Vibration Damping Analysis of Sandwich Beam with Viscoelastic Layer

Journal of Composite
Materials http://jcm.sagepub.com/
Vibration and Damping Analysis of a Sandwich Beam Containing a Viscoelastic

Constraining Layer
Min Hao and Mohan D. Rao
Journal of Composite Materials 2005 39: 1621
DOI: 10.1177/0021998305051124
The online version of this article can be found at:

http://jcm.sagepub.com/content/39/18/1621
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
American Society for Composites
Additional services and information for Journal of Composite Materials can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://jcm.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://jcm.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://jcm.sagepub.com/content/39/18/1621.refs.html
>> Version of Record - Aug 18, 2005
What is This?
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at National Dong Hwa University on April 10, 2014
Vibration and Damping Analysis of a
Sandwich Beam Containing a Viscoelastic
Constraining Layer
MIN HAO AND MOHAN D. RAO*

Department of Mechanical Engineering-Engineering Mechanics
Michigan Technological University
Houghton, MI 49931, USA
(Received May 7, 2004)

(Accepted November 8, 2004)
ABSTRACT: Viscoelastic layered systems provide a simple and flexible solution

for damping vibration of sheet metal panels. They also help to effectively eliminate
noise from resonant structures and surfaces. This article presents an analytical
formulation to predict the stiffness and damping of three layered beams with two
different viscoelastic materials adjacent to each other. The complex modulus
approach is used to model the elastic and shear moduli of the viscoelastic material
and closed-form equations are derived for predicting system stiffness and damping.
The model is derived for unsymmetrical setups using variational methods.
Experiments are conducted on simply supported three-layered beams at different
temperatures to validate theoretical results. Similar results are obtained from both
the theoretical model and the experiments. A procedure for the optimization of
structural and material parameters for maximizing the damping and minimizing the
system mass for a given temperature and frequency range is also presented.
KEY WORDS: damping, viscoelastic constraining layer, vibration, sandwich

materials.
INTRODUCTION
ERIOUS PROBLEMS LEADING to material fatigue, noise, and other failures are often
S induced in machines and structures subjected to dynamic loadings and vibrations.
Therefore, reduction or elimination of such dynamic loadings and vibrations is crucial
in the design and utilization of these devices. One approach to eliminate or reduce
the problems caused by vibrations is the application of passive damping treatment.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: mrao@mtu.edu
Journal of COMPOSITE MATERIALS, Vol. 39, No. 18/2005 1621

0021-9983/05/18 1621–23 $10.00/0 DOI: 10.1177/0021998305051124
ß 2005 Sage Publications
1622 M. HAO AND M. D. RAO
Passive damping methods involve the application of soft, viscoelastic materials (VEMs).
In the past, the most investigated structure is a three-layered beam. Usually, this structure
consists of a basic layer, a viscoelastic damping layer, and a relatively stiff constraining
layer. Due to its physical appearance, this is often referred to as a ‘sandwich beam.’ This
paper presents the vibration analysis of a three-layered system in which the constraining
layer is also viscoelastic. One example of such a system utilizes an extruded polymer (EP)
constraining layer bonded to a base metal using a pressure sensitive adhesive (PSA). In this
case, the traditional three-layer sandwich beam theory is not applicable since both the
EP and the PSA possess viscoelastic properties. Such systems with dual damping layers
achieve greater damping over a broad temperature and frequency range. Also they have
excellent flammability resistance, meet the toughest requirements, and are resistant to
most common chemicals. These systems are easy to handle and can also be easily molded
and shaped using heat and pressure. Due to these excellent properties, they are used for
computer housings, appliances, transportation and construction equipment plus a wide
variety of architectural applications. A tutorial on the various industrial applications of
viscoelastic damping can be found in [1].
Numerous researchers have successfully implemented the passive constrained layer
(PCL) and active constrained layer(ACL) systems. In 1959, Kerwin [2] and Ross–
Kerwin–Ungar [3] presented a general analysis of viscoelastic material structure.
The damping was attributed to the extensional and shear deformations of the viscoelastic
layers. They applied this theory to a number of practical damping treatments. The
experimental data for different treatments confirmed the theory. In the 1960s, researchers
extended work based on Ross–Kerwin–Ungar’s (RKU) basic assumptions. Diraranto [4]
developed sixth-order equations of motion in terms of axial displacements and developed
a closed-form solution. Mead and Markus [5,6] developed sixth-order equations of motion
for transverse displacement, which was then applied to certain boundary conditions.
The energy method has been applied to many types of problems. A paper by Rao [7]
presented the equations of motion and boundary conditions using the energy method. The
equations were solved numerically and a practical design guideline was presented. Similar
to Rao’s theory, Cottle [8] used Hamilton’s principle to derive equations of motion.
The damping could also be increased by adding passive stand-off layer (PSOL) and
slotted stand-off layer (SSOL) to the layered systems. This concept was first proposed in
1959. In recent years, many researchers have studied these systems. Falugi [9] and Parin [10]
did theoretical and experimental work on a four-layered panel and a five-layered beam
with PSOL treatment. Rogers and Parin [11], and Yellin et al. [12] have performed
experimental investigations and demonstrated that PSOL treatment increased the damp-
ing significantly in aeronautical structures and beams. Yellin and colleagues [13,14] also
developed normalized equations of motion for beams, fully treated with PSOL using
non-ideal standoff layer assumption. The equations were solved using the method of
distributed transfer functions [15]. The experimental data confirmed the theory. The intro-
cell boundary conditions [16] were used to construct the transfer matrix of basic unit cells.
Singh and Gupta [17] studied the damped-free vibrations of composite cylindrical shells
using the first-order shear deformation theories.
The concept of PCL treatment has been applied to engineering design and optimi-
zation of dynamic structures. Finite element model (FEM) analysis has been used for
both unconstrained and constrained type damping in complex cases for determining
optimum locations and thickness of additive damping, and sensitivity of damping layers in
partial coverage cases [18,19]. A multiparameter optimization study on viscoelastic layered
Analysis of Viscoelastic Constraining Layered Systems 1623
systems was carried out to achieve dynamically optimal configuration of viscoelastic

