0 Voturi pozitive0 Voturi negative

11 (de) vizualizări123 paginidownload

Nov 26, 2015

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd

download

© All Rights Reserved

11 (de) vizualizări

download

© All Rights Reserved

- The Law of Explosive Growth: Lesson 20 from The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership
- Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race
- Hidden Figures Young Readers' Edition
- The E-Myth Revisited: Why Most Small Businesses Don't Work and
- Micro: A Novel
- The Wright Brothers
- The Other Einstein: A Novel
- State of Fear
- State of Fear
- The Power of Discipline: 7 Ways it Can Change Your Life
- The Kiss Quotient: A Novel
- The 10X Rule: The Only Difference Between Success and Failure
- Being Wrong: Adventures in the Margin of Error
- Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions
- The 6th Extinction
- The Black Swan
- The Art of Thinking Clearly
- The Last Battle
- Prince Caspian
- A Mind for Numbers: How to Excel at Math and Science Even If You Flunked Algebra

Sunteți pe pagina 1din 123

Thanks go to Bahir Dar University Engineering Faculty for sponsoring my education. Also

a special thanks to the head, Solomon T/Mariam, and all the staffs of the Mechanical

Engineering Department for their kind and unforgettable collaboration during study period.

I really give thanks to my advisor, Dr. Alem Bazezew, for the inspiration and

encouragement to work on this project. I also appreciate not only for his professional,

timely and valuable advices, but also for his continuous scheduled follow up and valuable

comments during my research work. I can say that without his guidance I may not be the

one finalize this project soon enough.

It is really hard to skip many thanks to friends and family who were always with me in bliss

and despair. A special thanks goes to all my family members and friends: Korbaga Fantu,

Birhane Hagos, Seifu Admasu, Yoseph Alemu, Melkam Tegegn, Dereje Engda and all

members of Applied Mechanics stream. Also I would like to thank Nebil

Mohammed,

Fikrea and Tamrat for giving me valuable reference materials specially at the beginning of

my research.

Generally, I would like to extend my gratitude for all the above people and those who are

not mentioned here but contributed their part a lot towards the success of this research.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ....................................................................................................i

TABLE OF CONTENTS .....................................................................................................ii

LIST OF FIGURES ..............................................................................................................v

LIST OF TABLES..............................................................................................................vii

NOTATION....................................................................................................................... viii

ABSTRACT.........................................................................................................................xii

ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................i

1.

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................1

1.1

1.2

1.3

2.1

Introduction.............................................................................................................9

2.2

2.2.1

Modes of Fracture.........................................................................................10

2.2.2

2.2.3

2.2.4

2.2.5

3.1

3.2

ii

3.3

3.4

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

5.1

5.1.1

For Euler-Bernoulli.......................................................................................58

5.1.2

5.1.3

5.2

6

RESULT DISCUSSIONS...........................................................................................65

6.1

6.2

Effect of crack position as a function of crack depth ratio (for Tim. Beam)........68

6.3

6.4

6.5

CONCLUSION ...........................................................................................................78

REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................83

APPENDICES.....................................................................................................................93

iii

Appendix II. Program For Timoshenko Beam ..............................................................103

iv

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig 2-2 Arbitrary contour around the tip of crack ................................................................13

Fig 2-3 Loaded beam element with transverse crack ...........................................................17

Fig 3-1 Euler-Bernoulli beam element .................................................................................21

Fig 3-2 A two node beam element........................................................................................24

Fig 3-3 Deformation of an Euler Bernoulli Beam ................................................................24

Fig 3-4 A cantilever beamwith one end clamped and a concentrated mass attached at the

other. .............................................................................................................................29

Fig 3-5 Shear force and bending moment diagram...............................................................31

Fig 3-6 Schematic representation of an element with a crack. .............................................34

Fig 4-1 Deformation of a Timoshenko Beam .......................................................................35

Fig 4-2 Two Node Linear Element. ......................................................................................38

Fig 4-3 Linear Shape Functions............................................................................................39

Fig 4-4 Linear Element in the natural Coordinate system ....................................................41

Fig 4-5 Deformation of beam including shear......................................................................46

Fig 4-6 Cross-section of a beam ...........................................................................................47

Fig 4-7 Beam with two elements. .........................................................................................53

Fig 5-1 The program algorithm for Euler-Bernoulli beam ...................................................58

Fig 5-2 The program algorithm for Timoshenko beam ........................................................59

Fig 5-3 The program algorithm for the GUI program ..........................................................60

Fig 5-4 Front page of GUI ....................................................................................................61

Fig 5-5 The input Window for Euler-Bernoulli beam. .........................................................62

v

Fig 5-7 The input window for Timoshenko beam. ...............................................................63

Fig 5-8 The output window for Timoshenko beam ..............................................................64

Fig 6-1 Error analysis for comparison of Timoshenko and Euler-Bernoulli beams.............67

Fig 6-2 Fundamental (first) frequency ratios for different crack positions. .........................69

Fig 6-3 The changes of the first natural frequencies as a function of the crack depth at

element seven, a) for Timoshenko beam, b) for the Euler-Bernoulli beam..................71

Fig 6-4 Mode shape graphs without mass: a) for Euler-Bernoulli beam with crack

(continuous line) and without crack (dash line), b) for Timoshenko beam with crack

(continuous line) and without crack (dash line)............................................................72

Fig 6-5 Mode shape graphs with mass: a) for Euler-Bernoulli beam with crack (continuous

line) and without crack (dash line), b) for Timoshenko beam with crack (continuous

line) and without crack (dash line). ..............................................................................73

Fig 6-6 Mode shape graphs without mass for second mode shape: a) for Euler-Bernoulli

beam with crack (continuous line) and without crack (dash line), b) for Timoshenko

beam with crack (continuous line) and without crack (dash line). ...............................73

Fig 6-7Mode shape graphs with mass for second mode shape: a) for Euler-Bernoulli beam

with crack (continuous line) and without crack (dash line), b) for Timoshenko beam

with crack (continuous line) and without crack (dash line)..........................................74

Fig 6-8 Deviation of first mode shape due to crack for Timoshenko beam without mass. ..74

Fig 6-9 Deviation of first mode shape due to crack for Euler-Bernoulli without mass........75

vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1 ...............................................................................................................................12

Table 6-1Geometry and Property of Timoshenko beam and Euler-Bernoulli beams ..........66

Table 6-2 Comparison of the first three natural frequencies of Timoshenko beam and EulerBernoulli for various L/h ratios. ...................................................................................66

Table 6-3 Geometry and Property of Timoshenko beam .....................................................68

Table 6-5 Determination of Natural Frequencies with different crack depth ratio at

element 7 for Timoshenko ........................................................................................70

Table 6-6 Determination of Natural Frequencies With different crack depth at

element 7 for Euler-Bernoulli beam. .......................................................................70

Table 6-7 For the First Natural Frequency at e/L=0.4..........................................................76

Table 6-8 For the Second Natural Frequency at e/L=0.4 .....................................................76

Table 6-9 For Third Natural Frequency at e/L=0.4 ..............................................................76

Table 6-10 For the First Natural Frequency at e/L=0.6........................................................76

Table 6-11 For the Second Natural Frequency at e/L=0.6 ...................................................77

Table 6-12 For the Third Natural Frequency at e/L=0.6 ......................................................77

vii

NOTATION

A

Width of beam

E

nth element

Form factor

Shear modulus

Height of beam

I

Moment of inertia

KE

Kinetic energy

Ki

Stress intensity factor for different modes of fracture, for i=I, II, and III

Bending moment

Ml

Lamped mass

viii

nel

Ni

P1

Axial load

P2

P3

P4

P5

Pi

First moment

r

Weigh residual

Arc length

sdof

Shear forces

wi

Test function

Characteristic stress

Fe

Me

ix

Ke

Shear stress

Element domain

{d }

{ }

Shear angle

Strain energy

[T ]

Transfer matrix

ui

Displacement component

M eR

Rotary Inertia

ij

Strain tensor

iT

cij(oT )

[kk ]

cij

Local flexibility

Poisson ratio

[K c ]

[K cT ]

cij( 0 )

cij(1)

pi

Traction load

M eT

Translating inertia

Ub

Us

K be

K se

Mass density

ij

Stress tensor

[kk]

xi

ABSTRACT

Beams are widely used as machine elements and structural elements in civil, mechanical,

naval and aeronautical engineering with quite complex design features. These machine and

structural elements are designed with more care for different load conditions, with good

range of safety factors, and are inspected regularly. Still there are unexpected sudden

failures.

In order to attain the maximum reliability of machinery and structures, there is no way

except monitoring the health of susceptible critical components. This leads to continuous

gathering of information of changes in their static and/or dynamic behavior.

The main objective of this thesis is to develop a method for the investigation of cracked

beam behavior of a Timoshenko beam under different conditions such as orientation of

crack, size of crack and inclusion of additional mass. Moreover, the results have been

compared with Euler-Bernoulli beam. The methods, formulation and results obtained can

be used to understanding the behavior of a cracked beam structure.

The results obtained are compared with other published results. The comparison shows that

the method used in the thesis is eligible to investigate the behavior of cracked Timoshenko

beams under different loading conditions.

xii

ABSTRACT

Beams are widely used as machine elements and structural elements in civil, mechanical,

naval and aeronautical engineering with quite complex design features. These machine and

structural elements are designed with more care for different load conditions, with good

range of safety factors, and are inspected regularly. Still there are unexpected sudden

failures.

In order to attain the maximum reliability of machinery and structures, there is no way

except monitoring the health of susceptible critical components. This leads to continuous

gathering of information of changes in their static and/or dynamic behavior.

The main objective of this thesis is to develop a method for the investigation of cracked

beam behavior of a Timoshenko beam under different conditions such as orientation of

crack, size of crack and inclusion of additional mass. Moreover, the results have been

compared with Euler-Bernoulli beam. The methods, formulation and results obtained can

be used to understanding the behavior of a cracked beam structure.

The results obtained are compared with other published results. The comparison shows that

the method used in the thesis is eligible to investigate the behavior of cracked Timoshenko

beams under different loading conditions.

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1

by

using

metallic beams. Beams are widely used as structural element in civil, mechanical, naval,

aeronautical engineering. During the time leading to World War, every structure and part of

machinery were designed based on the tensile strength of a material. However, unforeseen

failure had been frequently observed. One of the major disasters of structural failure was

the sinking of Liberty Ships. These ships were participating in the war. Though they were

designed well, they collapsed without any external force. After careful investigations, the

cause of failure was determined to be fracture of components. And that was the main reason

for an introduction of fracture mechanics. Due to this new design concept, substantial

improvement the life of machinery and saving was observed.

In structures and machinery, one undesirable phenomenon is crack initiation in which the

impact cannot be seen overnight. Cracks develop gradually through time that lead finally to

catastrophic failure. Therefore, crack should be monitored regularly with more care. This

will lead to more effective preventive measure and ensure

In order to investigate the behavior of cracks in structures and machinery, there are

different methods like ultrasonic inspection, X-ray inspection, experimental method, Eddy

current inspection, etc. However the above methods require high cost and time even if they

1

are easy to apply them. Moreover, most of them are limited to detection of cracks. So it is

better to establish a new method for simple geometric structures that helps to see the

behavior of cracked beam element using Finite Element Method, FEM, based on vibration

analysis. When cracks are predicted using this method, time and money will be saved.

Using FEM method based on vibration analysis we can observe the effects of inclusion and

orientation of crack on the natural frequency of the beam, since the presence of crack

reduce the system natural frequency of the beam. Most of the beams in the structures and

machinery have mass so that the effects of additional mass attachment on the cracked beam

will be investigated.

Therefore the main objective of this thesis is to develop a method for investigation of

cracked beam behavior for Timoshenko beam under different conditions such as orientation

of crack, size of crack and inclusion of additional mass. Moreover, the results have been

compared to results obtained for Euler-Bernoulli beams. The results obtained can be used

for determining behavior of cracked beams which can eventually be used for prediction of

cracks in beams

1.2

Literature Review

The tendency to monitor a structure and detect damage at the earlier stage is pervasive

throughout the civil, mechanical and aerospace engineering fields. Most currently used

damage investigation methods are included in one of the following categories: visual or

localization experimental methods such as ultrasonic method, magnetic field methods,

radiography, eddy-current method and etc. All of these experimental techniques require

that the vicinity of damage be known a priori and that the portion of the structure being

inspected be readily accessibly.

The need for quantitative global damage investigation and detection method that can be

applied to complex structure has led to the development and continued research of

methods, which examine change in static and dynamic characteristic of the structure. In this

literature review, different ways of investigation of crack behavior will be discussed.

To study the behavior of cracked beam, in the past decade researchers have used open and

closed (breathing) crack model in their studies. In 1970s, Dimarogonas and Chondros [26]

used local flexibility matrix to simulate the stiffness of the shaft system with opening crack.

Also Maiti[76], Tsai et. Al.[80] and Ostachowitwz et. Al.[84] assumed in their work that

the crack in a structural element is open and remains open during vibration. Such an

assumption give an advantage to avoid the complexities that results

characteristics presented by introduced a breathing crack.

On the other hand, different researchers have implemented closed crack model in their

work for investigation of crack behavior. Among them, Chondros and Dimarogonas [29],

Rivola and White [15], Dimarogonas and Paipetis [36], and Shen[62] dealt with closed

crack model. Dimarogonas and Paipetis [36]

discussion of the dynamic

the

including for closing cracks. Also, Rivola and White analyzed the behavior of crack based

on closed crack model and they have done experimental test to show the effectiveness of

their method. Even if all the above researchers did their work on closed crack model, they

didnt show the effectiveness of their method with respect to open crack model. However,

the application

To study the behavior of crack in the structures, vibration parameter like compliance,

mechanical impedance and damping factors have played great roll. The presence of crack

in the structure affects directly or indirectly these vibration characteristics. Specifically, the

eigen frequency and mode shape of structures are changed from their original value due to

an inclusion of a crack. That is why many researchers focus on these parameters to

investigate the behavior of crack. Pandey [13] investigated the behavior of crack related

with curvature mode shape of structure. He has shown that the absolute change in the

curvature made shapes are localized in the region of damage and hence can be

used to

analyzed the damage in the structure. He proposed an experimental method to verify his

work.

