Cantilever Frequency Validation

Available online at www.sciencedirect.
com
ScienceDirect
Materials Today: Proceedings 21 (2020) 1176–1194 www.materialstoday.com/proceedings
ICRACM-2019
Modal Analysis of Four Layered Composite Cantilever Beam with

Lay-Up Sequence and Length-To-Thickness Ratio
Nitesh Talekara,*, Mangesh Kotambkarb
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology, Nagpur, PIN - 440010, India
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology, Nagpur, PIN - 440010, India
Abstract
Composites are well known for their specific strength and specific modulus and therefore finding lots of engineering applications
now a day. In this study, a first order shear deformation theory is used to describe mathematical procedure for the free vibration
analysis of layered composite cantilever beam. The finite element (FE) model is prepared by using 281 Shell element having 8
nodes with six degrees of freedom at each node for the modal analysis. The detailed effect of lay-up sequence and length-to-
thickness ratio with lay-up angle on natural frequencies of various modes are studied by considering four layered composite
cantilever beam. Four different lay-up sequences and five different length-to-thickness ratios are considered to study their effect
on bending, transverse and torsional modes of vibration. The results obtained are compared with the previously published
literature to validate the efficacy and accuracy of the model. The analysis results show distinct modal characteristics due to
change in lay-up sequence and length-to-thickness ratio. This study could be used for proper selection of the lay-up sequence and
length-to-thickness ratio to adjust modal parameter like natural frequency of the cantilever beam in order to avoid resonance.
The parametric study using analytical model would be highly complex and thus FE model is used for the purpose. Natural
frequency of all the modes is observed to be highly sensitive to lay up sequence and the effect of length-to-thickness ratio also
needs to be considered. Bending mode natural frequency is higher with antisymmetric lay up sequence whereas transverse mode
is with symmetric layup sequence for entire range of layup angles. The torsional mode natural frequency is higher with
symmetric layup sequence upto the layup angle 450.
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and peer-review under responsibility of SIXTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON RECENT ADVANCES IN COMPOSITE
MATERIALS, ICRACM-2019.
Keywords: Free vibration; Composite cantilever beam; Modal analysis; Lay-up sequence; Length-to-thickness ratio;
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +91-9766919381; fax: +91-712-2802200.

