optimum hyperparameter of neural network. The
PINN predictions are compared and validated with available where 𝛽 , n1 and n2 denotes the FG index in the axial and
analytical or numerical solutions. To this end, convergence transverse directions, respectively. PM and PC stands for
and accuracy of PINN prediction for deflection and natural material properties of metal and ceramic phases, respec-
frequencies of TDFG porous beam with different boundary tively, and 𝜃 is also a model constant [12]. In order to
conditions are investigated. In the presented approach, the consider the porosity effects on the FG beam material prop-
beam's natural frequency is considered an unknown variable erties, the Eq. (4) needs be modified as [39]:
to be determined by solving an inverse problem. Results show ( ) [ ( ) ]
present PINN approach can predict both fundamental and 2z + h n2 2z + h n2
𝛾P (z) = PC + PM 1 − − Ppor (z),
higher natural frequencies and vibration mode shapes which 2h 2h
is not possible using the methods proposed in previous studies. (5)
Then, the effects of material distribution, porosity level, and where Ppor (z) is function that describe how the porosity is
distribution on the TDFG porous beam deflection and natural distributed in the TDFG beam. There are some possible dis-
frequencies are presented. tribution patterns for the porosity inside the beam as [39,
40]:
2 Governing equations 𝛼( )
Uniformdistribution ∶ Ppor (z) =
2
Pm + Pc , (6.1)
Consider a straight TDFG porous beam with rectangular cross-
section defined in Cartesian coordinate with length in L in x 𝛼( )( z )
direction, width b in y direction, and thickness h in z direction X − shapeddistribution ∶ Ppor (z) =
2
Pm + Pc 2 ,
h
resting on a Winkler–Pasternak foundation as shown in Fig. 1. (6.2)
The material properties of the TDFG beam, i.e., Young's ( )
𝛼( ) |z|
modulus E(x, y, z) and density 𝜌(x, y, z) vary in three dimen- O − shapeddistribution ∶ Ppor (z) = P + Pc 1 − 2 ,
2 m h
sions, i.e., in x, y and z directions according to any arbitrary
(6.3)
function as:
𝛼(
(
) 1 z)
V − shapeddistribution ∶ Ppor (z) = Pm + Pc + ,
P(x, y, z) = 𝜇(x)𝜂(y)𝛾P (z), (1) 2 2 h
(6.4)
where P is the desired material properties and 𝜇(x), 𝜂(y) and
𝛼( ) ( 𝜋 ( z 1 ))
𝛾P (z) are arbitrary functions which are considered to be as u − shapeddistribution ∶ Ppor (z) = Pm + Pc cos − ,
2 2 h 2
[12]: (6.5)
𝛼( ) ( 𝜋 ( z 1 ))
𝜇(x) = e𝛽x , (2) n − shapeddistribution ∶ Ppor (z) = Pm + Pc cos + ,
2 2 h 2
[ (6.6)
(y ) n1 (y )n1 ]
1 1 where 𝛼 is the porosity factor. The governing equation of
𝜂(y) = + +𝜃 1− + , (3)
b 2 b 2 TDFG porous beam resting on an elastic foundation is
obtained as:
( )( )
𝜕2w d𝜇 𝜕 3 w 𝜕4 w 𝜕2w B211 d2 𝜇 𝜕 2 w d𝜇 𝜕 3 w 𝜕4w
I0 𝜇(x) 2 − I2 − I 2 𝜇(x) + Kw w + Kg − − D11 + 2 + 𝜇(x) = q, (7)
𝜕t dx 𝜕t2 𝜕x 𝜕t2 𝜕x2 𝜕x2 A11 dx2 𝜕x2 dx 𝜕x3 𝜕x4

where w and q are the beam deflection and the applied exter-
nal load, respectively. Moreover, A11 , B11 , D11 are the stiff-
ness coefficients and I0 , I2 are the inertia coefficients. All the
parameters definition and the governing equation derivation
process are explained in details in supplementary material. It
is worth mentioning that Eq. (7) is a linear differential equa-
tion with variable coefficients. There is no general closed-
form solution for this type of differential equation; thus, the
Fig. 1  The geometry of the beam on a Winkler–Pasternak foundation

13
 Engineering with Computers

application of numerical techniques for the solution of this 3 Basic theory of physics‑informed neural
equation is mandatory. Moreover, Eq. (7) is obtained without network (PINN)
any assumption for 𝜇(x), 𝜂(y) and 𝛾P (z), thus it is valid for
any arbitrary function considered for material distribution In this section, the general procedure of PINN for the solu-
of the FG beam. However, in the continuation of the study, tion of differential equations will be explained. A general
the material properties are assumed to vary according to form of the time-independent differential equation on the
the Eqs. (2), (3) and (4), thus the governing equation can domain Ω ∈ Rd which governs a wide range of problems
be rewritten as: in mathematics and engineering, can be considered as:
( ) 3 ( ) [( )2 ( ) 3 ]
𝜕2 w 𝛽 𝜕 w 𝜕 4
w 𝜕 2
w B211 𝛽 𝜕2 w 𝛽 𝜕 w 𝜕4 w
(8)
𝛽 𝛽 𝛽 𝛽
x x x x
I0 e L − I2 e L − I2 e L + Kw w + K g 2 − − D11 e L +2 + 4 = q.
𝜕t2 L 𝜕x𝜕t2 𝜕x2 𝜕t2 𝜕x A11 L 𝜕x2 L 𝜕x3 𝜕x

Furthermore, for simplicity of the parametric studies,

the following dimensionless variables are defined:
√
A10 K L3 Kg L I I A B D11 qL2
x h w
𝜁 = ,𝜂 = ,w = ,t =
t
, kw = w 2 , kg = , 𝜆0 = 0 , 𝜆2 = 0 2 , a1 = 11 , b1 = 11 , d1 = ,q = . (9)
L L h L I0 A10 h A10 h2 I10 I10 h A10 A10 h A10 h2 A10 h2

( )
Substituting these nondimensionalized parameters in 𝜕u 𝜕u 𝜕 2 u 𝜕2 u
Eq. (8) leads to the dimensionless form of governing equa- f x;u, ,…, ; ,…, ; … ;𝜆 = 0, x ∈ Ω.
𝜕x1 𝜕xd 𝜕x1 𝜕x1 𝜕x1 𝜕xd
tion and boundary conditions as: (14)
( ) [( )2 2 ( ) 3 ]
𝜕2 w 𝜕3 w 𝜕4 w 𝜕2 w 2 b1 𝛽 𝜕 w 𝛽 𝜕 w 𝜕4 w
𝜆0 e 𝛽𝜁 2 𝛽𝜁
− 𝜆2 𝜂 𝛽e − 𝜆2 𝜂 e 2 𝛽𝜁
+ kg 2 − 𝜂 − d1 e𝛽𝜁
+2 + 4 + Kw w = q, (10)
𝜕t
2
𝜕𝜁𝜕t
2
𝜕𝜁 2 𝜕t
2 𝜕𝜁 a1 L 𝜕𝜁 2 L 𝜕𝜁 3 𝜕𝜁

for Clamped (C) end: in which u(x1 , x2 , … , xd ) and xi are the solution function and
( ) general spatial coordinates, respectively. Moreover, 𝜆 is an
( ) 𝜕w 𝜁b , t unknown parameter that can be calculated by solution of an
w 𝜁b , t = = 0;𝜁b = 0, 1, (11)
𝜕𝜁 inverse problem. The operator f is a general operator which
can be linear or nonlinear, and there is no restriction on the
for simply supported (S) end:
type of operator f . The boundary condition of the problem
( ) can be considered in general form as:
( ) 𝜕 2 w 𝜁b , t
w 𝜁b , t = = 0;𝜁b = 0, 1, (12) ( )
𝜕𝜁 2 𝜕u 𝜕u 𝜕 2 u 𝜕2 u
B x;u, ,…, ; ,…, ; … ;𝜆 = 0on𝜕Ω,
𝜕x1 𝜕xd 𝜕x1 𝜕x1 𝜕x1 𝜕xd
for free (F) end:
(15)
( ) ( )
𝜕 2 w 𝜁b , t 𝜕 3 w 𝜁b , t where B is a general operator and 𝜕Ω is the domain's
= = 0;𝜁b = 0, 1. (13)
𝜕𝜁 2 𝜕𝜁 3 boundary.
Based on the universal approximation theorem, a feedfor-
The TDFG beam boundary conditions are specified by ward neural network with one single hidden layer is enough
letter symbols, for example, CC means a beam clamped to approximate any continuous function [41]. For complex
(C) at 𝜁 = 0 and 𝜁 = 1 and CF means a beam with clamped and nonlinear functions, the number of neurons of that hid-
support at 𝜁 = 0 and free at 𝜁 = 1. den layer should be increased to capture the whole feature

