Sunteți pe pagina 1din 14

Journal of Sound and Vibration (I 978) 56(2), 187-200

FINITE ELEMENT EIGENVALUE ANALYSIS OF TAPERED AND TWISTED TIMOSHENKO BEAMS


R. S. GUPTA

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Punjab Engineering College, Chandigarh-11, India AND


S. S. RAO

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur-208016, India (Received 13 January 1977, and in revisedform 14 September 1977)
The stiffnessand mass matrices of a twisted beam element with linearly varying breadth and depth are derived. The angle of twist is assumed to vary linearly along the length of the beam. The effects of shear deformation and (otary inertia are considered in deriving the elemental matrices. The first four natural frequencies and mode shapes are calculated for cantilever beams of various depth and breadth taper ratios at different angles of twist. The results are compared with those available in the literature. 1. INTRODUCTION The analysis of tapered and twisted beams has wide application in many industrial problems. The vibration and deflection analysis of compressor blades, turbine blades, aircraft propeller 131ades, helicopter rotor blades, gear teeth, springs of electromechanical devices, electrical contact switches, etc., all can be made by using such beam elements. Tapered beams have been analyzed by many investigators using different techniques. Rao [1] used the Galerkin method to calculate the fundamental natural frequencies of beams tapered in depth. Housner and Keightley [2] applied the Myklestad [3] procedure to determine the first three modes of a tapered beam. Martin [4] obtained the frequencies of a tapered beam using the assumption that the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of a tapered beam can be expa.nded about those of a beam with zero taper in terms of the taper parameters. Rao and Carnegie [5] used the finite difference method to obtain the frequencies and mode shapes of tapered blading. MaNe and Rogers [6, 7] solved the differential equation of vibration of tapered beams with different boundary conditions using Bessel functions and tabulated the results of the first five vibrational frequencies for different breadth and depth taper ratios. In analyzing pretwisted beams, different approaches have been used by various investigators. Mendelson and Gendler [8] used station functions while Rosard [9] applied the Myklestad method. The Rayleigh-Ritz method was used by Di Prima and Handelman [10], Carnegie [11] and Dawson [12]. Rao [13] analyzed pretwisted beams using the Galerkin method. Carnegie and Thomas [14] used a finite difference procedure for the analysis of pretwisted beams. The finite element technique has also been applied by many investigators, mostly for the vibration analysis of beams of uniform cross-section. All these investigations differ one from the other in the nodal degrees of freedom taken for deriving the elemental stiffness and mass matrices. McCalley [15] derived consistent mass and stiffness matrices by selecting the 187

188

R. S. G U P T A A N D S. S. RAO

total deflection and the total slope as nodal co-ordinates. Archer [16] analyzed various beams with specific boundary conditions. Kapur [17] took bending deflection, shear deflection, bending slope and shear slope as nodal degrees of freedom and derived the elemental matrices of beams with linearly varying inertia. Carnegie et aL [18] analyzed uniform beams by considering few internal nodes in it. Nickel and Secor [19] used total deflection, total slope and bending slope of the two nodes and the bending slope at the mid-point of the beam as the degrees of freedom to derive the elemental stiffness and the mass matrices of order seven. Thomas and Abbas [20] analyzed uniform Timoshenko beams by taking total deflection, total slope, bending slope and the derivative of the bending slope as nodal degrees of freedom. In this work the finite element method is applied for finding the frequencies of natural vibration of doubly tapered and twisted beams. The stiffness and mass matrices of the beam element are developed by taking bending deflection, bending slope, shear deflection and shear slope in two planes as nodal degrees of freedom. The effects of shear deformation and rotary inertia, which are of significant importance at higher modes of vibration, are considered in ~he derivation. The elemental matrices of a doubly tapered beam without pretwist and a pretwisted beam without taper can be derived as special cases of the present matrices. The stiffness and mass matrices of a tapered beam and that of a uniform beam without shear deformation are also special cases of the general matrices. The first four natural frequencies of vibration have been calculated for untwisted and a pretwisted doubly tapered cantilever beams by using the finite element thus developed. The effects of variation of depth and breadth taper ratios of the beam have also been studied. The results compare well with those reported in the literature. 2. ELEMENT STIFFNESS AND MASS MATRICES 2.1. DISPLACEMENT MODEL Figure l(a) shows a doubly tapered, twisted beam element of length /with the nodes as 1 and 2. The breadth, depth and the twist of the element are assumed to be linearly varying along its length. The breadth and depth at the two nodal points are shown as bt, lh and b2, h2, respectively. The pretwist angles at the two nodes are denoted by 01 and 02, respectively (a list of notation is given in Appendix B). Figure l(b) shows the nodal degrees of freedom of the element, with bending deflection, bending slope, shear deflection and shear slope in the two planes taken as the nodal degrees of freedom. The total deflections of the element in the y and x directions at a distance z from node 1, namely, w(z) and r(z), are taken as
w ( z ) = w~(z) + we(z), v(z) -- v~(z) + v~(z),
(l)