E-mail address: kitsniteshtalekar@gmail.com
2214-7853 © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and peer-review under responsibility of SIXTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON RECENT ADVANCES IN COMPOSITE
MATERIALS, ICRACM-2019.
N. Talekar and M. Kotambkar / Materials Today: Proceedings 21 (2020) 1176–1194 1177
1. Introduction
The use of composite materials in mechanical, civil structure and military applications has increased
tremendously in the past few years. Structural components made of anisotropic materials are ideal for structural
applications because of the high strength to weight and stiffness to weight ratios and their ability to be tailored to
meet the design requirements of stiffness, strength and natural frequency. For any structure that may be subjected to
dynamic loads, the determination of the natural frequencies plays important role in the design process and structures.
It is important, in a dynamic environment, to know the free vibration characteristics of these structures. The present
work deals with the free vibration problem of thin composite cantilever. Specifically, cantilever like structures finds
a lot of applications in the aerospace industry and in robotics.
In the dynamic analyses, it is quite essential to consider an overview of the free vibration characteristics,
including the natural frequencies of any composite structures. Dynamic analysis of laminated composite beams with
cross-ply laminas has received considerable attention in recent decades [1] and continues to provide great interest in
the beginning of the new millennium. Chandrashekhara and Bangera [2] put forward a finite element model based
on a higher-order shear deformation theory to study the free vibration of generally layered composite beams. The
Poisson effect, which is often neglected in one dimensional laminated beam analysis, was incorporated in the
formulation of the constitutive equation. He has conducted a variety of parametric studies to demonstrate the
influence of beam geometry, Poisson effect, ply orientation, number of layers and boundary conditions on the
frequencies and mode shapes of generally layered composite beams. Krishnaswamy et al. [3] used Hamilton’s
principle to formulate the dynamic equations governing the free vibration of laminated composite beams. The
influences of transverse shear deformation and inertia were also considered, and analytical solutions for un-
symmetric laminated beams were obtained by applying the Lagrange multipliers method. Symbolic computation
technique was reported by Teboub and Hajela [4] on the basis of a first order shear deformation theory. Little effort
has been done on analysis of generally laminated beams directly based on elasticity theory.
Jun et al. [5] introduced a dynamic finite element method for free vibration analysis of generally laminated
composite beams on the basis of first-order shear deformation theory. He derived the coupled differential equations
governing the free vibration of generally laminated composite beam by means of Hamilton’s principle. He has
investigated the impacts of Poisson effect, material anisotropy, slender ratio, shear deformation and boundary
condition on the natural frequencies of composite beams. Raveendranath et al. [6] proposed a 2-noded curved
composite beam element with three degrees of freedom per node for the analysis of laminated beam structures.
Yildirim [7] considered the anisotropy of the rod material, the curvatures of the rod axis and the effects of the rotary
inertia. He has also considered the shear and axial deformations in the formulation. Out-of-plane bending free
vibration of a simply supported beam with three special orthotropic lay-up is considered. He has solved the out-of-
plane bending free vibration example for a simply supported beam with a transversely isotropic unidirectional layer
to compare the frequencies with the existing numerical results. Chakraborty et al. [8] presented a new refined
locking free first order shear deformable finite element and demonstrated its utility in solving free vibration and
wave propagation problems in laminated composite beam structures with symmetric as well as asymmetric ply
stacking. There he has given a novel way of modeling structural discontinuities such as delamination, which
significantly reduces the modeling effort to determine static, dynamic and wave propagation responses quickly and
accurately.
Balci et al. [9] obtained a numerical model of the laminated composite beam for various boundary conditions
based on different length-to-thickness ratios for a number of layer using FEM. Also, free vibrations of a laminated
composite beam were studied using classical lamination theory for different boundary conditions and length-to-
thickness ratios for a number of layers. Miller and Adams [10] presented an analytic method of determining the
resonant frequencies of generally orthotropic beams, where flexural to torsional coupling is caused by the character
of the elastic material constants. Chen et al. [11] presented a new method of state-space-based differential quadrature
for free vibration of generally laminated beams. By discretizing the state space formulations along the axial direction
using the technique of differential quadrature, new state equations at discrete points are established. Shi and Lam
[12] presented a new finite element formulation for the free vibration analysis of composite beams based on the
third-order beam theory.
1178 N. Talekar and M. Kotambkar / Materials Today: Proceedings 21 (2020) 1176–1194
2. Mathematical formulation
A laminated composite beam of length L, width b and height h made of N layers of orthotropic materials is
considered. As shown in Fig. 1, the principal material axes of a layer is oriented at an arbitrary angle with respect to
the x-axis. To developing the equations of motion for free vibration, following assumptions are made [4]:
1. All layers behave elastically;
2. Perfect bonding exists between layers;
3. The beam is flat and vibrates in a vacuum.
4. The laminate is equivalent to a single anisotropic layer;
5. Displacements, rotations and strains are small relative to the beam thickness;
Fig. 1. Layered composite beam geometry.
Based on a first order shear deformation theory, the assumed displacement field for the composite
beam can be written as follows
u1 ( x , z , t ) = u ( x , t ) + zφ ( x , t ) (1)
u2 ( x, z, t ) = zψ ( x, t )
(2)
u3 ( x, z, t ) = w( x, t ) (3)
where u, w are the displacements of a point on the mid-plane, and ϕ, ψ are the rotations of the normal to
the mid-plane about the y and x axes, respectively. The strain-displacement relations are given as
ε x = u '( x, t ) + zφ '( x, t ) (4)
γ xz = φ ( x, t ) + w '( x, t ) (5)
γ xy = zψ '( x, t )
(6)
k x = φ '( x, t ) (7)
k xy = ψ '( x, t ) (8)
where ( ' ) indicates differentiation w. r. to x. The constitutive equations of a laminate are given by the
classical laminated beam theory (CLBT)
 N  A B ε 0  (9)
 =  
 M  B D   k 
where N and M are the resultant forces and resultant moments, respectively. The matrices A, B and D are
the extensional, coupling and bending stiffness respectively. Here,
 ε x0   kx 
   
ε 0 =  ε y0  , k =  k y 
   
 γ xy   k xy  (10)
are the in-plane strains and the bending and twisting curvatures, respectively. The laminate constitutive
equation can be inverted to obtained
εx0  a11 a12 a16 b11 b12 b16  Nx 
 0   
εy  a12 a22 a26 b12 b22 b26  Ny 
γxy  a16 a26 a66 b16 b26 b66  Nxy 
  =  
kx  b11 b12 b16 d11 d12 d16 Mx 
k  b b22 b26 d12 d22 d26 My 
 y   12  
kz  b16 b26 b66 d16 d26 d66 Mxy 
(11)
and setting Ny, Nxy and My, in above equation to zero, the remaining equation are given by:
 ε x0   a11 b11 b16   N x 
    
 k x  =  b11 d11 d16   M x 
  d 66   M xy 
 k xy  b16 d16
(12)
Setting the stress resultants Ny, Nxy and the moment resultant My in above equation to zero while ε y , γ xy
0 0
and k y are assumed non-zero, the constitutive equation reduces to the following:
 N x   L11 L12 L13   ε x0 