13
Engineering with Computers

of the considered function. Another approach called deep 3.1 Training procedure

neural network (DNN) uses more hidden layers with fewer
neurons instead of just one hidden layer with a high number For the training of the model, a set of training points ( xt )
of neurons [37, 42]. Thus, it is possible to construct PINN which included some points inside the domain ( xd ) and
i.e., ̂
u(x;W, b) as a surrogate of the unknown function u(x) as: some points on the boundary ( xb ) is needed. These points
can be selected randomly or using a specified distribution
u(x;W, b) = NL (x;W, b) ∶ ℝdin → ℝdout .
u(x) ≅ ̂ (16) inside the domain or boundary. Then, to train the model
where N is an L-layer DNN (of L − 1 hidden layer) with parameters, i.e., W, b considering the governing PDE/ODE
input vector x, output vector u, and W, b are network param- (Eq. (14)) and the corresponding boundary conditions
eters which are called weight matrix and bias vector, respec- (Eq. (15)), the following mean squared error loss should
tively. The number of neurons in the input layer, output layer, be minimized in case of forward problems:
and ith hidden layer are designed as din, dout and Nni , respec- ( ) ( ) ( )
L xt ;W, b = 𝜔f Lf xd ;W, b + 𝜔b Lb xb ;W, b , (18)
tively. There are different types of DNN, such as feedforward
network, convolutional neural network, and recurrent neural where Lf and Lb are loss function corresponds to the govern-
network. Previous studies showed that a feedforward neural ing PDE/ODE and boundary conditions, respectively, and
network (FFNN) is suitable for the solution of most of PDEs/ they are defined as:
ODEs [43]. In the FFNN, the data for each layer is provided
by the previous layer using the following nested equation:
2
( ) 1 ∑ | ( 𝜕̂u )|
( ) Lf xd ;W, b = |f x ; , … , 𝜕̂u ; 𝜕2̂u , … , 𝜕2̂u ; … |
|x | | |
zi = 𝜎 i W i .zi−1 + bi , i = 1, … , L. (17) | d | x∈xd |
d 𝜕x
1 𝜕xd 𝜕x1 𝜕x1 𝜕x1 𝜕xd
|

In which z0 ≡ x and zL ≡ u, are the model's input and ( ) 1 ∑ | ( )|2

output, respectively. Moreover, the W i ∈ ℝNni ×Nni−1 and Lb xb ;W, b = |B ̂
|x | x∈xb |
u, x | .
| (19)
bi ∈ ℝNni are the weights matrix and biases vector of the ith | b|
layer, respectively. The 𝜎 is called the activation function, Moreover, 𝜔f and 𝜔b are the weights correspond to the
which relates the input and output of each layer. There is PDE and boundary condition losses, respectively. It is pos-
some possible choice for activation function, which are sible to use different weights for PDE and boundary condi-
all nonlinear function as logistic sigmoid, the hyperbolic tions; however, they are assumed to be equal in this study.
tangent, and the rectified linear unit [43]. The loss function presented in Eq. (19) is related to the
The next step is to calculate the required derivatives of forward problem; in the case of the inverse problem, there
the network outputs with respect to the network inputs. are some unknown parameters (𝜆) in the governing equation
Since the PINN's input parameters, i.e., spatial coordinates to be determined. To this end, extra information at some
in Cartesian coordinates, are physically meaningful, the points ( xi) inside of the domain or on the boundary is needed
differentiation of the network output with respect to the as:
input variables is also physically meaningful. In conven-
tional DNN, the network derivatives are taken with respect I(x;𝜆) = 0x ∈ xi . (20)
to the network parameters, i.e., weights and biases, dur-
Thus, the loss function for the inverse problem should be
ing the training procedure. Automatic differentiation (AD),
modified as:
also called algorithmic differentiation, can be employed
to differentiate PINN with respect to the input parame- ( ) ( ) ( )
L xt ;𝜃, 𝜆 = 𝜔f Lf xd , 𝜆;W, b + 𝜔b Lb xb ;W, b, 𝜆
ters. In recent years, AD has been integrated into differ- ( ) (21)
ent machine learning packages such as TensorFlow [44], + 𝜔i Li xi ;W, b, 𝜆 ,
PyTorch[45], Theano[46], and MXNet [47]. The next step
where the loss functions are defined as:
in PINN is to train the network parameters by minimizing
an appropriate loss function that considers the underlying
physics of the problem.

2
( ) 1 ∑ | ( 𝜕̂u )|
Lf xd ;W, b, 𝜆 = |f x ; , … , 𝜕̂u ; 𝜕2̂u , … , 𝜕2̂u ; … , 𝜆 | ,
|x | | |
| d | x∈xd |
d 𝜕x
1 𝜕xd 𝜕x1 𝜕x1 𝜕x1 𝜕xd
|

13

Fig. 2  Schematic of PINN framework for solution of governing PDE/ODEs
( ) 1 ∑ | ( ) |2
Lb xb ;W, b, 𝜆 = | B ̂
u, x, 𝜆 | ,
|x | x∈xb |
| b|
| the domain (ND) and on boundary, should be tuned carefully
( ) 1 ∑ |( ) |2
Li xi ;W, b, 𝜆 = |I ̂
|x | x∈xi |
u, x, 𝜆 | . (22)
|
| i|
The output of the training procedure is the model param-
eters that minimize the loss function. Figure 2 shows the
PINN algorithm for solution of forward and inverse ODE/
PDEs. The defined loss function is nonlinear and nonconvex
with respect to the model parameters; thus, it is preferred to
use a gradient-based optimizer like the Adam optimization
scheme for minimizing the loss function [48]. It should be
noted that in PINN despite conventional neural networks
who need a big set of data for training, only a small set
of input data which are the training point’s spatial coordi-
nates, are needed. It is not necessary to have any information
about the unknown function value at the training point, so
the PINN can be trained even for the problem that there is
no estimation for their solutions.
Since in PINN, a nonconvex optimization problem is
solved instead of solving a system of algebraic or differen-
tial equations which is common in conventional numerical
methods, there is no guarantee for unique solutions [43]. To
overcome this shortage, the model's hyperparameters, which
are the number of neurons in hidden layers ( Nni ), number
of hidden layers (NH), learning rate used in optimization
algorithm (LR), NN activation function (AFunc), number of
13
Engineering with Computers
training iterations (NI), and number of training points inside
[30]. The process of implementing PINN and the method
used to tune its network hyperparameters are outlined in the
following section..
3.2 PINN implementation
There are several available machine learning libraries
such as TensorFlow [44], PyTorch [45], Theano [46], and
MXNet [47]. Recently, researchers in the field of PINN
have developed some software packages for implementa-
tion of the PINN using these libraries, such as DeepXDE
[43], SimNet [49], PyDEns [50], NeuroDiffEq [51], and
SciANN [52]. Since Python is the main programming lan-
guage used in machine learning and neural networks, most
of the software are developed based on Python. Some of
this software like DeepXDE can be used as a solver, i.e., the
user needs to define the problem, and then the software will
handle the whole solution procedure. However, some others
like SciANN are just wrapper, and the user needs to imple-
ment all the steps needed to define and solve the problem by
themselves. In this study, DeepXDE as an easy-to-use PINN
software package is employed to solve the governing equa-
tion by PINN method. DeepXDE can solve different types of
differential equations like ODEs, PDEs, integrodifferential
equations, and fractional PDEs [43]. Based on the construc-
tive solid geometry technique, DeepXDE can be used for
Engineering with Computers

