See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/257775206

Free vibration analysis of beams with non-ideal

clamped boundary conditions
ARTICLE in JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FEBRUARY 2013
Impact Factor: 0.7 DOI: 10.1007/s12206-012-1245-2

CITATIONS

1 AUTHOR:
Jinhee Lee
Hongik University
24 PUBLICATIONS 214 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE

Available from: Jinhee Lee

Retrieved on: 22 August 2015

Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27 (2) (2013) 297~303

www.springerlink.com/content/1738-494x

DOI 10.1007/s12206-012-1245-2

Free vibration analysis of beams with non-ideal clamped boundary conditions

Jinhee Lee*
Department of Mechanical and Design Engineering, Hongik University, Jochiwon, Sejong, 339-701, Korea
(Manuscript Received June 3, 2012; Revised October 6, 2012; Accepted October 27, 2012)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abstract
A non-ideal boundary condition is modeled as a linear combination of the ideal simply supported and the ideal clamped boundary conditions with the weighting factors k and 1-k, respectively. The proposed non-ideal boundary model is applied to the free vibration analyses of Euler-Bernoulli beam and Timoshenko beam. The free vibration analysis of the Euler-Bernoulli beam is carried out analytically,
and the pseudospectral method is employed to accommodate the non-ideal boundary conditions in the analysis of the free vibration of
Timoshenko beam. For the free vibration with the non-ideal boundary condition at one end and the free boundary condition at the other
end, the natural frequencies of the beam decrease as k increases. The free vibration where both the ends of a beam are restrained by the
non-ideal boundary conditions is also considered. It is found that when the non-ideal boundary conditions are close to the ideal clamped
boundary conditions the natural frequencies are reduced noticeably as k increases. When the non-ideal boundary conditions are close to
the ideal simply supported boundary conditions, however, the natural frequencies hardly change as k varies, which indicate that the proposed boundary condition model is more suitable to the non-ideal boundary condition close to the ideal clamped boundary condition.
Keywords: Euler-Bernoulli beam; Free vibration; Natural frequency reduction; Non-ideal boundary conditions; Timoshenko beam
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Introduction
In the problems of mechanical systems the boundary conditions of structures play a very important role and are usually
represented in the idealized forms such as clamped, simply
supported, and free boundary conditions. It is always assumed
that those ideal boundary conditions are satisfied exactly in the
process of the problem solution. In practice, however small,
deviations from the ideal boundary conditions may exist and
the ideal boundary condition assumptions sometimes lead to
unsatisfactory solutions. The types of boundary conditions
with small deviations from the ideal boundary conditions are
referred as the non-ideal boundary conditions.
Often the non-ideal boundary conditions were represented
by using perturbation methods. Cherki et al. investigated the
uncertain boundary conditions of imperfectly clamped joints
and represented the uncertainties as fuzzy parameters with
assumed membership functions [1]. Pakdemirli and Boyaci
considered the vibrations of Euler-Bernoulli beams with simply supported and sliding-clamped boundary conditions [2, 3].
The non-ideal boundary conditions were modeled using perturbation theory, and it was shown how the non-ideal boundary conditions affected the natural frequencies and mode
*

Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 10 7321 2589, Fax.: +82 44 862 2664
E-mail address: jinhlee@hongik.ac.kr

Recommended by Editor Yeon June Kang

KSME & Springer 2013

shapes. Later they reported a case in which an Euler-Bernoulli

beam had ideal simply supported boundary conditions at the
ends and a non-ideal intermediate support [4]. Aydogdu and
Ece investigated the vibration of a rectangular plate which had
non-ideal simply supported boundary conditions along one of
its edges [5]. They assumed that one of the edges of the plate
allowed a small non-zero deflection and a small non-zero
moment and applied the Linshtead-Poincare perturbation
method. Their work was further extended by Malekzadeh et al.
who investigated the effect of non-ideal boundary conditions
and initial stresses on the vibration of laminated rectangular
plates on a Pasternak foundation [6].
Also the non-ideal boundary conditions of a uniform beam
were simulated by two types of equivalent springs, a transverse spring and a rotational spring, placed at the boundaries.
The boundary conditions could be realized depending on the
stiffness of the springs at the boundaries. The boundary condition was considered ideal clamped if both the transverse
spring and the rotational spring had infinite stiffness, and ideal
simply supported if the transverse spring had infinite stiffness
while the rotational spring had zero stiffness. If two equivalent
springs at a boundary did not satisfy the ideal boundary conditions, the boundary was considered as non-ideal boundary
condition [7].
Wang and Chen used a finite element model and the two
spring model for the non-ideal boundary conditions, where the
unknown boundaries were determined using measured modal