layered systems [20]. Lunden [21] proposed that optimum distribution of unconstrained
distributed damping on beams and frames reduces the response for the same weight or cost
of additive treatment. The objective was to minimize resonant vibration subject to con-
straints on weight or cost of the additive damping. The primary optimum objectives
of study done by Lall et al. [22] was loss factor and displacement response with
design variables such as the layer material densities, thickness, and temperature. A genetic
algorithm approach was also used for the optimization design of a cantilever sandwich
plate, the objective was to maximize the twist in the desired direction while minimizing
the weight of structure [23].
The objective of this research work is to develop an analytical model to predict the
damping of unsymmetrical three-layer beam systems having a viscoelastic constrained
layer. A parametric study has been conducted to study the effects of geometrical and
material factors on the damping capacity of the system. Numerical results are com-
pared with experimental results and an optimization scheme to obtain optimal design
for a given criterion is presented. Experiments are carried out to examine the validity of
the model and a comprehensive optimization scheme is conducted. The optimization
scheme presented is similar to the one carried out by the authors for the optimization of
multiple-constrained layered systems [24].
THEORY
Assumption
The system consists of a viscoelastic constraining layer bonded to a base metal beam
using a thin PSA to form a three-layered unsymmetrical beam system. This system has a
unit width, and the neutral plane of the composite beam is situated in the top viscoelastic
layer as shown in Figure 1. The following assumptions are made when deriving the
equations:
. The composite beam has a unit width, two damping layers, and one stiff basic layer
which is elastic.
. It is assumed that normal sections in each layer remain planar and continuous before
and after deformations and there is no slip at the interfaces.
. The deformations account for extension and transverse shear deformations in damping
layers and only extension deformations in the stiff elastic layer.
. Transverse displacement is the same for every layer of the composite beam, and only
the transverse directional inertia of the composite beam is dominant, with longitudinal
and rotary inertia of the beam negligible.
. In the current research, it is assumed that the damping occurs mainly through the shear
strain in the two viscoelastic layers, and the complex modulus approach is used to
represent both the extensional and shear moduli of the viscoelastic material. This causes
the eigenvalues of the system to be complex and, generally, numerical techniques
are needed to obtain the system modal loss factors and resonance frequencies. It should
be noted that the complex modulus approach is only valid for simple harmonic
vibration.
Figure 1. Three-layer unsymmetrical composite beam with a viscoelastic constraining layer.
Stress, Strain, and Energy Analysis
The longitudinal displacement ub, uc, ud in different layers (see Figure 1) can be
expressed in geometrical terms as:

Hc þ Hd @w @w
ub ¼ u0 c b Zb c b ,
2 @x @x

Hb Hd @w Hb Hd Hb Hc Hd @w
uc ¼ u0 þ cþ b Zc c , and
2 @x 2 2 @x
Hb þ Hc @w Hb þ Hc Hd Hb Hc Hd @w
ud ¼ u0 þ c þ b Zd :
2 @x 2 2 @x
Here u0 is the longitudinal displacement of a point in the neutral plane of the beam,
z is the distance to neutral plane, H is the layer thickness, is the shear strain, and w is
the transverse displacement. The subscripts, b, c, and d refer to the extruded material,
the VEM, and the base layer, respectively.
Let
Hc þ Hb Hb Hd
TB ¼ TD1 ¼ , TC1 ¼ TC2 ¼ ,
2 2
Hb Hc Hd Hc þ Hb Hd
TC3 ¼ TD3 ¼ , TD2 ¼ :
2 2
Assuming u0 ¼ 0, using the expression for TB, TC1 , TC2 , TC3 , TD1 , TD2 , and TD3 in
displacement expressions, we get

@w @w
ub ¼ TB c b Zb c b , ð1Þ
@x @x

@w @w
uc ¼ TC1 þ TC2 c þ TC3 b Zc c , ð2Þ
@x @x
@w @w
and ud ¼ TD1 þ TD2 c þ TD3 b Zd : ð3Þ
@x @x
Through the given displacement description, the longitudinal strains () of the
composite beam can be determined. For the different layers, they can be expressed as
2
@2 w 0 0 @ w 0 0
"b ¼ TB c b Zb c b , ð4Þ
@x2 @x2
2
@2 w 0 0 @ w 0
"c ¼ TC1 þ TC2 c þ TC3 b Zc c , ð5Þ
@x2 @x2
@2 w 0 0 @2 w
and "d ¼ TD1 þ TD2 c þ TD3 b Zd : ð6Þ
@x2 @x2
Applying the stress–strain relation on the elastic layer and noting xz ¼ "z ¼ 0, we get
0 1 2 30 1
x Q11 Q12 0 "x
B C 6 7B C
B z C ¼ 6 Q12 0 7 B C
@ A 4 Q22 5 @ "z A ,
xz 0 0 Q55 xz
where Qij is the normal or shear modulus of elasticity, and the superscript prime refers to
the first derivative with respect to the x-variable.
The stress-strain relation can be reduced and the strain energy density (U) of the layer
is expressed by
1
Ud0 ¼ Ed "2d : ð7Þ
2
The total strain energy of the elastic layers (Ud) is given by
Z L Z Hd =2
Ud ¼ Ud0 dz dx, ð8Þ
0 Hd =2
Applying the stress–strain relation for the viscoelastic layer