    
 M x  =  L12 L22 L23   k x 
 M xy   L13
  L23 L66   k xy 
(13)
Qxz = A55γ xx
(14)
where
+ h /2
A55 = 
− h /2
KQ55 dz
(15)
where, K is shear correction factor. For low to intermediate thickness and rectangular cross sections, a
value of K=5/6 is widely adopted. Q55 is transformed elasticity constant given by:
Q55 = Q44 sin 2 θ + Q55 cos 2 θ

(16)
Equation of motion is then formed by using strain energy (U) and then kinetic energy (T). The governing
differential equations follow from taking the first variation of the Lagrangian and setting it equal to zero:
t2
δ  (T − U )dt = 0
t1
(17)
with δ u = δφ = δ w = 0 at t = t1 and t = t2 .
Integrating the terms by parts and setting the coefficients δu, δϕ, δψ and δw equal to zero, the
equilibrium equations are obtained, and then apply required boundary condition for the beam. To get the
natural frequencies and corresponding mode shapes, apply the appropriate boundary conditions for the
particular problem under consideration. This results in a homogeneous system of eight equations in eight
unknowns. To obtain a nontrivial solution, the determinant of the coefficient matrix of this system of
equations should be equal to zero [4].
3. Finite element modeling
Results are obtained by formulating FE model in mechanical APDL ANSYS 16.2 by using 8 node 281
shell element shown in Fig. 2. The use of preprocessor is to inputs the neccesory requirement for the
analysis such as material properties, modelling, element type, real constraints, meshing, load and
boundary conditions etc. Material model is then defined as per requirement which is structural, linear,
elastic and orthotropic. All the necessary inputs should be given to define material model. Then next is to
define lay-up of the laminate by section, shell and lay-up. Here different lay-up sequences are used for the
analysis along with thickness of each layer. Lay-up sequences are selected as per discussed in result and
discussion section. Now then model the model as per required dimensions. Free quad fine meshing has
been used such that it comprises 2430 elements and 7597 nodes. Define boundary condition as per
requirement to solve the FE model to get modal solution. Solution can be seen in general post processor.
Fig. 2. Free-free FE model of a laminated composite beam with meshing.

