HIGHER ORDER COMPOSITE

© All Rights Reserved

14 tayangan

HIGHER ORDER COMPOSITE

© All Rights Reserved

- Beam Design125
- Beam Column Base Plate Design
- Statics
- Lab 3 Sheet Shearing Force-21Sep11
- Floor Slab BS Std.
- Normal Forces and BM
- TCC12 Bending and Axial Force.xls
- RCC95 Continuous Beams (Tables).xls
- Mathcad - Example 8.3.1 Nd p 140 Edtd Sg 6 Us
- AISC2005-BeamDesignAid
- Flexural analysis of prestressed concrete structures
- CE09 404 Structural Analysis I APR 2014
- Arch Action
- 10703-R1 rev A
- Students ME2112 (17-18) - E (Bending Stresses)
- kupdf.com_text-book-of-strength-of-materialsphjain.pdf
- MECHANICS OF SOLIDS.pdf
- PLATE.01.REVIEW-OF-MECHANICS-OF-MATERIALS-AND-ENGINEERING-MATERIALS.pdf
- Timber_Code_Check_Theory_enu.pdf
- tutorial problem in solid mechanics

Anda di halaman 1dari 20

BEAMS USING HIGHER ORDER SHEAR

DEFORMATION THEORY

S. R R N. G

Machine Dynamics Laboratory, Department of Applied Mechanics, Indian Institute of

Technology, Madras 600 036, India

(Received 6 May 1994, and in final form 5 September 1994)

Harmonic response of tapered composite beams is investiaged by using a finite element

model based on a higher order shear deformation theory. Only uniaxial bending is considered

and the interlaminar shear stresses are neglected. The Poisson ratio effect is incorporated in

the formulation of beam constitutive equations. The effect of in-plane inertia and rotary

inertia is also considered in the formulation of the mass matrix. A parametric study is

done of the influence of anisotropy, taper profile and taper parameter. Linearly and

parabolically varying thickness variations of increasing, decreasing, decreasingincreasing

and increasingdecreasing type are used.

7 1995 Academic Press Limited

1. INTRODUCTION

of structural components owing to their high strength-to-weight and stiffness-to-weight

ratios. Non-uniform beams, tapered and stepped, can be used to achieve a better distribution

of strength and weight and sometimes to satisfy architectural and functional requirements.

Interest in laminated beams, uniform and non-uniform, is growing as they are finding a

number of applications in turbine blades, helicopter blades and robot arms. Therefore, there

is a need for a better understanding of the vibration characteristics of laminated beams,

and far laminated composite beams, especially non-uniform beams, have not been studied

extensively.

The paper by Kapania and Raciti [1] gives the recent developments in the vibration

analysis of laminated composite beams. In recent years several authors have tried to predict

the natural frequencies of laminated beams of uniform thickness. Miller and Adams [2]

studied the vibration characteristics of orthotropic clampedfree beams using the classical

lamination theory. Vinson and Sierakowiski [3] have given exact solutions based on classical

lamination theory. Chen and Yang [4] and Chandrashekhara et al. [5] have undertaken the

free vibration analysis of composite beams based on first order shear deformation theory.

Recently Chandrashekhara and Bangera [6] have studied the free vibration characteristics

of laminated composite beams using a finite element model based on a higher order plate

theory [7]. They have corrected generalized force and generalized strain relations, to

consider the Poisson effect, by ignoring the forces in the y-direction. This operation involves

inversion of certain matrices and is limited to the type of beam theory one is using.

737

0022460X/95/450737+20 $12.00/0

. .

738

generalized force and generalized strain relations [8]. Oral [9] has formulated a shear flexible

finite element for linearly tapered symmetrically laminated composite beams using first order

shear deformation theory. The element has three nodes and there are six DOF at each

nodethree displacements and three independent rotations. The author [9] has used this

element to find the static response of tapered beams.

In the present work the dynamical behaviour of tapered composite beams subjected to

a point harmonic excitation is studied by using a finite element method. Higher order shear

deformation theory based on a higher order plate theory [7] is used in developing the finite

element model for tapered beams as it does not require shear correction factors and because

results predicted by it are accurate compared to those obtained with first order shear

deformation theory. The Poisson ratio effect is incorporated by correcting stressstrain

relations. The effect of in-plane inertia and rotary inertia is also considered in the formulation

of the mass matrix. Only uniaxial bending is considered and the effect of interlaminar shear

stresses is neglected. A variety of parametric studies are conducted to demonstrate the

influence of taper and material anisotropy on the dynamic response.