where wb(z) and vb(z) are the deflections due to bending in the y z and x z planes, respectively, and w~(z) and v~(z) are the deflections due to shear in the corresponding planes. The displacement models for wb(z), w~(z), vb(z) and v~(z) are assumed to be polynomials of third degree. They are similar in nature except for the nodal constants. These expressions are given by wb(z) = ( u l / I 3) (2z a - 3 1 z 2 + / 3) + (u2/l a) (31z 2 - 2z 3) - ( u 3 / p ) ( z 3 _ 21z 2 + t 2 z ) _ (u4/l 2) ( z 3 _ lz2),
Ws(z ) =

(us/13)1"2z 3 _

l z 2 - 13)

+ (u6/l 3) ( 3 1 z 2 -

2 z 3) -

- (uT/t ~) (z 3 - 21z" + 12z) - ( u s / t ~) ( ~ - tz2), v~(z) = (,19/l 3) ( 2 z 3 - 31z 2 - 13) + (Ulo/.13i ( 3 / z 2 _ 2 z 3) _ -(ulJlZ)(z 3 - 2 z 2 + 12z) - (u12/12)(z 3 - lz2), v,(z) = (u13/ 3) (2z3 - 3 z 2 - 13) + ( u , , / 1 3 ) ( 3 1 z 2 - 2z 3) - ( u x s / l 2) (z 3 - 2 l z 2 + l ' z ) - ( u z , / l 2) (z 3 - 1z2),

(2)

TAPERED AND TWISTED TIMOSHENKO BEAMS

189

Ul

U5

uZ

U6

L,
uII

/"
/ u

/l~u B I
/

/
u~

:
UI3 ~

Y'~ IY

/
1o x r

/
u14

\y'

(c) Figure 1. (a) An element of tapered and twisted beam; (b) degrees of freedom of art element; (c) angle of

twist 0. where ul, u2, ua and tt4 represent the bending degrees of freedom and us, u6, u7 and Us are the shear degrees of freedom in the y z plane, it9, trio , till and u~2 represent the bending degrees of freedom and u~3, ttz4, it15 and u16 the shear degrees of freedom in the x z plane.
2.2. ELEMENT STIFFNESS MATRIX

The total strain energy U of a beam of length 1, due to bending and shear deformation, is given by

U = o LI. 2 k OzZ] + E l , , , Oz z Oz2 ~- 2

kOz z/j+--2-tkW

] +k~z]

jldz.

(3)

As the cross-section of the element changes with z and as the element is twisted, the crosssectional area A, and the moments of inertia I,`,`, I . and I,`y will be functions o f z:
A ( z ) = b ( z ) h ( z ) = {bz + (b, - b , ) z / l } {hx + (h2 - h z ) z / l } = (l/12)(c, z* + cz l z + c3 12), (4)

where cl = (b2 - b,) (h2 - hi), c2 = b~(h2 - hx) + ht(b2 - b~),

c3=blhl,

(5)

I ~ ( z ) = I,`, ,`, cos z 0 + Ir y. sin z 0,

I . ( z ) = Iy.y, cos 2 0 + 1,`,,`, sin 2 0, I,`r(z) = (Ix,,`, - Iy, y,) 89sin 20, (6)