4. Result and discussion
4.1. Effect of lay-up sequence

Results are obtained by considering following geometrical and mechanical properties of the composite laminated
cantilever beam having four lamina are as follows [5]:
E1 = 144.8 × 109 Pa, E2 = E3 = 9.65 × 109 Pa, G12 = G13 = 4.14 × 109 Pa, G23 = 3.45 × 109 Pa, ν12 = 0.3, ρ = 1389.23
kg/m3, L = 0.381 m, b = 25.4 × 10-3 m, h = 25.4 × 10-3 m.
Table 1. First six natural frequencies (in Hz) for [θ/θ/θ/θ] lay-up sequence.
θ
0 0 0 0
Mode No. 0 15 30 45 600 750 900
1 278.47 209.78 140.01 90.80 75.25 73.77 74.22
(B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1)
2 278.96 256.70 163.23 94.76 76.62 75.21 75.68
(T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1)
3 1039.17 1145.36 823.11 552.27 461.37 452.59 455.16
(R1) (B) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2)
4 1468.35 1260.88 1009.66 589.87 476.89 466.88 465.16
(B2) (R1) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2)
5 1476.83 1520.54 1279.00 1276.30 1241.18 1128.60 988.70
(T2) (T2) (R1) (R1) (R1 (R1) (R1)
6 3119.13 2801.29 2116.08 1480.94 1252.32 1227.20 1233.51
(R2) (B2) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3)
Table 2. First six natural frequencies (in Hz) for [θ/-θ/-θ/θ] lay-up sequence.
θ
Mode No. 00 150 300 450 600 750 900
1 278.47 209.78 140.01 90.80 75.25 73.77 74.22
(B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1)
1, Ref. [5] 278.40 207.20 137.90 89.30 74.70 73.70 74.20
(B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1)
1, Ref. [2] NA NA NA 84.30 NA NA NA
(B1)
(B1)
(B1)
1, Ref. [8] 279.20 263.00 217.50 156.70 NA NA NA
(B1) (B1) (B1) (B1)
2 278.96 256.70 163.23 94.76 76.62 75.21 75.68
(T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1)
(T1)
3 1039.17 1145.36 823.11 552.27 461.37 452.59 455.16
(R1) (B) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2)
4 1468.35 1260.88 1009.66 589.87 476.89 466.88 465.16
(B2) (R1) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2)
5 1476.83 1520.54 1279.00 1276.3 1241.18 1128.6 988.7
(T2) (T2) (R1) (R1) (R1 (R1) (R1)
6 3119.13 2801.28 2116.08 1480.94 1252.32 1227.20 1233.51
(R2) 9 (B2) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3)
Four different lay-up, out of which two are symmetric lay-up ([θ/θ/θ/θ] and [θ/-θ/-θ/θ], as shown in
table 1 and table 2 respectively) and two are anti-symmetric lay-up ([θ/-θ/θ/-θ] and [-θ/-θ/θ/θ], as shown
in table 3 and table 4 respectively) are considered for the analysis on the composite cantilever. First six
natural frequencies are given for all the lay-up sequences. In every table natural frequency values are
written followed by bracket which represents its type of mode shape followed by its mode number.
Example, 100 (B2) represents natural frequency of 100 Hz and this is second mode of bending vibration.
Where, B stands for bending mode of vibration (about Y-axis), T stands for transverse mode of vibration
(about Z-axis), R stands for rotational or torsional mode of vibration (about X-axis) and L stands for
longitudinal mode of vibration (along length i.e. X-axis).
It can be seen that, results available in various literatures are in very good agreement with the current
result for fist mode of vibration which validate the current model. In table 2, NA represents results are not
available for that position. Tabulated result represents first six natural frequencies for particular lay-up
sequence for fibre lay-up angle θ varies from 00 to 900 in the interval of 150.
Table 3. First six natural frequencies (in Hz) for [θ/-θ/θ/-θ] lay-up sequence.
θ
0 0 0 0
Mode No. 0 15 30 45 600 750 900
1 278.47 233.28 154.48 93.18 75.45 73.79 74.22
(B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1)
2 278.96 246.30 158.31 93.99 76.53 75.11 75.68
(T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1)
3 1039.17 1080.20 874.84 563.35 462.33 452.69 455.16
(R1) (R1) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2)
4 1468.35 1216.70 975.07 583.91 476.18 465.98 465.16
(B2) (B2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T) (T2)
5 1476.83 1453.30 1090.80 1176.07 1251.72 1177.80 988.70
(T2) (T2) (R1) (R1) (B3) (R1) (R1)
6 3119.13 2805.60 2152.50 1494.30 1264.84 1227.50 1233.51
(R2) (B3) (B3) (B3) (R1) (B3) (B3)
Table 4. First six natural frequencies (in Hz) for [θ/θ/-θ/-θ] lay-up sequence.
θ
Mode No. 00 150 300 450 600 750 900
1 278.47 171.05 116.73 86.25 74.90 73.77 74.22
(B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1)
(B1) (B1)
2 278.96 199.36 130.00 88.78 75.99 75.08 75.68
(T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1)
(T1) (T1)
3 1039.17 563.98 441.87 483.95 456.60 452.69 455.16
(R1) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2)
(R1) (R1)
4 1468.35 732.47 525.18 549.86 471.70 464.29 465.16
(B2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2)
(B2) (B2)
5 1476.83 1184.60 800.77 600.24 1058.60 1099.60 988.70
(T2) (T2) (T2) (R1) (R1) (R1) (R1)
6 3119.13 1547.40 1129.30 1181.60 1227.20 1228.00 1233.51
(R2) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3)
Fig. 3 is plotted for first bending natural frequency for different lay-up. From the figure it is clear that
first natural frequency is depends on lay-up style. Amongst all the cases, all fiber set to same angle i.e.
[θ/θ/θ/θ] have lowest natural frequency for the entire angle starting from 00 to 900. Lay-up set [θ/-θ/θ/-θ]
have highest first natural frequency amongst all lay-up considered. It is very clear from the graph that
change in first natural frequency starts reducing nearly at 300 and change is quite negligible at about 500
for all the lay-up considered. [θ/θ/θ/θ] and [θ/θ/-θ/-θ] have almost same bending frequency till 150 can be
seen.
Fig. 3. First bending natural frequencies for different lay-up. Fig. 4. First transverse natural frequencies for different lay-up.
Fig. 5. First torsional natural frequencies for different lay-up.