0 1 2 30 1
xc Q11C Q12C Q13C 0 0 0 "xc
B C 6 7B C
B yc C 6 Q12C Q22C Q23C 0 0 0 7 B C
B C 6 7B "yc C
B C 6 7B C
B zc C 6 Q13C Q23C Q33C 0 0 0 7 B C
B C 6 7B "zc C
B C¼6 7B C,
B yzc C 6 0 0 0 Q44C 0 0 7 B yzc C
B C 6 7B C
B C 6 7B C
B xzc C 6 0 0 0 0 Q55C 0 7 B xzc C
@ A 4 5@ A

xyc 0 0 0 0 0 Q66C xyc
where the Qijc is the complex normal or shear modulus of the viscoelastic material.
Since yc ¼ zc ¼ yzc ¼ xyc ¼ 0, the stress–strain relation can be reduced to

xc Q11C 0 "xc
¼ :
xzc 0 Q55C xzc
The following equations show the strain energy density of the extruded material layer
Z L Z Hb =2
1 2 1 2
Ub ¼ E " þ G dz dx:
0 Hb =2 2 b b 2 b b
Then, the strain energy of the PSA layer can be obtained by
Z L Z Hc =2
1 2 1 2
Uc ¼ E " þ G dz dx:
0 Hc =2 2 b c 2 c c
The kinetic energy can be written in terms of the transverse deflections as
Z L 2
1 @w
T¼ M dx, with
2 0 @t ð9Þ
M ¼ b Hb þ c Hc þ d Hd ,
where is the density of different materials. The work done by the external distribution
load q(x,t) can be written as
Z L
W¼ qðx, tÞwðx, tÞ dx:
0
The total strain energy of the system can be expressed by
U ¼ Ub þ Uc þ Ud :
Equations of Motion
The differential equations of motion of the system can be derived by the application
of Hamilton’s principle
Z t2
ðT U þ W Þ dt ¼ 0: ð10Þ
t1
Let
Z L Z L
F dx ¼ T U þ W ¼ T ðUb þ Uc þ Ud Þ þ qw dx:
0 0
Hamilton’s principle gives

Z t2 Z t2 Z L
ðT U þ WÞ dt ¼ F dx dt:
t1 t1 0
By the principles of the calculus of variations, the equations of motion are given by:
8
>
> @2 @F @ @F @F
>
> þ ¼0
>
> @x 2 @w00 @t @w_ @x
>
>
>
>
< @F @ @F
0 ¼0 ð11Þ
>
> @ b @x @ b
>
>
>
>
>
> @F @ @F
>
> ¼0
:
@ c @x @ 0c
The boundary conditions can also be obtained as:

8 @F L
>
>
> w0 ¼0
>
> @w 00 0
>
>
>
>
>
> @ @F L
>
> w ¼0
>
< @x @w 00 0
L ð12Þ
>
> @F
>
> b ¼0
>
> @ 0
>
> b 0
>
>
>
> L
>
> @F
: c ¼0
@ 0c 0
After rearrangement of the formulations, we get

@ @F @ @F @F @F @ @F @F @ @F
, , , , , , :
@x2 @w00 @t @w_ @w @ b @x @ 0b @ c @x @ 0c
Using these in Equations (11), the governing equations of motion of the system can be
obtained as:
8 0000 000 000
< Dx w þ DDb
> b þ DDc c þ Mw€ ¼ 0,
Dxb w000 þ D11 00
b þ D12
00
c þ Dy1 b ¼0 ð13Þ
>
:
Dxc w000 þ D21 00
b þ D22
00
c þ Dy2 c ¼0
The superscripts prime (0 ) and dot () refer to differentiations with respect to x and time
variables, respectively. The variables Dx, DDb, DDc, Dxb , Dxc , D11 , D12 , D21 , D22 , Dy1 , and
Dy2 are the coefficients of the equations given by:
Eb H3b E H3 Ed H3d