2. FORMULATION

equations (see Figure 1) are

U(X, z, t)=u(x, t)+z[cx (x, t)(4/3)(z/h)2(cx (x, t)+1w(x, t)/1x)],

(1)

where u and w are the in-plane and lateral displacements of the middle surface, cx is the

rotation of the normal to the middle plane about the y-axis, and h is the thickness of the

beam. The strains associated with the displacements in equation (1) are

ex=ex0+z[kx1+z 2kx2 ],

2

gxz=g*

xz +z k*

xz ,

where

ex0=1u/1x,

g*

xz =cx+1w/1x,

kx1=1gx /1x,

2

k*

xz =(4/h )(cx+1w/1x),

(2)

739

The stresses in the nth layer, for layers stacked in the y-direction as shown in Figure 2, the

principal material axis of which is oriented at an angle u to the x-axis, are related to the strains

by the relation

F

G

G

j

J

G

G

f

sxx J

K C11

G

G C12

syy

G

G

szz f

C

= G 13

G 0

tyz F

G

G 0

gxy

G

G

txz j

k C16

C12

C13

C22

C23

C23

C33

C44

C45

C45

C55

C26

C36

C16L

C26G

G

C36G

0G

G

0

G

C66l

F

G

G

j

J

G

G

f

exx J

eyy G

ezz f

gyz F

(3)

G

G

gxz j

gxy

If the beam is undergoing uniaxial bending and if there is no torsional loading, one can take

syy=szz=tyz=txy=0, and upon substitution of this equation (3) one arrives at the following

relation which accounts for Poissons ratio effect [8]:

6 7$

sxx

Q

= 11

txz

Q16

Q16

Q66

%6 7

exx

.

gxz

(4)

Here Q11=C*

11 , Q16=C*

16 and Q66=C*

66 .

For layers stacked in the z-direction as shown in Figure 1 one can obtain, using the same

procedure and with appropriate stressstrain relations [8], the following relations among the

Qij and C*

ij constants: Q11=C*

11C*

16 C*

16 /C*

66 , Q16=0 and Q66=C*

44 . The relations for C*

ij in

terms of Cij are given in reference [8].

2.1.

The stiffness matrix is formulated by using the strain energy expressions for a beam given

by

U=12

U=12

vol

(5)

where {e0 }T=[ex0 kx1 kx2 g*

xz k*

xz ]

generalized stress vector as {N0 }=[D]{e0 } and substituting this in equation (5), the

expression for the strain energy becomes

U=12

(6)

740

. .

where

K

G

G

[D]=G

G

G

k

A11

B11

B11

E11

A16

D16

D11

F11

B16

E16

E11

F11

H11

E16

G16

A16

D16

B16

E16

E16

G16

A66

D66

D66

F66

L

G

G

G.

G

G

l

hk

hx

g g

bk

hx

bk1

nl

k=1

Qij (1, z, z 2, z 3, z 4, z 5 ) dz

hk1

nl

k=1

The layer configuration shown in Figure 2 is adopted for the tapered beams considered in

the present parametric study. Taper is considered for the thickness with the width of the

beam kept constant. Only symmetrically tapered beams of rectangular cross-section are

considered. Different tapered beams are obtained from a uniform beam by altering its

thickness along the length with its length, width and volume kept constant. For a tapered

beam defined by a function f(x) and for any particular taper parameter b, the half-thickness

hx at any distance x can be calculated by using the relation

hx=h1 {1bf(x)},

(7)

minimum half-thickness and f(x) is a function defining the taper profile (see the Appendix).

In equation (7) the only unknown is h1 , which can be calculated by equating the volume of

the tapered beam to that of uniform beam.

2.2.

The expression for the kinetic energy may be written as

T=

1

2

(8)

vol

2.3.

For the finite element formulation a two-node beam element with four degrees of freedom

[uj wj (1w/1x)j cxj ] per node is used. For this configuration the generalized displacements are

interpolated by using expressions of the form

2

j=1

j=1

j=1

(9)

741

where Nj are the Lagrange linear interpolation functions and zj (x) and jj (x) are Hermite

cubic interpolation functions. By using equation (9) the generalized strains can be expressed

as

{e0 }=[B]{de },

(10)

where [B] is the matrix of shape functions and their derivatives and {de } is the nodal

displacement vector. The element stiffness matrix can be obtained by substituting equation

(10) in equation (6) and the element mass matrix can be obtained by substituting equation

(9) in equation (8): [K]e=f0l [B]T[D][B] dx; [M]e=f0l [N]T[r][N] dx. Here [N] is the matrix of

shape functions and its derivatives.

2.4.

The natural frequencies are obtained by solving the eigenvalue problem

[K]{d}=v 2[M]{d},

(11)

where [K] and [M] are the global stiffness and the global mass matrices, respectively, d is

the corresponding eigenvector and v is the natural frequency.

For a small amount of structural damping, the steady state response of a beam subjected

to harmonic excitation is given by

[Kd ]{U}={F},

(12)

where [Kd ] is the dynamic stiffness matrix [Kd ]=[K](1+hi)V 2[M], in which {F} is the force

vector consisting of amplitudes of nodal forces, {U} is the displacement vector, V is the

frequency of excitation and h is the structural damping factor. The dynamic displacements

{U} obtained from equation (12) are then used to obtain dynamic stresses by using equations

(2), (4) and (9).