Y. Bamnios, E. Douka and A. Trochidis [89] used mechanical impedance model in order

to investigate the crack behavior and to predict the damaged zone. They investigated the

4

and

Qian, Du and Jiang [43] have derived an element stiffens matrix of a beam with crack from

an integration of stress intensity factors and then established a finite element model of

cracked beam

results that they have obtained analytically agree quite well with the experimental data.

Several methods were used to deal with the behavior of crack in the structure. Zheng et.

al. [22] used modified Fourier series to investigate the response of natural frequencies of

cracked beam. However, their method is applied only for standard linear eigen value

equation. T.G. Chondors and Dimarogonas studied the dynamic sensitivity of structure to

cracks using Rayleight principle. As per their conclusion, the method reduced the

computational effort needed for the full eigen solution of cracked structures and gave

acceptable accuracy. Also different researchers have used Finite Element Method (FEM)

for solving the problem related with crack behavior. Among them, Pandey et. al.[13],

Sekhar et. al. [17], Qain et. al. [43], Sinha et. al.[48], Chinchalkes[68], Maiti et. al. [73],

Ostachowitcz et. al.[85], Matijaz[5], G.D. Gouanaris and C.A. Papadoulso and also A.D.

Dimarogonas [8], P. G. Nikolakopouloz, D. E. Katsreas and C.A. Papadopouloss[9]. All

of them confirmed that their results are very close to the experimental methods. Matijaz

presented a generalization of a simple mathematical model based on FEM for transverse

motion of a beam with crack. However, he didnt show the effectiveness of his method by

comparing with other methods. Moreover, mass wasnt considered on his model.

Many investigators have studied the problem of crack detection in rotating shaft in the last

three decades. A.D Dimarogonas and C.A. Papadopoulos [10], [11], [91], [92], [93], have

investigated the behavior of crack on rotating shaft. In [98], they considered the system to

be bi-linear. A de Laval rotor with an open crack was investigated by way of application of

the theory of shafts with dissimilar moment of inertia. Furthermore, they found analytical

solution for the closing crack under the assumption of large static deflection, which is a

situation common in turbomachinery. In [11], they investigate the coupling of longitudinal

and bending vibration of rotating shaft, due to an open transverse surface crack. Also in

another next work [93], the coupling of

circular cross section of Timoshenko beam with a transverse crack was investigated.

investigate the crack behavior. Among them are S.P. Lene and S.K. Maiti [73], Zhou, and

Y.K. Cheung [6], and M. Kisa, J Brandon and M Topeu [48]. S.P. and S.K. Maiti, [73],

used both method forward (determination of frequency of beam knowing the crack

parameter) and inverse (determination of crack

their methods of accuracy and it is quite encouraging. Also M Kisa, J Brandon and M

Topeu analyzed the vibration characteristic of a cracked Timoshenko beam by applying

finite element method and component mode synthesis integrating together. To illustrate the

effectiveness of their approach, results had been compared with experimental data and

previous published literature. However, they didnt include additional mass to observe

effect of masseson the cracked beam behavior.

In this thesis investigation of crack behavior will be dealt by using the Finite Element

Method. In this method, the beam will be divided in to several

taking boundary conditions

by

advantage of finding natural frequency is its measurability from the machine and structure

at any single point and easily without dismantling much access requirement. In this thesis

the local flexibility of beam element model follows the approach of Dimarogonas [26, 11].

To avoid the non-linearity of the system, in this thesis work, crack will be modeled based

on open crack model and additional mass will be included. For the sake of verification the

beam model used is the cantilever beam, since many authors have analyzed the cantilever

beam and have got experimental results.

1.3

This thesis is organized in to eight chapters. In the first chapter, the objective and overview

of the thesis are discussed. Also a literature review is given detailing information about

investigations and methods of analysis of cracked beams and their behavior, which have

been investigated by different researchers.

In chapter two, mathematical model

concepts like stress intensity factors, mode of cracks, J-Integral and Castiglianos theorem

are discussed briefly.

In Chapter Three, the equation of motion for an Euler-Bernoulli beam is developed. Using

the governing equation of motion, Finite Element method is implemented for cracked and

uncracked beam elements.

7

developed based on FEM for cracked and uncracked element. Also related topics, like

isoparametric element and strain energy formulations will be discussed.

In chapter five, a computer programming is developed with the help of algorithms to study

the behavior of cracked beams for two cases: Euler-Bernoulli and Timoshenko beams. In

chapter six, detail discussion of results is presented. Finally, chapter seven gives conclusion

and future outlook.

2

2.1

Introduction

Crack is a problem that society has faced for as long as there have been man-made

structures. The occurrence of crack problems may actually be worse today than in the

previous century, because more can go wrong in our complex technological society.

The cause of crack initiation in structures generally falls in to one of the following major

groups: First, negligence during design, construction or operation of the structure: and

second, application of new design or material, which produce an unexpected results. In the

first case, existing procedures are sufficient to avoid failure, but are not

followed by one

or more of the parties involved, due to human error, ignorance, or willful misconduct.

Unskillful workmanship, substandard or inappropriate materials, error in stress analysis,

and operator error are example of where the appropriate technology and experience are

available, but not applied well.

In the second case, the initiation of crack is much more difficult to prevent. For instant,

when an improved design is introduced, there are invariably factors that the designer

may not anticipate. New materials can offer tremendous advantage, but also potential

problems. Consequently, a new design or material should be placed in to service only after

extensive testing and analysis. Such an approach will reduce the frequency of failure due to

crack, but not eliminate them entirely.

To avoid or minimize the structural failure due to the above cases, there are two design

approaches. Those are the strength of material approach and the fracture mechanics

9

approach. In the first approach, the anticipated design stress is compared to the flow

properties of a candidate material; a material is assumed to be adequate if its strength is

greater than the expected applied stress. This approach may attempt to guard against brittle

fracture by imposing a safety factor on stress, combined with minimum tensile elongation

requirements on material.

In the second approach, that of fracture mechanics has three important variables: applied

stress, flow size and fracture toughness. In fracture analysis there are two approaches:

energy criterion and the stress intensity approach. In this thesis the stress intensity approach

will be discussed in detail and will be employed to investigate the behavior of cracks in

vibration analysis.

2.2

Modeling of Crack

In cracked structure, the stress field near crack-tips may be one of the three modes of

fracture, Fig 2.1. The opening mode, Mode I, is associated with local displacement in

which the crack surfaces move directly apart, symmetric with respect to the x-y and x-z

plane. The edge-sliding mode, Mode II, is characterized by displacement in which the

cracked surfaces slide over one another perpendicular to the leading edge of the crack,

symmetric with respect to the x-y plane and skew-symmetric with respect to the x-z plane.

Mode III, the tearing mode, finds the crack surfaces sliding with respect to one another

parallel to the leading edge, skew-symmetric with respect to the x-y and x-z planes.

10

x

y

Mode I

Mode II

Mode III

Even if these are the basic fracture modes, most of the time the crack growth usually takes

place in Mode I or close to it [2], especially for member like slender beams [57]. If there is

a load on the structure, due to shear force, Mode II will be considered combined with Mode

I to study the crack behavior. Therefore, Mode I and Mode II will be applied to investigate

the behavior of crack if there is a load on the beam.

The stress intensity factor defines the amplitude of the crack tip singularity. That is stresses

near the crack tip increase proportional to the stress intensity factor. Physically, stress

intensity factor may be regarded as the intensity of load transmittal through the crack-tip

region caused by the introduction of a crack into the body of interest.

11

K I = F

2.1

F is a form factor, which is dimensionless constant that depend on geometry and

mode of loading.

numerically or analytically for various cases, such as for the Center Cracked Test

Specimen, the Double Edge Notch Test Specimen, the Single Edge Notch Test Specimen

and the Pure Bending etc.

( h ) , where h is

Different authors have given different empirical relations and value for F

the height of the beam, and some of them are given in Table 2.1

Table 2-1

( h)

Person

Brown

= 1.122 1.40 + 7.33 13.0.8 + 14.0

h

h

h

h

Tada

Anderson

Papadopoulos

Accuracy

3

2h

2h

=

tan

2h

cos

2h

1.12

2

3

+

1

.

122

0

.

56

0

.

085

0

.

18

h

h

h

=

1

1 ( / h ) 2

12

0.2% for

0.6

Better than

0.5% for any

The J contour integral is the strain energy density function (SEDF). It has enjoyed great

success as a fracture characterizing parameter for nonlinear and linear materials.

Consider an arbitrary counter-clockwise path ( ) around the crack tip of a crack, Fig 2.2.

The J integral is given by [2].

u

J = wdy pi i ds

xi

2.2

ii

0

s is the arc length.

pi is the traction exerted on the boundary and the crack surface.

u i is displacement component

y

13

To implement J-integral in modeling of crack, the following argument plays a great roll.

Let represent the area enclosed by the curve in Fig 2.2 and assume that the curve is

shrunk toward the crack tip ( 0 ). Within this area the gradients are so large (toward

singularities at the crack tip) that they dominate all local derivatives with respect to the

crack length. Thus, the field within 0 will be stationary in the sense that they

mainly translate with the crack tip during a differential crack motion. Give the external

action, when the crack tip moves a small step forward, the changes observed at a fixed

location in will therefore be the same as when the observer moves the same length back

toward the stationary crack. [57]

2.4

applying to some function of x and with x measured form a fixed origin. Then the

second right-hand term of Eq. 2.2 equals

pi

u i

u

ds = pi i ds

x

2.5

which can be interpreted as the rate of work exerted per unit thickness by the outside

material on the material inside as the crack moves.

wdy

can be seen as total strain energy carried by particles in to per unit thickness and crack

advance when that region move the crack tip.. The sum J will therefore represent a net

expenditure of mechanical energy per unit crack area during virtual growth, which again

14

equals to the crack driving force. We have thus arrived at a simple relation and an

important physical interpretation of the J integral

2.6

J=G

where G is crack driving force.

For linear elastic material G will be

K i2

G=

E'

hence J =

2.7

K i2

E'

2.8

E ' = E , or E

(1 )

2

Eq. 2.8 gives a relation between J-integral and the stress intensity factor for linear elastic.

1 n

n

J = K Ii + K IIi + m K IIi

E i =1

i =1

i =1

where j=1, 2, 3., n the load index which are applied on the structure.

15

2.9

Due to the presence of crack in the structure additional displacement will be created. This

additional displacement will introduce strain energy. Castiglianos theorem says, When

forces act on elastic system subjected to small displacement, the displacement

corresponding to any force, collinear with the force, is equal to the partial derivative of the

total strain energy with respect to the force. Mathematically that is

ui =

U

Pi

2.10

Pi is the applied load (force or bending moment)

In order to study the behavior of crack in the beam we have to take some assumption. The

crack has been considered as open with transverse crack depth, and its depth is uniform.

Also the material has the same EI.

According to the principle of Saint-Venant, the stress field is affected only in the region

adjacent to crack. The element stiffens matrix, except for the cracked element may be

regarded under a certain limitation of element size. It is very difficult to find an appropriate

shape function to express the kinetic energy and elastic potential energy approximately,

because of the discontinuity of deformation in the cracked element. Finding of the

additional stress energy of crack, however, has been studied deeply in fracture mechanics

16

and the flexibility coefficient expressed by a stress intensity factor can be easily derived by

means of Castilianos theorem, in linear range.

Consider a beam with a given stiffness properties, dimension b h, and a transverse crack

depth of , see Fig. 2.3.

y

z

a

P

P

x

P

P

P

Where P1

Axial load

P4 & P5 - bending Moments

Paris [36] give the additional displacement u i due to a crack of depth , in the i direction

as

ui =

J ( )d

Pi

2.11

where J ( ) is strain energy density function [SEDF] or J-Integral, which is found in Eq. 2.9

17

cij =

u i

2

J ( )d

=

Pi Pi Pj

2.12

cij =

u i 1 2 b

=

Pi b Pi Pj 0

J ( )ddz

2.13

Since the energy density is a scalar quantity, it is permissible to integrate along tip of the

crack it being assumed that the crack depth is variable and that the stress intensity factor is

given for the element strip.

K I 1 = 1 F1

h

K I 4 = 4 F1

h

K I 5 = 5 F1

h

KI2 = KI3 = KI6 = 0

KI3 =

where 1 =

P1

bh

where 4 =

P4

6P

z = 42

3

h(b) 12

hb

where 5 =

6P

P5

y = 52

3

bh

bh 12

3P3 L

FI , the stress intensity due to shear force for mode I

bh 2

K II 3 = 3 FII

h

K II 1 = K II 2 = K II 4 = 0

where 3 =

18

P3

bh

2.14

In this thesis only bending moment about z-axis, P5, and shear force in the direction of y,

P3, are considered.

Now we can find the local flexibility of c33, c35, c55 by combining Eq. 2.9, 2.13, and 2.14,

then we will make the non-dimensional term.

u i 1 2 b

c 33 =

=

P3 b P3 P3 0

J ( )ddz

0

1

(K I 3 + K I 5 )2 + K II2 3

E'

3P LF 2

3P LF 6 P5 FI

+ 2 3 I

3 I

2

2

bh 2

bh

bh

1

2

2

E'

6 P F

P FII

+ 5 2 I + 3

bh

bh

where J ( ) =

Up on substitution Eq. 2.14 to the above equation the following result is obtain

c33 =

18FI2 L2

E' b 2 h 4

2 FII2 2

+ 2 2

b h 2

2.15

2 b 1

2

K I 3 + K I 5 ) + K II2 3 ddz

(

P3 P5 0 0 E '

1

(K I 3 + K I 5 )2 + K II2 3

where J =

E'

c35 =

Over integration

19

c35 =

18LFI2 2

2.16

E' b 2 h 4 2

And finally

u i

2 b 1

=

(K I 3 + K I 5 )2 + K II2 3 ddx

0

0

E'

P5 P5 P5

1

where J =

(K I 3 + K I 5 )2 + K II2 3

E'

c55 =

c55 =

72 FI2 2

2.17

E' b2 h4 2

In the case of this thesis I assume that the only available loads are P3 and P5, where P3 is

bending load and P5 is shear load due to mass.