298

J. Lee / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27 (2) (2013) 297~303

parameters [8]. Pai et al. employed the two spring model and
considered the vibration of Euler-Bernoulli beams with damages and imperfect boundary conditions [9]. A signal decomposition method was suggested, where an experimental operational deflection shape was processed using a sliding-window
least squares curve fitting technique to separate central and
boundary solutions. The extracted boundary solutions and the
central solutions were used to identify the damage locations
and the boundary conditions, respectively. Ritto et al. developed a finite element model based on the Timoshenko beam
theory, in which the uncertain boundary conditions were represented by pinned while the rotation was restrained by a torsional spring [10]. A parametric stochastic approach was used
to model the stiffness of the torsional spring. Sari and Butcher
applied the shifted Chebyshev polynomials to compute the
natural frequencies of a tapered Euler beam, where the damaged boundary conditions were modeled as the two spring
model [11]. Wang and Yang modeled the boundary condition
of a tapered cantilever beam by two springs [12]. The relationship between the static flexibility and boundary conditions
was deduced based on the static equilibrium equation, and a
set of linear equations for identifying the boundary conditions
was formed by static flexibility measurements.
The clamped boundary condition is considered to be
achieved by fixing a beam between a top and a bottom plate
using bolts. In practice, however, the clamped boundary condition may be degenerated from its ideal state when the
clamping force is reduced due to the aging and/or the damages
on its support. The simply supported boundary condition is
hard to come by because it is very difficult to install a moment-free sharp edge support at the extremity of a beam. In
this study, the non-ideal boundary condition is represented by
a linear combination of the ideal clamped boundary condition
and ideal simply supported boundary condition, and its effect
on the natural frequencies of uniform beams is discussed.

2. Free vibration of Euler-Bernoulli beam

The equation governing the free vibration of uniform beams
based on the Euler-Bernoulli theory is found in most textbooks on vibration as follows:
d 4Y ( x)
A 2
4Y ( x) = 0, 4 =
4
dx
EI

(0 x L) .

(1)

, A , , E and I are the density, the cross-sectional

area, the natural frequency in radian per second, Youngs
modulus, and the second moment of area of the beam, respectively. The lateral displacement Y ( x ) and its derivatives are
Y ( x) = C1 sin x + C2 cos x + C3 sinh x + C4 cosh x

Y ( x) = C1 cos x C2 sin x
+ C3 cosh x + C4 sinh x
Y ( x) = C1 2 sin x C2 2 cos x

+ C3 2 sinh x + C4 2 cosh x .

(2a)
(2b)
(2c)

The ideal boundary conditions at the ends of the beam

x = xb are given as
Y ( xb ) = 0, Y ( xb ) = 0 ,

(3a)

ideal simply supported: Y ( xb ) = 0, Y ( xb ) = 0 ,

(3b)

ideal clamped:

Y ( xb ) = 0, Y ( xb ) = 0.

ideal free:

(3c)

In this study the non-ideal boundary condition is represented by a linear combination of the ideal clamped and the
ideal simply supported boundary conditions. It is worthwhile
to note that Eq. (3a) and Eq. (3b) have Y ( xb ) = 0 in common,
which is also employed in the non-ideal boundary condition as
it is. The other condition is obtained by the addition of the
other conditions Y ( xb ) = 0 and Y ( xb ) = 0 with the
weighting factors k and 1 k , respectively, so that the proposed non-ideal boundary condition is expressed as
Y ( xb ) = 0, kLY ( xb ) (1 k ) Y ( xb ) = 0, ( 0 k 1) .

(4)

In Eq. (4) L is multiplied to Y ( xb ) to match the dimension of Y ( xb ) . Eq. (4) indicates that for k = , where is
a small positive value, the originally clamped boundary condition is deteriorated to allow a reduced clamping force. It also
describes the case that the originally simply supported boundary condition is stiffened for k = 1 . Eq. (4) becomes the
ideal clamped boundary condition for k = 0 , and the ideal
simply supported boundary condition for k = 1 . It is found
that the sign convention in Eq. (4) is different for the left end
and the right end of the beam, and the non-ideal boundary
condition is rewritten as
Y = 0, k L LY (1 k L ) Y = 0 at left end ( xb = 0 )
(5)

Y = 0, k R LY + (1 k R ) Y = 0 at right end ( xb = L ) .