Dx ¼ Eb Hb T2B þ þ Ec Hc T2C1 þ c c þ Ed Hd T2D1 þ ,
12 12 12

E H3
DDb ¼ Eb Hb T2B þ b b þ Ec Hc TC1 TC3 þ Ed Hd TD1 TD3 ,
12
Dxb ¼ DDb ,
Eb H3b E H3
DDc ¼ Eb Hb T2B þ Ec Hc TC1 TC2 Ed Hd TD1 TD2 þ c c ,
12 12
Dxc ¼ DDc ,
Eb H3b
D11 ¼ Eb Hb T2B þ Ec Hc T2C3 þ þ Ed Hd T2D3 ,
12
Eb H3b
D12 ¼ Eb Hb T2B þ Ec Hc TC2 TC3 Ed Hd TD2 TD3 ,
12
D12 ¼ D21 ,
Eb H3b
D22 ¼ Eb Hb T2B þ þ Ec Hc TC2 TC3 þ Ed Hd T2D2 ,
12
Dy1 ¼ Gb Hb ,
and Dy2 ¼ Gc Hc :
NUMERICAL ANALYSIS
Material Properties
In this research, the extruded material chosen is the Whisperdamp VE-V0, an extruded
vinyl vibration damping sheet which has been optimized for effectively eliminating noise
emanating from resonant structures and surfaces. Both PSA and extruded materials are
supplied by American Acoustical Products, Inc.
The material properties of the damping layer and their frequency and temperature
dependence are needed as input to the program. Considerable research is being carried out
in the area of analytical modeling of frequency and temperature effects on the damping
and modulus of viscoelastic materials. Although data on the shear modulus and loss
factor of damping materials corresponding to a frequency and temperature are available
in the data sheets supplied by the manufacturers, these data are not useful here, since we
do not know the resonance frequencies of the system. However, based on the experimental
data, and curve-fitting, analytical expressions can be developed.
The VEM properties loss factor ðT, f Þ and shear modulus G(T, f ) determined by
experimental methods and the curve-fitting process were supplied by the manufacturer.
For the PSA material
Gmax Gmin
G ¼ Gmax : ð14Þ
1 þ K1 ð f ðT ÞÞn
K2 ð f ðT ÞÞp1
Loss factor ¼ : ð15Þ
ð1 þ K3 ð f ðT ÞÞp Þm
For the extruded material
Gmid Gmin Gmax Gmin

G ¼ Gmid þ Gmax : ð16Þ
1 þ K1a ð f ðT ÞÞna 1 þ K1b ð f ðT ÞÞnb
K2a ð f ðT ÞÞpa 1 K2b ð f ðT ÞÞpb 1

Loss factor ¼ pa pa þ : ð17Þ
ð1 þ K3a ð f ðT ÞÞ Þ ð1 þ K3b ð f ðT ÞÞpb Þmb
The variables Gmid, Gmax, Gmin, K1, K2, K3, p, m, n, K1a , na, K1b , nb, K2a , pa, pa, K3b , pb,
and mb are the coefficients obtained by curve-fitting the experimental data. The function
(T ) is a function of T and q given by (in metric units)
ðT Þ ¼ 10 ððTref T Þq=ðTref þ273:3ÞðTþ273:3Þ , ð18Þ
where q is the ‘slope’ or ‘activation temperature’, T is the ambient temperature, Tref is the
reference temperature, and f is the frequency.
The complex Young’s modulus E* of the viscoelastic material can be calculated using
E ¼ 2ð1 þ ÞG : ð19Þ
Solution Scheme
In order to find the loss factors and resonance frequencies of the system, a MATLAB
program was developed to evaluate the complex stiffness of the system considered using
the equations developed here. For the case of a simply supported composite beam under
simple harmonic vibration, the comparison functions can be given by
X
1
k x i!t
w¼ Ak sin e : ð20Þ
k¼1
L
X
1
k x i!t
b ¼ Bbk cos e : ð21Þ
k¼1
L
X
1
k x i!t
c ¼ Bck cos e : ð22Þ
k¼1
L
Considering the first m modes of vibration, using Equations (20) and (21) in Equation (13),
the following equations can be obtained after rearrangement
2 30 1
0 1
Dx ðm =LÞ4 M!2 DDb ðm =LÞ3 DDc ðm =LÞ3 Am 0
6 7B C B C
6 7B
6 Dxb ðm =LÞ3 D11 ðm =LÞ2 Dy1 D12 ðm =LÞ2 7@ Bbm C B C
A ¼ @0A
4 5
Dxc ðm =LÞ3 D21 ðm =LÞ2 D22 ðm =LÞ2 Dy2 Bcm 0
Here A, B, and C are constants to be determined. Rewriting we get

2 30 1 0 1
k11 M!2 k12 k13 Am 0
6 7B C B C
4 k21 k22 k23 5@ Bbm A ¼ @ 0 A:
k31 k32 k33 Bcm 0
The determinant of the coefficient matrix should be zero for a nontrivial solution.

k11 M!2 k12 k13

k21 k22 k23 ¼ 0:

k31 k32 k33
This is rewritten as
P3
j¼2 k1j k1j
k11 þ !2 M ¼ 0:
k11
The study of system resonance (modal) frequencies ! and modal loss factors are our
primary interest here. Hence, it is appropriate to assume that the layered beam system is
under simple harmonic vibration with the complex resonance frequency !2 ¼ !2r ð1 þ iÞ.
It has been shown in [5] that a special class of complex modes exist when the system is
externally excited by specific ‘damped loads’ that are proportional to the local inertial
loadings of the mode. Solving the equation, the damped complex resonance frequency
is found to be
P3 !
2 j¼2k1j k1j .
! ¼ k11 þ M,
k11
!2r ¼ Realð!2 Þ, !2I ¼ Imagð!2 Þ:
Hence, the resonance frequency !r and loss factor can be calculated for each mode
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
!r ¼ Realð!2 Þ, ð23Þ
and
Imagð!2 Þ
¼ : ð24Þ
Realð!2 Þ
The loss factor is evaluated as the ratio of the imaginary to the real part of the square
of the system’s complex resonance frequency. For comparison with experimental results,
the vicious damping ratio
is generally used. The term
is approximately equal to =2
estimated at modal frequencies.
In the numerical approach, however, the resonance frequency is needed in the very
beginning to select the properties of the viscoelastic material since these properties are
frequency and temperature dependent. Therefore, an iterative process was developed.
First, an approximate resonance frequency is determined for a reference beam having
the same overall geometrical setup as the considered multilayered system and having the
Young’s modulus of the first elastic layer. Assuming chosen boundary conditions, length,
and mode number, the approximate modal frequency can be determined. This determined
modal frequency is then used to calculate the exact modal frequency of the multilayer
system. Since the frequencies should be identical, the initial value is compared to the
new value. This process is repeated until the difference between the two values is smaller
than 5%. This process needs to be repeated in the desired temperature range, a number of
times, to obtain the damping and modal frequencies within that range.
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
To verify the dynamic model for its prediction of modal frequencies and loss factors of
a three-layer composite beam, shaker tests for different specimens were conducted.
As shown in Figure 2, a steel beam of 40 mil (1 mm) thickness and 22 mm length, was
bonded to an extruded viscoelastic material layer with a PSA layer of 3 mil. The extruded
material layer is relatively thick to induce significant damping effects and its thickness
varied from 50 to 120 mil in different specimens.
Because the damping measurement is very sensitive to boundary conditions, the
experimental setup was first validated using a steel beam to insure simply supported
boundary conditions. The base beam was fixed by using two knife edges at both ends
to simulate the simply supported boundary conditions. This fixture was rigidly clamped to
a large steel base to avoid any unnecessary excitation. In order to ensure that
proper boundary conditions were obtained, a modal analysis of a simple bare beam was
carried out using the same fixture as used for the actual beams. The mode shapes and
modal frequencies that were obtained for the steel beam were close to the predicted
values from the Euler beam theory. The measured resonance frequencies were within
5% of the predicted values. Also, the displacements at the boundary points were measured
to make sure that the support structure was not taking part in the motion in the
experiments.
Accelerometer
Force
transducer
Shaker
Power Power
amplifier supply
Data acquisition system