20

3

3.1

Euler- Bernoulli Beam formulation

In this thesis the beam is first modeled based on the Euler- Bernoulli beam theory.

The Euler-Bernoulli assumption of elementary beam theory will be employed, namely:

a) There is an axis of the beam, which undergoes no extension or contraction. The xaxis is located along this neutral axis.

b) Cross sections perpendicular to the neutral axis in the undeformed beam remain

plane and remain perpendicular to the deformed neutral axis, that is, transverse

shear deformation is neglected.

c) The material is linearly elastic and the beam is homogenous at any crass section.

d) y and z are negligible compared to x

q(x, t)

M(x , t)

M(x + dx, t)

The Euler Bernoulli equation for beam bending can be written as follow

2v 2

+

t 2 x 2

2v

EI 2 = q( x, t )

x

21

3.1

EI is the beam rigidity;

q(x, t) is the externally applied pressure loading.

3.2

We apply one of the methods of weighted residual, Galerkins method, to the beam

equation to develop the finite element formulation and the corresponding matrix equation.

R=

2v 2 2v

0 t 2 + x 2 EI x 2 q wi dx = 0

3.2

wi is a test function

The weak formulation of Eq. 3.2 is obtained from integration by parts for the second term

of the equation as follow.

n

dw

d 3v

d 3v

2

R = 2 wi dx + EIwi 3 |l0 i EI 3 dx wi q( x )dx = 0

dx

dx

x

i =1

e

e

e t

d 2 wi

d 3 v dw

2

d 2v

d 3v

R = 2 wi dx + EIwi 3 i EI 2 | l0 +

EI

dx wi q( x )dx = 0

2

3

dx

x

dx

dx

dx

i =1

e t

e

e

22

3.3

dwi

2v

2 v 2 wi

R = 2 wi dx + EI 2

qwi dx + Vwi M

2

=0

x

t

x

x

e

e

e

0

i =1

where V = EI

M = EI

3.4

3v

is shear forces

x 3

2v

is bending moment

x 2

n

For the time being we consider shape function for special interpolation of transverse static

deflection, v, in terms of nodal variable. Interpolation in terms of time domain will be

discussed latter on. Also in Galarkins method, the shape functions are the same

as the

wi=Ni

where Ni is shape function which is supposed to be found in the in the for going

discussion

Then

l

dN i

d 2 N i d 2v

e EI dx 2 dx 2 dx e N i q(x )dx + N iV M dx 0 = 0

3.5

To formulate the shape function now we consider an element, which has two nodes on each

end, Fig 3.2

23

y

v2

v1

1

The deformation of a beam must have continuous slope as well as continuous deflection at

any two neighboring beam elements.

The Euler-Bernoulli beam equation is based on the assumption that the plane normal to the

natural axis before deformation remains normal to the natural axis after deformation (see

Fig. 3.3).

24

dv

(i.e. slop is the first derivative of deflection in terms of x).

dx

Because there are four nodal variables for the beam element, we assume a cubic polynomial

function for v (x).

The elastic curve of a beam can be approximated by.

v( x ) = C 0 + C1 x + C 2 x 2 + C 3 x 3

(x ) =

3.6

dv( x )

= C1 + 2C 2 x + 3C 3 x 2

dx

3.7

(0)=C0=1, C0=1

At x=l, v (l)=v1 + 1l + C2l2 + C3l3=v2

From the above relations, C2 and C3 can be obtained by simplification:

2

(v1 v2 ) + 13 (1 + 2 )

3

l

l

3

2

C 2 = 2 (v 2 v1 ) 1 2

l

l

l

C3 =

By substituting the C0, C1, C2, and C3 and rearranging then we found the following results.

3x 2 2 x 3

3x 2 2 x 3

3x 2 x 3

2x 2 x3

v( x ) = 1 2 + 2 v1 + x

+ 2 1 + 2 3 v 2 + 2 + 2 2

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

Thus, the shape functions are:

25

3.8

3x 2 2 x 3

N 1 = 1 2 + 2

l

l

2x 2 x3

N 2 = x

+ 2

l

l

3.9

3x 2 2 x 3

N 3 = 2 3

l

l

3x 2 x 3

N 4 = 2 + 2

l

l

It is important to note two shape functions corresponding to v and are used for each.

Such types of shape function are called Hermitian shape function.

Let

N1

N

{N } = 2

N3

N 4

d 2 {N }

B=

= N1''

2

dx

N 2''

N 3''

N 4''

N1

N

v( x ) = 2

N3

N 4

v1

2

T

= {N } {vi }

v

3

4

d 2 N

where {B} = 2

dx

d 2v

T

= {B} {vi }

2

dx

3.10

Substitute Eq. 3.10 in and 3.5 when concentrated moment or shear forces are absent

T

[K ]{v } = {F }

e

26

[K ] =

e

{B}EI {B}T dx

3.11

The third term in Eq 3.4, results in the element force vector. For a generally distributed

pressure loading, we need to compute

{F }

e

N1

N

= e {N }q( x )dx = 2 dx

N3

N 4

3.12

In the case concentrated shear forces and moments act on a node they have to be added

after.

Integrating Eq. 3.11 we can find the stiffens matrix

[K ]

e

6l

12

6l 4l 2

EI

= 3

l 12 6l

2l l

6l

12

6l

12

6l

6l

2l 2

6l

4l 2

3.13

If we have a uniform pressure load q0 within the element force vector become

{F }

e

6l

N1

2

l

q l

N

= q0 2 dx = 0

0

12 6l

N3

l 2

N 4

3.14

{F }

e

6l V

2

q0 l M 1

=

+

12 6l V2

l 2 M 2

3.15

27

The last term in Eq 3.4) represents the boundary condition of shear forces and bending

moment at the two boundary points, x=0 and x=l, of the beam. If these

boundary

condition are known, the known shear forces and/or bending moment are included in the

system forces vector at the two boundary nodes. Otherwise

However, deflection and /or slope are known as geometric boundary conditions for this

case.

For dynamic analysis of beams the inertia forces must be included. In this case the

transverse deflection is a function of x and t. The deflection is interpolated within a beam

element as given below.

v( x, t ) = N 1 ( x)v1 (t ) + N 2 ( x) 1 (t ) + N 3 ( x)v 2 (t ) + N 4 ( x) 2 (t )

3.16

As we see Eq. 3.16 states that the shape functions are used to interpolate the deflection in

terms of the spatial domain and the nodal variation are function of time. Now the first terms

in Eq. 3.4 becomes

where [N ] = [N 1

[N ] [N ]dx{d&&e }

T

N2

N3

3.17

N4 ]

e

And the superimposed dot denote temporal derivative for Eq. 3.17 and = A , the

element mass matrix becomes

[M ] = A[N ] [N ]dx

e

3.18

28

156 22l

2

A 22l 4l

=

13l

420 54

2

13 3l

54

13l

156

22l

13l

3l 2

22l

4l 2

3.19

Ml

Fig 3-4 A cantilever beamwith one end clamped and a concentrated mass attached at the

other.

e

3.20

156 22l

2

A 22l 4l

=

13l

420 54

2

13 3l

[M ]

e

54

13l

156

22l

13l

0

0

2

3l

+ Ml

0

22l

2

4l

0

54

156 22l

2

13l

Al 22l 4l

420

=

13l 156 +

Ml

420 54

Al

13 3l 2

22l

29

13l

3l 2

22l

2

4l

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 1 0

0 0 0

3.21

The element stiffness matrix does not change for the dynamics analysis because the shape

function are the same for both static and dynamics analysis. However the force term may

vary as a function of time. The force vector is for the dynamic analysis

l

3.22

The mass matrix equation for a dynamic beam analysis is, after assembly of element

matrix and vectors,

[M ]{d&&}+ [k ]{d } = {F (t )}

3.23

For free vibration of a beam, the eigen value problem

([K ] [M ]){d }= 0

2

3.24

3.3

When we make comparison between the concentrated load and distributed load for cracked

beam, the shear force

respect to length.

30

varied with

x

Shear Force Diagram

Since shear force has its impact on the behavior of cracked beam it is advisable to take

the shear forces which has uniform value through the length in order to take the critical

condition in every part of the beam, by assuming q = qo l .

3.4

In order to develop an element stiffness matrix for a cracked beam element, there are two

parts to the strain energy: The strain energy for the uncracked beam element and the

additional strain energy due to the crack. The strain energy of an element without crack is

obtained from the existing moment and load (mass). The additional strain energy due to

the crack has been

With shear action neglected, the strain energy of an element without a crack is

U=

1

1 x

dV

=

bhdx

v

0

2

2

E

31

3.25

Where = E

3.26

3.27

Up on substitution Eq. 3.26 and 3.27 in Eq. 3.25 the strain energy can be given as follow

U=

bh x 2

dx

2 E 0

3.28

The stress, , in Eq.3.28 refers to the stress due to bending and the stress due to shear

force, which is

= M + P

where

3.29

M =

M

M h

y=

I

I 2

3.30

P =

P(l x)

P(l x) h

y=

I

I

2

3.31

By substituting Eq. 3.30 and 3.31 in Eq. 3.28 the following equation is found.

2

bh

U=

2E

Mh P(l xh)

0 2I + 2I dx

bh

U=

2E

2

Mh 2

Mh P (l x)h P(l x)h

0 2I + 2 2 I 2I + 2I dx

3.32

U=

3

2 EI

2

P 2l 3

2

M

l

MPl

+

+

3.33

Now, the flexibility coefficient for an element without a crack, in different load condition is

32

cij(o ) =

U (0 )

Pi Pj

Where P3 = P, P5 = M ,

i, j = 3, 5

3.34

U (0 ) = U

(0 )

=

c33

2

P32

2 EI

2

P 2l 3

2

+

+

M

l

MPl

l3

(0 )

c33

= 3

3EI

(0 )

=

c35

(0 )

c35

(0 )

c55

2

P3 P5

3.35

2 EI

2

P 2l 3

2

+

+

M

l

MPl

l2

(0 )

= c53

3

=

2 EI

2

=

P52

(0 )

c55

=

2 EI

3.36

2

P 2l 3

2

M l + MPl +

3l

EI

The total flexibility coefficient matrix for an element without a crack will be

c ( 0 )

cij( 0) = 33

(0 )

c53

(0 )

c35

(0 )

c55

3.37

3.38

Where cij(1) is the compliance for cracked beam, which was derived in Eq. 2.15-2.17.

(1)

cij

(1)

c33

= (1)

c53

(1)

c35

(1)

c55

33

P5= M

P3=P

Fig 3-6 Schematic representation of an element with a crack.

From equilibrium condition of the element, transfer of moment and shear from one node to

the other is obtained by,

Pi

T

M

Pi +1

i

= [T ]

P

i

+

1

M i +1

M i +1

1 0

l 1

Where [T ] =

1 0

0 1

, Transfer matrix

So, the stiffness matrix of the cracked element can be written as [43]

[K c ] = [T ][c]1 [T ]T

1 0

l 1

[c ]1

[K c ] =

1

0

1

0

3.39

1 l 1 0

0 1 0 1

3.40

1

Once we have got the stiffness matrix for the cracked beam we can assemble it and find the

global matrix, which will be discussed in chapter four. In this case the number of elements

in the beam can be varied based on desired accuracy.

34

4

4.1

TIMOSHEKNO BEAM

Timoshenko Beam Formulation

In the case of Timoshenko beam, a plane normal to the beam axis before deformation does

not remain normal to the axis after deformation. Thus the effects of rotary inertia and

transverse shear deformation have to be included in the analysis of a Timoshenko beam.

g

j v

j v

j x

j x

y, v

x, u

Let u and v be the axial and transverse displacement of a beam, respectively. Because of

transverse shear deformation, the slope of the beam is different from

slope equals

dv

. Instead, the

dx

dv

where is the transverse shear strain. As result, the displacement

dx

u ( x, y ) = y ( x )

4.1

v( x ) = v

4.2

35

Where the x-axis is located along the neutral axis of the beam and the beam is not subjected

to an axial load such that the neutral axis does not have the axial strain. From Eq. 4.1 and

4.2, the axial and shear strain are

d

dx

= y

= +

4.3

dv

dx

4.4

The element stiffness matrix can be obtained from the strain energy expression for an

element. The strain energy for an element of length , l, is

l h 2

b

b

U = T E dy dx +

2 0 h 2

2

l h2

G dy dx

4.5

0 h 2

The first term in Eq. 4.5 is the bending strain energy and the second term is the shear strain

energy. b and h are the width and height of the beams respectively, and is the correction

factor for shear energy where value is normally

5

. [1]

6

Substitute Eq. 4.3 and Eq. 4.4 into Eq. 4.5 and taking integration with respect to y gives

T

1 d

dv

dv

d

U =

dx + + GA + dx

EI

2 0 dx

2 0

dx

dx

dx

4.6

where I and A are the moment of inertia and area of the beam cross-section.

To derive the element stiffness matrix for the Timoshenko beam, the variables v and

need to be interpolated within each element. As it has been observed form Eq. 4.6, v and

are independent variables. That is, we can interpolate them independently using proper

shape functions. This results in the satisfaction of inter-element compatibility, i.e continuity

36

of both the transverse displacement v and slope between two neighboring elements. As a

result, any kind of C0 shape function can be used for the present elements. Shape function

of order C0 are much easier to construct than shape functions of order C1. It is especially

very difficult to construct shape function of order C1 for two-dimensional and threedimensional analysis such as the classical plate theory. C1 means both v and

v

continuous

x

between two neighboring elements. In general, Cn type continuity means the shape function

have continuity up to the nth order derivative between two neighboring element elements

To derive the stiffness matrix we use the simple linear shape function for both variables.