Fig. 4 represents first transverse natural frequency for different lay-up. It is clear that transverse
vibration have same behavior as that of bending vibration. In transverse vibration also, difference in
natural frequency for all lay-up is start decaying at 300 and becomes very small at 600 onwards. Bending
vibration has highest natural frequency in [θ/-θ/θ/-θ] anti-symmetric ply where as in that of transverse
vibration it is highest in [θ/-θ/-θ/θ] symmetric ply. In transverse vibration, [θ/θ/θ/θ] has lowest frequency
amongst all the lay-up for the considered material properties.
Fig. 5 shows first torsional natural frequency for different lay-up. It has random behavior and can be
seen in the figure. [θ/θ/-θ/-θ] has lowest natural frequency at 300. Only [θ/θ/-θ/-θ] lay-up initially starts
decreasing natural frequency till 300 and then starts increasing afterwards and further starts decreasing
nearly at 700. [θ/θ/θ/θ] initially has highest amongst all till nearly 350. Anti-symmetrical lay-up has
highest amongst all at higher angle.
Fig. 6 shows second mode of natural frequency where figure a. is for bending and figure b. is for
transverse mode. It is observed that, Bending vibration decreases for all the lay-up starting from 00 to 900
where as in transverse case it is so for [θ/θ/θ/θ] and [θ/θ/-θ/-θ] only. In second mode of vibration also,
change in natural frequency is very less after 600 and onwards for all the lay-up.
Fig. 6. Second mode of natural frequency (a) bending; (b) Transverse
Fig. 7 shows third mode of natural frequency where figure a. and figure b. represents bending and
transverse mode respectively. It is observed that, lay-up [θ/-θ/-θ/θ] and [θ/-θ/θ/-θ] increases its transverse
natural frequency nearly at 150 and then starts decreasing, where as other than this two lay-up reduces
both bending as well as transverse till 900. It is also observed that, [θ/θ/-θ/-θ] has different behavior in
bending rather than others. Its third mode bending vibration is found to be minimum at 300 and then
further starts increasing.
Fig. 7. Third mode of natural frequency (a) bending; (b) Transverse
Fig. 8 shows fundamental natural frequencies for different lay-up and different modes. Graphs
represent first natural frequency in bending, transverse and rotational mode for all the considered lay-up.
It is clearly seen that, for the geometry and the properties consider for the composite beam, rotational
frequency is much higher than bending and transverse frequency. Even though cross section is same but
yet transverse frequencies in all the cases are found to more than bending frequencies, this is due to the
reason that all the fibres are placed in z-plane. Again it can be seen that, behaviour of rotational mode is
quite complicated for all lay-up style varying from 00 to 900. It means lay-up angle plays very important
role knowing rotational natural frequency for the considered geometry and the properties of the laminate.
a b
c d
Fig. 8. First natural frequency for (a) [θ/θ/θ/θ]; (b) [θ/-θ/-θ/θ]; (c) [θ/-θ/θ/-θ]; (d) [θ/θ/-θ/-θ].
4.2. Effect of length-to-thickness ratio
To find the effect of length-to-thickness ratio, following results are plotted with the geometric and physical
properties of the laminated composite cantilever beam are as follows [9]:
E1 = 38 × 109 Pa, E2 = E3 = 3.8 × 109 Pa, G12 = G13 = 1.9 × 109 Pa, G23 = 0.76 × 109 Pa, ν12 = 0.25, ν23 =
0.25, ρ = 1295 kg/m3, L = 1 m, b = 0.01 m.
Table 5 shows natural frequencies for length-to-thickness ratio L/h=20 and hence h = 0.05 m. Table 6
shows natural frequencies for length-to-thickness ratio L/h=50 and hence h = 0.02 m. Table 7 shows
natural frequencies for length-to-thickness ratio L/h=100 and hence h = 0.01 m. Table 8 shows natural
frequencies for length-to-thickness ratio L/h=300 and hence h = 0.00333 m. Table 9 shows natural
frequencies for length-to-thickness ratio L/h=500 and hence h = 0.002 m.
Five different length-to-thickness ratios are considered for the free vibration analysis of the composite cantilever
beam. First ten natural frequencies are tabulated for θ varies from 00 to 900 in the interval of 150. In every table
natural frequency values are written followed by bracket which represents its type of mode shape and subscript
represents its mode number. Where, B stands for bending mode (vibration about Y-axis), T stands for transverse