(LMS-Cada-X)
Figure 2. Experimental setup.
In the experimental procedure, the excitation and response locations were carefully
selected to be away from the node points for the modes under investigation. The
viscoelastic layers were removed from the base beam at the locations where it was attached
to the knife edges to avoid additional damping at the boundaries. A burst random
signal was used for excitation. The signals from the accelerometer and force transducer
were recorded and transferred to LMS-Cada-X software for further processing the data.
From the measured frequency response functions, the modal frequencies and viscous
damping ratio (
) were estimated using multiple degrees of freedom curve fitting in the
narrow frequency band. Time domain MDOF parameter estimation technique was mainly
used for curve fitting. Both frequency and time domain techniques were used for the
systems with thick damping material. The experiments were conducted for four different
extruded material layer thicknesses (50, 70, 90, and 120 mil) and for two different
temperature ranges.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Figure 3 shows the variation of the system’s first mode loss factor and resonance
frequency with temperature obtained from the analytical model. This result is for
a composite system having a base layer thickness of 1 mm and a constraining layer
thickness of 1.8 mm. As seen, the damping is highest close to the temperature of
2 C when the material operates around its transition region. The material gives best
damping performance when operated close to its glass transition temperature. The
frequency, on the other hand, decreases as the temperature is increased. This is due to
the softening of the material which decreases the complex modulus of the viscoelastic
material.
0.2
0.18
0.16
0.14
System loss factor η
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30
Temperature °C
140
120
100
Freq (Hz)
80
60
40
20
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30
Temperature °C
Figure 3. Variation of loss factor and fundamental frequency with temperature.
Modal frequency for 50 mil case Damping ratio (ζ) for 50 mil case
1634
1000 0.14
800 0.12
600 0.1
400 0.08
Damping ratio (ζ)
Modal frequency (Hz)

200 0.06
0 0.04
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Mode no. Mode no.
Modal frequency for 70 mil case Damping ratio (ζ) at for 70 mil case
1000 0.18
0.16
800
0.14
600 0.12
400 0.1
Damping ratio (ζ) 0.08
200
0.06
0 0.04
M. HAO
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Mode no. Mode no.
AND
Figure 4. Comparison of analytical and experimental results at 21 C, - - - theory, - experiment.

M. D. RAO
800 0.16
0.14
600
0.12
0.1
400
0.08
0.06
Damping ratio (ζ)

200

0.04
0 0.02
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Mode no. Mode no.
1000 0.25
800
Analysis of Viscoelastic Constraining Layered Systems
0.2
600
0.15
400
Damping ratio (ζ)

0.1

200
0 0.05
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Mode no. Mode no.

1635
1000 0.14
1636
800 0.12
600 0.1
400 0.08
Damping ratio (ζ)

200 0.06
0 0.04
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Mode no. Mode no.
Modal frequency for 70 mil case Damping ratio (ζ) at for 70 mil case
1000 0.18
0.16
800
0.14
600 0.12
400 0.1
Damping ratio (ζ) 0.08

200
0.06
0 0.04
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
M. HAO
Mode no. Mode no.

AND

M. D. RAO
1000 0.22
0.2
800
0.18
600 0.16
400 0.14
0.12
Damping ratio (ζ)

200
0.1
0 0.08
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Mode no. Mode no.
1200 0.35
1000 0.3
Analysis of Viscoelastic Constraining Layered Systems
800
0.25
600
0.2
400
Damping ratio (ζ)

200 0.15
0 0.1
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Mode no. Mode no.