That is,

v = [H 1

v

H 2 ] 1

v

4.7

= [H 1

H 2 ] 1

2

4.8

where H1 and H2 are linear shape functions for Timoshenko beam. The linear element looks

like that in Fig 3.2, but the shape functions used are totally different from those for the

Hermitian beam element in Euler Bernoulli beam. To develop the stiffness matrices using

linear shape function for Timoshenko beam, the concept of isoparametric mapping will be

applied.

4.2

Isoparametric Element

Isoparametric elements use mathematical mapping from one coordinate system to another

coordinate system. The former coordinate system is called the natural coordinate system

while the latter is called the physical coordinate system.

37

To derive the isoparametric element shape functions, the shape functions with respect to

physical coordinate should be derived, first. Consider a subdomain or a finite element

shown in Fig. 4.2. The element has two nodes, one at each end. At each node, the

coordinate value (x1 or x2) and the nodal variable (u1 or u2) are assigned. Let us assume the

unknown trial function to be

u = c1 x + c 2

4.9

c1 and c2 are constants

x

x2

u2

x1

u1

Fig 4-2 Two Node Linear Element.

Eq. 4.9 will be express in terms of nodal variables. In other word, c1 and c2 need to be

replaced by u1 and u2. To this end, u will be evaluated at x=x1 and x=x2. Then

u ( x1 ) = c1 x1 + c 2 = u1

4.10

u ( x 2 ) = c1 x 2 + c 2 = u 2

4.11

Now solving Eq. 4.10 and 4.11 simultaneously for c1 and c2 gives

c1 =

u 2 + u1

x 2 x1

4.12

c1 =

u1 x 2 u 2 x1

x 2 x1

4.13

38

Substitution of Eq. 4.12 and 4.13 into Eq. 4.9 and rearrangement of the resultant expression

result in

u = H 1 ( x )u1 + H 2 ( x )u 2

4.14

H 1 (x ) =

x2 x

l

4.15

H 2 (x ) =

x x1

l

4.16

where

l = x 2 x1

4.17

Equation 4.14 gives an expression for the variable u in terms of nodal variables, and Eq.15

and Eq. 16 are called linear shape functions. The shape functions are plotted in Fig. 4.3.

H1 (x)

x1

H2 (x)

x2

1. The shape function associated with node 1 has a unit value at node 1 and vanishes

at other nodes. That is,

39

H 1 ( x1 ) = 1, H 1 ( x 2 ) = 0, H 2 ( x1 ) = 0, H 2 ( x 2 ) = 0, H 2 ( x 2 ) = 1

4.18

2

H (x ) = 1

4.19

These are important properties for shape functions. The first property, Eq. 4.18, states that

the variable u must be equal to the corresponding nodal variable at each node (i.e. u(x1)=u1

and u(x2)=u2 as enforced in Eq. 4.10 and 4.11. The second property, Eq. 4.19, says that the

variable u can represent a uniform solution within the element.

Once the shape function for physical coordinate system is developed, the shape function for

isoparametric element will be given in terms of the natural coordinate system as seen in Fig

4.4. The two nodes are located at 1 = 1.0 and 2 = 1.0 , originally, which were x1 and x2 in

physical coordinate system. These nodal positions are arbitrary but the proposed selection

is very useful for numerical integration because the element in the natural coordinate

system is normalized between 1 and 1. The shape function can be written as [1]

H 1 ( ) =

1

(1 )

2

4.20

H 2 ( ) =

1

(1 + )

2

4.21

40

node 1

node 2

x

x 1

Any point between 1 = 1 and 2 = 1 in the natural coordinate system can be mapped onto

a point between x1 and x 2 in the physical coordinate system using the shape function

defined in Eqs. 4.20 and 4.21.

x = H 1 ( )x1 + H 2 ( )x 2

4.22

The same shape functions are also used to interpolate the variables u and v with in the

element

u = H 1 ( )u1 + H 2 ( )u 2

4.23

v = H 1 ( )v1 + H 2 ( )v 2

4.24

If the same shape functions are used for the geometric mapping as well as nodal variable

interpolation, such as Eq. 4.22, 4.23 and 4.24, the element is called the isoparametric

element.

In order to compute

dv

, which is necessary in Eq. 4.6 to compute element matrix for

dx

41

dH 2 ( )

dv dH 1 ( )

=

v1 +

v2

dx

dx

dx

dH 1 ( ) d

dH 2 ( ) d

v1 +

v2

d dx

d dx

4.25

d

dx

, which is the inverse of

. The latter can be computed

dx

d

dH 2 ( )

1

dx dH 1 ( )

x1 +

x 2 = ( x 2 x1 )

=

2

d

d

d

4.26

1

1

dv

=

v1 +

v2 ,

dx

x 2 x1

x 2 x1

dv

1

1

= v1 + v 2

dx

l

l

4.27

In matrix form, Eq. 4.27 can be written as follow

dv 1 1 v1

=

dx l l v 2

4.28

dv 1 1 v1

=

dx l l v 2

d

as follow

dx

4.29

Also Eq. 4.8 can be expressed in terms of isoparametric element by substituting Eq. 4.20

and 4.21.

42

1

1

(1 + ) 1

H 2 ] 1 = (1 )

2

2

2 2

= [H 1

4.30

Now using Eq. 4.7-4.30 along with the strain energy expression Eq. 4.6 yields the

following stiffness matrix for the Timoshenko beam.

[K ]

e

b

1 d

d

=

dx

EI

2 0 dx

dx

l

4.31

Derivate with respect to x and substitute in to Eq. 4.31 yields the following result.

[K ]

e

b

0 0

EI 0 1

=

l 0 0

0 1

0

0 1

0 0

0 1

0

4.32

Also for shear strain energy an equation will be taken from Eq. 4.6.

[K ]

e

s

dv

dv

= + GA + dx

2 0

dx

dx

4.33

Using the concept of isoparametric mapping discussed previously the stiffness matrix for

shear will be derived as follow.

43

Substituting Eq. 4.29 and 4.30 in to Eq.4.33 also changing the limit of integration of

physical coordinate x 2 and x1 to natural coordinate system, 1 and 1, then

[K ]

1l

GA (1 )

=

2 1 1 l

(1 + )

[K ]

2l

4

2l

l2

GA

=

4l 4 2l

l2

2l

e

s

e

s

where dx =

l

d ,

2

2 1

1

l

2

2

4

2l

4

2l

2l

l 2

2l

l2

1

1+ l

d

2 2

l

4.34

4.35

At this point one thing to be noted is that the bending stiffness term, Eq. 4.32, is obtained

using the exact integration of the bending strain energy but the shear stiffness term, Eq.

4.35, is obtained using one point Gauss quadrature rule. The major reason is if the beam

thickness becomes so small compared to its length, the shear energy dominates over the

bending energy. As we have seen Eq. 4.32 and Eq. 4.35, the bending stiffness is

proportional to h 3 l while the transverse shear stiffness is proportional to hl, where h and l

are the thickness and length of beam element, respectively. Hence, as h l becomes smaller

for a very thin beam, the bending term become negligible compared to the shear term. This

is not correct in the physical sense. As the beam becomes thinner, the bending strain energy

is more significant than the shear energy. This phenomenon is called shear locking. In

order to avoid shear locking, the shear strain energy is under-integration. Because of the

44

under-integration the presence beam stiffness matrix is rank deficient. That is, it contains

some fictitious rigid body mode (i.e. zero energy modes).

4.3

In the case of Euler-Bernoulli beam, by neglecting the shear action, the strain energy

without crack is derived. But in the case of Timoshenko beam the shear action will be

included to model the crack entirely.

The strain energy of an element without a crack is given for two cases as follows.

For bending strain energy,

bh

Ub =

2E

2

Mh 2

Mh P(l x)h P (l xh

0 2 I + 2 2I 2I + 2 I dx , from Eq. 3.32

P 2l 3

3 2

2

Ub =

M l + MPl +

2 EI

3

4.36

l

Us =

1

Adx

2 0

4.37

where the shear coefficient which is equal to =5/6 for rectangular beam.[1, 3]

A is cross-section of beam

is shear stress

=

v

x

45

4.38

dv/dx

x

Fig 4-5 Deformation of beam including shear

Us =

1

Adx

2 0 G

Us =

1

2

Adx

2 0 G

where =

4.39

4.40

Once the equation of shear strain energy is determiend, it can be evaluated by substituting

the shear stress value in to Eq. 4.39.

1

Us =

G

20

l

where =

4.41

PQ

Ib

4.42

46

I is the moment of Inertia about the neutral axis

b is the width of the section

Q is the first moment with respect to the neutral axis of the area below the point

Q = zdA = A' z

4.43

where A is the area of that part of the section below the point desired.

z is the distance from the neutral axis to the centroid of A.

For beam of uniform cross section the maximum shear stress occurs at the section having

the greatest shear force, P. In the case of this thesis the shear force is uniform through the

length of the beam.

neutral axis

A'

b

Fig 4-6 Cross-section of a beam

If the shear stress is desired at level z1 of the rectangular cross section, Fig 4.6, Q must be

calculated for the shaded area

47

h 2 z1

h

Q = A' z = b z1 z1 +

b h2

Q = z12

2 4

4.44

It follows from Eq. 4.42 that the shear stresses vary according to

P h2

z12

2I 4

4.45

Eq. 4.45 shows that the shear stress varies parabolically with z1. For modeling of crack the

maximum value of shear will be taken for z1=0, at the natural axis.

Ph 2 3P 3P

=

=

8I

2bh 2 A

4.46

h

1 2 P

U s =

2 0 G h 2I

2

l

h

2

z1 bdz1 dx

However, for this thesis the maximum shear stress will be taken to get the shear strain

energy,

Us =

9 P 2 l

8 GA

4.46

The total strain energy will be the summation of strain energy due to bending and the strain

energy due to shear, by adding Eq. 4.36 Eq. 4.46.

U (oT ) = U b + U s

U (oT ) =

3

2 EI

2

P 2 l 3 9 P 2 l

2

+

+

M

l

MPl

+

3 8 GA

48

4.47

cij(oT ) =

(oT )

c33

2

=

P32

(oT )

c33

=

(oT )

c35

U (oT )

Pi Pj

3 2

P 2 l 3 9 P 2 l

2

M l + MPl +

+

3 8 GA

2 EI

l2

15l

+

,

EI 8GA

2

=

P3 P5

where A=bh

2

P52

(oT )

=

c55

3l

2 EI

4.49

3 2

P 2 l 3 9 P 2 l

2

M l + MPl +

+

3 8 GA

2 EI

l2

(oT )

(oT )

= 3 = c53

c35

EI

(oT )

=

c55

4.48

2 EI

4.50

2

P 2 l 3 9 P 2 l

2

+

+

M

l

MPl

+

3 8 GA

4.51

c (oT )

cij( oT ) = 33

(oT )

c53

(oT )

c35

(oT )

c55

4.52

4.53

49

Now the stiffness matrix of the cracked element can be written as [43]

[K cT ] = [T ][c]1 [T ]T

Once we get the stiffness matrix for the cracked Timoshenko beam element we can

assemble it and find the global matrix. In this case the number of elements in the beam can

be varied based on desired accuracy of results.

The consistent mass matrix for the Timoshenko beam is computed from the equation of

kinetic energy.

l

KE =

1

u& 2 + v& 2 dAdx

2 0 A( x )

4.54

l

KE =

1

y 2& 2 + v& 2 dAdx

2 0 A( x )

l

4.55

1

1

KE = I& 2 dx + Av& 2 dx

20

20

where I ( x ) =

4.56

Now, by defining

m = A the mass per unit of beam length

r2 =

I

where r is the gyration radius of the cross section

A

50

1

1

KE = mv& 2 dx + mr 2& 2 dx

20

20

4.57

The first term on the right hand side of Eq. 4.57 is translating inertia and the second term is

the rotary inertia.

By taking the shape function from Eq. 4.7 and 4.8 substituting in Eq. 4.57, then the mass

matrix for translation will be

M eT = mH T Hdx

4.58

l

eR

mr

H T H dx

4.59

As we have seen from Eq. 4.58 and Eq. 4.59, the beam element mass matrix has two

components: Transverse and rotary component.

M eT

ml 0

=

6 1

0 1 0

0 0 0

0 2 0

0 0 0

And

4.60

1

mr 0

=

l 1

0

2

M eR

0 1 0

0 0 0

0 1 0

0 0 0

51

Once the mass matrix and stiffness matrix are found, the system characteristic equation can

be found for free vibration as follow

([K ] [M ]){&&} = 0

2

Where

4.61

[M] is the sum of component of rotary and transverse mass matrices

{ } is

4.4

Once the element characteristics, namely, the element matrices stiffness and element mass

matrices are found in common global coordinate system, the next step is to construct the

overall or system equation. The procedure for constructing the system equation from the

element characteristic is the same regardless of the type of problem and the number and

type of elements used.

compatibility at the element nodes. This means that at the nodes where elements are

connected, the value(s) of the unknown nodal degree(s) of freedom or variable(s) is (are)

the same for all the elements joining at that node.

52

Let nel and sdof denote the total number of elements and nodal degree of freedom

(including the boundary and restrained degrees of freedom), respectively. Let q denote the

vector of sdof nodal degrees of freedom and [kk] the assembled system characteristics

matrix of order sdof x sdof. Since the element characteristic matrix [Ke] is order of 4x4, it

can be expressed to order of sdof x sdof by including zeros in the remaining locations. Thus

the global characteristics matrix can be obtained by algebraic addition as

nel

kk

=

kk e

e =1

[ ]

4.62

[ ]

where kk e is the expanded characteristic matrix of element e (of order sdof x sdof).

In actual computation, the expansion of the element matrix [Ke] to the size of the overall

[kk] is not necessary. [kk] can be generated by identifying the elements of [Ke] in [kk] and

adding them to the existing values as e changes from 1 to nel.

This procedure is shown with reference to the assemblage of beam elements as shown in

Fig. 4.7.

53

For assembling [Ke], we consider the elements one after another. For e=1, the element

stiffness matrix [K1] can be written as shown below.