The subscripts in k L and k R refer the left end and right

end of the beam.
Lets consider a free vibration of a uniform beam which is
subject to the non-ideal boundary condition at the left end and
the free boundary condition at the right end. The boundary
conditions are written as
Y (0) = 0,

(1 kL ) Y (0) kL LY (0) = 0

Y ( L) = 0, Y ( L) = 0 .

(6a, b)
(6c, d)

Substituting the expressions of Eqs. (2a-c), Eqs. (6a-d) can

be rearranged in a matrix equation form as follows:
1
0
1 C1 0
0

kL L
1 kL
k L L C 2 0
1 kL
. (7)
=
sin L cos L sinh L cosh L C3 0

cos L sin L cosh L sinh L C4 0

299

J. Lee / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27 (2) (2013) 297~303

Table 1. Non-dimensional natural frequencies of Euler-Bernoulli beam

(non-ideal condition at the left end and free boundary condition at the
right end of the beam, kL = ).

Table 2. Non-dimensional natural frequencies of Euler-Bernoulli beam

(non-ideal boundary conditions at both ends, k L = k R = ).

kL

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

kL
kR

0
0

0.01
0.01

0.02
0.02

0.03
0.03

0.04
0.04

0.05
0.05

1L
2L
3L
4L
5L

1.8751
4.6941
7.8548
10.996
14.137

1.8566
4.6493
7.7820
10.897
14.014

1.8386
4.6085
7.7195
10.817
13.919

1.8210
4.5712
7.6654
10.751
13.846

1.8039
4.5369
7.6183
10.697
13.787

1.7872
4.5055
7.5770
10.651
13.740

1L
2L
3L
4L
5L

4.7300
7.8523
10.996
14.137
17.279

4.6405
7.7090
10.799
13.892
16.988

4.5599
7.5867
10.642
13.707
16.779

4.4870
7.4818
10.514
13.563
16.624

4.4205
7.3908
10.408
13.448
16.505

4.3597
7.3113
10.319
13.354
16.411

The solution for the free vibration analysis requires finding

those values of L that satisfy the determinant equation
1
0
1
0

1 kL
1 kL
kL L
kL L
det
=0.
sin L cos L sinh L cosh L

cos L sin L cosh L sinh L

(8)

The non-dimensional natural frequencies i L ( i = 1,L,5 )

for various values of k L are computed and are given in Table
1. It shows that as k L increases the originally clamped
boundary condition at the left end becomes softer and, as the
result, the natural frequencies of the beam decrease. The lowest natural frequency 1L decreases 4.7% for k L = 0.05
compared to that of the ideal cantilever. For higher vibration
modes, however, the rate that the natural frequency decreases
as k L increases appears smaller than that of lower vibration
modes.
Lets consider another example of free vibration where a
uniform beam is constrained with the non-ideal boundary
condition at both ends. The boundary conditions are written as
Y ( 0 ) = 0,
Y ( L ) = 0,

(1 k L ) Y ( 0 ) kL LY ( 0 ) = 0
(1 kR ) Y ( L ) + kR LY ( L ) = 0 .

(9a, b)
(9c, d)

Eqs. (2a-c) are substituted into Eqs. (9a-d) and are rearranged in a matrix form
0
1
0
1

C1 0
1 kL
kL L
1 kL
k L L

C 0

sin L
cos L
sinh L
cosh L 2 = .