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A number of examples have been considered. Unless mentioned otherwise, the following

AS4/3051-6 graphite/epoxy material properties are used: E1=14480 GPa, E2=965 GPa,

G23=345 GPa, G12=G13=414 GPa, n12=03, r=138923 kg/m3. The non-dimensional

parameters used in presenting results are the following: v=vL 2zr/E1 h 2 ; V*=(natural

frequency of a tapered beam)/(corresponding natural frequency of a uniform beam);

w*=(maximum dynamic displacement w of a uniform or tapered beam)/(maximum static

displacement w of a uniform beam); s*=(maximum dynamic normal stress sx of a uniform

or tapered beam)/(maximum static normal stress sx of a uniform beam); t*=(maximum

dynamic shear stress txz of a uniform or tapered beam)/(maximum static shear stress txz

of a uniform beam); wn=(maximum displacement w of a uniform beam)/(maximum

displacement w of a uniform orthotropic (0) beam); s1n=(maximum principal normal stress

s1 of a uniform beam)/(maximum principal stress s1 of a uniform orthotropic (0) beam);

s2n=(maximum principal normal stress s2 of a uniform beam)/(maximum principal stress

s1 of a uniform orthotropic (0) beam); t12n=(maximum shear stress in principal plane t12

of a uniform beam)/(maximum principal stress s1 of a uniform orthotropic (0) beam).

For Tables 13 the laminated plate strip (i.e., plies stacked in the z-direction as shown

in Figure 1) is considered. In Table 1 the natural frequencies of a simply supported

orthotropic (0) graphite/epoxy beam are compared with existing results. The comparison

is quite good. It is well known that the classical theory over predicts the natural frequencies

in case of thick beams.

. .

742

and angle-ply beams of uniform thickness for various boundary conditions are compared.

Only the first natural frequency is considered for comparison. In Table 3 is shown the

T 1

Comparison of natural frequencies (kHz) of a simply supported orthotropic (0) graphite/epoxy

beam

L/h

Mode

number

CLT

[3]

FSDT

[5]

HSDT

[6]

Present

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

0051

0203

0457

0812

1269

0813

3250

7314

13002

20316

0051

0203

0454

0804

1262

0755

2548

4716

6960

9194

0051

0202

0453

0799

1238

0756

2554

4742

7032

9355

0051

0202

0454

0804

1252

0754

2555

4753

7052

9382

120

(L=762 mm)

15

(L=381 mm)

T 2

Comparison of non-dimensional natural frequencies (v ) of symmetrically laminated cross-ply

[0/90/90/0] and angle-ply [45/45/45/45] beams under various boundary conditions

[0/90/90/0]

ZXXXXXXCXXXXXXV

HSDT [6]

Present

Boundary

conditions

SS

CC

CF

25023

45940

09241

24980

46440

09231

[45/45/45/45]

ZXXXXXXCXXXXXXV

HSDT [6]

Present

08295

18472

02965

07966

17611

02849

T 3

Comparison of non-dimensional frequencies (v ) of a simply supported [45/45/45/45]

antisymmetric angle ply beam

Mode

number

HSDT

[6]

Present

1

2

3

4

5

08278

32334

70148

107449

119145

0797

3120

6791

11862

13030

T 4

Comparison of tip displacements of a tapered cantilever isotropic beam

D/d

2

5

Bending

Reference [9]

002729

004789

Present

Stretching

Reference [9]

002782

004856

023077E03

032609E03

Present

02310E03

03350E03

743

T 5

Comparison of non-dimensional dynamic displacements of a simply supported isotropic beam

of uniform thickness

xL/4

ZXXXXXXCXXXXXXV

Reference [10]

Present

Mode

number

1

2

3

10000

1250

12350

xL/2

ZXXXXXXCXXXXXXV

Reference [10]

Present

9747

1258

12608

14140

1746

13784

01191

17821

T 6

Effect of anisotropy on the maximum static response of a simply supported composite beam

of uniform thickness

Type beam

wn

s1n

s2n

=t12n =

R.F.

Orthotropic

[0/90/90/0]

[15/15/15/15]

[30/30/30/30]

[45/45/45/45]

[60/60/60/60]

[75/75/75/75]

[90/90/90/90]

1000

1679

1040

4024

15170

26070

28810

29030

10000

17410

07490

05873

04042

02157

00676

00000

00000

00000

00355

01546

03300

05184

06687

07373

00331

00332

01666

03034

03671

03365

02157

00363

100

263

606

2879

7889

15507

23239

27277

. .

744

T 7

Effect of anisotropy on the maximum dynamic response of a simply supported composite beam

of uniform thickness

Type of beam

wn

s1n

s2n

=t12n =

R.F.

