See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/256799933

On the eigenfrequencies of a cantilever beam carrying a tip spring–mass system

with mass of the helical spring considered

Article in Journal of Sound and Vibration · April 2005

DOI: 10.1016/j.jsv.2004.04.020

CITATIONS READS

22 3,477

1 author:

Metin Gurgoze
Istanbul Technical University
129 PUBLICATIONS 1,428 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Metin Gurgoze on 17 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Sound and Vibration (1996) 190(2), 149–162

ON THE EIGENFREQUENCIES OF A
CANTILEVER BEAM WITH ATTACHED TIP
MASS AND A SPRING-MASS SYSTEM
M. G̈̈
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Istanbul,
80191 Gümüşsuyu-Istanbul, Turkey

(Received 14 July 1993, and in final form 7 November 1994)

This paper deals with the derivation of the frequency equation of a special combined
dynamic system. It consists of a clamped-free Bernoulli-Euler beam with a tip mass where a
spring-mass system is attached to it. The derivation of the frequency equation is essentially
carried out by means of the Lagrange multipliers method. Frequency equations of some
simpler systems are also obtained from the general expression by using limiting processes.
These equations are then numerically solved for various combinations of physical
parameters. The comparison with the results from the solution of the corresponding
Bernoulli-Euler frequency equations shows that the frequency equations established are
very accurate.
7 1996 Academic Press Limited

1. INTRODUCTION
There is a vast number of papers in the technical literature which are concerned with the
determination of the eigenfrequencies of Bernoulli-Euler beams, subject to various
boundary conditions [1–6]. In the investigation of the vibrations of elastic arms and their
suppression in the field of mechanical engineering and robotics, various systems may be
modeled as a clamped-free beam with a tip mass to which a spring-mass system is attached.
In connection with the subject of investigating the general properties of the
eigenfrequencies of combined systems, there are a number of works [7–14] dealing with
the problem of free and forced transverse vibration of beams and plates carrying elastically
mounted concentrated masses, by using analytical and numerical approaches. In the
fundamental paper [7], Laura et al. dealt with the dynamic behaviour of such systems.
Goldfracht and Rosenhouse [8] used Lagrange multipliers with polynomial series for
dynamic analysis of constrained plates. Nicholson and Bergman studied the vibrations of
damped plate-oscillator systems [9]. Ercoli and Laura investigated continuous beams
carrying elastically mounted masses, analytically and experimentally [10]. Lin and
Trethewey carried out a finite element analysis of elastic beams subjected to moving
dynamic loads [11]. Rossi et al. presented an exact solution of the free vibrations of
Timoshenko beams carrying elastically mounted concentrated masses [12]. Weissenburger
investigated the effect of local modifications on the vibration characteristics of
linear systems [13]. With his method, given natural frequencies and modes of the
original system, the frequency equation of the modified system can be obtained. In the
fundamental paper [14], Dowell has given and reviewed some general properties of
combined dynamical systems. Among others, he also derived frequency equations of beams
to which an additional spring-mass system is attached. He used the assumed modes
149
0022–460X/96/070149+14 $12.00/0 7 1996 Academic Press Limited
150 . ̈̈
method in conjunction with the Lagrange multipliers method. By using his approach, in
the present paper the frequency equation of a cantilevered beam with a tip mass which
has an additional spring-mass system is obtained. The frequency equation derived here has
principally the same structure, but it is more general than the corresponding equation of
reference [14] because of the existence of the tip mass. From the expression derived, the
frequency equations of much simpler systems are obtained. These frequency equations are
then numerically solved for various combinations of the physical parameters. The results
are compared and discussed with those given in the technical literature and from the exact
frequency equation derived in Appendix 2.