190

R.S. GUPTA AND S. S. RAO

where x ' x ' and y'y' are the axes inclined at an angle O, the angle o f twist, at any point in the element, to the original axes x x and y y as shown in Figure l(c). The value of/=,,, = 0 and the values ofl~,~, and I,,y, can be computed as Ix,~,(z)-where a, = (b2 - b,) (h2 - h,) 3, az = b,(h2 - h,) 3 + 3(b2 - b,) (h2 - h,) 2 h,,

b(~)h'(~)

l'-----~-= 12Y [a'z4+a2 I z 3 + a 3 1 2 z 2 + a 4 1 3 z + a s ] '

(7)

a3 = 3{b,h~(h2 - h,) 2 + (62 - b,) (h2 - h~)h~},


a, = 3b, h~(h2 - h,) + (b2 -- 6,) h~, as = bx h~,

(8) (9)

~,. ,.(z) = h(z). b3(z) = ~


12 where 1214

[a, z" + a2 t : + a~ t" z 2 + d, t 3 z + a, t'],

d, = (h2 - h,) (62 - b,) 3,

d2 = h,(b2 - b,) 3 + 3(h2 - h,) (62 - b,) 2 b,,

d3 = 3{h, b,(62 - 6,) 2 + (h2 - h,) (b2 - 6,) 6~},

d4= 3h, b ~ ( b 2 - b , ) + ( h 2 - h , ) b ~ ,

ds--h,b].

(113)

By substituting the expressions for wb, w:, vb, vs, A, Ixx, Ixy and Iyy from equations (2), (4) and (6) in equation (3), the strain energy U can be expressed as

v = 89

(l l)

where u is the vector o f nodal displacements u,, u2 . . . . . u,6, and [K] is the elemental stiffness matrix o f order 16. In terms o f the integrals defined as

f
z

[a 2 w~\'
EI,,,,~--~z~J d z =
/02. \2

[u~u2u3u4lr[AK][u~u2u3u4],

(12)

i
0

.law,\2 ~AG \ //-~-z/ dz = [u, u6 u7 us] r [CK] [u, u6 u7 us],

(14)

and

la 2 wb\ [a" vb \

05)

the element stiffness matrix can be expressed as

[AK]

[0]

[DK]

[0]

[o]
16x16

[CK]
[0]

[0]
[BK]

[01 1,
[0] /

[K] =

[DK]

(16)

[o1

[o1

[o1

[CKl]

where [AK], [BK], [CK] and [DK] are symmetric matrices o f order 4 and [0] is a null matrix o f order 4. The elements o f matrices [AK], [BK], [CK] and [DK] are formulated in Appendix A.

TAPERED AND TWISTED TIMOSHENKO BEAMS 2 . 3 . ELEMENT MASS MATRIX

191

The kinetic energy of the element T, including the effects of shear deformation and rotary inertia, is given by

o;L w
+gi,,,ta---~t)t-~.~]+.~glO--~)
By defining
! 2

+
ldz.

/a'w~\/azv~'~ p[= [a~w,\q

(17)

J -~- \ ~ - /
0

dz = [a, a~ a3 a,]" [aM] [a, a, a3 a,],


2

(18)

( 3 T
0

\ 0--ff~/ dz = [a, uz a, ~,]r

[BM] [a, uz u3 ti,],

(19)

fT

\a-~-~/ dz = [a9 a,o a,, a,=]" [CM] [ag.,o.,, a,.].

(20)

and
1

Jo g \OzOt] ~OzOt] dz =

[a, az z~39,]r

[DM] [99 9,o u,, ~,=1,


tq, i =

(21)

where ~ denotes the time derivative of the nodal displacement energy of the element can be expressed as T = 89 where [M] is the mass matrix given by fi,

1, 2 . . . . . 16, the kinetic

(22)

[ [AM] + [aM] [AM] [DM] [01 ] = [ [AM] [AM] [AM] [01 1 [M] tAM] tAM] + [CM] tAM]/' l~6x16 / [DM] L [0] [0] [AM] [AMlJ
/ /

(23)

and [AM], [BM], [CM] and defined in Appendix A.