Orthotropic

[0/90/90/0]

[15/15/15/15]

[30/30/30/30]

[45/45/45/45]

[60/60/60/60]

[75/75/75/75]

[90/90/90/90]

1000

1655

1048

4146

1563

2609

2874

2894

1000

1843

0896

0754

0510

0273

0086

0000

0000

00000

00382

01926

04059

06446

08291

09154

00493

00479

01915

03845

04581

04229

02721

00497

100

253

642

3676

9712

19381

28843

33885

T 8

Maximum dynamic response values of simply supported cross-ply and angle-ply beams of

uniform thickness

Type of

beam

v

(rad/s)

Res.

no.

Cross-ply

[0/90/90/0]

Angle-ply

[45/45/45/45]

s*

w*

3 571

4993

12 896

541

25 410

099

1

2

3

1 633

6 463

14 303

5104

449

065

t*

0

29920

299290

21020

210290

98530

985390

3023

2076

767

3292

219590

12110

08790

4040

02790

3896

1350

425

Superscripts over the numerical values in cross-ply cases denote the fiber direction in the layer.

T 9

Maximum response values of a simply supported cross-ply beam [0/90/90/0] subjected to a point

harmonic load for linearly varying thickness variation: increasing type

Res.

no.

1

2

3

V*

w*

Layer 1

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

025

050

075

025

050

075

025

050

075

09933

09629

08700

09971

09833

09401

09972

09846

09447

5218

6144

8938

609

738

1073

102

108

106

31

28

23

16

13

11

10

10

8

3446

4045

5973

1335

1592

2235

419

424

419

28

22

15

13

13

9

10

10

6

Element in which maximum normal stress is obtained.

Element in which maximum shear stress is obtained.

3564

4931

9244

2412

2984

4399

1018

1049

984

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Layer 2

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

230

270

398

089

106

149

028

028

028

28

22

15

13

13

9

10

10

6

3564

4931

9244

2412

2984

4399

1018

1049

984

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

745

T 10

Maximum response values of a simply supported cross-ply beam [0/90/90/0] subjected to a point

harmonic load for linear thickness variation: decreasing type

Res.

no.

1

2

3

V*

w*

Layer 1

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

025

050

075

025

050

075

025

050

075

09933

09629

08700

09971

09833

09401

09972

09846

09447

4719

4789

5591

543

563

657

108

124

160

31

34

37

46

49

49

52

52

52

3118

3144

3736

1193

1221

1369

438

502

647

34

37

46

46

49

52

52

52

55

3221

3842

5783

2148

2277

2693

1070

1208

1535

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

Layer 2

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

208

210

249

079

081

091

029

033

043

34

37

46

46

49

52

52

52

55

3221

3842

5783

2148

2277

2693

1070

1208

1535

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

Element in which maximum normal stress is obtained.

Element in which maximum shear stress is obtained.

T 11

Maximum response values of a simply supported cross-ply beam [0/90/90/0] subjected to a point

harmonic load for linear thickness variation: decreasingincreasing type

Res.

no.

1

2

3

V*

w*

Layer 1

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

025

050

075

025

050

075

025

050

075

09393

08252

05914

09929

09630

08731

09969

09894

09768

5888

8426

19670

548

580

727

111

132

178

31

31

31

16

19

19

31

31

31

42.16

6598

16550

1223

1311

1652

447

519

656

31

31

31

43

19

37

31

31

31

2573

2277

2027

2416

3034

4817

1015

1049

1082

4

55

7

31

31

31

40

22

22

Layer 2

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

281

440

1104

082

087

110

030

035

044

31

31

31

43

19

37

31

31

31

2573

2277

2027

2416

3034

4817

1015

1049

1082

4

55

7

31

31

31

40

22

22

Element in which maximum normal stress is obtained.

Element in which maximum shear stress is obtained.

T 12

Maximum response values of a simply supported cross-ply beam [0/90/90/0] subjected to a point

harmonic load for linear thickness variation: increasingdecreasing type

Res.

no.

1

2

3

V*

w*

Layer 1

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

025

050

075

025

050

075

025

050

075

10405

10633

10279

09945

09667

08791

10003

09952

09719

4290

3825

3783

545

573

710

101

105

113

31

31

31

16

13

13

10

10

10

2676

2395

2681

1218

1299

1621

405

409

448

25

43

10

13

49

7

10

52

55

Element in which maximum normal stress is obtained.

Element in which maximum shear stress is obtained.

3439

4410

7384

2410

3019

4766

1057

1177

1451

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Layer 2

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

178

160

179

081

087

108

027

027

030

25

43

10

13

49

7

10

52

55

3439

4410

7384

2410

3019

4766

1057

1177

1451

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

. .

746

T 13

Maximum response values of a simply supported cross-ply beam [0/90/90/0] subjected to a point

harmonic load for parabolic thickness variation: increasing type

Res.

no.