mode (vibration about Z-axis), R stands for rotational or torsional mode (vibration about X-axis) and NA represents
results are not available for that position. Results are validated with first three to seven bending natural frequencies
given in ref. [9] as seen in tables. Results produce is have very good agreement with the result in ref. [9] can be
seen.
Table 5. First ten natural frequencies (in Hz) for length-to-thickness ratio L/h=20.
Lay-up angle θ (Degree)
Mode No. 00 150 300 450 600 750 900
1 11.57 10.75 8.65 7.03 7.11 7.66 8.06
(T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1)
2 43.23 34.44 24.40 17.26 14.44 13.84 13.78
(B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1)
Ref. [9] NA NA NA 17.30 NA NA NA
(B1)
3 72.29 67.26 54.21 44.07 44.52 47.95 50.49
(T2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2)
4 109.81 96.87 82.80 77.86 74.50 70.89 69.20
(R1) (R1) (R1) (R1) (R1) (R1) (R1)
5 201.47 187.92 146.90 105.61 88.80 85.12 84.70
(T3) (T3) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2)
(B2)
6 253.59 203.78 151.60 123.30 124.66 134.10 181.10
(B2) (B2) (T3) (T3) (T3) (T3) (T3)
7 332.53 293.33 250.10 234.41 224.16 213.25 208.18
(R2) (R2) (R2) (R2) (R2) (R2) (R2)
8 392.10 367.07 296.70 241.35 241.59 231.50 230.25
(T4) (T4) (T4) (T4) (B3) (B3) (B3)
9 564.30 492.51 387.30 285.24 243.97 262.30 275.81
(R3) (R3) (B3) (B3) (T4) (T4) (T4)
(B3)
10 642.54 532.44 422.90 393.43 375.57 357.30 348.80
(T5) (B3) (R3) (R3) (R3) (R3) (R3)
Mode No. 00 150 300 450 600 750 900
1 9.25 8.49 6.21 4.35 3.90 3.98 4.10
(T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1)
2 17.46 13.90 9.82 6.93 5.79 5.55 5.53
(B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1)
(B1)
3 57.85 53.17 38.88 27.25 24.45 24.96 25.71
(T2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2)
4 108.23 86.27 61.14 43.25 36.18 34.69 34.55
(B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2)
(B2)
5 161.23 148.59 108.80 76.26 68.42 69.83 71.92
(T3) (T3) (T3) (T3) (T3) (T3) (T3)
6 222.52 207.91 169.31 120.34 100.42 96.65 96.25
(R1) (R1) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3)
(B3)
7 297.68 237.91 182.59 149.34 133.98 136.70 140.74
(B3) (B3) (R1) (T4) (T4) (T4) (T4)
8 313.88 290.34 213.01 172.78 165.12 155.47 149.84
(T4) (T4) (T4) (R1) (R1) (R1) (R1)
9 514.50 455.93 326.82 233.69 196.17 188.04 187.21
(T5) (B4) (B4) (B4) (B4) (B4) (B4)
(B4)
10 568.98 478.19 351.68 246.65 221.26 255.69 232.22
(B4) (T5) (T5) (T5) (T5) (T5) (T5)
0 0 0
Mode No. 0 15 30 450 600 750 900
1 8.75 6.96 4.91 3.46 2.89 2.78 2.76
(B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1)
(B1)
2 8.78 8.12 5.77 3.84 3.19 3.12 3.15
(T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1)
3 54.65 43.53 30.76 21.70 18.14 17.39 17.33
(B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2)
(B2)
4 55.47 50.84 36.16 23.89 19.98 19.57 19.77
(T2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2)
5 152.33 121.39 85.89 60.67 50.74 48.64 48.44
(B3) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3)
(B3)
6 154.62 142.08 101.20 66.88 55.94 54.78 55.31
(T3) (T3) (T3) (T3) (T3) (T3) (T3)
7 277.25 236.49 167.64 118.63 99.25 95.14 94.75
(R1) (B4) (B4) (B4) (B4) (B4) (B4)
(B4)
8 296.53 277.63 198.15 131.00 109.56 107.28 108.28
(B4) (T5) (T5) (T4) (T4) (T4) (T4)
9 300.99 291.18 271.47 195.50 163.68 156.91 156.26
(T4) (R1) (R1) (B5) (B5) (B5) (B5)
(B5)
10 486.02 388.06 275.89 216.40 180.99 177.17 178.74
(B5) (B5) (B5) (T5) (T5) (T5) (T5)
Mode No. 00 150 300 450 600 750 900
1 2.92 2.32 1.64 1.16 0.97 0.93 0.92
(B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1)
(B1)
2 8.76 8.01 5.63 3.64 2.94 2.82 2.81
(T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1)
3 18.27 14.56 10.28 7.25 6.05 5.80 5.78
(B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2)
(B2)
4 51.14 40.76 28.78 20.29 16.95 16.24 16.18
(B3) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3)
(B3)
5 54.75 50.13 35.32 22.81 18.45 17.67 17.63
(T2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2)
6 100.14 79.81 56.38 39.75 33.21 31.83 31.71
(B4) (B4) (B4) (B4) (B4) (B4) (B4)
(B4)
7 152.60 131.82 93.16 63.84 51.66 49.45 49.33
(T3) (B5) (B5) (T3) (T3) (T3) (T3)
8 165.38 140.10 98.84 65.70 54.88 52.60 52.39
(B5) (T3) (T3) (B5) (B5) (B5) (B5)
(B5)
9 170.92 196.70 139.10 98.11 81.96 78.56 78.24
(R1) (B6) (B6) (B6) (B6) (B6) (B6)
(B6)
10 246.76 221.43 193.53 125.05 101.20 96.85 96.58
(B6) (R1) (T4) (T4) (T4) (T4) (T4)
0 0 0
Mode No. 0 15 30 450 600 750 900
1 1.75 1.39 0.98 0.69 0.58 0.55 0.55