[DM] are

symmetric matrices of order 4 whose elements are

2.4. BOUNDARYCONDmONS The following boundary conditions are to be applied depending on the type of end conditions:

OwdOz=O and Ov,/Oz=O; clamped end: w, = 0, wb = 0, v, = 0,


free end: hinged end: w, = 0, wb = 0, v, = 0

(24) vb = 0, and

Owb/Oz =

0 and

OvdOz=

0;

(25) (26)

vb = 0.

It is to be noted here that all the forced boundary conditions could be satisfied by the present model. Among the natural boundary conditions, if the condition of zero bending moment is to be enforced at a free end, the element due to Thomas and Abbas [20] is expected to be better than the present one.

192

R.S. GLIPTAAND S. S. RAO 3. NUMERICAL RESULTS

The element stiffness and mass matrices developed are used for the dynamic analysis of cantilever beams. By using the standard procedures of structural analysis, the eigenvalue problem can be stated as (iX] -- o,2[M]) U = 0, (27) where [K] and [M] denote the stiffness and mass matrices of the structure, respectively, U indicates nodal displacement vector of the structure, and w is the natural frequency of vibration. A study of the convergence properties of the element is made by taking the special case of a uniform beam with a length of 0.2540 m, breadth of 0.0762 m, depth of 0.0704 m, E = 2.07 10 ~I N / m z, G = 3E/8, mass density of 800 kg/m 3,/a = 2/3 and 0 = 0 ~ For this beam, the first, second, third and fourth natural frequencies obtained by the present method (with 4 elements) have been found to have 0 " 0 0 yo, 0.07 ~o, 0.30 ~ and 0.60 ~ errors, respectively. The first four natural frequencies obtained by using 8 elements are 845.8, 3989.5, 8836.8 and 13827.1 Hz while the exact values are 845.8, 3988.9, 8834.2 and 13818.1 Hz, respectively [20]. The convergence of the natural frequencies of a pretwisted doubly tapered cantilever beam has also been studied and the results are shown in Table 1. In this case the natural frequencies given by the method of reference [21] have been found to be slightly higher than those predicted by the present method. It can also be seen that reasonably accurate results can be obtained even by using four finite elements. TA~Lz 1

Natural frequencies of a tapered and twisted Tirnoshenko beam (Hz)


Number of elements 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Accordingto the method of re~rence [21] First mode 304-8 298.7 298-1 297.9 297.8 297.8 297.8 297-8 299.1 Second mode 1187.0 1146.8 1139.2 1137.9 1137.5 1137.4 1137.3 1137-3 1142-8 Third mode 2259.3 1685-3 1652.2 1647.3 1646.0 1645.3 1645.1 1645-0 1653"3 Fourth mode 4519-2 4046.5 3647.4 3593.5 3585.6 3578.8 3578.5 3578.3 3595.7

Data: length of beam = 0.1524 m, breadth at root = 0-0254 m, depth taper ratio = 2.29, breadth taper ratio = 2"56, twist = 45~ shear coefficient = 0.833, mass density = 800 kg]m3, E = 2.07 x 10tl N]nl2, G = (3/8)E. Table 2 shows the frequency ratios of an untwisted tapered beam for various combinations of depth and breadth taper ratios. Six finite elements are used to model the beam. It is observed that for constant depth taper ratio the frequency ratio of all the four modes increases with breadth taper ratio while for constant breadth taper ratio the frequency ratio decreases for the first mode and increases for the second, third and fourth modes with an increase in the depth taper ratios. The shear deformation effects reduce the frequency of modal vibration. The present results can be seen to compare well with those reported by Mabie and Rogers [6] which are also indicated in Table 2. Figure 2 shows comparison of the results given by the finite element method with those reported by Rosard [9] for a twisted beam of 0.0254 m x 0.00635 m cross-section and 0.2794 m length. It can be seen that the two sets of results are quite comparable.

77

Z
0 0

lJ

II 0

II
"0

II

00 0 II

E ~J

",d"

o
0 II

~J cJ ~J

,o

~o ~

g
II

~j~3

.~0~ 0

I1

......

,+-~j 0 0 0

'0

,.~

194
9 87 6 .o

R. S. GUPTA AND S. S. RAO


1 I

Third mode

Second mode
g4 ~

First mode

I0

ZO

30

Angle of twist (degrees)

Figure 2. Comparison of results for an uniform twisted beam. - - - - ,

Values by Rosard method; - -

values by present method.