1

2

3

V*

w*

Layer 1

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

025

050

075

025

050

075

025

050

075

09796

09236

07651

09944

09735

09038

09966

09803

09201

5482

6952

13350

621

803

1435

103

111

114

30

27

24

15

15

13

11

10

9

3625

4577

8470

1368

1710

2806

424

452

445

27

23

17

15

13

11

10

9

8

3414

4384

7673

2320

2743

3870

990

982

805

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Layer 2

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

242

305

564

091

114

187

028

030

030

27

23

17

15

13

11

10

9

8

3414

4384

7673

2320

2743

3870

990

982

805

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Element in which maximum normal stress is obtained.

Element in which maximum shear stress is obtained.

T 14

Maximum response values of a simply supported cross-ply beam [0/90/90/0] subjected to a point

harmonic load for parabolic thickness variation: decreasing type

Res.

no.

1

2

3

V*

w*

Layer 1

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

025

050

075

025

050

075

025

050

075

09796

09236

07651

09944

09735

09038

09966

09803

09201

4923

5323

7993

550

586

734

108

125

175

32

34

38

47

47

49

51

52

53

3254

3505

5066

1209

1247

1435

444

509

686

34

38

44

46

48

50

51

52

53

3063

3355

4592

2051

2002

1980

1037

1108

1239

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

Layer 2

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

217

234

338

081

083

096

030

034

046

34

38

44

46

48

50

51

52

53

3063

3355

4592

2051

2002

1980

1037

1108

1239

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

Element in which maximum normal stress is obtained.

Element in which maximum shear stress is obtained.

T 15

Maximum response values of a simply supported cross-ply beam [0/90/90/0] subjected to a point

harmonic load for parabolic thickness variation: decreasingincreasing type

Res.

no.

1

2

3

V*

w*

Layer 1

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

025

050

075

025

050

075

025

050

075

09413

08308

05951

09848

09368

07898

09956

09780

09207

5888

8483

20840

570

655

1005

111

136

211

31

31

31

17

18

19

31

31

31

3910

5521

12030

1292

1499

2279

437

503

682

Element in which maximum normal stress is obtained.

Element in which maximum shear stress is obtained.

30

30

30

17

19

22

30

30

30

2543

2292

2137

2327

2764

4032

1057

1167

1388

5

9

14

30

30

30

21

21

22

Layer 2

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

261

368

802

086

100

152

029

034

045

30

30

30

17

19

22

30

30

30

2543

2292

2137

2327

2764

4032

1057

1167

1388

5

9

14

30

30

30

21

21

22

747

T 16

Maximum response values of a simply supported cross-ply beam [0/90/90/0] subjected to a point

harmonic load for parabolic thickness variation: increasingdecreasing type

no.

V*

w*

Layer 1

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

025

050

075

025

050

075

025

050

075

10410

10711

10659

10009

09820

09159

09982

09868

09514

4297

3825

3629

529

538

607

099

101

107

31

31

31

15

14

13

11

10

9

2773

2349

2213

1172

1180

1401

397

397

430

2

3

30

30

7

14

11

6

9

8

5

3564

4806

8452

2503

3283

5496

1100

1297

1759

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Layer 2

ZXXXXCXXXXV

s*

t*

185

157

148

078

079

093

026

026

029

30

29

7

14

11

6

9

8

5

3564

4806

8452

2503

3283

5496

1100

1297

1759

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Element in which maximum normal stress is obtained.

Element in which maximum shear stress is obtained.

angle-ply beam of uniform thickness. For all these beams the L/h ratio is taken as 15, h being

equal to 254 cm. The present results in both Table 2 and Table 3 are in good agreement

with those in reference [6]. A slight deviation of the present results from those in reference

[6] may be due to the procedure employed in considering the Poisson ratio effect. In reference

[6] this effect is considered after the evaluation of stress resultants, whereas in the present

case it is considered before the evaluation of stress resultants.

For checking the accuracy of the present formulation for tapered beams, linearly tapered

clampedfree isotropic beams with decreasing thickness variation and of rectangular

cross-section have been analyzed for stretching and bending modes. Two beams, one with

h1 /h2=2 and the other with h1 h2=5, were taken for analysis. The following properties were

used: E=30106 lb/in2, n=0, L=10 in, b=1 in. The force is applied at the tip and is equal

to 1000 lb. The tip displacements are compared in Table 4 with those in reference [9]. The

comparison is good.

To validate the present formulation for dynamic analysis the non-dimensional dynamic

displacements of a simply supported isotropic beam of uniform thickness, subjected to a

point harmonic excitation at the first three natural frequencies, are compared with the

analytical solutions given in reference [10]. The force is applied at quarter span. The

comparison is shown in Table 5. The non-dimensional displacement is given by

w(x)p 4EI/PL 3, where E is the Youngs modulus, I is the moment of inertia, P is the magnitude

of the harmonic force and L is the length of the beam. The hysteretic damping constant is

taken as 0.01. The results obtained by the present formulation are in good agreement with

those in reference [10].

3.1.