(B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1) (B1)
(B1)
2 8.75 8.00 5.63 3.63 2.92 2.79 2.78
(T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1) (T1)
3 10.96 8.74 6.17 4.35 3.63 3.48 3.47
(B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2) (B2)
(B2)
4 30.70 24.95 17.29 12.18 10.17 9.75 9.71
(B3) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3) (B3)
(B3)
5 54.69 47.94 33.87 22.72 18.33 17.51 17.45
(T2) (B4) (B4) (T2) (T2) (T2) (T2)
6 60.14 50.07 35.25 23.88 19.94 19.10 19.03
(B4) (T2) (T2) (B4) (B4) (B4) (B4)
(B4)
7 99.39 79.24 56.00 39.47 32.95 31.58 31.45
(B5) (B5) (B5) (B5) (B5) (B5) (B5)
(B5)
8 111.66 118.32 83.65 58.96 49.22 47.16 46.97
(R1) (B6) (B6) (B6) (B6) (B6) (B6)
(B6)
9 148.40 139.93 98.65 63.59 51.31 49.00 48.82
(B6) (T3) (T3) (T3) (T3) (T3) (T3)
10 152.44 151.00 116.82 82.35 68.74 65.86 65.60
(T3) (R1) (B7) (B7) (B7) (B7) (B7)
(B7)
Fig. 9, fig. 10 and fig. 11 show first bending, transverse and torsional natural frequency for five
different L/h ratios respectively. It is very clear from the fig. 9 that, as thickness goes on decreasing as a
result length-to-thickness (L/h) ratio goes on increasing will reduce bending natural frequency for all lay-
up angles. Negative slope of the frequency curve is more for lower lay-up angle and lower length-to-
thickness ratio can be seen. For higher L/h ratio, there is insignificant change in the natural frequency for
all lay-up angles.
Fig. 9. First bending natural frequency Fig. 10. First transverse natural frequency
Fig. 11. First torsional natural frequency
In fig. 10, it can be seen that nature of transverse natural frequency is different than bending natural
frequency. In this, initially curve has lower slope upto 150 and then increases suddenly upto 450 and then
again insignificant change for higher length-to-thickness ratio. Frequency of vibration for higher lay-up
angle is more for lower L/h ratio and higher modes of transverse vibration is also observed.
Fig.11 shows first torsional mode of natural frequency. It is very difficult from the figure to know the
exact behavior of torsional mode of vibration but it can be seen that, for lower L/h ratio i.e. L/h = 20, 50
and 100, curves are sloping down for almost all the lay-up angle and for higher L/h ratio i.e. L/h = 300
and 500, first it increases from 00 lay-up to almost 400 lay-up and then start decreasing further to 900. It
can also observed that, torsional mode of vibration initially increases and is maximum for L/h = 100 and
then start decaying as L/h ratio goes on increasing from L/h = 20 to L/h = 500 for the respective lay-up
angle.
Fig. 12 shows second and third bending mode where as fig. 13 shows second and third transverse mode of
vibration respectively. Bending mode has almost same behavior for every mode where as transverse mode has
different for higher L/h ratio as discussed.
a b
Fig. 12. (a) Second mode; (b) Third mode of bending natural frequency.
a b
Fig. 13. (a) Second mode; (b) Third mode of transverse natural frequency.
Fig.14. shows first mode of bending, transverse and torsional natural frequency for all the L/h ratio
consider in this paper. It is observed that, torsional natural frequency is highest for all the L/h ratio
considered for given mechanical and geometrical properties. As thickness of the cantilever goes on
decreasing, nature of the torsional frequency curve changes as shown in fig. 14. Bending natural
frequency is more than the transverse natural frequency for lower L/h ratio. This is due to the reason that,
height of the cantilever beam becomes more than the width of the cantilever for lower L/h ratio (L/h = 20
and 50) and therefore it vibrates easily in transverse direction (about Z axis) than bending (About Y axis).
L/h = 100 for the given cantilever makes cross section of equal height and width (square cross section)
makes frequency of vibration in bending and transverse direction is different unlike isotropic material. In
this case bending natural frequency is less than the transverse natural frequency. This is due to reason
that, elastic property along X axis is more than other two directions. As there is no much difference
between E1 and E2, the difference in bending and transverse natural frequency is also less. For higher
values of L/h, thickness becomes less than the width and hence bending natural frequency is less than the
transverse natural frequency for all lay-up angles can be seen in fig. 14. d and fig. 14. e.
