You are on page 1of 16

# Chapter 3 Theory and Formulation

3.1 Introduction.
Structures are weakened by cracks.

When the crack size increases in course of time,

the structure becomes weaker than its previous condition.

Finally, the structure may

breakdown due to a minute crack. The basic configuration of the problem investigated here is a
composite beam of any boundary condition with a transverse one-edge non-propagating open
crack. However, a typical cracked cantilever composite beam, which has tremendous
applications in aerospace structures and high-speed turbine machinery, is considered.
The following aspects of the crack greatly influence the dynamic response of the
structure.
i.

The position of a crack

ii.

The depth of crack

iii.

The angle of fibers

iv.

The volume fraction of fibers

3.2 The Methodology
The governing equations for the vibration analysis of the composite beam with an open oneedge transverse crack are developed. An additional flexibility matrix is added to the flexibility
matrix of the corresponding composite beam element to obtain the total flexibility matrix and
therefore the stiffness matrix is obtained by Krawczuk & Ostachowicz (1995).

In Equation 1. The Euler–Bernoulli beam model is assumed.3 Governing Equation The differential equation of the bending of a beam with a mid-plane symmetry (Bij = 0) so that there is no bending-stretching coupling and no transverse shear deformation (εxz=0) is given by. iii. t ) IS11  q  x. This implies constitutive relations in generalized Hooke’s law for the material are linear. The damping has not been considered in this study.The assumptions made in the analysis are: i. 3 isotropic material. if Alembert’s Principle are used then one can add a term to Equation. The crack is assumed to be an open crack and have uniform depth ‘a’. In that case Equation. and derivatives therefore . 3. ii. which is in the line with Vinson & Sierakowski (1991). For dynamic loading.1 equal to the product mass and acceleration per unit length. then IS11 = EI = Ebh /12 and for a beam of rectangular cross-section Poisson’s ratio effects are ignored in beam theory. t    F d 4 x 2 where ω and q both become functions of time as well as space. IS11 d 4  q( x) d 4 (1) It can easily be shown that under these conditions if the beam involves only a one layer. The analysis is linear.1 becomes  2  x. t  d 4 ( x. it is seen that the imposed static load is written as a force per unit length. iv.

q(x. N  F   bh    b(hk  hk 1 ) k 1 However. Thus. natural frequencies for the beam occur as functions of the material properties and the geometry and hence are not affected by the forcing functions. ρ is the mass density of the beam material. and here F is the beam cross.become partial derivatives. In each case below. the natural frequency in radians /unit time is given as . IS11 d 4  x. therefore. for this study let q(x. For a composite beam in which different lamina have differing mass densities. the natural vibration equation of a mid-plane symmetrical composite beam is given by. and could be anything from a harmonic oscillation to an intense one-time impact. then in the above equations use. In the above. t   2  x. t) is now the spatially varying time-dependent forcing function causing the dynamic response.sectional area. for a beam of rectangular cross-section. because that would result almost certainly in a structural failure. t    F 0 d 4 x 2 It is handy to know the natural frequencies of beams for various practical boundary conditions in order to insure that no recurring forcing functions are close to any of the natural frequencies.t) be zero.

Young and Felgar and once ωn is known then the natural frequency in cycles per second (Hertz) is given by fn= ωn /2π. respectively in Figure1. The width. The stiffness and mass matrices are developed by . The characteristic matrices of the composite beam element are computed on the basis of the model proposed by oral(1991). 3. transverse displacement and the independent rotation) per node is considered. which value is catalogued by Warburton. L and H. 3. length and height of the beam are B.4 Mathematical model The model chosen is a cantilever composite beam of uniform cross-section A. In the present analysis three nodes composite beam element with three degree of freedom (the axial displacement.1 Derivation of element Matrices.n   2 IS11  FL4 Where α2 is the co-efficient. The angle between the fibers and the axis of the beam is α.4. which is in the line with Vinson & Sierakowski (1991). having an open transverse crack of depth ‘a’ at position L 1.