2. EQUATIONS OF MOTION AND DERIVATION OF THE FREQUENCY

EQUATION
The present study is concerned with the derivation and the investigation of the
frequency equation of the mechanical system shown in Figure 1. The system consists
of a clamped-free Bernoulli-Euler beam with an end mass M to which an additional
spring-mass system is attached. In order to derive the frequency equation of the system,
it is necessary to formulate first the equations of motion of the system. To this end the
approach used in reference [14] will be adopted here. The kinetic and potential energies
of the system in Figure 1 are

g
L

T=12 m ẇ 2(x, t) dx+12 Mż02+12 me ż 2, (1)

0

g
L

V=12 EI w02(x, t) dx+12 ke (z−z0 )2, (2)

0

where dots and primes denote partial derivatives with respect to time t and the position
coordinate x, respectively. Here EI is the bending rigidity, m is the mass per unit length
of the beam and z0 denotes the lateral displacement of the mass M, while z is the
displacement of the mass me . The lateral displacement of the beam at point x is assumed
to be expressible in the form of a finite series
n
w(x, t)= s wi (x)hi (t), (3)
i=1

where
wi (x)=(1/zmL )[chbi x−cos bi x−h̄i (shbi x−sin bi x)],

h̄i=(chbi L+cos bi L)/(shbi L+sin bi L). (4)

Figure 1. Cantilevered Bernoulli-Euler beam with a tip mass and a spring-mass system.
     151
Here wi (x) are the ortho-normalized eigenfunctions of the clamped-free beam and hi (t)
(i=1, . . . , n) are the generalized coordinates [15]. If equation (3) is set into equations
(1) and (2),
n n
T=12 s ḣi2+12 Mż02+12 me ż 2, V=12 s vi2 hi2+12 ke (z−z0 )2 (5, 6)
i=1 i=1

are obtained for the kinetic and potential energies. Here the following expressions have
been used, which are due to the special normalization of the eigenfunctions wi (x) given
in equations (4);

g g
L L

Mij= mwi (x)wj (x) dx=dij , Kij= EIw0i (x)w0j (x) dx=vi2 Mij . (7, 8)
0 0

dij is the Kronecker delta and vi is the ith eigenfrequency of the Bernoulli-Euler beam.
The equations of motion will be obtained by means of the Lagrange multipliers method.
They are, for a system with n degrees of freedom and where n redundant coordinates are
used [16],

0 1
d 1L 1L n 1f
− = s ll l , k=1, . . . , n+n, (9)
dt 1q̇k 1qk l=1 1qk
with the kinetic potential
L=T−V (10)
and n constraint equations
fl (t, q1 , . . . , qn+n )=0, l=1, . . . , n (11)
Here ll denotes the lth Lagrangian multiplier. The only constraint equation obtained from
w(L, t)=z0 (12)
is
n
f= s hi (t)wi (L)−z0=0. (13)
i=1

Upon taking into account the correspondence

[q1 , . . . , qn , qn+1 , qn+2 ]X[h1 , . . . , hn , z, z0 ] (14)
the following equations are obtained from equations (9) together with equations (6), (7),
(10) and (13):
ḧk+vk2 hk=lwk (L), k=1, . . . , n, (15)
me z̈+ke (z−z0 )=0, Mz̈0−ke (z−z0 )=−l. (16, 17)
The substitution of the harmonic solutions
hk=h̄k eivt , k=1, . . . , n, z=z̄ eivt , z0=z̄0 eivt , l=l
 eivt (18)
into equations (15)–(17) and (13), after rearrangement, results in
h̄k=wk (L)l
/(vk2−v 2 ), k=1, . . . , n (19)
and
/v 2[M(ve2−v 2 )+me ve2 ],
z̄0=(ve2−v 2 )l (20)
152 . ̈̈

Figure 2. Degenerate two-degrees-of-freedom system.

where according to
ve2=ke /me (21)
ve represents the eigenfrequency of the attached spring-mass system. If these equations are
put into the constraint equation
n
s h̄k wk (L)−z0=0, (22)
k=1