solution of differential equation in complex domain [53]. It should be mentioned that the analytical expressions for
More details about the DeepXDE package and how to imple- the shape modes of isotropic structures like beams, plates, and
ment the method can be found in [43]. shells with different boundary conditions can be found easily
For the bending analysis of TDFG beams, the inertial in the continuous vibration textbooks, for instance [54]. Thus,
terms in Eq. (10) should be neglected; thus, the governing it is possible to implement the proposed method for vibration
equation becomes as: analysis of different structures. Moreover, as it can be seen
( ) [( )2 2 ( ) 3 ]
b1 𝛽 𝜕 w 𝛽 𝜕 w 𝜕 4w 𝜕2 w −
−𝜂 2 − d1 e𝛽𝜁 + 2 + + Kw w + kg =q. (23)
a1 L 𝜕𝜁 2 L 𝜕𝜁 3 𝜕𝜁 4 𝜕𝜁 2

Solution of Eq. (23) using PINN will lead to the TDFG form Eq. (27), it is possible to find the desired natural fre-
beam deflection under the applied external load. quency without any limitation, despite the previous researches
In the case of free vibration analysis, the external load is in the literature about application of PINN for vibration analy-
zero; thus, the governing equation will be as: sis that only can compute the first natural frequency.

( ) [( )2 2 ( ) 3 ]
𝜕2 w 𝜕3 w 𝜕4 w 𝜕2 w 2 b1 𝛽 𝜕 w 𝛽 𝜕 w 𝜕4 w
𝛽𝜁
𝜆0 e − 𝜆2 𝜂 𝛽e2 𝛽𝜁
− 𝜆2 𝜂 e2 𝛽𝜁
+ kg 2 − 𝜂 − d1 e𝛽𝜁
+2 + 4 + Kw w = 0. (24)
𝜕t
2
𝜕𝜁𝜕t
2
𝜕𝜁 2 𝜕t
2 𝜕𝜁 a1 L 𝜕𝜁 2 L 𝜕𝜁 3 𝜕𝜁

Due to the harmonic nature of the free vibration, the beam 3.3 PINN hyperparameters tuning procedure
deflection is assumed to be as:
( ) The model's hyperparameters should be tuned to have accu-
w 𝜁, t = w ̂ (𝜁)ei𝜔t , (25) rate and stable results. Generally, increasing the number of
hidden layers, the number of training points, and also the
in which 𝜔 and i are the √beam's natural frequency and training iterations will lead to an increase in the accuracy
the imaginary unit ( i = −1 ), respectively, and w
̂ (𝜁) is
of the results. However, it will increase the required com-
free vibration mode shape of the TDFG beam which is an
putational efforts and simulation time. Therefore, a trade-
unknown function of 𝜁 to be determined. Substitution of
off between accuracy and the computational cost should
Eq. (25) into Eq. (24) leads to:
( ) ( ) [( )2 2 ( ) 3 ]
𝜕̂
w 𝜕2w
̂ 𝜕2w
̂ 2 b1 𝛽 𝜕 ŵ 𝛽 𝜕 ŵ 𝜕4ŵ
−𝜔 e 2 𝛽𝜁
𝜆0 w
̂ − 𝜆2 𝜂 𝛽 2
− 𝜆2 𝜂 2 2 + kg 2 − 𝜂 − d1 e𝛽𝜁
+2 ̂ = 0. (26)
+ 4 + Kw w
𝜕𝜁 𝜕𝜁 𝜕𝜁 a1 L 𝜕𝜁 2 L 𝜕𝜁 3 𝜕𝜁

It should be noted that in this case, there are two be done, which is generally a multi-objective optimization
unknowns in the governing equation, i.e., w ̂ (𝜁) and 𝜔 , thus problem. In the previous studies, the model's hyperparam-
the problem is converted to an inverse problem and con- eters were arbitrarily chosen and determined through a trial-
sequently a set of extra information is needed based on and-error procedure or a pruning technique [37, 55, 56].
what explained in Sect. 3.1 and Eqs. (20–22). The isotropic In this study, the model's hyperparameters are selected for
beam's free vibration mode shapes can be employed to gen- the first time by a systematic multi-objective optimization
erate the required extra information needed for solution of
the inverse problem using PINN. To this end, a new set of
points ( xi ) in the domain is selected and the corresponding Table 1  Input parameters and their levels
( )
loss function i.e. Li xi ;W, b, 𝜆 is defined as mean squared Input parameters Symbol Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
error of the difference between the network prediction and
Number of training ND 10 40 70 100
the mode shape’s values at xi . For instance, for isotropic SS
points inside the
beam the nth mode shape’s function is wn (𝜁) = sin(n𝜋𝜁 ). domain
To find the nth natural frequency ( of TDFG ) beam with SS Number of hidden NH 1 2 3 4
boundary condition the loss Li xi ;W, b, 𝜆 is defined as: layers
Learning rate LR 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001
( ) 1 ∑ | 2
Li xi ;W, b, 𝜆 = ŵ (x;W, b, 𝜆) − wn (x)|| . (27) Number of iteration NI 10,000 40,000 70,000 100,000
|x | x∈xi |
| i| Activation function AFunc tanh Sigmoid – –