Local d .o. f

Global d .o. f 1

k111

1

k 21

1

k 31

1

k 41

k121

k131

1

k 22

1

k 23

1

k 32

1

k 33

1

k 42

1

k 43

[K ] = 23

4.63

k141

1

k 24

1

k 34

1

k 44

The location of (raw ll and column ml) of any component K ij1 in the global stiffness matrix

[kk] is identified by the global degree of freedom ll and ml corresponding to the local

degree of freedom i(1) and i(2 ) respectively for i=1 to 4 and j=1 to 4. The corresponding

between ll and i(1) , and ml and i(1) is also shown already in Eq. 4.63. Thus the location

of the components K ij1 in [kk] will be show in Eq. 4.64.

Local d .o. f

4 5

Global d .o. f 1

4 5

k111

1

k 21

1

k 31

1

k 41

0

k121

1

k 22

1

k 32

1

k 42

k131

1

k 23

1

k 33

1

k 43

k141

1

k 24

1

k 34

1

k 44

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

2

kk 1 = 3

4

5

6

1

2

3

4

5

6

[ ]

0

0

0

0

0

0

4.64

0

0

0

0

0

For, the element stiffness matrix [K(2)] can be written as shown in Eq. 4.65 below

Local d .o. f

Global d .o. f 3

1

[K ( ) ] = 23

4

5

k11(2 )

(2 )

k 21

k 31(2 )

(2 )

k 41

k12(2 )

k13(2 )

k14(2 )

(2 )

k 24

(2 )

k 34

(2 )

k 44

(2 )

k 22

k 32(2 )

(2 )

k 42

54

(2 )

k 23

k 33(2 )

(2 )

k 43

4.65

As in the case of e=1, the location of the element K ij(2 ) for i=1 to 4 and j=1 to 4 in global

stiffness matrix [kk] can be identified. Hence these elements would be placed in [kk] at

appropriate location as shown in Eq. 4.66.

Global d .o. f 1

1

2

[kk ] =

3

4

5

6

k111

1

k 21

1

k 31

1

k 41

0

k121

k131

1

k14

1

k 22

1

k 23

1

k 24

0

k14(2 )

(2 )

k 24

k 34(2 )

(2 )

k 44

k + k11

(2 )

k + k 21

(2 )

k + k12 k13

(2 ) k (2 )

k + k 22

23

k 31(2 )

k 32(2 )

k 33(2 )

(2 )

k 41

(2 )

k 42

(2 )

k 43

k

k

1

32

1

42

1

33

1

43

(2 )

1

34

1

44

(2 )

Eq. 4.66 is the global assembled stiffness matrix of total number of elements.

The same procedure applies for the mass matrix.

55

4.66

4.5

The assembly procedure outline in the previous sector will be show in the Fig. 4.8 n the

form of flow chart.

element?

No

Yes

system and obtain [kke]

Set [kke]=[Ke]

From a knowledge of the global degree of freedom ll and ml that correspond to the local

degree of freedom i and j, add the element

Next element

Set e= e+1

No

Are all

elements

assembled?

Yes

56

In chapter three and chapter four Euler-Bernoulli and Timoshenko beams have been

discussed in detail by considering the crack in the beam elements. In order to study the

behavior of cracked beams, mathematical models are derived as show Eq. 3.24 and Eq.

4.61 based on FEM. However, to analyze the behavior of cracked beams with given input

variables, computer programming has been implemented using MATLAB to develop

Graphic User Interface and analysis, respectively.

In this chapter, the program algorithms for two cases, Euler-Bernoulli and Timoshenko

beam will be presented. For the Euler-Bernoulli beam the program algorithm is shown Fig.

5.1, and for the Timoshenko beam the algorithm is shown in Fig 5.2. To make easy use of

the program for users, the graphic user interface algorithm has been has been developed,

shown in Fig. 5.3. The first two algorithms are addressed to the stiffness of the beam.

Similarly, for mass matrix the stiffness algorithm can be taken as a base.

Finally, by using the above three algorithms five graphics windows will be discussed in this

chapter. The detail program analysis will be presented in appendices.

57

5.1

Program Algorithm

Start

Compute: Area and moment of Inertia of beam (A,I)

Initialized the system characteristic matrix [kk], i.e set [kk]=[0]

Set element number e=1

Yes

No

Compute [Ke] in local coordinate system

Net element

element?

Yes

No

e

Set [kk ]= [K ]

coordinate system and obtain [kke]

From a knowledge of the global degree of freedom ll and ml that correspond to the local degree of

freedom i and j, add the element

Set e= e+1

No

assembled?

Yes

Compute the natural frequencies of beam and

plot the mode shapes.

58

Start

Compute: Area and moment of Inertia of beam (A,I)

Initialized the system characteristic matrix [kk], i.e set [kk]=[0]

Set element number e=1

Yes

No

Compute [Ke] in local coordinate system

Net element

element?

Yes

No

Set [kke]= [Ke]

coordinate system and obtain [kke]

From a knowledge of the global degree of freedom ll and ml that correspond to the local degree of

freedom i and j, add the element

Set e= e+1

No

assembled?

Yes

Compute the natural frequencies of beam and

plot the mode shapes.

59

Start

Euler Bernoulli

Timoshenko

Timoshenko

That is in Fig 5.5

That is in Fig 5.7

Analysis:

The steps of the EulerBernoulli beam algorithm that

is shown in Fig. 5.1 will be

done.

Analysis:

The steps of the

Timoshenko beam

algorithm that is

shown in Fig. 5.2 will

be done.

For Euler-Bernoulli beam,

Fig. 5.6

Display: Output

window for

Timoshenko beam,

Fig. 5.8

60

5.2

To ease the use of the program for studying the behavior of cracked Euler-Bernoulli and

Timoshenko beams, five programs are developed. The first program, gui1, dealt with the

front page of GUI to choose either Euler Bernoulli or Timoshenko beam for investigation,

as shown in Fig. 5.4.

The second program, GUI2, is data entry window for Euler-Bernoulli beam, as shown in

Fig. 5.5. In this window geometric and material properties of the beam are input for

analysis. Also, in this window an option for inclusion and position of a crack in the beam is

available. In addition, the window provides the possibility to entry data to analyze the

behavior of the beam with or without mass. Finally the program gives a choice to go back

61

to the front window, gui1, or to continue to the output display window, GUI4, by analyzing

and saving Euler-Bernoulli beam results.

The third program, GUI4, deal with the output of Euler Bernoulli beam, as shown in

Fig.5.6. In this case, the input variables that are calculated and saved in GUI2 will be

displayed in Fig.5.7. In Fig.5.7, three first natural frequencies for uncracked beam and

cracked beam will be displayed when the Show results button is clicked. Also the mode

shape of cracked beam and uncracked beam will be displayed when the Plot the mode

shape button is clicked. If the user wants to go back to input window, GUI2, the Back

button will be clicked and any desire input variable can be modified. Also, if the user wants

to exit from the program, Exit button will be clicked.

62

Similar procedure to that of the Bernoulli beam analysis is followed to enter data and obtain

results for the Timoshenko beam.

63

64

RESULT DISCUSSIONS

assumptions were introduced. The crack is assumed to affect only the stiffness of the

cracked element in the beam, K c will replace the stiffness matrix of the element prior to

cracking to result in global [kk], for the case of Euler-Bernoulli and Timoshenko beam.

Thus the eigen frequencies and mode shape are obtained by solving the eigen value

problem from

[kk ] 2 [mm] = 0 ,

[ ]

system, respectively.

The eigen value analysis has been carried out for undamped and stationary beam with mass

and without mass. Also the crack has been treated as open, and hence, the stiffness matrix,

[K ] , of the cracked element replaces the uncracked beam element in the global stiffness

c , cT

[ ]

6.1

In chapter three and four Euler Bernoulli and Timoshenko beams have been discussed

briefly. Euler Bernoulli beam is modeled by ignoring the rotary inertia and the shear

deformation where as Timoshenko beam considered these two factors, rotary inertia and

shear effect. To observe the

circumstance should be applied, the following discussion gives some clue. Comparisons of

65

the first three natural frequencies are shown in Table 6.2. and error analysis is shown in

Fig. 6.1.

For Euler-Bernoulli beam For Timoshenko beam

Height (h)

0.04m

0.04m

0.04m

0.04m

10

10

7850Kg/m^3

7580Kg/m^3

216*10^9N/m^2

216*10^9N/m^2

90*10^9N/m^2

Width (W)

Total number of element

Mass density( )

Elastic Youngs Modules(E)

Shear Modules(G)

Table 6-2 Comparison of the first three natural frequencies of Timoshenko beam and

Euler-Bernoulli for various L/h ratios.

L/h

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

First Natural

Frequency (Hz)

Second Natural

Frequency (Hz)

For

Tim. (1T

For Tim.

For

For Tim. For

( 2T ) EB ( 2 ) ( 3T ) EB ( 3 )

25623.9

12427.8

7244.46

4721.94

3314.56

2452.16

1886.45

1495.72

For

EB (1 )

29187.8

13228.3

7510.4

4833.07

3368.49

2481.2

1903.35

1506.14

88440.2

53491.3

34879.7

24209.9

17657.4

13392.4

10479.9

8410.97

Third Natural

Frequency (Hz)

163732

74888.7

42738.1

27595.4

19278.9

14225.9

10927.7

8656.67

66

177247

126680

91302.9

67507.6

51325.6

40045.8

31966.3

26026.9

514292

242505

138487

89141.3

62073.6

45674.6

35002.5

27673.7

First

second third

Natural Natural Natural

frequency frequency frequency

(%)

(%)

(%)

(1T 1 ) ( 2T 2 ) (3T 3 )

1

12.21024

6.05142

3.540957

2.299367

1.601014

1.170401

0.887908

0.691835

45.98478

28.57227

18.38734

12.26835

8.41075

5.859032

4.097843

2.838274

65.53573

47.7619

34.07114

24.269

17.31493

12.3237

8.674238

5.950776

60

50

%Error

40

Error for first mode

30

20

10

0

0

10

L/h

Fig 6-1 Error analysis for comparison of Timoshenko and Euler-Bernoulli beams.

For given geometries and properties data, as given in Table 6.1, Timoshenko beam and

Euler-Bernoulli models give results which are shown in Table 6.2 for various L h ratio.

For shorter beams (lower L h ratios), the difference between the results obtained by the

Euler-Bernoulli and Timoshenko beam is higher. This shows the effects of rotational inertia

and shear deformation. Timoshenko beam model predicts the first natural frequency with

the higher accuracy than the Euler-Bernoulli results beam. The error decreases as the

L h ratio increases, as shown in Fig.6.1. Thus, for slender beams the Euler-Bernoulli and

Timoshenko beam gives more or less similar results and the beam can be modeled easily by

Euler-Bernoulli.

67

6.2

Effect of crack position as a function of crack depth ratio (for Tim. Beam).

The beam exhibits variation of natural frequency with respect to crack position and crack

depth ratio. Fig. 6.2 shows a plot of the ratio of the first natural frequency of the cracked

beam to that of uncracked beam as a function of crack depth ratio / h for several crack

positions. The natural frequencies of the cracked beam are lower than the natural

frequencies of the corresponding beam without crack. These differences increase as the

depth of the crack is increased. Due to the bending moment along the beam, which is

concentrated at the fixed end, a crack near the free end will have a smaller effect on the

fundamental frequency than a crack closer to fixed end and it can be said that the variation

in the natural frequency will be less in the case of crack location towards the free-end.

Height (h)

0.0078m

Width (W)

0.025m

0.2m

Mass density( )

7850Kg/m^3

216*10^9N/m^2

Shear Modules(G)

90*10^9N/m^2

68

1.2

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Fig 6-2 Fundamental (first) frequency ratios for different crack positions.

6.3

The effect of an attached mass at the free-end on the first three natural frequencies of the

cantilever beam with a crack is given in Tables 6.4 and 6.5 for a given geometry

of L = 0.6m, h = 0.0125m and W = 0.0125m . The attached mass has a magnitude of 1Kg.

69

Table 6-4 Determination of Natural Frequencies with different crack depth ratio at element 7 for Timoshenko

Crack

Depth

ratio

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Second Natural Frequency

Third Natural Frequency

Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam with

crack

crack

no crack no crack with crack crack

no crack no crack

crack

crack

no crack no crack

and

and a

and a

and

and a

and

and with a

and

and

and with a

and

and with a

without mass at without

mass at without mass at without mass at without mass at without

mass at

mass

the tip

the tip

mass

the tip

mass

the tip

mass

mass

the tip

mass

the tip

262.68

94.72

262.68

94.72

1680.38 1213.64 1680.38 1213.64 4904.77 4007.33 4904.77 4007.33

259.044

91.64

262.68

94.72

1464.60 1050.47 1680.38 1213.64 4344.60 3764.75 4904.77 4007.33

258.920

91.54

262.68

94.72

1458.40 1046.09 1680.38 1213.64 4333.10 3759.96 4904.77 4007.33

258.666

91.32

262.68

94.72

1445.98 1037.29 1680.38 1213.64 4310.32 3750.44 4904.77 4007.33

258.154

90.90

262.68

94.72

1421.89 1020.40 1680.38 1213.64 4260.13 3732.64 4904.77 4007.33

257.034

90.00

262.68

94.72

1373.17 986.86 1680.38 1213.64 4189.75 3699.05 4904.77 4007.33

254.311

87.87

262.68

94.72

1273.19 920.38 1680.38 1213.64 4053.40 3638.70 4904.77 4007.33

247.271

82.81

262.68

94.72

1094.50 808.28 1680.38 1213.64 3870.20 3553.30 4904.77 4007.33

229.839

72.35

262.68

94.72

867.83

676.28 1680.38 1213.64 3711.51 3473.96 4904.77 4007.33

Table 6-5 Determination of Natural Frequencies With different crack depth at element 7 for Euler-Bernoulli beam.