finally the following frequency equation is obtained, upon assuming 

l$0:
n
wk2 (L) (ve2−v 2 )
s 2− 2 =0. (23)
k=1
vk−v v [M(ve2−v 2 )+me ve2 ]
2

This equation corresponds to equation (7a) in the study of Dowell [14] and is somewhat
more general due to the existence of the term with M. It is to be noted that in the frequency
equation (23) v denotes the eigenfrequency of the modified system in Figure 1 which
is obtained from the cantilevered beam through attaching the M−ke−me system to the
free end. Equation (23) reveals some interesting properties. The left side goes to infinity
at the eigenfrequencies of the cantilevered beam and also becomes infinite at the
eigenfrequencies of the degenerate two-degrees-of-freedom subsystem shown in Figure 2.
It can easily be shown that the frequency equation of this system is
Mme v 4−ke (M+me )v 2=0. (24)
With the help of the definition (21) it can be rewritten as
v 2[M(ve2−v 2 )+me ve2 ]=0. (25)
An inspection of equation (23) reveals that the left side of equation (25) is just the
denominator of the second fraction. As stated also in reference [14], for v=ve the
spring-mass system ke−me acts as a vibration absorber for the point x=L: i.e., z0=0. For
further investigations, it is more suitable to rewrite the frequency equation (23) in terms
of dimensionless quantities as
n
ak2 ake−ame v*2
s 2− =0. (26)
l −v* v* [bM (ake−ame v*2 )+ake ame ]
k=1 k
2

Here the following abbreviations are used:

ak=ch bk−cos bk−h̄k (sh bk−sin bk ), h̄k=(ch bk+cos bk )/(sh bk+sin bk ),
bk=bk L, lk=b4k , vk2=lk v02 , v02=EI/mL 4,
v*=v/v0 , ake=ke /(EI/L 3 ), ame=me /mL, bM=M/mL. (27)
The value of ak can be expressed as
ak=2(−1)k−1 , (28)
so that ak2=4 [6]. The numerical values of the first ten lk and ak (k=1, . . . , 10) are given
in Appendix 1.
     153

Figure 3. Cantilevered beam with a tip mass.

Frequency equations of various simpler systems can be obtained from equation (26) as
limiting cases. For comparison purposes, the exact frequency equation for the system in
Figure 1 is also obtained:
(ake−ame b4 )[(sin b+sh b)r−(cos b+ch b)g]
+ake ame b4[(sin b+sh b)(cos b−ch b)−(sin b−sh b)(cos b+ch b)]=0. (29)
The derivation of this frequency equation and expressions for the factors r and g are given
in Appendix 2.
The numerical evaluations in section 4 will show clearly that frequency values obtained
from equations (26) and (29) are nearly the same, which in turn means that the approach
adopted here is quite in order as long as one is interested in the determination of the
eigenfrequencies of the system in Figure 1 or of the special systems given in Figures 3–5.
In the following, three distinct cases are considered.

3. FREQUENCY EQUATIONS OF SPECIAL SYSTEMS

Case 1. If in equation (26) ake , i.e., the dimensionless spring parameter, goes to infinity,
the frequency equation of a cantilevered beam with a tip mass is obtained; see Figure 3.
It is
n
4 1
s − =0, (30)
k=1
lk−v*2 bM v*2
in which
bM=M/mL. (31)
M represents the total mass at the free end of the beam.
Case 2. When ame , i.e., the ratio of the mass of the spring-mass system to the mass of
the beam, goes to infinity, equation (26) becomes
n
4 1
s 2+ 2=0, (32)
k=1
lk −v* a ke −bM v*

which corresponds to the physical system shown in Figure 4. Although it seems, at first
glance, to be too different from the corresponding frequency equation in reference [6], it

Figure 4. Cantilevered beam with a tip mass and spring support.

154 . ̈̈

Figure 5. Cantilevered beam carrying a spring-mass at the tip.

can be shown that both are identical. By making use of the abbreviations (27),
equation (32) can be brought into the form

ke−Mv 2 n 4
1+ s =0. (33)
EIL k=1 bk2 [1−(v/vk )2 ]

This is exactly the frequency equation (39) given in reference [6].

Case 3. For bM=0, i.e., no attached mass at the free end, equation (26) leads to the
frequency equation of a cantilevered beam with the spring-mass system ke=me attached
at the free end, as shown in Figure 5. The frequency equation is then
n
4 1 1
s 2+ − =0. (34)
k=1
lk −v* a ke a me v*2