Figures 3 and 4 show the variation of modal frequencies with breadth taper ratio for beams having 0 ~ 30 ~ 60 ~ and 90 ~ twist with constant depth taper ratio while Figures 5 and 6 show similar variations for beams with constant breadth taper ratio and varying depth taper ratio. Here the length of the beam is taken as 0.254 m and the root cross-section as 0.076 x 0.038 times the length of the beam. Again the effects of breadth and depth tapers are seen to
I i I

4 r - Second mode O~o

6O*

/]

First mode /-9o ~

'

///// //s

. -~- = . -~ f/llO i l l /////ll 1 ~ .~~ ,-- ~ I


2

I
3

I
4

Breadth toper rQliO

Figure 3. Effects of shear deformation and breadth taper ratio on the first and second natural frequencies of a twisted beam. e, Method of reference [22]; , without shear deformation; . . . . , Timoshenko beam; depth taper ratio = = 3.

T A P E R E D A N D T W I S T E D T I M O S H E N K O BEAMS
14 I I I

195

13 12
11
-

\\

\\ ~.\ \
\

\\

/ f / f - Fourth mode
\\ ~'',-

0 I0 9t~
8

~ ~"

/f/f-Third mode
~ +

6 -

30"

2 3 4 Breadth toper ratio,fl

Figure 4. Effects of shear deformation and breadth taper ratio on the third and fourth natural frequencies of a twisted beam. , Without shear deformation; . . . . . , Timoshenko beam; depth taper ratio cr = 3. be p r o n o u n c e d at higher modes of vibration. Here also the effect of shear d e f o r m a t i o n is seen to reduce the m o d a l frequencies at higher rates in higher modes of vibration in all the cases. T h e results f o u n d by the m e t h o d o f Carnegie a n d T h o m a s [22] for the first two n a t u r a l frequencies are also indicated in Figures 3 a n d 5. It can be seen that the present results c o m p a r e excellently with those o f Carnegie a n d T h o m a s .

.9

u~

Firsl mode--~

I~, 60~

90 ~

Depth taper ratio,a


Figure 5. Effects of shear deformation and depth taper ratio on the first and second natural frequencies of a twisted beam. , Without shear deformation; . . . . , Timoshenko beam; breadth taper ratio fl= 3. o, Method of reference [22].

196
13

R. S. G U P T A A N D S. S. R A O
I I I

12

FcxJrthmode~
II

~)o

I0 ._o 9

Third mode --~

5 4
i
2

i
3 Depth taper ratio

I
4

Figure 6. Effectsof shear deformation and depth taper ratio on the third and fourth natural frequencies of a twisted beam. , Without shear deformation; . . . . . , Timoshenko beam; breadth taper ratio/Y = 3. 4. CONCLUSION The finite element procedure developed for the eigenvalue analysis of doubly tapered and twisted Timoshenko beams has been found to give reasonably accurate results even with four finite elements. The effects of breadth and depth taper ratios, twist angle and shear deformation on the natural frequencies of vibration of cantilever beams have been investigated. The present results are found to compare very well with those reported in the literature. The element developed is expected to be useful for the dynamic analysis of blades of roto-dynamic machines. REFERENCES 1. J. S. RAo 1965 Aeronautical Quarterly 16, 139-144. The fundamental flexural vibration of cantilever beam of rectangular cross-section with uniform taper. 2. G. W. HOUSNERand W. O. KEIG}{T[.EY1962 Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Enghzeers 88, 95-123. Vibrations of linearly tapered beam. 3. N. O. MYKLESrAD1944 Journal of Aerospace Science 2, 153-162. A new method for calculating natural modes of uncoupled bending vibrations of aeroplane wings and other types of beams. 4. A. I. MARTIN1956 Aeronautical Quarterly 7,109-124. Some integrals relating to the vibration of a cantilever beams and approximations for the effect of taper on overtone frequencies. 5. J. S. RAO and W. CARNEGIE1971 Bulletin of Mechanical Engineerhtg Education 10, 239-245. Determination of the frequencies of lateral vibration of tapered cantilever beams by the use of Ritz-Galerkin process. 6. H.H. MAB1E,and C. B. ROGERS1972 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 51, 1771-1774. Transverse vibrations of double-tapered cantilever beams. 7. H. H. MABmand C. B. ROGERS1974 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 55, 986--988. Vibration of doubly tapered cantilever beam with end mass and end support. 8. m. MENDELSONand S. GENDLER 1949 NACA TN-2185. Analytical determination of coupled bending torsion vibrations of cantilever beams by means of station functions. 9. D. D. ROSARD1953 Jottrttal of Applied Mechanics 20, 241-244. Natural frequencies of twisted cantilevers. 10. R. C. DI PRIMAand G. H. HANDELMAN1954 Quarterly on Applied Mathematics 12, 241-259. Vibration of twisted beams.