13
 Engineering with Computers

Table 2  L16 ­(44 ­23) Taguchi orthogonal experimental design that minimize all the output parameters, which is generally
Trial no ND NH LR NI AFunc
a multi-objective optimization process.
The Grey relational analysis is generally used to combine
1 10 1 0.1 10,000 tanh all the considered outputs into a single value that can be
2 10 2 0.01 40,000 tanh used as the single characteristic in optimization problems.
3 10 3 0.001 70,000 SIGMOID In order to use grey relational analysis, the data should be
4 10 4 0.0001 100,000 SIGMOID normalized in the range from 0 to 1 based on the optimiza-
5 40 1 0.01 70,000 SIGMOID tion goal. If the target value of the original sequence has the
6 40 2 0.1 100,000 SIGMOID characteristic of "the lower, the better", the normalization
7 40 3 0.0001 10,000 tanh should be as[57]:
8 40 4 0.001 40,000 tanh ( )
9 70 1 0.001 100,000 tanh max xi (k) − xi (k)
(28)
∗
xi (k) = ( ) ( ),
10 70 2 0.0001 70,000 tanh max xi (k) − min xi (k)
11 70 3 0.1 40,000 sigmoid
12 70 4 0.01 10,000 sigmoid where xi∗ (k) and xi (k) are the ith normalized and original out-
13 100 1 0.0001 40,000 sigmoid put, respectively. Here, there are three outputs and for each
14 100 2 0.001 10,000 sigmoid output there are 16 trials, thus i = 1, 2, 3 and k = 1, … 16. A
15 100 3 0.01 100,000 tanh grey relational coefficient (GRC) can be calculated as:
16 100 4 0.1 70,000 tanh
( ) Δ + 𝜖Δmax
GRC xi∗ (k), xr∗ (k) = min , (29)
Δri (k) + 𝜖Δmax
using Taguchi design of experiments together with grey rela- where xr∗ (k) is reference sequence, and Δri (k) represent the
tional analysis. The model hyperparameters are the number deviation sequence of xr∗ (k) and xi∗ (k), 𝜖 = 0.5 is distinguish-
of hidden layers (NH), learning rate (LR) used in optimiza- ing coefficient, and the other parameters are defined as[57]:
tion algorithm, number of training iterations (NI), number
of training points inside the domain (ND), and the network Δri (k) = ||xi∗ (k) − xr∗ (k)||,
activation function (AFunc). In this study, for NH, LR, NI
and ND four levels and for AFunc two levels are considered ( ( ))
Δmin = min min Δri (k) ,
as shown in Table 1. In order to cover all the combinations
of the design parameters, a total 512 = 4 × 4 × 4 × 4 × 2 runs ( ( ))
would be expected, which is a time-consuming process, and Δmax = max max Δri (k) . (30)
it needs a huge computational effort. Thus, Taguchi orthogo-
nal design is employed to design of experiment in a way that The reference sequence is considered to be the sequence
the influence of each parameter and the optimal combina- with maximum normalized value i.e. xr∗ (k) = 1. Then, the
tion can be investigated with fewer trials. Here, a L16 (­ 44 average grey relational grade (GRG) can be obtained as:
­23) Taguchi array is employed with 16 trials, as shown in ( ) 1∑ m
( )
Table 2. GRG xi∗ (k), xr∗ (k) = GRC xi∗ (k), xr∗ (k) , (31)
m i=1
Then, the PINN results for the considered trials will be
calculated and compared with a reference solution. Since the Where m is the number of outputs i.e. three. Then, the con-
governing equation is a differential equation with variable sidered trials are ranked based on their GRG values, and the
coefficients, it is not possible to find an analytical solution optimum parameters are considered to correspond to the trial
for it in the general form. However, for some special cases with the maximum GRG value.
such as isotropic beams, the governing differential equations
are linear ODEs which is possible to find an exact analytical
solution. Here the parameters of the model will be tuned
based on the bending of a ceramic (n1 = n2 = 𝛽 = 0, 𝜃 = 1) 4 Results and discussion
SS beam under uniform distributed load ( q = 0.1). In this
case, the results of the PINN are compared by the exact In this section, the linear bending and free vibrations behav-
solution. The output parameters are considered as the differ- ior of a TDFG porous beam resting on a Winkler–Pasternak
ence between the PINN prediction and the exact solution at foundation with different boundary conditions and porosity
the center of beam, loss function value, and the simulation distribution patterns is investigated using PINNs. Material
time. The optimization goal is to find the hyperparameters properties of the metal and ceramic phases of the TDFG

13
Engineering with Computers

Table 3  PINN simulation Trial no Maximum displacement Loss function value Time (s)
results for SS isotropic beam
PINN Exact Diff (%) Loss Log (loss)

1 − 0.2561 − 0.3783 32.30 3.91E−03 − 2.41 5.52

2 − 0.3605 − 0.3783 4.71 2.21E−03 − 2.66 31.18
3 − 0.378 − 0.3783 0.08 8.26E−06 − 5.08 73.91
4 − 0.3686 − 0.3783 2.56 2.58E−04 − 3.59 120.78
5 − 0.3696 − 0.3783 2.30 5.17E−04 − 3.29 43.48
6 − 0.3618 − 0.3783 4.36 1.32E−03 − 2.88 89.26
7 − 0.3699 − 0.3783 2.22 1.54E−03 − 2.81 11.34
8 − 0.3456 − 0.3783 8.64 5.12E−04 − 3.29 48.77
9 − 0.3709 − 0.3783 1.96 1.10E−03 − 2.96 61.58
10 − 0.3774 − 0.3783 0.24 8.10E−05 − 4.09 63.37
11 − 0.1947 − 0.3783 48.53 9.94E−03 − 2.00 49.31
12 − 0.3978 − 0.3783 5.15 1.45E−03 − 2.84 16.18
13 − 0.3394 − 0.3783 10.28 2.63E−03 − 2.58 22.50
14 − 0.3254 − 0.3783 13.98 2.87E−03 − 2.54 10.18
15 − 0.3354 − 0.3783 11.34 6.62E−04 − 3.18 113.06
16 − 0.1849 − 0.3783 51.12 9.47E−03 − 2.02 100.36

Table 4  Data normalization and Trial no Normalized Deviation sequence

Deviation sequence calculation
result Diff (%) Log (loss) Time Diff (%) Log (loss) Time

1 0.79 0.13 1.00 0.21 0.87 0.00

2 0.97 0.21 0.78 0.03 0.79 0.22
3 1.00 1.00 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.59
4 0.98 0.51 0.00 0.02 0.49 1.00
5 0.99 0.42 0.67 0.01 0.58 0.33
6 0.97 0.28 0.27 0.03 0.72 0.73
7 0.99 0.26 0.95 0.01 0.74 0.05
8 0.94 0.42 0.62 0.06 0.58 0.38
9 0.99 0.31 0.51 0.01 0.69 0.49
10 1.00 0.68 0.50 0.00 0.32 0.50
11 0.00 0.00 0.62 1.00 1.00 0.38
12 0.97 0.27 0.91 0.03 0.73 0.09
13 0.93 0.19 0.85 0.07 0.81 0.15
14 0.91 0.18 0.96 0.09 0.82 0.04
15 0.93 0.38 0.07 0.07 0.62 0.93
16 0.66 0.01 0.18 0.34 0.99 0.82

beams are Em = 207.8GPa,Ec = 322.3GPa , 𝜌m = 8166 m3 ,

Kg
and 𝜌c = 2370 m3 [11]. In all considered examples, the beam
Kg
dimensions are considered as L = 2m, b = h = 0.1m. Moreo-
ver, the number of neurons in each layer is considered to be
20, and since the problem domain is 1 dimensional, only 2
training points on the boundaries are considered, one for
each side. The training data inside the domain are also dis-
tributed uniformly.
As mentioned in Sect. 3.3, the model parameters are
tuned based on the results of SS beam bending. Results of
the PINN and exact solution (maximum deflection) for all
the trials are presented in Table 3. Besides the maximum
deflection, the value of loss function and the required time
for each trial are also presented. The difference between the
PINN prediction and exact solution together with loss func-
tion value (Log (Loss)) and simulation time are considered
as output variables. It is evident that the goal is to find opti-
mum hyperparameters to minimize all the outputs.
In Table 4, normalized outputs based on Eq. (28) and the
deviation sequence of the outputs are presented. The GRC
and GRG of the considered trials are presented in Table 5.