1637
Table 1. Analytical and experimental results for a beam of 70 mil thickness.

Frequency (Hz) Damping ratio
Mode No. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Experimental 57 179 378 711 0.039 0.045 0.06 0.135
Calculated 43 170 398 745 0.031 0.05 0.072 0.119
The experimental and analytical results for tests conducted at room temperature (21 C)
are plotted in Figures 4 and 5, respectively. Figures 6 and 7 show low temperature
results at 14 C. Dotted lines in the plots show the calculated modal frequencies and
loss factors for the first three or four modes. The solid lines show the experimental results.
The vertical bars associated with solid lines represent the experimental scatter in the
test data. The results for a beam of thickness 70 mil and temperature of 21 C are as
shown in Table 1.
These results show that there is an excellent agreement between experimental and
predicted values of modal frequencies especially for experiments conducted at room
temperature. For experiments conducted at 14 C, the agreement is very good for the
first three modes. The damping results presented in Figure 4–7 do not show good
agreement and need some explanation. Except for the results presented in Figure 5,
and the 120 mil case in Figure 7, the predicted values of damping are greater than the
measured damping ratios. This is in contrast to the expected observation in which one
would expect the measured values of damping to be greater than these predicted by
theory because of additional contributions of damping from support structure and
acoustic radiation. There could be several reasons for the discrepancies in the damp-
ing results. It is possible that the damping contributions assumed through shear
strains in both of the VEMs in theory may not have been realized in practice. Also,
it should be noted that the empirical formula to estimate the material damping
and shear modulus of the two VEMs at various temperatures and frequencies were
supplied by the manufacturer. These were obtained from a curve-fit of experiments
conducted on individual materials. Any uncertainties in the estimation of these
material parameters will lead to errors in the estimated damping of the composite
system.
Additionally, it should be emphasized that in practice many parameters influence
the measurement of damping. These include (a) boundary conditions, (b) frequency,
(c) temperature, (d) humidity, (e) friction at the interfaces and joints, (f) displacement
level, etc. Among these, damping is by far most sensitive to changes in temperature.
These are in addition to other experimental and signal processing parameters
considered during vibration testing and modal parameter estimation. For example,
the frequency resolution (bandwidth), maximum frequency, number of modes,
choice of curve-fitting method are some parameters that play a role in the
determination of damping results. Hence, from an experimental point of view, it
does not make a lot of sense to present a single value for the damping ratio. As noted
by the error bars in the damping versus frequency plots, there is an inherent
range (scatter) in the measured values to account for the above factors. With this
perspective, it is seen that the predicted damping values are within the measured range
for the most part.
OPTIMUM STRUCTURE DESIGN
An optimum design analysis was carried out for the three-layer system to obtain
an optimum configuration that maximizes damping while minimizing the system mass.
Two parts were considered in this multi-objective optimization problem. First, the objec-
tive was to maximize the modal loss factor; second was the minimization of the total mass
of the system. Both of the objectives were subjected to constraints on design variables and
other requirements such as mass, thickness, temperature and frequency ranges. In this
way, it is easy to find the optimum configuration including layer thickness, layer number,
and material in a required range. The optimization problem was formulated to minimize
the function
FðHi Þ ¼ M C , ð25Þ
where M is mass of the system, and C is a constant.

The constraints imposed were:
Ml M Mu ; Ml and Mu are the lower and upper bounds of the total mass,
respectively;
fl f fu ; The calculated modal frequency f was assumed to be between fl and fu;
Also, Hl Hi Hu ; Hi is the thickness of the ith different layer. Hl and Hu are the
lower and upper bounds of the thickness, respectively;
Simply supported beams with three layers were considered as the illustrative example
to implement the optimization procedure outlined here. The constraining layer and
damping materials used in the system are the same as used in the experiments; the
reference temperature was 21 C; the Young’s modulus and density of the elastic layer
material were 210 GN/m2 and 7800 kg/m3. In the initial design, the thicknesses of the
elastic layer (steel), PSA layer, and extruded material layer were set at 39.4 mil (1 mm),
3, and 90 mil, respectively.
In this three-layer case, the initial modal frequency f of the system was set to 40.9 Hz.
The loss factor was 0.0211, and mass was 0.0683 kg. The optimization results
revealed the optimized thicknesses of steel, PSA, and extruded layers as 35.43, 3, and
135 mil, respectively. Using the optimized thickness, the modal frequency and loss
factor obtained were 36.17 Hz and 0.042. The mass of the system was 0.075 kg in the
final design. The results indicate that the loss factor increases significantly and the
resonant frequency stays in a similar range as the original, but the structure becomes
lighter than that in the original design. The variation of the loss factor and funda-
mental frequency of the original and optimized systems with temperature are shown
in Figure 8.
The advantages of the optimization procedure are evident from this sample
problem. The final design system loss factor is improved significantly with reduced
structural weight, while simultaneously satisfying all the performance bounds. At the
same time, the optimization process does not significantly change the mode
natural frequencies of the structure; this is very important in the structure design.
Additionally, the beam system can be optimized by choosing the best damping
materials for the two layers from a catalog of different materials available. This is
usually done to achieve an optimum damping performance over wide temperature and
frequency ranges.
0.35
Optimal
Original
0.3
0.25
Loss factor (η)
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Temperature °C
180
Optimal
Original
160
Fundamental mode frequency (Hz)
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Temperature °C
Figure 8. Optimization of unsymmetrical three-layer system.
CONCLUSIONS
In this research, a comprehensive analytical formulation for a three-layer unsymmetrical