TAPERED A N D TWISTED TIMOSHENKO BEAMS

197

11. W. CARNEGIE1959 Proceedings of the Institute ofitlechanical Engineers 173, 343-346. Vibration of pretwisted cantilever blading. 12. B. DAWSON 1968 Journal of Mechanical Engineerhtg Science 10, 381-388. Coupled bending vibrations of pretwisted cantilever blading treated by Rayleigh-Ritz method. 13. J. S. RAG 1971 Journal of the Aeronautical Society of lndia 23, 62-64. Flexural vibration of pretwisted beams of rectangulc.r cross-section. 14. W. CARNEGIEand 3". THOMAS 1972 Journal of Engineerhtg for Industry, Transactions of the. American Society of Mechanical Enghwers 94, 255-266. The coupled bending-bending vibration of pretwisted tapered blading. 15. R. McCALLEY 1963 General Electric Company, Schenectady, New York, Report No. DIG/SA, 63-73. Rotary inertia correction for mass matrices. 16. J. S. ARCHER 1965 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Journal 3, 1910-1918. Consistent matrix formulations for structural analysis using finite element techniques. 17. K. K. KAPUR 1966 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 40, 1058-1063. Vibrations of a Timoshenko beam, using finite element approach. 18. W. CARNEGIE, J. THOMAS and E. DOCUMAKI 1969 Aeronautical Quarterly 20, 321-332. An improved method of matrix displacement analysis in vibration problems. 19. R. NICKEL and G. SECOR 1972 bzternational Journal of Numerical Methods in Enghwering 5, 243-253. Convergence of consistently derived Timoshenko beam finite elements. 20. J. THOMASand B. A. H. ABBAS 1975 Journal of Soundand Vibration 41,291-299. Finite element model for dynamic analysis of Timoshenko beam. 21. 3. S. RAG 1972 Journal of Engineerhtg for bMustry, Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 94, 343-346. Flexural vibration of pretwisted tapered cantilever blades. 22. W. CARNrGmand J. THOMAS1972JournalofEngineeringforlndustry, Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 94, 367-378. The effects of shear deformation and rotary inertia on the lateral frequencies of cantilever beams in bending.

APPENDIX A: EXPRESSIONS FOR [AK], [BK] . . . . The following notation is used for convenience:
1

, [DM]

w,=Jz'-'dz,
0

i = 1,2 . . . . . n,
i=

(AI)
(A2)

L l = I t-l,

1,2 . . . . . n,

Vl = f z ' - ' cos 2 (02 - 0,)


0

St = f z l-~ sin 2 (02 - 01)


0

[ [

z] z]

+ 01 dz,

i = 1,2 . . . . . n,

(13)

+ 01 dz,

i = 1,2 . . . . . n,

(14)

where O~ and 02 denote the values of pretwist a t nodes I and 2, respectively, of the element. As wb, w~, Vb and v~ are all the same in nature except for their positions in the stiffness and mass matrices, one can use )~ to denote any one of the quantities wb, ws, vb or vs and in a similar manner the set (111,112,113,a4) can be used to represent any one of the sets (u~, u2, u3, u4), (us, u6, u7, us), (ug, U,o, ul,, u12) or (u13, u14, u,s, U16). Thus

1] 2 - 3 1 z 2+ 13) _113 if(z)=~-~(2z ~ ( ~-3 - , .or.2 , ~ + 12Z) q_~3(3122_223)_~__~4(23 1 12" - IZ2),


d ~ = -f~(6z2-61z) 111 "( 6 1 z - 6 z 2 ) - ~ ( 3 -~z - ~ (3Z 2 - - 41z + 1 2 ) + ~ z2-21z),
d 2 if,

(AS)
(A6)

l]1 dz 2 = I-S (12z

a3 t]2 a4 61) - . ~ ( 6 z - 41) + i f ( 6 1 - 12z) - 7~(6z - 21).