The following discussion deals with the steady state response of simply supported

composite beams, with plies stacked in the y-direction as shown in Figure 2, when subjected

to harmonic excitation. Three types of harmonic loading with the excitation frequencies

equal to the first three natural frequencies are considered. The amplitude of the load is kept

constant in all three types of harmonic excitation. The point harmonic load is applied at

quarter span from the left end of the beam. For harmonic response the hysteretic damping

748

. .

constant is taken as 002. For tapered beams two types of profiles, linear and parabolic, are

considered for thickness variation. The different taper profiles considered are shown in

Figure 3.

The effect of anisotropy on the response, static and harmonic, is shown in Tables 6 and 7.

The maximum harmonic response values of simply supported cross-ply and angle-ply beams

of uniform thickness are shown in Table 8. Maximum response values along with the

Figure 4. The distribution of displacements and stresses for a SS (45/45/45/45) beam; increasing typelinear,

w, hx=0; W, hx=025; Q, hx=050; R, hx=075.

749

Figure 5. The distribution of stresses for a SS (45/45/45/45) beam; increasing typelinear. Key as Figure 4.

variations when subjected to a point harmonic load are shown in Tables 916. The maximum

response values of [45/45/45/45] beams are not given, as a more or less similar trend

as that observed in cross-ply beams is observed. The variation of displacement and stresses

along the length of the beam are shown in Figures 411. It is to be noted that the variations

of lateral displacement and stresses of [45/45/45/45] beams of linear variation only are

shown, because the variation is more or less similar in all the types of beams considered.

From these tables and figures, the following observations are made.

In the case of symmetric angle-ply beams the magnitude of the stresses developed is the

same in all the laminae. In the case of cross-ply beams the magnitude of the normal stress

developed in the 0 ply is greater than that developed in the 90 ply and the ratio between

these two stresses is approximately equal to the ratio of the elastic moduli. However the same

shear stresses are developed in both the 0 ply and the 90ply. In all the beams considered

the variation of normal stress along the length of the beam is the same as that of the

displacement for any particular mode and for any particular thickness variation considered.

However, the variation of shear stress is opposite to that of displacement.

3.1.1. Effect of anisotropy

The effect of anisotropy on the response values of simply supported uniform composite

beams is shown in Tables 6 and 7. For Tables 6 and 7, graphite/epoxy material with the

750

. .

following properties was used: E1=30106 psi, E2=075106 psi, G12=0375106 psi,

n12=025. Only the resonant response values of beam at the lowest natural frequency are

presented in Table 7. The stresses presented are those in the principal material directions

of the first layer. A similar trend is observed in both the static and dynamic cases. The laminae

arrangement is as shown in Figure 2. In the case of an angle-ply beam, as the fibre orientation

angle, u to the x-axis increases, the normal stress in the fibre direction decreases and that

in the direction perpendicular to the fibre increases. The shear stress, t12n , increases with the

751

increase in u up to u=45 and then decreases. The normal stress in the fibre direction of a

cross-ply beam is greater than that in all the other types of beams considered. In contrast,

the shear stress t12n in a cross-ply beam is less than that obtained for the angle-ply beams.

In the case of an angle-ply beam the beam becomes flexible as the inclination of fibre to the

x-axis increases. It can be seen that the relative factor of safety (with respect to an orthotropic

(0)beam) is a minimum in case of an orthotropic (0) beam. In the case of an angle-ply beam,

the relative factor of safety increases with increase in fibre orientation angle and is very

great compared to that of the orthotropic (0) beam. The relative factor of safety for any

lamination scheme is calculated by dividing the value obtained upon substitution of its

principal stresses in the TsaiHill failure criterion by the value obtained upon substitution

of the principal stresses of the orthotropic (0) beam. It can be seen that, the orthotropic

(0) beam is better insofar as uniaxial bending is considered.

3.1.2. Effect of taper profile

It is shown in Tables 916 that, for increasing and decreasing thickness variations, the

maximum dynamic displacement and the maximum dynamic normal stress obtained with

a parabolic profile are greater than those obtained with linear profile, whereas the maximum

shear stress obtained with parabolic profile is less. In the case of a decreasingincreasing

thickness variation, the maximum dynamic displacements obtained with both profiles are

the same, whereas the stresses obtained with a linear variation are greater due to the presence

752

. .

of the stress concentration effect as there is a sudden change in cross-section. The stress

concentration effect becomes predominant for a taper parameter, bq05. In the case of

decreasingincreasing thickness variation the maximum displacement and the maximum

normal stress obtained with both profiles are more or less the same, but the maximum shear

stress obtained with a parabolic variation is greater. Among all the variations considered,

insofar as the first resonance is concerned, the decreasing-increasing thickness variation gives

higher maximum dynamic displacement and higher maximum dynamic normal stress

753

displacement and maximum dynamic normal stress. Upon comparison one can conclude

that the increasingdecreasing with a linear profile is better suited for simply supported end

conditions.