4. NUMERICAL APPLICATIONS
So far, the frequency equation of the more general system shown in Figure 1 has been
obtained. Through limiting processes, the frequency equations of some special systems
have also been derived from this equation. This section is concerned with the determination
of roots (i.e., eigenfrequencies) of these equations. For nE2 it is possible to find them
analytically. But in the case of nq2 one often has to solve for them numerically. Because
of the existence of several asymptotes and the fact that the corresponding frequency curves
are often very steep in the neighbourhood of the roots, one could expect to have some
difficulties in finding the roots, but they can always be obtained by means of the regula-falsi
method without having any notable problems.
The first two dimensionless eigenfrequencies v* k =b2k (k=1, 2) of the mechanical system
in Figure 3 are given in Table 1 for various values of the mass parameter bM . The values
in the first row are fundamental frequency results, obtained from equation (30) for n=1,
whereas those of the second row are values obtained numerically from the same equation
for n=10. The comparison of these two rows gives an impression of the effects of the terms
considered. The values in the third row come from the formula

v*
1 =[l1 /{1+l1 /3)bM }] ,
1/2
(35)

which is based on the combined use of Dunkerley’s and Southwell’s methods [3]. Finally,
the values in the fourth row are taken from reference [1], and are fundamental frequencies
obtained from the numerical solution of the exact frequency equation of the cantilevered
Bernoulli-Euler beam carrying a mass at the tip. The frequency equation can also be
obtained from equation (29) as a special case. The value of the eigenfrequency for bM=0·5
is not given in reference [1] so it has been obtained through the solution of the frequency
equation, given also in reference [3], for this parameter value. The last two rows contain
 T 1
Comparison of the eigenfrequency parameters v*
1 and v*
2 of the system shown in Figure 3 for various values of the mass ratio bM

v*1 =b21 v*2 =b

22
ZXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXCXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXV ZXXXXXXXXCXXXXXXXV
From equation (30), From equation (30), From reference [3] From reference [1] From equation (30), From reference [1]
bM n=1 n=10 bM n=10
0·001 3·509004 3·509003 3·508793 3·509002 0·001 21·990700 21·990697
0·01 3·447736 3·447658 3·445736 3·447658 0·01 21·619960 21·619952
0·1 2·971575 2·967849 2·958838 2·967840 0·1 19·355920 19·355803
0·5 2·029972 2·016318 2·009843 2·016295 0·5 16·901790 16·901423
1 1·572410 1·557319 1·553754 1·557297 1 16·250430 16·250082
5 0·767257 0·756952 0·756457 0·7566937 5 15·602660 15·602342
10 0·549109 0·541386 0·541195 0·541375 10 15·512010 15·511514
50 0·248001 0·244379 0·244357 0·244374 50 15·437560 15·437072
100 0·175581 0·173005 0·172995 0·173001 100 15·427880 15·427652
   

1000 0·0555861 0·054767 0·054766 0·054766 1000 15·419680 15·419154

155
156 . ̈̈
T 2
Fundamental frequency parameter b1 L of the system shown in Figure 4 for various values
of the spring and mass ratios; the first figure reading downwards is the fundamental frequency
parameter taken from reference [3] and the second figure is from formula (36)
ake
ZXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXCXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXV
bM 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
0 1·87510 1·94640 2·01000 2·06753 2·12010 2·16854 2·21350
1·87510 1·94673 2·01123 2·07006 2·12426 2·17460 2·22167
0·2 1·61640 1·67930 1·73567 1·78688 1·83389 1·87742 1·91800
1·61885 1·68069 1·73637 1·78716 1·83396 1·87742 1·91806
0·4 1·47241 1·53000 1·58167 1·62865 1·67183 1·71185 1·74919
1·47667 1·53307 1·58386 1·63019 1·67288 1·71252 1·74959
0·6 1·37567 1·42958 1·47796 1·52198 1·56245 1·60000 1·63498
1·38088 1·43363 1·48133 1·52445 1·56436 1·60144 1·63610
0·8 1·30409 1·35524 1·40115 1·44293 1·48135 1·51697 1·55023
1·30982 1·35986 1·40491 1·44601 1·48387 1·51903 1·55191
1 1·24792 1·29689 1·34086 1·38086 1·41766 1·45177 1·48363
1·25396 1·30186 1·34499 1·38433 1·42058 1·45424 1·48572
4 0·91736 0·95340 0·98576 1·01521 1·04230 1·06743 1·09090
0·92345 0·95873 0·99049 1·01946 1·04615 1·07095 1·09413
8 0·77688 0·80740 0·83481 0·85975 0·88270 0·90398 0·92386
0·78234 0·81223 0·83914 0·86368 0·88630 0·90730 0·92694
12 0·70367 0·73132 0·75615 0·77874 0·79953 0·81880 0·83681
0·70872 0·73580 0·76017 0·78241 0·80289 0·82192 0·83971