13
 Engineering with Computers

Table 5  Grey relational Trial no Input hyperparameters GRC​ GRG​ Rank

coefficient and grey relational
grade calculation and ranking of ND NH LR NI AFunc Diff (%) Log (loss) Time (s)
the considered trials
1 10 1 0.1 10,000 tanh 0.70 0.37 1.00 0.69 6
2 10 2 0.01 40,000 tanh 0.94 0.39 0.69 0.67 9
3 10 3 0.001 70,000 Sigmoid 1.00 1.00 0.46 0.82 1
4 10 4 0.0001 100,000 Sigmoid 0.97 0.51 0.33 0.60 12
5 40 1 0.01 70,000 Sigmoid 0.97 0.46 0.60 0.68 7
6 40 2 0.1 100,000 Sigmoid 0.95 0.41 0.41 0.59 13
7 40 3 0.0001 10,000 tanh 0.97 0.40 0.91 0.76 2
8 40 4 0.001 40,000 tanh 0.90 0.46 0.57 0.64 10
9 70 1 0.001 100,000 tanh 0.98 0.42 0.51 0.63 11
10 70 2 0.0001 70,000 tanh 1.00 0.61 0.50 0.70 5
11 70 3 0.1 40,000 Sigmoid 0.33 0.33 0.57 0.41 16
12 70 4 0.01 10,000 Sigmoid 0.94 0.41 0.84 0.73 3
13 100 1 0.0001 40,000 Sigmoid 0.88 0.38 0.77 0.68 8
14 100 2 0.001 10,000 Sigmoid 0.84 0.38 0.93 0.72 4
15 100 3 0.01 100,000 tanh 0.87 0.45 0.35 0.56 14
16 100 4 0.1 70,000 tanh 0.60 0.33 0.38 0.44 15

The bolded row is correspond to the trial with the highest GRG and the optimum hyperparameters for the
training network

(a) (b)

Fig. 3  a Deflection of isotropic beam with SS and CC boundary condition under uniform distributed load, b loss function value
( Kw = 0.1;Kg = 0.02;q = 0.1;𝛼 = 0.1)

Based on the GRG value, the third trial has the highest GRG
value; thus, the optimum hyperparameter of the neural net-
work model are obtained as ND = 10, NH = 3, LR = 0.001,
NI = 70,000 and AFunc = sigmoid. Now the PINN predic-
tions for bending and free vibration of beams against the
exact or numerical solution will be compared to check the
model's accuracy.
Figure 3 shows the isotropic beam deflection with both
SS and CC boundary conditions and the corresponding loss
function value. The PINN predictions for both boundary
conditions are in good agreement with the exact solution.
Moreover, the loss function value in both cases rapidly
decreases to less than ­10–4 after 20,000 iterations, which
means that the network converges to the final solution with
enough accuracy.
Figure 4 shows the deflection of CF beam under both
uniform load and endpoint load. Here, both boundary condi-
tions and the loading are more complex than in the previous
example. Again, an excellent agreement between the PINN
and the exact solution can be seen.
To check the PINN performance for the free vibra-
tion analysis of beams, the first three natural frequencies

13
Engineering with Computers

(a) (b)

q = 10), b loss
Fig. 4  a Deflection of isotropic beam with CF boundary condition under uniform distributed load ( q = 0.1) and end point load ( ̂
function value ( Kw = 0.05;Kg = 0.0;;𝛼 = 0.1)

Table 6  First and second natural frequency of isotropic beam with different boundary conditions ( Kg = 0.0;𝛼 = 0.1)
Boundary Kw 1st mode 2nd mode 3rd mode
condition
PINN Exact[54] Diff (%) PINN Exact[54] Diff (%) PINN Exact[54] Diff (%)

SS 0.0 0.357199 0.357756 0.16 1.426125 1.426640 0.04 3.228657 3.243186 0.45
0.1 0.754214 0.754796 0.08 1.573750 1.572999 0.05 3.268791 3.280232 0.35
CC 0.0 0.814490 0.813591 0.11 2.227825 2.227169 0.03 4.296866 4.317921 0.49
0.1 1.051538 1.050459 0.10 2.323883 2.323513 0.02 4.515905 4.555645 0.88
CF 0.0 0.126992 0.127591 0.47 0.792991 0.797511 0.57 2.058813 2.078372 0.95
0.1 0.676181 0.677491 0.19 1.035083 1.037996 0.28 2.357422 2.382175 1.05

(a) (b)

Fig. 5  a Convergence of first natural frequency, b convergence of second natural frequency of the isotropic beam with different boundary condi-
tions ( Kg = 0.0;𝛼 = 0.1)

13
 Engineering with Computers

(a) (b)

Fig. 6  Free vibration mode shapes of isotropic beam, a first mode, b second mode, and c third mode ( Kg = 0.0;𝛼 = 0.1)

of isotropic beams with SS, CC, and CF boundary condi-

Fig. 7  Loss function value for free vibration analysis of isotropic
beam ( Kg = 0.0;𝛼 = 0.1)
tions for different elastic foundation coefficient values are
presented in Table 6. The exact solution [54] is included
for comparison. As it can be seen, the maximum difference
between the PINN and exact solution is around 1% percent
which shows the PINN's predictions are accurate enough for
free vibration analysis of beams as well.
As mentioned before, in the PINN, the natural frequency
is obtained by solution of an inverse problem. Figure 5
shows the convergence of the unknown parameter, i.e., the
natural frequency for the first and second frequencies dur-
ing the training iterations. Obviously, for all considered
cases, the unknown variable converges to the final value
after 10,000 iterations, and it remains stable until the end of
the simulation. In all cases, the initial value for the natural

(a) (b)

Fig. 8  a Convergence of isotropic SS beam natural frequency for different function employed to create required extra information, b Vibration
shape modes of isotropic SS beam for different functions employed to create required extra information ( Kw = 0.0;Kg = 0.0;𝛼 = 0.1)

13
Engineering with Computers
frequency is set to two, and results show that the initial value
of the unknown parameters does not affect the final value of
the parameter.
Figure 6 shows the isotropic beam's the first three mode
shapes with different boundary conditions. Again, the pre-
dicted mode shapes agree with the exact shape modes.
Finally, Fig. 7 shows the loss function value for the free
vibration analysis of isotropic beams with different bound-
ary conditions. As it can be seen, the loss function value is
small enough for all the considered boundary conditions,
which shows the presented PINN approach's capability for
the free vibration analysis.
Fig. 9  Deflection of SS TDFG beam under uniform distributed load-
ing ( Kw = 0.1;Kg = 0.02;n1 = n2 = 2;𝜃 = 0.5;𝛼 = 0.1;q = 0.1)
(a)
Fig. 10  a) Effects of the material index in y-direction on the
deflection of CC TDFG beam under uniform distributed load
( Kw = 0.0;Kg = 0.0;n1 = 2;𝜃 = 0.5;𝛽 = 1;𝛼 = 0.1;q = 0.1 ) ,
For the free vibration analysis using PINN, a set of extra
information inside the domain is required. It has been stated
before that the shape modes of isotropic beam (without
foundation) are used to create that extra information. The
exact shape modes of isotropic beams with different bound-
ary conditions are obtained from [54]. In order to check the
sensitivity of the PINN results with respect to the employed
extra information, the convergence of the isotropic beam
natural frequency with the use of five different functions to
create extra information is investigated, and the results are
presented in Fig. 8. Results show that the PINN converges to
the desired frequency and shape mode when the employed
function satisfies only the natural boundary conditions (for
SS and CC beam: w(0) = w(1) = 0). It means that the PINN
prediction is not sensitive to the used extra information for
the free vibration analysis. This is a great advantage for the
presented PINN approaches for the solution of free vibra-
tion problems in comparison to the previous studies in the
literature that can predict only the fundamental frequency.
Generally, analytical expressions for the shape modes of iso-
tropic structures like beams, plates, and shells with different
boundary conditions can be found easily in the continuous
vibration textbooks, for instance [54]. Then, these analytical
expressions can be used to produce the needed extra infor-
mation for the desired problem with more complex material
and geometrical properties.
The optimum hyperparameters are obtained based on the
SS beam bending analysis using grey relational analysis.
Then, the model's accuracy with those parameters for bend-
ing and free vibration of SS, CC and CF isotropic beams is
proved. Results show that the PINN can predict the deflec-
tion, natural frequencies, and mode shapes of isotropic
(b)
b) Effects of material index in z direction on the deflec-
tion of CC TDFG beam under uniform distributed load
( Kw = 0.0;Kg = 0.0;n2 = 2;𝜃 = 0.5;𝛽 = 1;𝛼 = 0.1;q = 0.1)
13
 Engineering with Computers