Crack

Depth

ratio

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Second Natural Frequency

Third Natural Frequency

Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam with Beam with

crack

crack

no crack no crack

crack

crack

no crack no crack

crack

crack

no crack no crack

and

and a

and

and with a

and

and a

and

and with a

and

and a

and

and with a

mass at

mass at

mass at

without

mass at

without

without

mass at

without

without

mass at

without

the tip

the tip

the tip

mass

the tip

mass

mass

the tip

mass

mass

the tip

mass

262.47

94.63

262.47

94.63

1645.02 1191.01 1645.02 1191.01 4607.13 3774.57 4607.13 3774.57

258.95

91.57

262.47

94.63

1436.90 1032.49 1645.02 1191.01 4080.28 3557.44 4607.13 3774.57

258.82

91.47

262.47

94.63

1430.91 1028.22 1645.02 1191.01 4069.28 3552.09 4607.13 3774.57

258.57

91.26

262.47

94.63

1418.81 1019.64 1645.02 1191.01 4047.56 3543.90 4607.13 3774.57

258.07

90.84

262.47

94.63

1395.32 1003.15 1645.02 1191.01 4007.26 3527.05 4607.13 3774.57

256.97

89.93

262.47

94.63

1347.75

970.38

1645.02 1191.01 3932.42 3495.18 4607.13 3774.57

254.29

87.81

262.47

94.63

1246.79

905.38

1645.02 1191.01 3802.39 3437.84 4607.13 3774.57

247.37

82.77

262.47

94.63

1074.21

795.38

1645.02 1191.01 3628.31 3356.36 4607.13 3774.57

230.11

72.33

262.47

94.63

850.85

665.63

1645.02 1191.01 3478.39 3280.57 4607.13 3774.57

70

300

First natural frequencies

250

Crack without mass

for Timoshenko beam

200

150

Timoshenko beam

100

50

0

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

a)

300

250

Euler-Bernoulli beam

200

150

100

50

0

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

b)

Fig 6-3 The changes of the first natural frequencies as a function of the crack depth at

element seven, a) for Timoshenko beam, b) for the Euler-Bernoulli beam.

Results show that the inclusion of mass on the both models, Timoshenko and EulerBernoulli beam, gives the same response by reducing the first three natural frequencies,

71

as shown in Table 6.4, Table 6.5, Fig 6.3. Also, the presence of crack in the Timoshenko

and Euler-Bernoulli beams will reduce the first three natural frequencies for both cases,

with mass and without mass.

6.4

For given geometries of L = 0.6m, h = 0.05m and W = 0.06m , the mode shapes of cracked

Timoshenko and Euler-Bernoulli beams are shown in Fig.6.4, where the position of crack is

at the center (element five). Fig. 6.8 and Fig. 6.9 show the numerical deviation of

fundamental mode shapes of the cracked and ucracked beams. The deviation of the

fundamental mode shape sharply changes at the crack for both cases.

a)

b)

Fig 6-4 Mode shape graphs without mass: a) for Euler-Bernoulli beam with crack

(continuous line) and without crack (dash line), b) for Timoshenko beam with crack

(continuous line) and without crack (dash line).

72

a)

b)

Fig 6-5 Mode shape graphs with mass: a) for Euler-Bernoulli beam with crack (continuous

line) and without crack (dash line), b) for Timoshenko beam with crack (continuous line)

and without crack (dash line).

a)

b)

Fig 6-6 Mode shape graphs without mass for second mode shape: a) for Euler-Bernoulli

beam with crack (continuous line) and without crack (dash line), b) for Timoshenko beam

with crack (continuous line) and without crack (dash line).

73

a)

b)

Fig 6-7Mode shape graphs with mass for second mode shape: a) for Euler-Bernoulli beam

with crack (continuous line) and without crack (dash line), b) for Timoshenko beam with

crack (continuous line) and without crack (dash line).

Fig 6-8 Deviation of first mode shape due to crack for Timoshenko beam without mass.

74

Fig 6-9 Deviation of first mode shape due to crack for Euler-Bernoulli without mass.

From the mode shapes shown in Fig. 6.4-6.7 it can be observed very clearly the changes in

slopes and deviations are due to the cracks in the mode shapes at crack position element

five in the beam (at the center of the beam).

6.5

To observe the effectiveness of this paper, the results obtained in this paper are comparing

with Kisa [58].

Timoshenko beam. It integrates the finite element method and component mode synthesis.

75

The above geometries and material properties, Table 6.3, are used for the two cases. The

crack is assumed to be located at different locations with different crack depth ratios.

Tables 6.6 to Table 6.11 give comparison of the first three natural frequencies of the

proposed model with the results of Kisa [58], as shown below.

For Crack depth

ratio

Proposed Method

Reference [73]

frequency (%)

0.2

932.251

1030.095

9.498541

0.4

904.336

1006.856

10.18219

For Crack depth

ratio

0.2

0.4

Proposed Method

6139.89

6039.28

Reference [73]

6389.394

6174.539

frequency (%)

3.90497127

2.19059269

For Crack depth

ratio

0.2

0.4

Proposed Method

17283

16967

Reference [73]

17844.86

17499.83

frequency (%)

3.14858172

3.04477243

Crack depth ratio Proposed Method

0.2

1003.04

0.4

992.38

Reference [73]

1035.284

1029.262

76

frequency (%)

3.11450771

3.58334418

Crack depth ratio Proposed Method

0.2

5565.02

0.4

5337.38

Reference [73]

6365.914

6071.655

natural frequency (%)

12.5809742

12.0934902

Crack depth ratio Proposed Method

0.2

18543

0.4

18467

Reference [73]

17807.94

17359.27

77

frequency (%)

4.1277093

6.3812015

CONCLUSION

In this thesis the behavior of cracked Timoshenko beam has been analyzed for different

conditions compared with Euler-Bernoulli beam. The presence of crack

first three natural frequencies and mode shapes of the beam are altered. Also an inclusion of

mass on the beam shows change in natural frequencies and mode shapes of the beam for

both cases, Timoshenko and Euler-Bernoulli beams.

As we have seen from the results shown in Table 6.2 and Fig. 6.1 the variation of the first

three natural frequencies for the corresponding model, cracked Timoshenko and Euler

Bernoulli beams, the difference will be reduced as the length of beam longer and longer.

For shorter, L h , the error between Timoshenko and Euler-Bernoulli is gone up to 12.21%

for the first natural frequency. This error will be insignificant for L h = 9 , which is 0.692%.

This indicates that for shorter beam, up to L h = 6 for this specific case, the effects of

rotary inertia and shear deformation are very pronounced. This imply that for shorter beam

Timoshenko beam should be taken as a model where as for longer beam Euler-Bernoulli

beam model can be taken since the error between them is very insignificant. Also for both

models inclusion of crack reduces the system natural frequencies, as expected.

From Fig. 6.2 as we have seen for different crack location, from the fixed end towards the

free end, the system natural frequencies increased. This implies that the presence of crack

near the fixed end more sensitive for changing of system natural frequencies and

consequently for failure of structure. Also as we have seen from Fig. 6.2 for different crack

location variation of crack depth ratio makes the first three natural frequencies vary. If the

78

crack depth ratio is increasing for a given crack location, the system natural frequencies

will be lower and lower. So, from this we can conclude that the crack depth ratio and

location of crack will affect the system natural frequencies.

Inclusion of additional mass at free end of cantilever beam makes change of system natural

frequencies and mode shapes, as shown in Table 6.4, Table 6.5, Fig. 6.3, Fig 6.4 and Fig.

6.5. For Timoshenko and Euler-Bernoulli beams obviously as we know from the equation

of = K M , if the global mass matrix increased, the system natural frequencies will be

reduced. This idea is confirmed by the results obtained from Table 6.4, Table 6.5 and Fig.

6.3. Also the beams, with mass and without mass, exhibit reduction of natural frequencies

as a function of crack depth ratio, as shown in Fig. 6.3 for both Timoshenko and EulerBernoulli. This implies that inclusion of crack for both cases, beams with and without mass,

have the same effect that reduces system natural frequencies.

As we have seen from Fig. 6.4 and Fig. 6.5 the presence of crack makes some change on

the mode shapes for cases, Timoshenko and Euler-Bernoulli beams. From the deviation of

the fundamental mode shapes of cracked and uncracked beams we can conclude that the

position of crack can be identify easily since the deviation is sharply changed at the cracked

element, as show in Fig. 6.6 and Fig. 6.7.

To see the validity of this work, results of the first three natural frequencies are compared

with Kisas [58] results for deferent crack location. As we have seen from Table 6.6

through Table 6.11. the proposed model gives results with range of 2.19% to 3.9% error for

79

second and third natural frequencies. Where as, for first natural frequencies the error goes

to 10.18% for crack depth ratio of 0.4. The natural frequencies obtained by the proposed

method are lower than the natural frequencies obtained by Kisa [58], for the specific crack

depth of 0.4. This indicates that the proposed method more sensitive for presence of crack.

The error may arise due to the shear modulus, which is not given specifically in Kisa [58].

Also the model of crack in Kisa [58], which is spring model, makes some variation of

results with the proposed model that implement transfer matrix method to obtain the

stiffness matrix of cracked element. Generally, from this discussion we can conclude that

the proposed method can be an alternative way of investigating the behavior of cracked

Timoshenko beam.

80

FUTURE OUTLOOK

In this thesis the behavior of single edge crack for Timoshenko cantilever beam is studied

with comparison of Euler-Bernoulli cantilever. Also the effects of mass on both beams with

and without crack also have been discussed. So this work is restricted to the specified cases.

However, this paper can be extended to other situation listed below.

In this thesis the beam is modeled based on cantilever, however this type of beam can be

extended to other model for further study by considering the boundary conditions like,

simply supported at both end, fixed-fixed and fixed-simply supported condition.

Beam is considered as a uniform cross-sectional area through out the length with uniform

crack depth. However, the beam can be analyzed with variation of cross-sectional area

along the length like taper or stepped beam. Also the crack depth can be varied along the

width.

The crack in this thesis is modeled as a single edge crack. However this model can be

extended to multiple edge cracks that are located at different positions. Also, the crack

might be closed rather than open crack. And also the transverse crack, which is applied here

in this thesis, might be extended to included crack for future work.

Therefore, this thesis can be extended to different cases like to different boundary

conditions, closed crack model, multiple edge crack model. Also it might be extended to

non-uniform beam like taper or stepped beam and to included crack model. Moreover, to

81

make more practical the model, dead load or live load can be added for different boundary

condition by considering free damped vibration analysis.

82

REFERENCES

[1]

Young W. Kwon and Hyochoong Bang, The Finite Element Using MATLAB,

Second edition, CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, Florida, 2000.

[2]

[3]

Inc., 1992.

[4]

Vahit Mermertas and Haluk Erol, Effects of Mass Attachment on The free Vibration

of Cracked Beam, The 8th International congress on Sound and Vibration,2-6 July

2001, Hong Kong, China.

[5]

Cracks, Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Maribor, Slovenia.

[6]

Static Timoshenko Beam Function, Journal of Transaction of the ASME, Vol. 68,

July 2001.

[7]

of the Eigenvalue problem, Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State

University, Dec. 1997.

[8]

Beam by Coupled Response Measurements, Journal of Computer & Structure, Vol.

58, No. 2. pp. 299-305, 1996.

[9]

Structure, CIVIL-COMP Ltd, Edinburgh, Scotland, 1994.

83

Coupled Vibration Mode, Journal of Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 110, July

1968.

[11] D. Dimarogonas and C. A. Papadopuolos, Coupled Longitudinal And Bending

Vibrations of A Rotating Shaft with An Open Crack, Journal of Sound and

Vibration, Vol. 117, pp 81-93, 1986.

[12] A.C Ugural and S.K Fenster, Advanced Strength and Elasticity, Second Edition,

PTR Prentic Hall, New Jersy, USA, 1987.

[13] A. K. Pandey, M. Biswas and M. M. Samman, Damage Deflection from changes in

Curvature Mode Shapes, Journal of sound and Vibration, Vol. 145,No.2, PP 321332, 1991.

[14]

of Dynamic Characteristics of A Beam with A closing crack, Journal of Sound and

Vibration, Vol. 235, No. 3, PP 415-434, 2000.

[15] A. Rivo;a and P. R. White, Bisectral Analysis of The Bilinear Oscillator with

Application to The Detection of Fatigue Cracks, Journal of Sound and Vibration,

Vol. 216, No.5 PP 889-910, 1998.

[16] A. S. Sekhar and P. Balaji Prasad, Crack Identification in A cantilever Beam using

Coupled response Measurements, Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and

Power, Vol. 120, PP 775-777, 1998.

[17] A. S. Sekhar and P. Balaji Prasad, Vibration Characteristics of A Cracked Rotor

with Two Open Cracks, Journalof sound and Vibration, Vol. 223, No.4, PP 497512, 1999.

84

and Co. Publishers Ltd, 1985.

[19] B. Y. Tongue , The Indeterminate beam, Butterworth and Co. (Publishers) Ltd,

London, 1972.

[20] C. G. Gutafson, The Stress Intensity Factors for Cyclic Reversed Bending of Single

Edge Cracked Strip Including Crack Surface Interference, International Journal of

Fracture, Vol. 12, PP 460-461, 1976.

[21] D. J. Hatter, Matrix Computer Methods of Vibration Analysis, Butterworth and Co.

Limited, London, 1973.

[22] D. Y. Zheng and S. C. Fan, Natural Frequencies of A Non- Uniform Beam with

Multiple cracks Via Modified Fourier Series, Journal of Sound and Vibrations, Vol.

242, No. 4, PP 701-717, 2001. John Wiley and Sons Inc, Canada, 19

[23] Demeter G. Fertis, Mechanical and Structural Vibrations, John Wiley and Sons

Inc, Canada, 1995.

[24] Dimarogonas A. D., S. D. Panteliou, V. C. Argyrakis and T. G. Chondros, Damping

Factor as An Indicator of Crack Severity, Journal of Sound and Vibration. Vol. 241,

No. 2, PP 235-245, 2001.

[25] Dimarogonas A. D. and N. Anifantis, Stability of Columns with A single Crack

Subjected to Follower and Vertical Loads, International Journal of Solid and

Structures, Vol. 19, No, 4, PP 281-291, 1983.