C
0
k
L
k
L
k
L
1

cos

sin
1

cosh
1

( R)
( R)
( kR ) sinh L C3 0
(
R)

4
+ k R L sinh L + k R L cosh L
k R L sin L k R L cos L

(10)
For the non-trivial solution of Eq. (10), it is required that the
determinant of the matrix vanishes
0
1
0
1

1 kL
1 kL
kL L
k L L

=0.

sin
cos
sinh
cosh
L
L
L
L
det

k
cos
L

k
sin
L
1

k
cosh
L
1

k
sinh
L
(
)
(
)
(
)
(
)

R
R
R
R

+k R L sinh L +kR L cosh L

k R L sin L kR L cos L

(11)

Table 3. Non-dimensional natural frequencies of Euler-Bernoulli beam

(non-ideal boundary conditions at both ends, k L = k R = 1 ).
kL
kR

0.95
0.95

0.96
0.96

0.97
0.97

0.98
0.98

0.99
0.99

1
1

1L
2L
3L
4L
5L

3.1581
6.2915
9.4303
12.571
15.711

3.1547
6.2898
9.4292
12.570
15.711

3.1514
6.2881
9.4281
12.569
15.710

3.1481
6.2864
9.4269
12.568
15.709

3.1448
6.2848
9.4258
12.567
15.709

3.1416
6.2832
9.4248
12.566
15.708

The non-dimensional natural frequencies i L ( i = 1, L, 5 )

with the non-ideal boundary conditions which are close to the
ideal clamped boundary conditions ( k L = k R = ) and those
close to the ideal simply supported boundary conditions
( k L = k R = 1 ) are computed and are shown in Table 2 and
Table 3, respectively. Table 2 shows that the natural frequencies are reduced noticeably as k L and k R increase when the
non-ideal boundary conditions are close to the ideal clamped
boundary conditions. The lowest frequency 1L decreases
7.8% for k L = k R = 0.05 when compared to that of the ideal
clamped boundary conditions. On the other hand, the results
shown in Table 3 indicate that the natural frequencies hardly
change as k L and k R vary when the non-ideal boundary
conditions are close to the ideal simply supported boundary
conditions, which indicate that the boundary condition model
of Eq. (5) is more suitable to the non-ideal boundary condition
close to the ideal clamped boundary condition.
A finite element model is provided to help understand the
relationship between the non-ideal boundary condition parameter k and the state of degeneration of the clamped
boundary condition. The finite element model is a cantilever
beam which is clamped at the left end and it consists of evenly
spaced 200 elements. Youngs modulus E is the same for all
the elements except the leftmost one. The leftmost element is
clamped at the left and its Youngs modulus is E *. Lets
assume that the clamped boundary condition is softened due
to the damages on its support, and its effect is realized by E *
which is smaller than E . The mechanism how the stiffness of
an element at the boundary is affected by the damage is beyond the scope of this study. The natural frequencies of the
finite element model are computed for various E * E and are
presented in Table 4, which shows that the natural frequencies
decrease considerably as E * E is reduced. When the number
of elements of the finite element model increases the computed natural frequencies also increase slightly, because the

300

J. Lee / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27 (2) (2013) 297~303

Table 4. Non-dimensional natural frequencies of the finite element

model of a cantilever beam (evenly spaced 200 elements, E * E =
ratio of Youngs modulus of the leftmost element to that of other elements).

E* E

1/2

1/3

1/4

1/5

1L
2L
3L
4L
5L

1.8751
4.6941
7.8548
10.996
14.137

1.8659
4.6718
7.8186
10.947
14.076

1.8566
4.6501
7.7844
10.902
14.022

1.8481
4.6308
7.7549
10.864
13.977

1.8395
4.6119
7.7267
10.826
13.937

proportion that the leftmost element takes in the entire model

decreases and consequently the range that E * is in effect is
reduced. However, it shows the same trend that the natural
frequencies decreased as E * E is reduced.
The natural frequencies of the finite element model in Table
4 can be compared with those of the non-ideal boundary condition model in Table 1. The natural frequencies of the nonideal boundary condition model for k L = 0.01 are very similar
to those of the finite element model for E * E = 0.333. Such a
resemblance can also be found between the natural frequencies of the non-ideal boundary model for k L = 0.02 and those
of the finite element model for E * E = 0.2. It suggests that
the non-ideal boundary condition model proposed in this study
may serve as a qualitative assessment of the robustness of real
clamped boundary conditions. One can estimate the non-ideal
boundary condition parameter of a cantilever to be 0.01 when
he finds its non-dimensional natural frequencies of a cantilever are 1.8566, 4.6501 and 7.7844.