beams with different boundary conditions with high accu-

Fig. 11  Effects of the material index in x-direction on the
deflection of CC TDFG beam under uniform distributed load
( Kw = 0.0;Kg = 0.0;n1 = n2 = 2;𝜃 = 0.5;𝛼 = 0.1;q = 0.1)
racy and stability.
Then, the applicability of PINN for analysis of TDFG
beam on elastic foundation is investigated. Since there is
no exact solution for the TDFG beams, the numerical solu-
tion obtained by BVP4C method in MATLAB is employed
as a reference solution. BVP4C is a finite difference code
that implements the three-stage Lobatto IIIa [58] formula
for the solution of boundary value differential equations.
Results of BVP4C are called the numerical solution in the
presented figures. Figure 9 shows the deflection of a TDFG
beam under uniform distributed load with different values of
𝛽 . The PINN predictions show an excellent agreement with
numerical solution predictions for all considered values of
𝛽 . Thus, it can be concluded that PINN with optimum hyper-
parameters can predict the TDFG beam behavior accurately.
The next step is to investigate the effects of material distri-
bution, foundation parameters, and porosity distribution on
bending and free vibration of TDFG beam.

Table 7  Natural frequency 𝛽 n2 1st mode 2nd mode

of CC TDFG beam
( Kw = 0.1;Kg = 0.02;𝜃 = 0.5;𝛼 = 0.1) n1 n1
0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1

0 0 1.2007 1.3057 1.3711 1.4644 1.5653 1.6287

0.5 0.8335 0.9072 0.9532 1.6575 1.7696 1.8390
1 0.7420 0.8079 0.8490 1.4653 1.5651 1.6286
1 0 0.9521 1.0296 1.0780 2.0974 2.2041 2.2717
0.5 0.6576 0.7122 0.7464 1.4095 1.4862 1.5353
1 0.5842 0.6332 0.6638 1.2392 1.3094 1.3542
5 0 0.4177 0.4397 0.4539 1.5919 1.6921 1.7248
0.5 0.2814 0.2968 0.3059 1.0664 1.1127 1.1429
1 0.2472 0.2615 0.2694 0.9631 0.9832 0.9956

(a) (b)

Fig. 12  Effects of foundation properties on the deflection of CC TDFG beam under uniform distributed loads, a elastic stiffness of foundation, b
shear stiffness of foundation (n1 = n2 = 2;𝜃 = 0.5;𝛽 = 1;𝛼 = 0.1;q = 0.1)

13
Engineering with Computers

Figure 10 shows the effect of the material index in y and

z directions, respectively, on the deflection of CC TDFG
beam. Results show that as the material index increases,
the beam stiffness decreases, and consequently, the maxi-

3.1935
3.7936
2.7989
2.2936
1.6676
2.3691
mum deflection increases. Figure 11 shows that increasing

0.2
the material index in the axial direction will increase the
beam stiffness and decrease deflection. Moreover, as the 𝛽
increases, the beam deflection tends to be unsymmetrical

2.9953
3.4736
2.7431
2.1850
1.6277
2.2991
and the maximum of deflection shifts to the left side of the
0.1

beam, which has lower stiffness.

Table 7 shows the first and second natural frequencies of
CC TDFG beam for different values of the material indexes.
Based on the results, as the n2 and 𝛽 increases, the natural
3rd mode

2.8768
3.2102
2.7037
2.1221
1.5770
2.2201

frequency decreases while, as the n1 increases the natural

Kw

frequency also increases. Thus, it is possible to reach the

0

desired static and dynamic response of the TDFG beams by

tuning the material index in different directions.
Figure 12 shows the CC TDFG beam deflection for different
Table 8  The first three natural frequencies of TDFG beam with different boundary conditions (n1 = n2 = 2;𝜃 = 0.5;𝛽 = 1;𝛼 = 0.1)

1.6309
1.9541
1.6644
1.2097
0.8604
1.3216

values of linear and shear stiffness coefficient of foundation.

0.2

As expected, increasing the foundation stiffness decreases the

beam deflection. Since the foundation behavior is linear, the
deflection pattern remains symmetric under a uniform dis-
tributed load. Moreover, the first three natural frequencies of
1.5883
1.9201
1.6250
1.1552
0.7825
1.2700

TDFG beams with different boundary conditions are presented

0.1

in Table 8. Results show that increasing foundation stiffness

will increase the TDFG beam's natural frequencies.
Figure 13 shows the effect of the porosity factor and distribu-
2nd mode

tion type on the defection of the TDFG beams. As expected,

1.8857
1.0959
1.5460
0.6960
1.2207
1.5839

a higher porosity level will decrease the beam's stiffness; con-

Kw
0

sequently, the beam's deflection will be increased. Thus, the

effects of porosities that appear during the manufacturing pro-
cess of functionally graded material should be considered to
1.0138
0.6525
0.8559
0.5309
0.7278
0.8830

better approximate these structural elements' behavior. Besides

0.2

the porosity factor, the porosity distribution also affects the

beam response. Results show that the beam with uniform poros-
ity distribution has the highest deflection while the beam with
x-shaped distribution has the lowest deflection.
0.9487
0.5456
0.7775
0.3974
0.6367
0.8095

The first and second natural frequencies of the TDFG

0.1

beams with different porosity factors and distribution pat-

terns are presented in Table 9. Results show that the natural
frequency increases as the porosity factor increases except
1st mode

for the beam with x-shaped distribution which the frequency

0.8786
0.4113
0.6901
0.1828
0.5296
0.7279

is almost constant. With the same porosity level, beams with

Kw
0

uniform porosity distribution have the highest natural fre-

quency, while those with the x-shaped porosity have the
lowest natural frequency.
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.04
Kg

0
0

5 Conclusion

This paper presents a physics-informed neural network-

Boundary
condition

based computational method for bending and free vibration

analysis of TDFG porous beam resting on elastic foundation.
CC
SS

13
 Engineering with Computers

(a) (b)

Fig. 13  a Effects of porosity factor on the deflection of CC TDFG beam (n1 = n2 = 2;𝜃 = 0.5;𝛽 = 1;𝛼 = 0.1;Kw = 0.1;Kg = 0.02;q = 0.1), b
Effects of porosity distribution pattern on the deflection of CC TDFG beam (n1 = n2 = 2;𝜃 = 0.5;𝛽 = 1;𝛼 = 0.1;Kw = 0.1;Kg = 0.02;q = 0.1)

Table 9  The natural Boundary Porosity distribution 1st mode 2nd mode
frequency of TDFG beam condition
with different porosity factors 𝛼 𝛼
and distribution patterns
(n1 = n2 = 2;𝜃 = 0.5;𝛽 = 1; 0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0 0.1 0.2 0.4
𝛼 = 0.1;Kw = 0.1;Kg = 0.02)
SS Uniform 0.6123 0.6367 0.6647 0.7366 1.2399 1.2689 1.3075 1.39891
x-Shaped 0.6124 0.6127 0.6129 0.6125 1.2400 1.2430 1.2439 1.242174
o-Shaped 0.6124 0.6249 0.6383 0.6681 1.2399 1.2618 1.2832 1.332793
v-Shaped 0.6124 0.6244 0.6371 0.6654 1.2401 1.2575 1.2746 1.313024
n-Shaped 0.6124 0.6273 0.6435 0.6803 1.2399 1.2582 1.2770 1.3184
u-shaped 0.6123 0.6279 0.6448 0.6836 1.2405 1.2642 1.2868 1.3423
CC Uniform 0.7567 0.7776 0.8015 0.8626 1.5644 1.5883 1.6160 1.6868
x-Shaped 0.7568 0.7583 0.7590 0.7574 1.5642 1.5691 1.5714 1.5665
o-Shaped 0.7568 0.7700 0.7841 0.8155 1.5643 1.5868 1.6108 1.6648
v-Shaped 0.7568 0.7677 0.7792 0.8045 1.5644 1.5785 1.5943 1.6268
n-Shaped 0.7568 0.7691 0.7821 0.8094 1.5651 1.5772 1.5893 1.6090
u-shaped 0.7568 0.7713 0.7872 0.8231 1.5645 1.5854 1.6501 1.7088