a b
c d
Fig. 14. First natural frequency for length-to-thickness ratio (a) L/h = 20; (b) L/h = 50; (c) L/h = 100; (d) L/h = 300; (e) L/h = 500.
5. Conclusion
Free vibration analysis of anisotropic laminated composite cantilever beam formulating finite element model in
mechanical APDL ANSYS 16.2 were investigated. Various results have been included to represents the effect of the
fiber lay-up angle, fiber lay-up sequence, beam geometry, material property, material anisotropy, length-to-thickness
ratio and coupling on the different modes and the natural frequencies of bending, transverse and rotational vibration
of the generally layered composite cantilever. This model gives reader detail knowledge of proper selection of the
lay-up sequence, fiber orientation and length-to-thickness ratio to adjust any mode and natural frequency for
particular geometry and material parameters to avoid the resonance. By this model, different modes of vibration can
also be altered as per requirements.
Acknowledgements
The author is thankful to Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology (VNIT, Nagpur – 440010), for the
financial support.
References
[1] K. Chandrashekhara, K. Krishnamurthy, and S. Roy, “Free vibration of composite beams including rotary inertia and shear deformation,”
Compos. Struct., vol. 14, pp. 269–279, 1990.
[2] K. Chandrashekhara and K. M. Bangera, “Free vibration of composite beams using a refined shear flexible beam element,” Comput. Struct.,
vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 719–727, 1992.
[3] S. Krishnaswamy, K. Chandrashekhara, and W. Z. B. Wu, “Analytical solution to vibration of generally layered composite beams,” J. Sound
Vib., vol. 159, pp. 85–99, 1992.
[4] Y. Teboub and P. Hajela, “Free vibration of generally layered composite beams using symbolic computations,” Compos. Struct., vol. 33, pp.
123–134, 1995.
[5] L. Jun, H. Hongxing, and S. Rongying, “Dynamic finite element method for generally laminated composite beams,” Int. J. Mech. Sci., vol.
50, pp. 466–480, 2008.
[6] P. Raveendranath, G. Singh, and B. Pradhan, “Application of coupled polynomial displacement fields to laminated beam elements,” Comput.
Struct., vol. 78, pp. 661–670, 2000.
[7] V. Yildirim, “Governing equations of initially twisted elastic space rods made of laminated composite materials,” Int. J. Eng. Sci., vol. 37, no.
8, pp. 1007–1035, 1999.
[8] A. Chakraborty, D. R. Mahapatra, and S. Gopalakrishnan, “Finite element analysis of free vibration and wave propagation in asymmetric
composite beams with structural discontinuities,” Compos. Struct., vol. 55, pp. 23–36, 2002.
[9] M. Balci, M. O. Nalbant, E. Kara, and O. Gundogdu, “Free vibration analysis of a laminated composite beam with various boundary
conditions,” Int. J. Automot. Mech. Eng., vol. 9, pp. 1734–1746, 2014.
[10] A. K. Miller and D. F. Adams, “An analytic means of determining the flexural and torsional resonant frequency of generally orthotropic
beams,” J. Sound Vib., vol. 41, pp. 433–449, 1975.
[11] W. Q. Chen, C. F. Lv, and Z. G. Bian, “Free vibration analysis of generally laminated beams via state-space-based differential quadrature,”
Compos. Struct., vol. 63, pp. 417–425, 2004.
[12] G. Shi and K. Y. Lam, “Finite element vibration analysis of composite beams based on higher-order beam theory,” J. Sound Vib., vol. 219,
no. 4, pp. 707–721, 1999.

Cantilever Frequency Validation

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

Cantilever Frequency Validation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Available online at www.sciencedirect.

Modal Analysis of Four Layered Composite Cantilever Beam with

© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +91-9766919381; fax: +91-712-2802200.

2214-7853 © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Fig. 1. Layered composite beam geometry.

ε x = u '( x, t ) + zφ '( x, t ) (4)

 N x   L11 L12 L13   ε x0 

Q55 = Q44 sin 2 θ + Q55 cos 2 θ

Fig. 2. Free-free FE model of a laminated composite beam with meshing.

4. Result and discussion

4.1. Effect of lay-up sequence

Fig. 5. First torsional natural frequencies for different lay-up.

Fig. 6. Second mode of natural frequency (a) bending; (b) Transverse

Fig. 7. Third mode of natural frequency (a) bending; (b) Transverse

4.2. Effect of length-to-thickness ratio

Fig. 11. First torsional natural frequency

You might also like