beam system with two viscoelastic damping layers adjacent to each other is developed.
The vibration characteristics of the laminated beam was calculated using a numerical
method. To examine the validity of the theoretical analysis, vibration tests were conducted
on sample beams. The experimental results show good agreement with the modal
frequencies estimated by theory. The first four modes were considered in the computation
and experiment validation. A procedure for carrying out an optimum design study
has been outlined. Maximizing the system loss factor and minimizing the system weight
were the two main objectives which were combined into objective functions using the
weighting method. Constraints were imposed to make the system satisfy the configuration
and natural frequency requirements. Using an illustrative example, it is shown that it
is possible to arrive at a configuration that has maximum damping without sacrificing
stiffness and weight requirements. Additional experimental work is needed to validate the
results of the optimization scheme presented in the paper.
NOMENCLATURE
E ¼ Young’s modulus
Eb ¼ material complex Young’s modulus of the extruded material layer
Ec ¼ material complex Young’s modulus of the PSA layer
Ed ¼ material Young’s modulus of the basic layer
f ¼ frequency of vibration (Hz)
G ¼ shear modulus
Gb ¼ material complex shear modulus of the extruded material layer
Gc ¼ material complex shear modulus of the PSA layer
Gd ¼ material shear modulus of the basic layer
k ¼ index for summation
L ¼ length of the beam
H ¼ layer thickness
Hb ¼ thickness of the extruded material
Hc ¼ thickness of the PSA layer
Hd ¼ thickness of the base material

¼ viscous damping ratio ¼ =2
u0 ¼ longitudinal displacement of a point in the neutral plane of the beam
ub ¼ longitudinal displacement of a point in the neutral plane of the extruded material
layer
uc ¼ longitudinal displacement of a point in the neutral plane of the PSA layer
ud ¼ longitudinal displacement of a point in the neutral plane of the basic layer
w ¼ transversal displacement of a point in the neutral plane of a layer
!r ¼ real part of natural frequency
!I ¼ imaginary part of natural frequency
"b ¼ longitudinal normal strain of the extruded material layer
"c ¼ longitudinal normal strain of the PSA layer
"d ¼ longitudinal normal strain of the basic layer
¼ loss factor of the system
¼ slope of transverse displacement

¼ material density
! ¼ frequency of vibration (rad/s)
¼ shear strain in the viscoelastic material
c ¼ shear strain in the PSA material
b ¼ shear strain in the extruded material
Zb ¼ distance from a point in the extruded material layer to the neutral plane of the layer
Zc ¼ distance from a point in the PSA layer to the neutral plane of the layer
Zb ¼ distance from a point in the basic layer to the neutral plane of the layer
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We would like to thank Mr. Peter Jackson of American Acoustical Products for
supplying the material samples and their properties for use in this research.
REFERENCES
1. Rao, M.D. (2003). Recent Applications of Viscoelastic Damping for Noise Control in
Automobiles and Commercial Airplanes, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 262: 457–474.
2. Kerwin, E.M. (1959). Damping of Flexural Waves by a Constrained Viscoelastic Layer, Journal
of the Acoustical Society of America, 31(7): 952–962.
3. Ross, D., Ungar, E. and Kerwin, E.M., Jr. (Dec. 1959). Damping of Plate of Flexural Vibrations
by Means of Viscoelastic Laminate, Structural Damping, ASME, New York, pp. 49–88.
4. Diraranto, R.A. (Dec. 1965). Theory of Vibratory Bending for Elastic and Viscoelastic Layered
Finite-Length Beams, Journal of Applied Mechanics, 32: 881–884.
5. Mead, D.J. and Markus, M. (1969). The Forced Vibration of a Three-Layer, Damped Sandwich
Beam with Arbitrary Boundary Conditions, Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 10(2): 163–175.
6. Mead, D.J. and Markus, S. (1970). Loss Factors and Resonant Frequencies of Encastre
Damped Sandwich Beams, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 12(1): 99–112.
7. Rao, D.K. (1978). Frequency and Loss Factors of Sandwich Beams under Various Boundary
Conditions, Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, 20(2): 271–282.
8. Cottle, E.T. (Dec. 1990). Damping of Layered Beams with Mixed Boundary Conditions, Master
Thesis, Air Force Institute of Technology.
9. Falugi, M. (1991). Analysis of a Five-Layer, Viscoelastic, Constrained-Layer Beam, In:
Proceedings of Damping Workshop Paper, p. CCB.
10. Parin, M., Rogers, L.C. and Falugi, M. (1989). Practical Stand Off Damping Treatment for
Sheet Metal, In: Proceedings of Damping Workshop Paper, p. IBA.
11. Rogers, L.C. and Parin, M. (1995). Experimental Results for Stand-off, Passive Vibration
Damping Treatment, In: Proceedings of SPIE – The International Society for Optical
Engineering, Vol. 2445, pp. 374–383.
12. Yellin, J.M., Shen, I.Y. and Reinhall, P.G. (1999). An Experimental Investigation of a Passive
Stand-off Layer Damping Treatment Applied to an Euler-Bernoulli Beam, In: Proc SPIE, 3672
pp. 228–233.
13. Yellin, J.M., Shen, I.Y. and Reinhall, P.G. (Oct 2000). An Analytical and Experimental Analysis
for a One-Dimensional Passive Stand-off Layer Damping Treatment, Transactions of ASME
Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 122: 440–447.
14. Yellin, J.M. and Shen, I.Y. (1998). An Analytical Model for a Passive Stand-off Layer
Damping Treatment Applied to an Euler-Bernoulli Beam, In: Proceedings of SPIE, Vol. 3327,
pp. 349–356.
15. Yang, B. and Tan, C.A. (1959). The Transfer Functions of One Dimensional Distributed
Parameter Systems, Journal of Applied Mechanics, 116: 341–349.
16. Yellin, J.M. and Shen, I.Y. (2000). An Analytical Model for a One-Dimensional Slotted Stand-
off Layer Damping Treatment, In: Proceedings of SPIE, Vol. 3989, pp. 132–141.
17. Singh, S.P. and Gupta, K. (1994). Damped Free Vibrations of Layered Composite Cylindrical
Shells, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 172(2): 191–209.
18. Johnson, C.D. and Kienholz, D.A. (1981). Finite Element Prediction of Damping in Beams with
Constrained Viscoelastic Layers, The Shock and Vibration Bulletin, 51(1): 71–81.
19. Nakra, B.C. (2001). Some Studies on Structural Dynamic Modifications, In: 2001 India-USA
Symposium on Emerging Trends in Vibration and Noise Engineering, The Ohio State University.
20. Nakra, B.C. (1998). Vibration Control in Machines and Structures using Viscoelastic Damping,
Journal of Sound and Vibration, 211(3): 449–465.
21. Lunden, R. (1979). Optimum Distribution of Damping for a Vibrating Beam, Journal of Sound
and Vibration, 66: 196–203.
22. Lall, A.K., Nakra, B.C. and Asnani, N.T. (1983). Optimum Design of Viscoelastically Damped
Sandwich Panels, Engineering Optimization, 6: 197–205.
23. Malott, B., Averill, R. and Goodman, E. (1996). Use of Genetic Algorithms for Optimal Design
of Laminated Composite Sandwich Panels with Bending-Twisting Coupling, AIAA Journal,
37: 1874–1881.
24. Hao, M., Rao, M.D. and Schabus, M.H. (2004). Optimum Design of Multiple-Constrained-
Layered Systems for Vibration Control, AIAA Journal, 42(12): 2448–2461.