3.1.3. Effect of taper parameter

It is shown in Tables 916 that, in the cases of both cross-ply and angle-ply beams, higher

mode frequencies decrease with the increase in the taper parameter for any particular

thickness variation considered. Excepting the increasingdecreasing taper variation, for

all the other thickness variations of both the cross-ply and angle-ply beams considered

the first natural frequency decreases as the taper parameter b increases. In the case of

increasingdecreasing thickness variation, the change in the first natural frequency

is minimum for 025Qbq05. From the graphs presented one can observe that if the

thickness of the beam at any particular section increases the stresses developed at that section

decrease and vice versa. Also, the locations of the maximum displacement and the maximum

stresses shift towards the smaller cross-section end as the taper parameter increases. The

peaks of dynamic shear stress occur near points where the bending moment is zero. In the

case of a uniform beam peaks of dynamic shear stresses developed near the points where

the bending moment is zero are equal in magnitude. In the case of a tapered beam, among

all the sections where the bending moment is zero maximum dynamic shear stress would be

754

. .

developed at the smallest cross-section. Usually the maximum dynamic shear stress

developed increases with increase in the taper parameter.

4. CONCLUSIONS

A number of results have been presented to show the effect of taper profile, taper

parameter and material anisotropy on the harmonic response of laminated composite

755

beams. The validity of the present results has been established by comparing results with

existing results in the literature. From the results presented it can be concluded that, insofar

as uniaxial bending is considered, the orthotropic (0) beam is better than all the other types

of beams considered. It can also be seen that, among all thickness variations considered the

increasingdecreasing thickness variation with taper parameter equal to 05 would be better

for simply supported end conditions.

REFERENCES

1. R. K. K and S. R 1989 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Journal 27,

935946. Recent advances in analysis of laminated beams and plates, part II: vibrations and wave

propagation.

2. A. K. M and D. F. A 1975 Journal of Sound and Vibration 41, 433449. An analytic

means of determining the flexural and torsional resonant frequencies of generally orthotropic

beams.

3. J. R. V and R. L. S 1986 Behaviour of Structures Composed of Composite

Materials: Martinus Nijhoff. See pp. 139144.

4. A. T. C and T. Y. Y 1985 Journal of Composite Materials 19, 459475. Static and dynamic

formulation of symmetrically laminated beam finite element for microcomputer.

5. K. C, K. K and S. R 1990 Composite Structures 14, 269279.

Free vibration of composite beams including rotary inertia and shear deformation.

756

. .

vibration of composite beams using a refined shear flexible beam element.

7. J. N. R 1984 Journal of Applied Mechanics 51, 745752. A simple higher order theory for

laminated composite plates.

8. A. B and K. C 1991 Composite Structures 19, 371380. Some

observations on the modelling of laminated composite beams with general lay-ups.

9. S. O A shear flexible finite element for non-uniform laminated composite beams. 1991

Computers and Structures 38(3), 353360.

10. G. B. W 1976 The Dynamical Behaviour of Structures. Oxford: Pergamon Press. See

pp. 131133.

1. Linearincreasing:

f(x)=1x/L.

2. Lineardecreasing:

f(x)=x/L.

3. Linearincreasingdecreasing:

f(x)=

2x/L

2(1x/L)

for 0ExEL/2,

.

for L/2ExEL.

4. Lineardecreasingincreasing:

f(x)=

12x/L

(12x/L)

for 0ExEL/2,

.

for L/2ExEL

5. Parabolicincreasing:

f(x)=1(x/L)2.

6. Parabolicdecreasing:

f(x)=1(1x/L)2.

7. Parabolicdecreasingincreasing:

f(x)=1((2x/L)1)2.

8. Parabolicincreasingdecreasing:

f(x)=(12x/L)2.

- Beam Design125Diunggah olehdhruvgoku
- Beam Column Base Plate DesignDiunggah olehSPUD1
- StaticsDiunggah olehMia Jones-Johnson
- Lab 3 Sheet Shearing Force-21Sep11Diunggah olehMohd Fazli
- Floor Slab BS Std.Diunggah olehMelissa Crystal Sammy
- Normal Forces and BMDiunggah olehpropone
- TCC12 Bending and Axial Force.xlsDiunggah olehhala_azhari
- RCC95 Continuous Beams (Tables).xlsDiunggah olehAhsan Sattar
- Mathcad - Example 8.3.1 Nd p 140 Edtd Sg 6 UsDiunggah olehhendragt
- AISC2005-BeamDesignAidDiunggah olehDhimas surya negara
- Flexural analysis of prestressed concrete structuresDiunggah olehFabio Okamoto
- CE09 404 Structural Analysis I APR 2014Diunggah olehSai Das
- Arch ActionDiunggah olehvempadareddy
- 10703-R1 rev ADiunggah olehGP
- Students ME2112 (17-18) - E (Bending Stresses)Diunggah olehJohn Tan Guan Zhong
- kupdf.com_text-book-of-strength-of-materialsphjain.pdfDiunggah olehAmeer Alborihi
- MECHANICS OF SOLIDS.pdfDiunggah olehjeelani
- PLATE.01.REVIEW-OF-MECHANICS-OF-MATERIALS-AND-ENGINEERING-MATERIALS.pdfDiunggah olehLewe Polgo
- Timber_Code_Check_Theory_enu.pdfDiunggah olehjcvalencia
- tutorial problem in solid mechanicsDiunggah olehvsanthanam
- Singly Reinforced Beam1Diunggah olehBien Carlos Esteves Via
- DAB20801_LAB STRUKTUR_Labsheets.pdfDiunggah olehAhmad Farriz
- Lecture 39Diunggah olehDEEPAK
- MOS 12012010Diunggah olehBhavesh Pipaliya
- 2 AbstractDiunggah olehdhanaraj
- Lesson Plan1Diunggah olehNagaraj Muniyandi
- BeamsDiunggah olehywakade
- Almasi - Cracks as important constituents of strut-and-ties models.pdfDiunggah olehsebivaq
- Suport CursDiunggah olehAna Maria
- 128982454815448Diunggah olehgreelmind