3. Free vibration of Timoshenko beam

Even though the solution of the free vibration of EulerBernoulli beam is given in a simple form as can be found in
Eq. (2a), it is difficult to find the solution of free vibration of
Timoshenko beam in an analytical form and various numerical methods have been suggested. Discretization methods such
as the finite element method and the finite difference method
have been widely used in the analyses of Timoshenko beams,
however, it has not been easy to include the non-ideal boundary conditions with those methods. Lee and Schultz carried
out a free vibration analysis of Timoshenko beam using the
pseudospectral method [13], in which the pseudospectral
method showed its versatility in dealing with various boundary conditions. In this study the pseudospectral method is
employed to include the non-ideal boundary conditions in the
analysis of the free vibration of Timoshenko beam.
Assuming simple harmonic motions, the equations of motion of a homogeneous uniform beam based on the Timoshenko theory is as follows [13]:

2x L
1, 1 .
L

z=

(13)

Eqs. (12a, b) are rewritten as

4 EI **
2

+ Gh W * = 2 I ,
L2
L

2
L

G * +

(14a)

4 **
W = 2 W
L2

(14b)

where * stands for the differentiation with respect to z . The

ideal boundary conditions are represented by
ideal clamped:
= 0, W = 0
ideal simply supported: * = 0, W = 0
* = 0,

ideal free:

(15a)
(15b)

2 *
W =0
L

(15c)

at the extremities zb = 1 . The rotation and the lateral deflection W are approximated by the series expansion
( z)

N +2

a T ( z ),
n n 1

W (z)

n =1

N +2

b T (z) .
n n 1

(16a, b)

n =1

Tn 1 ( z ) is the Chebyshev polynomial of the first kind, and

an and bn are the expansion coefficients. Expansions of Eq.

(16a, b) are substituted into Eq. (14a, b), and are collocated at
the Chebyshev grid points
zi = cos

( 2i 1)
2N

i = 1, , N

(17)

to produce the set of algebraic equations as follows:

N +2

a
n =1

4 EI **
2 Gh
bnTn*1 ( zi )
2 Tn 1 ( zi ) GhTn 1 ( zi ) +
L
L

N +2

(18a)

= 2 I an 1Tn 1 ( zi )
n =1

4 G
2 G

anTn*1 ( zi ) + 2 bnTn**1 ( zi )

L
L

n =1

N +2

(18b)

N +2

= 2 bnTn 1 ( zi )
n =1

( i = 1, , N ) .
Eqs. (18a, b) can be rearranged in the matrix form

EI + Gh (W ) = 2 I ,

(12a)

Gh ( + W ) = 2 hW

(12b)

(0 < x < L) .

beam. The shear correction factor is considered to be

5 6 . It is convenient to normalize the independent variable as

G and h are the shear modulus and the thickness of the

{ }

{ })

K {d } + K d = M {d } + K d

where the vectors {d } and {d } are defined by

(19)

301

J. Lee / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27 (2) (2013) 297~303

{d } = {a1 a2 aN b1 b2 bN }
{d } = {aN +1 aN + 2 bN +1 bN + 2}T .
T

(20a)
(20b)

The total number of unknowns in {d } and {d } is

2 N + 4 whereas the number of equations in Eqs. (18a, b) is
2N . The remaining four equations are obtained from the
boundary conditions. As discussed in the precedent section,
the non-ideal boundary conditions of the Timoshenko beam
are obtained by a linear combination of the ideal clamped and
ideal simply supported boundary conditions.
*
W = 0, 2k L (1 k L ) = 0

*
W = 0, 2k R + (1 k R ) = 0

at left end ( zb = 1)
at right end ( zb = 1)

(21)
Using the expressions of Eq. (16a, b), Eq. (21) can be realized by
N +2

N +2

b T (1) = 0, a {2k T (1) + (1 k )T (1)} = 0

n n 1

*
R n 1

n =1

n 1

n =1

(22a)
N +2

N +2

b T ( 1) = 0, a {2k T ( 1) (1 k )T ( 1)} = 0.
n n 1

*
L n 1

n =1

n 1

n =1

(22b)
The ideal free boundary condition of Eq. (15c) is also expressed as
N +2

N +2

2b
a T ( z ) = 0, L
*
n n 1

n =1

n =1

Tn*1 ( zb ) anTn 1 ( zb ) = 0

(23)

at zb = 1 .
Lets consider a situation that a Timoshenko beam is restrained by the non-ideal condition at the left end and free at
the right end. The combination of Eq. (22a) and Eq. (23)
makes up the four additional equations required to match the
number of unknowns:
N +2

bnTn 1 ( 1) = 0

n =1

N + 2
*
an 2k LTn 1 ( 1) (1 k L ) Tn 1 ( 1) = 0
n =1

N +2

anTn*1 (1) = 0

n =1

N +2
2bn *

Tn 1 (1) anTn 1 (1) = 0 .

n =1 L

(24a)

{ }

Since {d } is expressed as

{d } = V

U {d } .