Vibration Damping Analysis of Sandwich Beam with Viscoelastic Layer

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vibration Damping Analysis of Sandwich Beam with Viscoelastic Layer

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Composite

Vibration and Damping Analysis of a Sandwich Beam Containing a Viscoelastic

The online version of this article can be found at:

American Society for Composites

Email Alerts: http://jcm.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

>> Version of Record - Aug 18, 2005

MIN HAO AND MOHAN D. RAO*

(Received May 7, 2004)

ABSTRACT: Viscoelastic layered systems provide a simple and flexible solution

KEY WORDS: damping, viscoelastic constraining layer, vibration, sandwich

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: mrao@mtu.edu

Journal of COMPOSITE MATERIALS, Vol. 39, No. 18/2005 1621

systems was carried out to achieve dynamically optimal configuration of viscoelastic

Figure 1. Three-layer unsymmetrical composite beam with a viscoelastic constraining layer.

Stress, Strain, and Energy Analysis

The total strain energy of the elastic layers (Ud) is given by

Applying the stress–strain relation for the viscoelastic layer

Then, the strain energy of the PSA layer can be obtained by

The kinetic energy can be written in terms of the transverse deflections as

The total strain energy of the system can be expressed by

Hamilton’s principle gives

The boundary conditions can also be obtained as:

After rearrangement of the formulations, we get

Eb H3b E H3 Ed H3d

For the extruded material

Gmid Gmin Gmax Gmin

K2a ð f ðT ÞÞpa 1 K2b ð f ðT ÞÞpb 1

ðT Þ ¼ 10 ððTref T Þq=ðTref þ273:3ÞðTþ273:3Þ , ð18Þ

E ¼ 2ð1 þ ÞG : ð19Þ

Here A, B, and C are constants to be determined. Rewriting we get

!2r ¼ Realð!2 Þ, !2I ¼ Imagð!2 Þ:

Data acquisition system

Figure 2. Experimental setup.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Figure 3. Variation of loss factor and fundamental frequency with temperature.

Damping ratio (ζ)

Modal frequency (Hz)

Figure 4. Comparison of analytical and experimental results at 21 C, - - - theory, - experiment.

Damping ratio (ζ)

Modal frequency (Hz)

Damping ratio (ζ)

Modal frequency (Hz)

Figure 5. Comparison of analytical and experimental results at 21 C, - - - theory, - experiment.

Damping ratio (ζ)

Modal frequency (Hz)

Damping ratio (ζ) 0.08

Modal frequency (Hz)

Mode no. Mode no.

Figure 6. Comparison of analytical and experimental results at 14 C, - - - theory, - experiment.

Damping ratio (ζ)

Modal frequency (Hz)

Damping ratio (ζ)

Modal frequency (Hz)

Figure 7. Comparison of analytical and experimental results at 14 C, - - - theory, - experiment.

Table 1. Analytical and experimental results for a beam of 70 mil thickness.

OPTIMUM STRUCTURE DESIGN

where M is mass of the system, and C is a constant.

Figure 8. Optimization of unsymmetrical three-layer system.

In this research, a comprehensive analytical formulation for a three-layer unsymmetrical

¼ slope of transverse displacement

You might also like

K2a ð f ðT ÞÞpa 1 K2b ð f ðT ÞÞpb 1

ðT Þ ¼ 10 ððTref T Þq=ðTref þ273:3ÞðTþ273:3Þ , ð18Þ

E ¼ 2ð1 þ ÞG : ð19Þ

Figure 4. Comparison of analytical and experimental results at 21 C, - - - theory, - experiment.

Figure 5. Comparison of analytical and experimental results at 21 C, - - - theory, - experiment.

Figure 6. Comparison of analytical and experimental results at 14 C, - - - theory, - experiment.

Figure 7. Comparison of analytical and experimental results at 14 C, - - - theory, - experiment.