the values of the second eigenfrequencies and are due to the solution of equation (30) and
eigenfrequencies taken from reference [1], respectively.
Comparisons of the figures from the second and fourth rows show clearly that the
agreement is very good, indicating the accuracy of the frequency equation (30). Another
fact which can be seen from the table is that the values from the first row give upper bounds
for the exact eigenfrequencies whereas those of the third row yield lower bounds.
As a second numerical application, the fundamental frequency parameters of the system
depicted in Figure 4 have been calculated from the formula

bl L=[(l1+4ake )/(1+4bM )]1/4 (36)

for various combinations of the spring and mass ratios ake and bM ; formula (36) is
obtained from equation (32) for n=1. Comparisons of both figures in each box in Table 2,
where the first values are eigenfrequencies based on the solution of the Bernoulli-Euler
frequency equation taken from reference [3], reveals that equation (32) yields even for n=1,
approximate eigenfrequencies with satisfactory accuracy.
As the third application, the first two eigenfrequencies of the mechanical system
as shown in Figure 5 were obtained from the numerical solution of the frequency
equation (34) for n=10. The exact frequency equation, resulting from the Bernoulli-Euler
procedure for this system is obtained from equation (29) by setting bM=0, and is also given
in reference [17]. In order to gain also an impression of the performance of the Dunkerley’s
method for the present mechanical system, the values of the fundamental frequencies were
also determined by this method. It is an easy task to show that
     157
Dunkerley’s method yields the formula

$ >6 0 1 7%
1/2
1 1
v*
1 = l1 1+ame + l . (37)
3 ake 1

The results are shown in Table 3. The first figure in each box is the fundamental frequency
from Dunkerley’s formula (37) whereas the second is the fundamental frequency obtained
from the solution of equation (29) for bM=0. The third figure stems from the solution of
equation (34). Finally, the fourth figure is the second eigenfrequency as also obtained from
equation (34). The agreements of the figures in the second and third rows are excellent.
In the general case of the system shown in Figure 1, there are three physical parameters
in the frequency equation (26) which can be varied. Therefore, as a typical combination,
the values ame=bM=ake=0·5 are chosen. For these values the left side of the frequency
equation (26) for the interval 0Ev*E25 and for n=10 is plotted in Figure 6. The first
root, i.e., the fundamental frequency obtained from equation (29) or also from equation
(26), is at v* 1 =0·9094, whereas the second is at v* 2 =2·2165. As can be seen from

T 3
Eigenfrequencies of the system shown in Figure 5 for various values of the spring and mass
ratios; the first figure reading downwards is fundamental frequency from formula (37) based
on Dunkerley’s method, the second is the fundamental frequency obtained from equation (29)
for bM=0, the third figure comes from the solution of equation (34) for n=10 and the fourth
figure (bold) is the second eigenfrequency as obtained also from equation (34)
ake
ZXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXCXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXV
ame 0.5 1 5 10 50 100
0·5 0·895302 1·156585 1·696238 1·883220 1·970439 1·989848
0·921122 1·205409 1·764572 1·883690 1·988822 2·002508
0·921125 1·205414 1·764586 1·883707 1·988840 2·002526
3·807759 4·104860 6·144904 7·929246 13·462560 15·135210
1 0·643593 0·840893 1·275959 1·394517 1·517550 1·535332
0·653037 0·859420 1·307155 1·419384 1·527404 1·542201
0·653039 0·859425 1·307168 1·419400 1·527425 1·542221
3·797827 4·071135 5·866861 7·447368 12·571920 14·279810
5 0·291760 0·384970 0·603291 0·667029 0·735700 0·745862
0·292628 0·386724 0·606746 0·670001 0·736996 0·746678
0·292629 0·386726 0·606754 0·670011 0·737011 0·746793
3·790287 4·046612 5·653459 7·060446 11·778340 13·476080
10 0·206662 0·273034 0·429766 0·475963 0·526008 0·533440
0·206969 0·273659 0·431021 0·477054 0·526491 0·533782
0·206970 0·273660 0·431027 0·477061 0·526501 0·533793
3·789369 4·043105 5·627513 7·012291 11·673820 13·367230
50 0·092550 0·122400 0·193356 0·214435 0·237373 0·240789
0·092578 0·122457 0·193471 0·214535 0·237417 0·240821
0·092578 0·122457 0·193473 0·214539 0·237422 0·240826
3·788638 4·040715 5·606887 6·973856 11·589450 13·278550
100 0·065454 0·086576 0·136827 0·151769 0·168039 0·170463
0·065464 0·086596 0·136867 0·151805 0·168056 0·170475
0·065464 0·086597 0·136869 0·151807 0·168059 0·170478
3·788547 4·040417 5·604317 6·969055 11·578730 13·267550
158 . ̈̈