(26)

(24b)
(24c)

Eq. (19) is reformulated as

(K K V

(24d)

Eqs. (24a-d) can be arranged in the matrix form

U {d } + V d = {0} .

Fig. 1. Non-dimensional natural frequencies of Timoshenko beam

(non-ideal boundary condition at the left end and free boundary condition at the right end, = 5 6 , k L = ).

(25)

U {d } = 2 M M V U . (27)
1

Eq. (27) can be solved for the estimates of the natural frequencies and corresponding expansion coefficients. This procedure can also be applied the case that both ends of the beam
are restrained by the non-ideal boundary conditions. In such a
case, Eq. (24a-d) would be replaced with

302

J. Lee / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27 (2) (2013) 297~303

for a very slender beam ( h L = 0.005 ) are practically identical

to those of the Euler-Bernoulli beam. The non-dimensional
natural frequencies decrease as k L increases and the rate of
decrement with respect to k L tends to be slower for a larger
value of k L . It was reported that the natural frequencies of a
Timoshenko beam with ideal boundary conditions decease as
h L increases [13], and it appears the non-dimensional natural frequencies are more reduced for a higher h L ratio except the lowest vibration mode, which is relatively less affected by h L ratio.
Eq. (27) is also solved with the non-ideal clamped boundary
conditions at both ends as given in Eqs. (28a-d), and the computed natural frequencies are plotted in Fig. 2 for various values of weighting factors k L = k R and h L ratios. Fig. 2
shows similar features to those of Fig. 1. The computed natural frequencies for a very slender beam are practically identical to those based on the classical beam theory, and the nondimensional natural frequencies decrease as k L and k R
increase. The tendency that natural frequencies are reduced r a
higher h L ratio, however, is evident even in the lowest
vibration mode.

4. Conclusions

Fig. 2. Non-dimensional natural frequencies of Timoshenko beam

(non-ideal boundary conditions at both ends, = 5 6 , k L = k R = ).
N +2

bnTn 1 ( 1) = 0

n =1

N +2
*
an 2k LTn 1 ( 1) (1 k L ) Tn 1 ( 1) = 0
n =1

N +2

bnTn 1 (1) = 0

n =1
N +2

an 2k RTn*1 (1) + (1 k R ) Tn 1 (1) = 0

n =1

(28a)
(28b)
(28c)
(28d)

Eq. (27) is solved for various thickness-to-length ratios

h L with the non-ideal clamped boundary condition at the
left end and ideal free boundary condition at the right end as
given in Eqs. (24a-d) and the computed non-dimensional natural frequencies i L ( i = 1, L , 4 ) are plotted in Fig. 1.
It is shown in Fig. 1 that the computed natural frequencies

In the problems of mechanical systems the non-ideal

boundary conditions have been modeled either by the perturbation methods or by two springs. In this study it is proposed
that the non-ideal boundary condition is modeled as a linear
combination of the ideal clamped and the ideal simply supported boundary conditions. The proposed non-ideal boundary
model is applied to the free vibration analyses of EulerBernoulli beam and Timoshenko beam.
For the free vibration of Euler-Bernoulli beam with the nonideal boundary condition at the left end and the free boundary
condition at the right end, the natural frequencies of the beam
decrease as the weighting factor k L increases. The free vibration of Euler-Bernoulli beam which is constrained by the nonideal boundary conditions at both ends is also considered. It is
found that when the non-ideal boundary conditions are close
to the ideal clamped boundary conditions ( k L = k R = ) the
natural frequencies are reduced noticeably as k L and k R
increase. When the non-ideal boundary conditions are close to
the ideal simply supported boundary conditions
( k L = k R = 1 ), however, the natural frequencies hardly
change as k L and k R vary, which indicate that the proposed
boundary condition model is more suitable to the non-ideal
boundary condition close to the ideal clamped boundary condition. In this study a pseudospectral method is employed to
include the non-ideal boundary conditions in the analysis of
the free vibration of Timoshenko beam. The natural frequencies of a Timoshenko beam are computed for various thickness-to-length ratios h L with the non-ideal clamped boundary condition at the left end and ideal free boundary condition
at the right end of the beam. The computed natural frequencies
for a very slender beam are found practically identical to those