v. a general finite element.k97 = BH S13 / 2 .M1. Following standard procedures the element stiffness matrix and mass matrix can be expressed as follows: 3. k12 = k21 = k78 = k87 = 7BHS13 /3L .M2} and the corresponding displacements δ={u1.…. θ) at each node. Ke = [kij](9x9) where [kij](9x9) ( i.F2. u3.9) are given as k11 = k77 = 7BHS11 /3L . Figure. u2. θ2. are given in the line Krawczuk and Ostachowicz (1995) as follows: K e  IS11   B  DBdV T V  B  Where  N x 2 = strain displacement matrix. . for the case of bending in the x.k79 = .4. y plan. [N] = shape function matrix. 2. v1. 2 finite element of composite beam In Fig. θ3} are shown. v3.2Element stiffness matrix Element stiffness matrix for a three-noded composite beam element with three degrees of freedom δ = (u. v2. k13 = k31 = . the applied system forces F= {F 1. θ1.the procedure given by Krawczuk and Ostachowicz (1995).Q1.1.Q2. j = 1.

k52 = .k34 = . k45 = k54 = 16BHS13 /3L .k68 = 2BH S33 / 3 .k58 = . k46 = k56 = 0 where B is the width of the element. k28 = k82 = BHS33 /3L .k89 = . k26 = k62 = k59 = k95 = .k67 = .k48 = . k23 = k32 = .k84 = 8BHS13 /3L . k44 = 16BHS11 /3L .3 Generalized element mass matrix The element mass matrix of the intact composite beam element is given in the line Krawczuk and Ostachowicz (1995) as .k76 = 2BH S13 / 3 . .k35 = . H is the height of the element and L denotes the length of the element.k86 = . k22 = k88 = 7BHS33 /3L . k24 = .4. k16 = k61 = . k55 = 16BHS33 /3L .k53 = .k14 = . k66 = BH{4 S11 H2 /9L + 4 S33 L /9} .k51 = .k41 = k47 = k74 = 8BHS11 /3L . -k25 = .strain constants.7BHS13 /3L . S11 .k19 = ..k43 = k49 = k94 = . k33 = k99 = BH{7S11 H2 /36L + S33 L /9} . k39 = k93 = BH{S11 H2 /36L – S33 L/18} . k18 = k81 = k27 = k72 = BHS13 /3L .k19 = BHS13 /6 .k15 = .S13 and S33 are the stress.k42 = .k85 = 8BHS33 /3L .k98 = BH S33 / 2 . k17 = k17 = BHS11 /3L . k73 = k37 = . 3. k38 = k83 = -k29 = -k92 = BHS33 /6 .1.

T M e    N NdV V 2 15 0 0 2 15 0 0 −1 30 0 0 0 2 15 L 180 0 1 15 −L 90 0 −1 30 L 180 0 L 180 0 0 −L2 H 2 + 945 180 0 −L 180 L2 H2 − 1890 360 2 15 0 0 8 15 0 0 1 15 0 0 0 1 15 0 0 8 15 0 0 1 15 0 0 −L 90 0 0 2 L2 2 H 2 + 945 45 0 L 90 −L2 H 2 + 945 180 −1 30 0 1 15 0 0 2 15 0 0 0 −1 30 0 1 15 L 90 0 2 15 −L 180 0 L 180 0 0 −L2 H 2 + 945 180 0 −L 180 Me = [Mij](6x6) L2 H2 − 1890 90 −L2 H 2 + 945 180 0 −L 180 L2 H2 − 1890 360 where [mij](6x6) ( i.…. j = 1.6) are given as L2 H2 − 1890 90 .

1988 ) U   GdA A jN iN iN iN   U    D1  K 2 i  D12  K i  K j  D2  K 2i dA i 1 i 1 j 1 i 1  A Where K and K  are the stress intensity factors for fracture mode  and  . DimarogonasAD. The additional strain energy due to crack leads to flexibility coefficients expressed by stress intensity factors derived by means of castigliano’s theorem in linear elastic range. H is the height of the element and L denotes the length of the element.4 Stiffness matrix for cracked composite beam element According to the St.1. ( Tada H. 3. A =the area of the crack section.where ρ is the mass density of the element. Venant's principle. The strain energy (U) of the beam due to crack and can be expressed as (Nikpour K. U=the strain energy of the beam due to crack. Paris PC. the stress field is influenced only in the region near to the crack. 1985) G=∂U/∂A Where. B is the width of the element.4. developed in Griffth-Irwin theory. The compliance coefficients Cij induced by crack are derived from the strain energy release rate G. .