The beam material properties vary in three dimensions con-
tinuously according to an arbitrary function. The governing
equations of motion are obtained using Hamilton's principle.
In the PINN method, an approximate solution of the dif-
ferential governing equation is obtained by constructing a
neural network. The network's input is the spatial coordinate,
and output is the beam's displacement field. The network's
parameters are trained by minimizing a loss function that
includes the physical information about the problem, i.e.,
governing equation and boundary conditions.
A set of points inside the domain and on the bounda-
ries are sampled without knowing the solution of governing
equation to train the neural network. In other words, despite
conventional neural networks that need a big set of data for
training, in the presented PINN, only a small set of points
which are simply the input spatial coordinates, are needed.
Despite previous studies which used trial-and-error to find
optimum hyperparameters, in this study, the network hyper-
parameters are tuned by a systematic optimization procedure
by using Taguchi design of experiments combined with grey
relational analysis. Then, the performance and accuracy of
the employed PINN is carefully examined using bending,
and free vibration analysis of TDFG beams with different
boundary conditions and loading cases.

13
Engineering with Computers
Results show that the PINN can characterize the bending
and free vibration TDFG porous beams resting on an elastic
foundation with a satisfactory accuracy using the obtained
optimum hyperparameters. In the presented approach, the
beam's natural frequency is considered an unknown variable
to be determined by solving an inverse problem. To this end,
a set of extra information at some point inside the domain is
required. It is shown that any function that satisfies the natu-
ral boundary conditions can generate the extra information,
and the PINN will converge to desired frequency irrespec-
tive of the employed function, which proves the applicability
of the presented PINN method for free vibration analysis.
Moreover, results show present PINN approach can predict
both fundamental and higher natural frequencies and vibra-
tion mode shapes which is not possible using the methods
proposed in previous studies.
Finally, the effects of material distribution, porosity
factor, and foundation on the bending and free vibration
behavior of TDFG beams are investigated. Results show
that it is possible to tune the material index in different
directions to achieve the desired behavior. Moreover, the
existence of porosity affects the beam bending and vibra-
tion behavior, and it should be considered in the design of
the TDFG beams.
Supplementary Information The online version contains supplemen-
tary material available at https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 007/s​ 00366-0​ 23-0​ 1799-7.
Declarations
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no known com-
peting financial interests or personal relationships that could have ap-
peared to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
1. Niknam H, Fallah A, Aghdam M (2014) Nonlinear bending of
functionally graded tapered beams subjected to thermal and
mechanical loading. Int J Non-Linear Mech 65:141–147
2. Saeedifar M, Zarouchas D (2020) Damage characterization of
laminated composites using acoustic emission: a review. Compos
B Eng 195:108039
3. Dikici B, Tuntas R (2021) An artificial neural network (ANN)
solution to the prediction of age-hardening and corrosion behavior
of an Al/TiC functional gradient material (FGM). J Compos Mater
55:303–317
4. Yu X, Zhang T, Li Y (2020) 3D printing and bioprinting nerve
conduits for neural tissue engineering. Polymers 12:1637
5. Mueller E, Drašar Č, Schilz J, Kaysser W (2003) Functionally
graded materials for sensor and energy applications. Mater Sci
Eng A 362:17–39
6. Jahromi H, Aghdam M, Fallah A (2013) Free vibration analysis
of Mindlin plates partially resting on Pasternak foundation. Int J
Mech Sci 75:1–7
7. Gatheeshgar P, Poologanathan K, Gunalan S, Tsavdaridis KD,
Nagaratnam B, Iacovidou E (2020) Optimised cold-formed steel
beams in modular building applications. J Build Eng 32:101607
8. Behzad M, Meghdari A, Ebrahimi A (2008) A linear theory for
bending stress–strain analysis of a beam with an edge crack. Eng
Fract Mech 75:4695–4705
9. Benedetti A, Tralli A (1989) A new hybrid FE model for arbitrar-
ily curved beam—I. Linear analysis. Comput Struct 33:1437–1449
10. Agarwal S, Chakraborty A, Gopalakrishnan S (2006) Large defor-
mation analysis for anisotropic and inhomogeneous beams using
exact linear static solutions. Compos Struct 72:91–104
11. Fallah A, Aghdam MM (2011) Nonlinear free vibration and post-
buckling analysis of functionally graded beams on nonlinear elas-
tic foundation. Eur J Mech A/Solids 30:571–583. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1016/j.​eurom​echsol.​2011.​01.​005
12. Hadi A, Nejad MZ, Hosseini M (2018) Vibrations of three-dimen-
sionally graded nanobeams. Int J Eng Sci 128:12–23
13. Tang Y, Wang G, Ren T, Ding Q, Yang T (2021) Nonlinear
mechanics of a slender beam composited by three-directional
functionally graded materials. Compos Struct 270:114088. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​comps​truct.​2021.​114088
14. Zghal S, Ataoui D, Dammak F (2020) Static bending analysis of
beams made of functionally graded porous materials. Mech Based
Des Struct Mach:1–18
15. Ramteke PM, Panda SK, Patel B (2022) Nonlinear eigenfrequency
characteristics of multi-directional functionally graded porous
panels. Compos Struct 279:114707. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
comps​truct.​2021.​114707
16. Foroutan K, Carrera E, Pagani A, Ahmadi H (2021) Post-buck-
ling and large-deflection analysis of a sandwich FG plate with FG
porous core using Carrera’s Unified Formulation. Compos Struct
272:114189
17. Li X, Li L, Hu Y, Ding Z, Deng W (2017) Bending, buckling and
vibration of axially functionally graded beams based on nonlocal
strain gradient theory. Compos Struct 165:250–265. https://d​ oi.​
org/​10.​1016/j.​comps​truct.​2017.​01.​032
18. Şimşek M, Kocatürk T, Akbaş Ş (2012) Dynamic behavior of
an axially functionally graded beam under action of a moving
harmonic load. Compos Struct 94:2358–2364
19. Shahba A, Attarnejad R, Hajilar S (2013) A mechanical-based
solution for axially functionally graded tapered euler-bernoulli
beams. Mech Adv Mater Struct 20:696–707. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1080/​15376​494.​2011.​640971
20. Abbaspour-Gilandeh Y, Molaee A, Sabzi S, Nabipur N, Sham-
shirband S, Mosavi A (2020) A combined method of image
processing and artificial neural network for the identification
of 13 Iranian rice cultivars. Agronomy 10:117
21. Azarmdel H, Jahanbakhshi A, Mohtasebi SS, Muñoz AR (2020)
Evaluation of image processing technique as an expert system
in mulberry fruit grading based on ripeness level using artificial
neural networks (ANNs) and support vector machine (SVM).
Postharvest Biol Technol 166:111201
22. Brown BP, Mendenhall J, Geanes AR, Meiler J (2021) General
Purpose Structure-Based drug discovery neural network score
functions with human-interpretable pharmacophore maps. J
Chem Inf Model 61:603–620
23. Mignan A, Broccardo M (2020) Neural network applications in
earthquake prediction (1994–2019): meta-analytic and statisti-
cal insights on their limitations. Seismol Res Lett 91:2330–2342
24. Le Glaz A, Haralambous Y, Kim-Dufor D-H, Lenca P, Billot R,
Ryan TC, Marsh J, Devylder J, Walter M, Berrouiguet S (2021)
Machine learning and natural language processing in mental
health: systematic review. J Med Internet Res 23:e15708
25. Brunton SL, Kutz JN (2019) Methods for data-driven multiscale
model discovery for materials. J Phys Mater 2:044002
26. Brunton SL, Noack BR, Koumoutsakos P (2020) Machine learn-
ing for fluid mechanics. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 52:477–508
27. Yaghoubi V, Cheng L, Van Paepegem W, Kersemans M (2022)
CNN-DST: ensemble deep learning based on Dempster-Shafer
13