J. Lee / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27 (2) (2013) 297~303

of the Euler-Bernoulli beam. The natural frequencies decrease

as k L increases and the rate of decrement of the frequencies
with respect to k L tends to be slower for a higher value of
k L . The natural frequencies are reduced for a higher h L
ratio except the lowest vibration mode, which is little affected
by h L . A free vibration analysis of Timoshenko beam with
the non-ideal clamped boundary conditions at both ends is
also conducted, where the computed natural frequencies show
similar features to those with the non-ideal camped boundary
condition at the left end and the free boundary condition at the
right end of the beam. The natural frequencies appear more
reduced as h L ratio grows larger in all vibration modes.
One recognizes that the clamped boundary condition is degenerated from its ideal state when the measured natural frequencies of a clamped beam deviate from those with ideal
clamped boundary conditions, and the parameter k can be
assessed quantitatively according to the degree that the natural
frequencies are reduced. The non-ideal boundary condition
model proposed in this study may serve as a qualitative assessment of the robustness of real clamped boundary conditions in laboratorial and industrial practices.

Acknowledgment
This work was supported by 2011 Hongik University Research Fund.

References
[1] A. Cherki, G. Plessis, B. Lallemend, T. Tison and P. Level,
Fuzzy behavior of mechanical systems with uncertain
boundary conditions, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 189 (2000) 863-873.
[2] M. Pakdemirli and H. Boyaci, Vibrations of a stretched
beam with non-ideal boundary conditions, Mathematical &
Computational Applications, 6 (3) (2001) 217-220.
[3] M. Pakdemirli and H. Boyaci, Effects of non-ideal boundary
conditions on the vibrations of continuous systems, Journal
of Sound and Vibration, 249 (4) (2002) 815-823.
[4] M. Pakdemirli and H. Boyaci, Non-linear vibrations of a
simple-simple beam with a non-ideal support in between,
Journal of Sound and Vibration, 268 (2003) 331-341.
[5] M. Aydogdu and M. C. Ece, Buckling and vibration of nonideal simply supported rectangular isotropic plates, Me-

303

chanics Research Communications, 33 (2006) 532-540.

[6] K. Malekzadeh, S. M. R. Khalili and P. Abbaspour, Vibration of non-ideal simpli supported laminated plate on an
elastic foundation subject to in-plane stresses, Composite
Structures, 92 (2010) 1478-1484.
[7] U. Lee, 14.1 Identification of non-ideal boundary conditions,
Spectral element method in structural dynamics, John Wiely
& Sons, 2009.
[8] F. Wang and S. Chen, A method to determine the boundary
condition of the finite element model of a slender beam using measured modal parameters, ASME Journal of Vibration
and Acoustics, 118 (1996) 474-478.
[9] P. F. Pai, L. Huang, S. H. Gopalakrishnamurthy and J. H.
Chung, Identification and application of boundary effects in
beams, International Journal of Solids and Structures, 41
(2004) 3053-3080.
[10] T. G. Ritto, R. Sampaio and E. Cataldo, Timoshenko beam
with uncertainty on the boundary conditions, Journal of Brazilian Society of Mechanical Science and Engineering, 30
(2008) 295-303.
[11] M. Sari and E. A. Butcher, Natural frequencies and critical
loads of beams and columns with damaged boundaries using
Chebyshev polynomials, International Journal of Engineering Science, 48 (2010) 862-873.
[12] L. Wang and Z. Yang, Identification of boundary conditions of tapered beam-like structures using static flexibility
measurements, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing,
25 (2011) 2484-2500.
[13] J. Lee, and W. W. Schultz, Eigenvalue analysis of Timoshenko beams and axisymmetric Mindlin plates by the
pseudospectral method, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 269
(2004) 609-621.

Jinhee Lee received B.S. and M.S.

degrees from Seoul National University
and KAIST in 1982 and 1984, respectively. He received his Ph.D degree from
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor in
1992 and joined Dept. of Mechanical
and Design Engineering of Hongik University in Sejong, Korea. His research
interests include inverse problems, pseudospectral method,
vibration and dynamic systems.