1990):  K ji   i  aY j    Fji a K H and K  are constant. D12 and D2 are the coefficients depending on the materials parameters.1988 )   s1  s2   s1s2  D1  0. for a composite beam with a  Where. σi = stress at the crack cross-section due to force acting on the beam.D1 . (Nikpour K. Dimarogonas AD. Yj    = correction factor for the anisotropic material.5 b 22 m   D12  b11 m  s1s2   D2  0. crack are expressed as (Nikpour K. .5 b11 m  s1  s2   bij Where the coefficients s1 .s2 are complex constants and   The mode and stress intensity factors. Fji(a/H) = correction factor for finite dimensions of the beam. .

561 a H   0.85  a H   0.199(1  sin  ) 4 cos  F 2  F 5  F   1. H= Height of the element.18  a H     2 Where 3 1 a H    a 2H Y     1  0. i = 1.122  0.37(1  sin  )3 cos  F 2  F 3  F 5  F 6  F  tan    0.923  0. Y     1 is defined as function of the elastic constants by   E22 E11 2G12   12 21 .a = Crack depth. Yj    The correction functions and Fji (a/H) (j = I.6) are taken from the line Krawczuk and Ostachowicz (1995) .752  2. II. F1  F 4  F  tan    0.1   1  0.02  a H   0.016    1  0.002    1 2 The dimensionless parameter  3 .

1985): cij  ui Pj 2  GdA Pi Pj A  2U cij  Pi Pj . the relation between displacement and strain energy release rate G can be written as follows ui   GdA Pi A The flexibility coefficients matrix.Castigliano’s theorem implies that the additional displacement due to crack. can be introduced as follows ( Tada H. is ui =∂U/∂Pi Substituting the strain energy release rate G into the above equation. which is the functions of the crack shape and the stress intensity factors. according to the direction of the Pi . Paris PC.

     18D1 L2  2 D2  6 D12 L  2 2 c22  c55  a F Y d a  a F d a  aF F Y d a           BH 2 0 B 0 BH 0 a a a    36 D1 L2  6D  2 c23  c26  c35  c56   a F Y d a  12  aF11F111Y1d a     2  BH BH 0 0 a  a    18 D1 L2  2 D2  2 2 c25  a F Y d a  a F d a        BH 2 0 B 0 a a .   12 D1  2 c13  c16  c34  c46  aF F Y d a    BH 0 a  . C -1 . are being derived from above equation and the inverse of compliance coefficients matrix.6 . Considering the cracked node as a cracked element of zero length and zero mass (Ratcliffe CP1997).6) and cij=cji With the terms of matrix C being given by   2D   2 c11  c14  c44  1  a  FY  d a B 0 a . is the stiffness matrix due to crack. .The compliance coefficients matrix. j=1. (i=1. Castigliano’s theorem yields the additional flexibility matrix of the element C due to the crack in the form C= [cij] .     6D  L  D   c12  c15  c24  c45   1  aF FY 2 d a  12  aF FY d a BH 0 B 0 a a . . . the crack stiffness can be represented as equivalent compliance coefficients.

three degrees of freedom of the element should be constrained.  72 D1  2 c33  c36  c66  a F Y da 2      BH 0 a Where a  a/H . K= Ki+ Kc Where Ki = Stiffness matrix for the intact beam. . Kc = [C]-1 In order to invert stiffness matrix of non.cracked element K i . the total stiffness matrix of the cracked element is given as.(Przemieniecki). C -1 . Kc = additional stiffness matrix for the crack. The governing equation for free vibration of the beam can be expressed as . is the stiffness matrix due to crack. d a  da / H  c11  c  21  c31   c41  c51   c61 c12 c13 c14 c15 c22 c32 c42 c52 c62 c23 c33 c43 c53 c63 c24 c34 c44 c54 c64 c25 c35 c45 c55 c65 c16 c26 c36  c46 c56  c66 C= The inverse of compliance coefficients matrix. From the numerical point of view it is convenient to constrain the second node of the element. Finally.

 K   2 M q  0 where . . K and M are the stiffness and mass matrices of the beam.