[26] Dimarogonas A. D. and T. G. Chondros, Dynamic Sensitivity of Structures to

Cracks, Journal of vibration Acoustics, Vol. 111, PP 251-256, July 1989.

85

Complex Structures", Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 69, No. 4, PP 531-538,

1980.

[28] Dimarogonas A. D. and T. G. Chondros, Identification of Cracks in Circular Plates

Welded at The Contour, Presented In ASME designs Engineering Technical

Conference, St. Louis, Mo., September 10-12, 1979.

[29] Dimarogonas A. D. and T. G. Chondros, Vibration of Beam with A Breathing

Crack, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 239, No. 1, PP 57-67, 2001.

[30] Dimarogonas A. D. and T. G. Chondros, Vibration of A Cracked Cantilever Beam,

Journal of Acoustics, Vol. 120, PP 742-746, July 1998.

[31] Dimarogonas A. D. and T. G. Chondros and J. Yao, A Consistent Bar Vibration

Theory, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 200, No. 3, PP 303-313, 1997.

[32] Dimarogonas A. D. and T. G. Chondros and J. Yao, A Continuous Cracked Beam

Vibration Theory, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 215, No. 1, PP 17-34, 1998.

[33] Dimarogonas A. D. and T. G. Chondros and J. Yao, Longitudinal Vibration of A

Bar with A Breathing Crack, Engineering Fructure Mechanics, Vol. 61, PP 503518, 1998.

[34] Dimarogonas A. D. and T. G. Chondros and J. Yao, Longitudinal Vibration of A

Continuous Cracked Bar, Engineering Fracture Mechanics, Vol. 61, PP 593-606,

1998.

[35] Dimarogonas A. D. and Sam Haddad, Vibration for Engineers, Prentice-Hall, USA,

1992.

[36] Dimarogonas A. D. and Stephen A. Paipetis, Analytical Methods in Rotor Dynamics,

Applied Science Publishers Ltd, England, 1983.

86

[37] Dimarogonas A. D., Vibration Engineering, West Publishing Company, USA, 1976.

[38] Dimarogonas A. D., Vibration Of Cracked Structures, A State of the Art Review,

Engineering Fracture Mechanics, Vol. 55, No.5, PP 831-857, 1996.

[39] Dimarogonas A. D., P. F. Rizos and N. Aspragathos, Identification of Crack Location

and Magnitude in A Cantilever Beam from The Vibration Modes, Journal of Sound

And Vibration, Vol. 138, No. 3, PP 381-388, 1990.

[40] Eduard C. Pestel and Frederick A Leckie, Matrix Methods in Elasto-Mechanics,

McGraw-Hill Book Company, USA, 1963.

[41] F. Ismail, A. Ibrahim and H. R. Martin, Identification of Fatigue Cracks From

Vibration Testing, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 140, No. 2, PP 305-317,

1990.

[42] G. C. Sih, Mechanics of Fracture 1, Methods of Analysis and Solution of Crack

Problems, Noordhoff International Publishing Leyden, Netherlands. 1973.

[43] G. -L. Qian, S. N and J. S. Jiang, The Dynamic Behavior and Crack Detection of A

Beam With A Crack, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 138, No. 2, PP 233-243,

1990.

[44] H. Liebowiz and W. D. Claus. Jr., Failure Of Notched Columns, Engineering

Fracture Mechanics, Vol.1, PP 379-383, 1968.

[45] H. Liebowiz, Hiroyuki Okamur, H. W. Liu and Chong-Shin Chu, A Cracked Column

Under Compression, Engineering Fracture Mechanics. Vol. 1, PP 547-564, 1969.

[46] Hroshi Tada, Paul C. Paris and George R. Irwin, Analysis of Crack Handbook, Third

Edition, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2000.

[47] Irwin, G.R., Fracture Mechanics, In Structural Mechanical (Eds. J. N. Goodier and

N. J. Hoff), Pergamon Press Oxford, 1960.

87

[48] J. K. Sinha, M. I. Friswell and S. Edwards, Simplified Model for The Location of

Cracks In Beam Structures Using Measurement Vibration Data, Journal of Sound and

Vibration, Vol. 251, No. 1, PP 13-38, 2002.

[49] J. R Rice and N. Levy, The Part-Through Surface Crack in An Elastic Plate, Journal

of Applied Mechanics, PP 185-193, 1972.

[50] J. S. Roa, Advanced Theory of Vibration (Nonlinear Vibration and One Dimensional

Structures), Wiley Eastern Limited, New Delhi, India, 1992.

[51] J. S. Rao and K. Gupta, Introductory Course on Theory and Practice of Mechanical

Vibration, Second Edition, new Age International (P) Limited, Publishers, India,

1999.

[52] J. S. Rao, Rotor Dynamics, Second Edtion, Wiley Eastern Limited, New-Delhi,

India, 1991

[53] Jialou Hu Robert Y. Liang, An Integrate Approach to Detection of Cracks Using

Vibration Characteristics, Journal of Franklin Institute, Vol. 330, No. 5, PP 841-853,

1993.

[54] Jorg Wauer, On The Dynamic of Cracked Rotors: A Litreture Survaey, Journal of

Applied Mechanics, Vol. 43, No. 1. PP 13-17, 1990.

[55] Joseph E, Shigley and Charles R. Mischke, Mechanical Engineering Design, Sixth

Edition, McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2001.

[56] K R Y Simha, Fracture Mechanics For Modern Engineering Design, University

Press, India, 2001.

[57] Kare Hellen, Introduction to Fracture Mechanics, McGraw-Hill Company, Norway,

1984.

88

[58] M. Kisa, J. Brandon and M. Tipcu, Free Vibration Analysis of Cracked Beam By A

Ombination of Finite Elements and Component Mode Synthesis Methods, Computers

and Structures, Vol. 67, PP 215-223, 1998.

[59] M. Boltzer,B. Strancar and A. Kuhelj, Identification of Transverse Crack Location in

Flexural Vibrations of Free-Free Beams, Journal of Sound and Vibration , Vol. 211,

No. 5, PP 729-734,1998.

[60] M. D. Rajab and Al-Sabeeh, Vibration Characteristics of Cracked Shafts, Journal of

Sound and Vibration, Vol. 147, No. 3, PP 465-473, 1990.

[61] M. H. H. Shen and C. Pierre, Natural Modes of Bernoulli-Euler Beam with Symmetric

Cracks", Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 138, No. 1, PP 115-134, 1990.

[62] M. H. H. Shen and Y. C. Chu, Vibration of A Cracked Beam, Computer And

Structures, Vol. 45, No. 1, PP 79-93, 1992.

[63] M. N. Cerri and F. Vestroni, Detection of Damage in Beam Subjected to Diffuse

Cracking, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 234, No. 2, PP 259-276, 2000.

[64] Mohamed A. Mohmoud, Mohamed Abu Zaid and Shabeeb Al Harashani, Numerical

Frquency Analysis of Uniform Beam With A transverse Crack, Communication In

Numerical Methods Engineering, Vol. 15, PP 709-715, 1999.

[65] Moshe F. Rubunstein, Matrix Computer Analysis of Structure, Prentice Hall Inc.,

Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1966.

[66] R. Ruotolo and C. Surace, Damage Assessment of Multiple Crack Beams: Numerical

results and Excremental Validation", Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 206, No. 4,

PP 567-588, 1997.

89

[67] Robert Y. Liang, Fred K. Choy and Jialou Hu, Detection of crack In Beam Structures

Using Measurements Frequencies, Journal of Franklin Institute, Vol. 328, No. 4, P

505-518, 1991.

[68] S. Chinchalkar, Determination of Location in Beam Using Natural Frequencies,

Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 247, No. 3, PP 417-429, 2001.

[69] S. H. Farghaly, Comments and Further Results On Analysis of the Effects of Crack on

The Natural Frequencies of A Cantilever Beam, Journal of Sound and Vibration , Vol.

169, No. 5, PP 704-708, 1994.

[70] S. K Maiti and B. P. Nandwana, Detection of The Location and Size of Crack in

Stepped Cantilever Beams based on measurements of Natural Frequencies, Journal of

Sound and Vibration, Vol. 203, No. 3, PP 435-446, 1997.

[71] S. K Maiti and B. P. Nandwana, Modeling of Vibration of Beam in Presence of

Inclined Edge of Internal Crack for Its Possible Detection based on Frequency

Measurements, Engineering Fracture Mechanics, Vol. 58, No, PP 193-205, 1997.

[72] S. K. Maiti and N. V. Medheker, Derivative Procedure For BEM Based Computation

of Change in Natural Frequency with Crack Size, International Journal of Fracture,

Vol. 115, PP L23-L27, 2002.

[73] S. K. Maiti and S. P. Lele, Modeling of transverse Vibration of Short Beam for Crack

Detection and measurement of Crack Extension, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol.

257, No. 3, PP 559-583, 2002.

[74] S. K. Maiti and T. D. Chaudhari, A Study of Vibration of Geometrically Segmented

Beams with and without crack, International Journal of Solid s and Structures, Vol.

37, PP 761-779, 2000.

90

of Crack in Taper and Segmented Beams Based on Modeling of Transverse Vibration,

International Journal of Fracture, Vol. 102, PP L33-L38, 2000.

[76] S. K. Maiti and T. D. Chaudhari, Modeling of Transverse Vibration of Beam of

Linearly Variable Depth with Edge Crack, Engineering Fracture mechanics, Vol. 63,

PP 425-445, 1999.

[77] Satya N. Atluri, Computational methods in The Mechanics of Fracture, Elsevier

Science Publishers, Netherlands, 1986.

[78] Scott W. Doedling, Charles R. Farrar and Michael B. Prime, Summary, Review of

Vibration Based on Damage Identification Method, The Shock and Vibration Digest,

Vol. 30, No. 2, PP 91-105, March 1998.

[79] Singiresu S. Rao, Mechanical Vibrations, Third Edition, Addison Wesley Publishing

Company, USA, 1995.

[80] T. C. Tsai and Y. Z. Wang, Vibration Analysis and Diagnosis of Cracked Shaft,

Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 192, No. 3 PP 607-620, 1996.

[81] T. G. Chondros, In Memorandum A. D. Dimarogonas (1938-2000), Journal of Sound

and Vibration, Vol. 192, No. 3, PP 607-620, 1996.

[82] T. G. Chondros, The Continuous Crack Flexibility Model for Crack Identification,

Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract. Engng. Mater. Struct, Vol. 24, PP 643-650,

2001.

[83] T. L. Anderson, Fracture Mechanics Fundamentals and Applications, CRC Press

Inc., USA, 1991.

91

Natural Frequencies of A Cantilever Bear, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 150,

No. 2, PP 191-201, 1991.

[85] W. M. Ostachowicz and M. Krawczuk, Transverse Natural Vibrations of A Cracked

beam Loaded with A Constant Axial Force, Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, Vol.

115, PP 525-529, October 1993.

[86] W. M. Ostachowicz and M. Krawczuk, Vibration Analysis of A Cracked Beam,

Computers and Structures, Vol. 36, 245-250, 1990.

[87] Walter C. Hurtty and Moshe F. Rublnstein, Dynamics of Structure, Prentice Hall Inc,

Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1964.

[88] William T. Thomson, Theory of Vibration with Applications, Second Edition,

Prentice- Hall Inc, Englewood Cliffs, new Jersey. USA, 1981.

[89] Y. Bamnios, E. Douka and A. Trochidis, Crack Identification in Beam Structure

Using Mechanical Impedance, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 256, No. 6, PP

287-297, 2002.

[90] Y. Narkis, Identification of Crack Location in Vibrating Simple Supported Beams,

Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 172, No. 4, PP 549-558, 1994.

[91] A. D. Dimarogonas and C. A. Papadopuolos, Vibration of Cracked Shafts In

Bending, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 94, PP 583-593, 1983.

[92] A. D. Dimarogonas and C. A. Papadopuolos, Crack Detection In Turbine Rotors,

The Second International Symposium on Transport Phenomena., Dynanics nas Design

of Rotating Machinery, Vol. 2, Dynamics, April, 1988

[93] A. D. Dimarogonas and C. A. Papadopuolos, Coupled Vibration of Cracked Shafts,

Journal of Sound and Acoustics, Vol. 114, 461-467, 1992

92

APPENDICES

Appendix I. Program For Euler-Bernoulli Beam

%---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%

% This program is developed for Euler-Bernoulli Beam to find the natural %

% frequencies

and

% Problem description

% Variable descriptions

% bcdof = a vector containing dofs associated with boundary conditions %

% bcval = a vector containing boundary condition values associated with %

%

93

%

%

to the eigenvector.

%

%

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %

% clear

%nel=input('give no. of element=');

% number of elements

%pam=input('give position of additional mass=');

%mode=input('find the nth mode shape=');

nnel=2;

ndof=2;

sdof=nnode*ndof; % total system dofs

%b;

% width of a beam

%h ;

% height of a beam

%el;

% elastic modulus

%rho;

% mass density

%tleng;

l=tleng/nel;

leng=l;

area=b*h;

% cross-sectional area

bcdof(1)=1;

94

bcval(1)=0;

bcdof(2)=2;

bcval(2)=0;

c=ell*xi/(leng^3);

mmi=rho*area*leng/420;

k1=c*[12

6*leng

-12

6*leng;...

-12

-6*leng

12

-6*leng;...

m1=mmi*[156

22*leng 54

-13*leng;...

54

13*leng

156

-22*leng;...

kk=zeros(sdof,sdof);

mm=zeros(sdof,sdof);

nnode=(nnel-1)*nel+1; % total number of nodes in system

sdof=nnode*ndof;

M=1;

c=el*xi/(leng^3);

95

k1=c*[12

6*leng -12

6*leng;...

2*leng^2;...

-12

-6*leng;...