- Vibrations of a Free-Free BeamDiunggah olehCaresma
- VD Equations ImportantDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- VehidCLe Dynamics - NOtes _InternetDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- CANDiunggah olehmahesh12ka4
- Automotives WIRESDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- modalDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- Ferreira 2005Diunggah olehShyam Radsun
- 080815BRules Csab Special Round1 2 ModifiedDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- The Finite Element Method in Engineering Using Ansys - CopyDiunggah olehMohammad Reza E
- Isolated Building System Using Substructure MethodDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- materialsDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- VIBRATIONDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- NATURAL FREQUENCIESDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- Iast.lect22Diunggah olehShyam Radsun
- Syllabus GATE 2016Diunggah olehbestmadeeasy
- FFT FundamentalsDiunggah olehFernando Rmz
- AE568_Assignment2Diunggah olehShyam Radsun
- 16.0_ConfCADIntDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- 16.0 RSM MigrationDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- CADDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- Steps to Install MatlabDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- AnsysMatlabDiunggah olehElyes Haouas
- Ansys Apdl TutorialDiunggah olehrsimoes
- mechanical property of glass fiberDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- adt-NU20060210.15574814appendixDDiunggah olehAmr_Halawa
- ANSYS Stiffness Matrix v8p1Diunggah olehBrajesh Raghuwanshi
- ASCE1997cDiunggah olehShyam Radsun
- COMPOSITESDiunggah olehShyam Radsun

- Gardner et al. (1974)Diunggah olehamoddather
- Biogas UpgradingDiunggah olehMohamad Farhan
- Paraphrasing MaterialsDiunggah olehMARVIN
- CIP Annual Report 1992Diunggah olehcip-library
- A discussion on type design revivalism.pdfDiunggah olehMário Vinícius
- rigid pavement.docxDiunggah olehanatoink2
- Phase Shifting Transformers - Principles and ApplicationsDiunggah olehRanko Čop
- Introduction to GeoscienceDiunggah olehNeethaKurup
- Advertisment AssignmentDiunggah olehvaibhavalawa
- RK171619 (JTC Gul Circle, I_ULT-6) - Correlation ReportDiunggah olehsawwahwah
- Sap Fundamental Guide Procurement ProcessDiunggah olehvmyreddy
- Sasan Power Plant GHG StudyDiunggah olehNur 'Atenk' Dwiyanto
- Operation PaukenschlagDiunggah olehCAP History Library
- Chhattisgarh Industrial Policy 2009 - 2014Diunggah olehIndustrialpropertyin
- Larry Williams IndicatorsDiunggah olehEduardo Bernardes de Araujo
- Chapter 10 - Drug Therapy in PediatricsDiunggah olehdlneisha61
- I-4100SMDiunggah olehJon Brown
- asamatrx.pdfDiunggah olehDang Le
- Stitch11.Com-Toy Airplane for AveryDiunggah olehcuentah12
- Omnitel Pronto full report on Omnitel Pronto ItaliaDiunggah olehSnehal Joshi
- Wireless Microphone - Wikipedia, The Free EncyclopediaDiunggah olehFranz Adiityatama Pudtra
- English CultureDiunggah olehSiti Hardiyanti
- Philippine Sugar Centrals Agency vs. Collector of CustomsDiunggah olehvanessa3333333
- Erika Knight BooteesDiunggah olehkarinlu
- Rubric for Case StudyDiunggah olehمتوج بذاتي
- On the Optimum Channel Sizing for HVAC SystemsDiunggah olehIntan Luruh Larasati
- 117_elar4_8_55054_webDiunggah olehBilly Alexander
- SDC 1561 Data SheetDiunggah olehJMAC Supply
- Relations-and-Functions-Quiz-Review.pdfDiunggah olehArianneKibadMaguen
- Narrative TextDiunggah oleheraset