(t7)

198

R. S. GUPTA AND S. S. RAO

By letting P~,t.k(i = 1. . . . . 4 ; j = i , . . . , 4; k = t . . . . . 7) denote the coefficient ofzk-Xl 7-k for the a~zT~ term in the expression o f ~2, Q~.~,k(l = 1. . . . . 4; j = i . . . . . 4; k = 1. . . . . 5) the coefficient o f zk-~l 5-k for the f i ~ term in the expression o f ( d ~ ] d z ) z, R~.j,k(i = 1. . . . . 4; j = i, . . . . 4; k = 1. . . . . 3) the coefficient ofzk-~l 3-k for the a~aj t e r m in the expression o f (d 2 ~'/dz2) 2, Hi. j(i = I . . . . . 4 ; j = i . . . . . 4) the index coefficient o f l to a c c o u n t for the difference in index o f I due to multiplication o f r o t a t i o n a l degrees o f f r e e d o m ~1 a n d a2 a n d the displacement degrees o f freedom a3 a n d t74, the values ofP~.j.k, Q~.j.k, R~.j,k a n d H~,~ can be o b t a i n e d as shown in T a b l e s A I a n d A2. TABLE A1

Vahtes of Hi.j, Ri.j.k, Ql.j.~


R~.~., for k =
r )k "~ r

Qt.j., for k =
A 9

i 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4

j
1 2 3 4 2 3 4 3 4 4

H~.j 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 2 2

1 144"0 -144"0 -72"0 -72"0 144-0 72-0 72-0 36-0 36"0 36-0

2 -144"0 144"0 84"0 60"0 -144"0 -84"0 -60'0 -48"0 -36-0 -24"0

3 36"0 -36.0 -24.0 -12"0 36"0 24.0 12"0 16"0 8.0 4-0

1 36.0 -36"0 -18.0 -18"0 36-0 18:0 18"0 9"0 9"0 9"0

2 -72-0 72"0 42"0 30'0 -72"0 -42"0 -30'0 -24"0 -18"0 -I2-0

3 36"0 -36"0 -30"0 -12"0 36"0 30"0 12"0 22.0 11.0 4-0

4 6-0 0-0 6'0 0"0 0-0 -6-0 0-0 -8-0 -2"0 0-0

5 0.0 0'0 0'0 0.0 0-0 0'0 0.0 1"0 0"0 0"0

TABLE A 2

Vahles of Pt, j.
PI.j.~ for k =
r

i
I 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4

]
1 2 3 4 2 3 4 3 4 4

I
4.0 -4.0 -2.0 -2.0 4.0 2.0 2-0 1-0 1.0 1.0

2
-12.0 12.0 7.0 5.0 -12.0 -7.0 -5.0 -4.0 -3.0 -2.0

3
9.0 -9.0 -8.0 -3,0 9.0 8.0 3.0 6-0 3.0 1-0

4
4.0 -2,0 2.0 -1.0 0-0 -3.0 0.0 -4-0 -1.0 0.0

5
-6.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1-0 0-0 0.0

6
0.0 0.0 -1-0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0-0 0.0 0.0

7
1.0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0.0 0.0 0-0 0-0 0.0 0.0

EVALUATION OF

[BK]

A s t h e p r o c e d u r e for the d e r i v a t i o n o f [AK], [BK] . . . . . [D~I] is the same for each, the e x p r e s s i o n for [BK] is derived here as a n illustration. One has

(A8)

TAPERED AND TWISTED TIMOSHENKO BEAMS

199

where ~ = vb and
tt2 t23 = Ulo )uH .