theory for vibration-based fault recognition. Struct. Health
Monit 21:2063–2082. https://​d oi.​o rg/​1 0.​1 177/​1 4759​2 1721​
10500​12
28. Yaghoubi V, Cheng L, Van Paepegem W, Kersemans M (2022)
An ensemble classifier for vibration-based quality monitor-
ing. Mech Syst Signal Process 165:108341. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1016/j.​ymssp.​2021.​108341
29. Lu L, Meng X, Mao Z, Karniadakis GE (1907) DeepXDE: a
deep learning library for solving differential equations (2019).
arXiv:1907.04502
30. Raissi M, Perdikaris P, Karniadakis GE (2019) Physics-
informed neural networks: a deep learning framework for solv-
ing forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial
differential equations. J Comput Phys 378:686–707
31. Zhu Y, Zabaras N, Koutsourelakis P-S, Perdikaris P (2019)
Physics-constrained deep learning for high-dimensional sur-
rogate modeling and uncertainty quantification without labeled
data. J Comput Phys 394:56–81
32. Zhao H, Storey BD, Braatz RD, Bazant MZ (2020) Learning
the physics of pattern formation from images. Phys Rev Lett
124:060201
33. Haghighat E, Raissi M, Moure A, Gomez H, Juanes R (2021)
A physics-informed deep learning framework for inversion and
surrogate modeling in solid mechanics. Comput Methods Appl
Mech Eng 379:113741. https://​d oi.​o rg/​1 0.​1 016/j.​c ma.​2 021.​
113741
34. Wu L, Kilingar NG, Noels L (2020) A recurrent neural network-
accelerated multi-scale model for elasto-plastic heterogeneous
materials subjected to random cyclic and non-proportional load-
ing paths. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 369:113234
35. Nguyen-Thanh VM, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T (2020) A deep
energy method for finite deformation hyperelasticity. Eur J
Mech A/Solids 80:103874. https://​d oi.​o rg/​1 0.​1 016/j.​e urom​
echsol.​2019.​103874
36. Samaniego E, Anitescu C, Goswami S, Nguyen-Thanh VM, Guo
H, Hamdia K, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T (2020) An energy approach
to the solution of partial differential equations in computational
mechanics via machine learning: concepts, implementation and
applications. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 362:112790.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​cma.​2019.​112790
37. Zhuang X, Guo H, Alajlan N, Zhu H, Rabczuk T (2021) Deep
autoencoder based energy method for the bending, vibration, and
buckling analysis of Kirchhoff plates with transfer learning. Eur J
Mech A/Solids 87:104225. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.e​ urome​ chsol.​
2021.​104225
38. Li W, Bazant MZ, Zhu J (2021) A physics-guided neural network
framework for elastic plates: comparison of governing equations-
based and energy-based approaches. Comput Methods Appl Mech
Eng 383:113933. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​cma.​2021.​113933
39. Hadji L, Zouatnia N, Bernard F (2019) An analytical solution for
bending and free vibration responses of functionally graded beams
with porosities: effect of the micromechanical models. Struct Eng
Mech 69:231–241
40. Jankowski P, Żur KK, Kim J, Reddy JN (2020) On the bifurca-
tion buckling and vibration of porous nanobeams. Compos Struct
250:112632. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​comps​truct.​2020.​112632
41. Funahashi K-I (1989) On the approximate realization of continu-
ous mappings by neural networks. Neural Netw 2:183–192
42. Mhaskar HN, Poggio T (2016) Deep vs. shallow networks: an
approximation theory perspective. Anal Appl 14:829–848
43. Lu L, Meng X, Mao Z, Karniadakis GE (2021) DeepXDE: a deep
learning library for solving differential equations. SIAM Rev
63:208–228. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1137/​19M12​74067
13
Engineering with Computers
44. Abadi M, Barham P, Chen J, Chen Z, Davis A, Dean J, Devin M,
Ghemawat S, Irving G, Isard M (2016) Tensorflow: a system for
large-scale machine learning. In: 12th {USENIX} symposium on
operating systems design and implementation ({OSDI} 16)
45. Paszke A, Gross S, Chintala S, Chanan G, Yang E, DeVito Z, Lin
Z, Desmaison A, Antiga L, Lerer A (2017) Automatic differentia-
tion in pytorch
46. Bergstra J, Breuleux O, Bastien F, Lamblin P, Pascanu R, Desjar-
dins G, Turian J, Warde-Farley D, Bengio Y (2010) Theano: a
CPU and GPU math expression compiler. In: Proceedings of the
Python for scientific computing conference (SciPy). Austin, TX
47. Chen T, Li M, Li Y, Lin M, Wang N, Wang M, Xiao T, Xu B,
Zhang C, Zhang Z (2015) Mxnet: a flexible and efficient machine
learning library for heterogeneous distributed systems. arXiv pre-
print arXiv:​1512.​01274
48. Kingma DP, Ba J (2014) Adam: a method for stochastic optimiza-
tion. arXiv preprint arXiv:​1412.​6980
49. Hennigh O, Narasimhan S, Nabian MA, Subramaniam A, Tangsali
K, Fang Z, Rietmann M, Byeon W, Choudhry S (2021) NVIDIA
SimNet™: an AI-accelerated multi-physics simulation framework.
In: International conference on computational science. Springer
50. Koryagin A, Khudorozkov R, Tsimfer S (2019) PyDEns: a python
framework for solving differential equations with neural networks.
arXiv preprint arXiv:​1909.​11544
51. Chen J, Huang D, Wang L, Hou J, Zhang H, Li Y, Zhong S, Wang
Y, Wu Y, Huang W (2020) 3D bioprinted multiscale composite
scaffolds based on gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA)/chitosan micro-
spheres as a modular bioink for enhancing 3D neurite outgrowth
and elongation. J Colloid Interface Sci 574:162–173
52. Haghighat E, Juanes R (2021) Sciann: a keras/tensorflow wrapper
for scientific computations and physics-informed deep learning
using artificial neural networks. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng
373:113552
53. Karniadakis GE, Kevrekidis IG, Lu L, Perdikaris P, Wang S,
Yang L (2021) Physics-informed machine learning. Nat Rev Phys
3:422–440
54. Rao SS (2019) Vibration of continuous systems. Wiley, Oxford
55. Anwar S, Hwang K, Sung W (2017) Structured pruning of deep
convolutional neural networks. ACM J Emerg Technol Comput
Syst (JETC) 13:1–18
56. Pang G, Lu L, Karniadakis GE (2019) fPINNs: Fractional physics-
informed neural networks. SIAM J Sci Comput 41:A2603–A2626
57. Zeng G, Jiang R, Huang G, Xu M, Li J (2007) Optimization of
wastewater treatment alternative selection by hierarchy grey rela-
tional analysis. J Environ Manag 82:250–259. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1016/j.​jenvm​an.​2005.​12.​024
58. Kierzenka J, Shampine LF (2001) A BVP solver based on residual
control and the Maltab PSE. ACM Trans Math Softw (TOMS)
27:299–316
Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds
exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the
author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of
such publishing agreement and applicable law.