-6*leng

12

4*leng^2]

c1=3*[leng^3/(3*el*xi) leng^2/(2*el*xi);

leng^2/(2*el*xi) leng/(el*xi)]

% Calculating additional Compliance due to crack

% FI and FII are form factors

FI=1.122-1.4*(ch)+7.33*(ch)^2-13.08*(ch)^3+14.0*(ch)^4 ;

FII=(1.122-0.561*(ch/2)+0.085*(ch/2)^2+0.18*(ch/2)^3)/(1-(ch))^0.5;

c2=((3.14*ch^2)/(ell*b*h^2))*[(9*leng^2*FI^2+(FII^2*h^2)) 18*leng*FI^2;

18*leng*FI^2

36*FI^2];

T=[-1 0;

-l -1;

1 0;

0 1];

%The total compliance of the cracked beam

%

96

cracked element

% The stiffness matrix of cracked beam element, KC, will be found as follow

KC=T*inv(C)*(T)';

% Consistent mass matrix

mmi=rho*area*leng/420;

m=mmi*[156

22*leng 54

-13*leng;...

54

13*leng 156

-22*leng;...

% Consitent mass matrix of an element with additional mass

Mp=mmi*[156

22*leng 54

54

-13*leng;...

-3*leng^2;...

for iel=1:nel

4*leng^2];

if iel==pce

k=KC;

elseif iel==0

k=k1;

97

else

k=k1;

end

if iel==pam

m=Mp;

elseif iel==0

m=m1;

else

m=m1;

end

index=feeldof1(iel,nnel,ndof);% extract system dofs associated with element

kk=feasmbl1(kk,k,index);

% system matrix

end

kk;

mm;

for i=1:2

kk(1,:)=[];

kk(:,1)=[];

mm(1,:)=[];

mm(:,1)=[];

end

98

kk

mm;

[n,n]=size(mm)

[V,D]=eig(kk,mm);

[lambda,s]=sort(diag(D)); % Sort the eigenvaules and eigenvectors in ascending order

V=V(:,s);

VV=V(n:s);

Factor=diag(V'*mm*V);

Phi=V*inv(sqrt(diag(Factor)))

Omega=real(Omega)

cc=length(V);

e=V(1:2:cc,:);

E=length(e);

p=[zeros(1,E);e]; % transverse displacement Eigen vectors

xp=[0:tleng/nel:tleng];

for np=mode

for n=1:(sdof/2)

xxxxx(n)=xp(n); % xxxxx is positon of nodes along the x-direction

ppp(n)=p(n,np);

end

plot(xxxxx,-ppp,'-r','LineWidth',2.5,...

99

'MarkerEdgeColor','k',...

'MarkerFaceColor','g',...

'MarkerSize',5);

hold on

grid on

end

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%

function [index]=feeldof1(iel,nnel,ndof)

%---------------------------------------------------------% Purpose:

%

dimensional problem

%

% Synopsis:

%

[index]=feeldof1(iel,nnel,ndof)

% Variable Description:

%

%----------------------------------------------------------edof = nnel*ndof;

start = (iel-1)*(nnel-1)*ndof;

100

for i=1:edof

index(i)=start+i;

end

%-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%

function [kk]=feasmbl1(kk,k,index)

%---------------------------------------------------------% Purpose:

%

%

% Synopsis:

%

[kk]=feasmbl1(kk,k,index)

%

% Variable Description:

%

kk - system matrix

k - element matri

%-----------------------------------------------------------

edof = length(index);

for i=1:edof

ii=index(i);

101

for j=1:edof

jj=index(j);

kk(ii,jj)=kk(ii,jj)+k(i,j);

end

end

%-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%

102

%---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%

% This program is developed for Timoshenko Beam to find the natural

% frequencies

and

% Problem description

% Variable descriptions

% bcdof = a vector containing dofs associated with boundary conditions %

% bcval = a vector containing boundary condition values associated with %

%

103

to the eigenvector.

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------

% clc

% clear

% nel=input('give no. of element=');

% number of elements

% pam=input('give position of additional mass=');

% mode=input('find the nth mode shape=');

nnel=2;

ndof=2;

sdof=nnode*ndof; % total system dofs

xi=(b*h^3)*(1/12);

%tleng

leng=l;

area=b*h;

% cross-sectional area

bcdof(1)=1;

bcval(1)=0;

bcdof(2)=2;

bcval(2)=0;

104

c=el*xi/leng;

d=(5/6)*sh*area/(4*leng);

k1= [ 4*d

2*d*leng

-4*d

2*d*leng;...

-4*d

-2*d*leng

4*d

-2*d*leng;...

mmt=rho*area*leng/6;

mt=mmt*[2 0 1 0;...

0 0 0 0;...

1 0 2 0;...

0 0 0 0];

mr=rho*xi/leng*[1 0 -1 0;...

0 0 0 0;...

-1 0 1 0;...

0 0 0 0];

m=mt+mr; % Total element stiffness mass matrix

kk=zeros(sdof,sdof);

mm=zeros(sdof,sdof);

M=1;

k1= [ 4*d

2*d*leng

-4*d

2*d*leng;...

-4*d

-2*d*leng

4*d

-2*d*leng;...

105

mmt=rho*area*leng/6;

mt=mmt*[2 0 1 0;...

0 0 0 0;...

1 0 2 0;...

0 0 0 0];

mr=rho*xi/leng*[1 0 -1 0;...

0 0 0 0;...

-1 0 1 0;...

0 0 0 0];

m1=mt+mr;

%Compliance for uncracked beam

c1=3*[leng^3/(3*el*xi) leng^2/(2*el*xi);

leng^2/(2*el*xi) leng/(el*xi)]

% Calculating aditional Compliance due to crack

% FI and FII are form factors

FI=1.122-1.4*(ch)+7.33*(ch)^2-13.08*(ch)^3+14.0*(ch)^4 ;

FII=(1.122-0.561*(ch/2)+0.085*(ch/2)^2+0.18*(ch/2)^3)/(1-(ch))^0.5;

c2=((3.14*ch^2)/(ell*b*h^2))*[(9*leng^2*FI^2+(FII^2*h^2)) 18*leng*FI^2;

18*leng*FI^2

% Transfer matrix in cracked element

T=[-1 0;

-l -1;

1 0;

106

36*FI^2];

0 1];

%The total compliance of the cracked beam

C=c1 + c2; % where cl is compliance an element due to strain energy of uncracked

beam and

%

KTC=T*inv(C)*(T)';

% Consistent mass matrix

mmt=rho*area*leng/6;

mt=mmt*[2 0 1 0;...

0 0 0 0;...

1 0 2 0;...

0 0 0 0];

mr=rho*xi/leng*[1 0 -1 0;...

0 0 0 0;...

-1 0 1 0;...

0 0 0 0];

m=mt+mr;

Ma=[0 0 0 0;...

0 0 0 0;...

0 0 1 0;...

0 0 0 0];

Mp=m+Ma;

107

for iel=1:nel

if iel==pce

k=KTC;

elseif iel==0

k=k1;

else

k=k1;

end

if iel==pam

m=Mp;

elseif iel==0

m=m1;

else

m=m1;

end

kk=feasmbl1(kk,k,index); % assemble element stiffness matrices into system matrix

end

kk;

108

mm;

for i=1:2

kk(1,:)=[];

kk(:,1)=[];

mm(1,:)=[];

mm(:,1)=[];

end

kk

mm;

[n,n]=size(mm)

[V,D]=eig(kk,mm);

[lambda,s]=sort(diag(D)); % Sort the eigenvaules and eigenvectors in ascending order

V=V(:,s);

VV=V(n:s);

Factor=diag(V'*mm*V);

Phi=V*inv(sqrt(diag(Factor)))

OmegaT=real(OmegaT);

OmegaT=sort(OmegaT)

OmegaT(1,1)

OmegaT(2,1)

OmegaT(3,1)

cc=length(V);

e=V(1:2:cc,:);

109

E=length(e);

p=[zeros(1,E);e]; % transverse displacement Eigen vectors

xp=[0:tleng/nel:tleng];

for np=mode

for n=1:(sdof/2)

xxxxx(n)=xp(n); % xxxxx is positon of nodes along the x-direction

ppp(n)=p(n,np);

end

plot(xxxxx,ppp,'--r','LineWidth',2,...

'MarkerEdgeColor','k',...

'MarkerFaceColor','g',...

'MarkerSize',5)

%'red'

hold on

grid on

end

%-------------------------------

110

- Bending SoalÎncărcat deRokhim van Heaven
- Chapter 10: Particle Size Reduction and SeparationÎncărcat deYsabel Salvador Dychinco
- Isolated Footing Design Example and Excel SheetÎncărcat deSougata Das
- CEPA_2007 - Stress Corrosion Cracking_Recommended PracticesÎncărcat demicver_00
- Study of fracture in concrete using fractalsÎncărcat deInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development - IJSRD
- 9 Design for Dynamic LoadingÎncărcat dePRASAD326
- 1-s2.0-S2214785318323411-mainÎncărcat deikhsan febriyan
- 5.Structural%20EngineeringÎncărcat dehayder1974
- Maritiem2013 Accounting for Thinckness Multi AxialityÎncărcat deAli Wakaa
- 5-Fatigue of Dental Ceramics in a Simulated Oral Environment - CopyÎncărcat demichael.cretzu
- numerical j integral.pdfÎncărcat deGopinath Chakraborty
- 3638.pdfÎncărcat deSridhar Tholasingam
- journalÎncărcat deNevin Manuel
- Stress Intensity FactorsÎncărcat deajmal
- 09CDE09 Mechanics of FractureÎncărcat deRajueswar
- FatndcÎncărcat deKarthi Keyan
- What is a Fixed SupportÎncărcat debmyertekin
- 1586_C011Încărcat deEngr Shahnawaz Ghanchi
- tesÎncărcat defitpraw
- 7B answerÎncărcat detarasasanka
- UsydÎncărcat deFlynn Gould
- Fracture of Cementitious MaterialsÎncărcat deraeggaeman
- FT01Încărcat debasark
- 1st DraftÎncărcat deMark D Lalduhawma
- Reservoir Geomechanics Course AnnouncementÎncărcat deMiguel Angel Vidal Arango
- Civil Engg Interview QuestionsÎncărcat depraveen
- Chapter 13Încărcat demuruganaviator
- ME_Con-4Încărcat devidya chakitwar
- Lectures 11.4.1 Analysis of ConnectionsÎncărcat decal2_uni
- Material Properties.docxÎncărcat deSyahri Maryadi

- Candle MakingÎncărcat denorthsage
- Advanced Body Armor Utilizing Shear Thickening FluÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- 3. Robust DesignÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- 1-s2.0-S0263822318343435-mainÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- Chapter 12 Working DrawingÎncărcat deAlexShear
- 1-s2.0-S0734743X15002201-main (1).pdfÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- Symmetric LaminatesÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- Us 5200256Încărcat deTibebu Meride
- Final SummerÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- Main Components of Pressure VesselÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- Mechanical Seal DesignÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- Types of Composite MaterialsÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- 0389-4304(94)90003-5Încărcat deTibebu Meride
- OneÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- AAU SponsorshipLetterFormÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- Multi.docxÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- Significant AdvantagesÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- ClutchÎncărcat deAvinash Kumar
- 1111128618_276985Încărcat deTibebu Meride
- ClutchÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- Problem of StatementÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- Manual Paper Recycling Machine DesignÎncărcat deLakshmanan Arunachalam
- Fertilizer Materials.docxÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- TillageÎncărcat deAbhilash Dwivedy
- logo bduÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- The Size of the Crac1Încărcat deTibebu Meride
- behal_solodyankin_crack_growth_simulation_in_the_course.pdfÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- What Are Different Types of FertilizerÎncărcat deTibebu Meride

- Example Ch 3Încărcat deabsmeena
- 1.Performance Study of a Re-circulating CabinetÎncărcat deChandan Kumar Ray
- Fracture ToughnessÎncărcat deAerocfdfreak
- fm paper GTUÎncărcat deJainesh
- IRC 113Încărcat deKomalesh C
- BidFile_552Încărcat deJothimanikkam Somasundaram
- Shear Strength Prediction of FRCÎncărcat dePremalatha Jeyaram
- Handout15_6333 turbulence flow.pdfÎncărcat denyj martin
- CN2116 HW11 Solution (XJP_ 2012) FinalÎncărcat dePrimus Ong
- CFD simulation of Lid driven cavity flowÎncărcat deInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development - IJSRD
- [PPT]PVT AnalysisÎncărcat deswpuxiaofan
- Design of Machine ElementsÎncărcat deKarthikeyan
- Using Computational Fluid Dynamicrigid Body Dynamic Results to Generate Aerodynamic Models for Projectile Flight SimulationÎncărcat demegustalazorra
- 67533870 Separation of Ammonia WaterÎncărcat deMuhd Faiz
- Investigation of casing shoe depth determination taking into consideration the Kick Tolerance and Well IntegrityÎncărcat deWCG
- 31-5-18Încărcat deRavi Kr Yadav
- Pile CapÎncărcat deHafeel Ahamed Ashraf Ali
- Correlations of Soil PropertiesÎncărcat deKeat Leong
- Thermolib-UserManualÎncărcat deFreeway Smile
- 19 Petrucci10e CSMÎncărcat deElah Palaganas
- CFG PUMPÎncărcat deAhmad Syazni Bin Moktar
- 1-s2.0-S0378381206000355-mainÎncărcat deWilo Jara
- Effects of Ship Motion on Ship Maneuvering in WavesÎncărcat deandevari
- page-15.pdfÎncărcat deJuan Ponce Manríquez
- MANUAL CAGC-CAG (1).docxÎncărcat deibnu kamilan
- module5.pdfÎncărcat deAndrew Kreimer
- 1-s2.0-S0263822318306433-mainÎncărcat deZhi_Ming_Cheah_8136
- Simulating a Heat Exchanger With a Pinch PointÎncărcat deAshutoshJha
- AccumulatorÎncărcat deThiMinhKhuyen
- Static Analysis of a Corner BracketÎncărcat deFaizan Rasool

## Mult mai mult decât documente.

Descoperiți tot ce are Scribd de oferit, inclusiv cărți și cărți audio de la editori majori.

Anulați oricând.