94

ku12

Putting the value oflyr and ff in equation (A8) gives

/a2rv\'

El,%. + (I,.,. i..>co,, {(0, , ,0, z+

0,)]x
~7(6z -

x g(12z - 61) - ~(6z - 40 +~(6! - 12z) with


BKx. a = coefficient of a~ ax = coefficient of u9 u9 E

20

dz, (A9)

1211~ + <(dl z 4 + d2 l z 3 + d3 1 z z 2 + d4 l 3 z + ds) - (al z 4 + a2 l z 3 + a3 l 2 z 2 +

,,,+,
E
-

,,,,+,

s
UT-, +L,+2Ra.,.3 V6-,] +
l-I

121--i-~L(n,.,+x ) ~. {a,[R,.,. a Us-, + L , + I R L , . 2

+ (d, - a,) [L, Rl.l.1 Vs_, + L,+x R~ .x.2 VT_, + L,+2 R1.1.3 V6-,]}
g 5 3

-- 121--i-6L(n,., +t) ~ ~ [{aiLl+s-1 U g - t - j R l . 1,j} + (d, -- at){Li+j-t V g - I - j R t . 1.s}].

t=tj=a This relation can be generalized as


g 5 3

(AI0)

B K I . s = l - ~ 6 L ( n , . , + 1 ) ~. ~. [{a, Lu+.j-1) U(9-i-j) Rz,s.j} +


1=I J=l

+ (dr - al){Lo+s-a) V(9-1-.oRt.s,j}],


g 5

I = 1 . . . . . 4,

J = 1, . . . . 4,

- 127~E ~
t=t J - t

[{aIL(I+J+HI.j )U9-1-JRI.J,J}+(dl-al)X
V(9_l_j).Rl.s.j}],
I = 1 . . . . . 4, J=1,...,4.

{Lu+j+U,,s)

(All)

Similarly
AK~.s = - -

12D ~ 1=1

E [{dIL(i+J+HI"I)U(9-I-j)RI'j'J}+
j=l

+(a,-dt){Lu+s+n,.s)Vg_,_jRr.a.~}],

I = 1 . . . . . 4, J = I . . . . . 4,

(AI2)

200 3 5

R.S.

G U P T A A N D S. S. R A O

CK, s = I t G ~
9

18 ~
l=l

~[c,L(,+j+n, .,, U o - i - j ) O t . j . j ],
9
j=l 5 3

1 = 1,

...,

4,

J=/,...,4,

(AI3)

I=
I=1 1=1
3 7

l .....

4,

J=I,

.... 4,

(AI4) I = I . . . . . 4,

AM,.s=g~x~[c,L,.s.m.jiUtu_,_s)P,.,.,],
= J=l 5 5

J = I , .... 4,

(Al5)

BMt s = P ~ 9 12gP ~

~
/=t

[{d, Lc,+j+m ,) Uo,-,-j) Qt.s.j} + I = 1. . . . . 4, J = l . . . . . 4,


(AI6)

I-1

+ (a, - dl){L(t+l.n,.:Vol_l_j) Qt.s.j}], CMt 9 s= P


$ 5

12gll~ ---- ~. ~ [{a,L,+j+,,,.,, Ucu_,_j, Q,.j.~} +


/-1 J=l

+ (di - al){L(i.~+n,.~) V(u-~-~) Q1.s.j}],


5 5

I = 1. . . . . 4,
I=

J = I . . . . . 4,
1. . . . . 4, J=I,

(A ! 7)
. . . . 4.

P
1=1 1=1

(AI8)
A P P E N D I X B: N O M E N C L A T U R E area of cross-section breadth of beam Young's modulus acceleration due to gravity shear modulus depth of beam moment of inertia of beam cross-section about xx, yy and xy axis, respectively [K] element stiffness matrix 1 length of an element L length of total beam [M] element mass matrix t time parameter U nodal degrees of freedom U strain energy 1) displacement in xz plane W displacement in yz plane x,y co-ordinate axes Z co-ordinate axis and length parameter frequency ratio ratio of modal frequency to frequency of fundamental mode of uniform beam with the same root cross-section and without shear deformation effects O~ depth taper ratio, = hdha fl breadth taper ratio, = b~[b2 0 angle of twist P mass density p shear coefficient Subscripts: b, bending; s, shear.

A b E g G h Ix,,, IT,),,Ix~,

S-ar putea să vă placă și