Figure 6. Frequency curve of the system in Figure 1 for ame=bM=ake=0.5.

formula (26) the frequency curve has asymptotes at v*=zl1=3·5160 and v*=zl2 =
22·0345, . . .. Inspection of formulas (25) and (26) brings out clearly that the frequency
curve has infinities at v*=0 and v*=z2, which correspond to the eigenfrequencies of
the M−ke−me vibrating system. For purposes of comparison, the frequency curve of the
system in Figure 3 is depicted in Figure 7. The mechanical system in Figure 1 can be
thought of as derived from the ‘‘original’’ system in Figure 3 by modification through the
attachment of the spring-mass system ke−me . The first two eigenfrequencies of the
clamped-free beam with a tip mass (see Figure 3) can be taken from Table 1 for bM=0·5
as v* 1 =2·0163 and v* 2 =16·9018, which are clearly above the corresponding values of the

modified system shown in Figure 1.

It can easily be shown that the choice of ame=bM=ake=0·5 leads to ve /v0=1, which in
turn means that all of the eigenfrequencies of the original system in Figure 3 are located
above the eigenfrequency ve of the additional spring-mass system. At this point, one may
think of comparing the above results with the result 6 in reference [14] where the following
statement is made: ‘‘If a spring-mass combination (which by itself has a rigid body degree
of freedom as well as an elastic degree of freedom) is added to another system, the
frequencies originally higher than the basic spring-mass frequency are increased, those
originally lower are decreased, and a new frequency appears between the original pair of
frequencies nearest the spring-mass frequency’’. The present example is a special case where

Figure 7. Frequency curve of the system in Figure 3 for bM=0.5.

     159

Figure 8. Original system with two-degrees-of-freedom, drawn in solid lines, and its modification through a
spring mass.

all of the eigenfrequencies of the original system are greater than the eigen-
frequency of the attached spring-mass system. Upon recognizing that the fundamental
frequency v* 1 =0·9094 of the modified system in Figure 1 is smaller than the
eigenfrequency v* e =ve /v0=1 of the spring-mass system, it can be stated that the special
case where the eigenfrequency of the spring-mass system is below the fundamental
frequency of the original system is not included in the result 6 of reference [14]. The
following simple example strengthens this statement. The original system with two degrees
of freedom in Figure 8, drawn in solid lines, with the physical data k1=k2=1, m1=m2=1
has the eigenfrequencies v1=0·618034, v2=1·618034. If the system is modified now
through a spring-mass system ke−me , where ve=zke /me=0·5, the modified system with
three degrees of freedom possesses now the eigenfrequencies v1=0·26925, v2=1·06386,
v3=1·74515. It is clearly seen that the fundamental frequency of the modified system is
smaller than that of the original system.
So far, numerical results are given which indicate clearly that the eigenfrequencies of
cantilevered beams with an attached spring-mass system can be accurately determined by
the present method. In order to give also a clear impression of how the attached
spring-mass system affect the eigenfrequencies of the primary clamped-free beams, in the
following two diagrams are given in Figures 9 and 10. In Figure 9, the variation of the
first three eigenfrequency parameters of the combined system in Figure 1 is depicted as
a function of the stiffness parameter ake in the range of 0 to 10, with the mass parameter
kept constant as ame=1 and bM taken to be zero. The second and third curves originate
on the b-axis at the points b=1·875104 and b=4·694091, which correspond to the first
two eigenfrequencies of the bare cantilevered beam. The first curve which can be attributed
to the appended spring-mass system has very small values in the vicinity of the origin. After
a sudden increase at the beginning, approximately after ake=2 this curve shows slightly
larger values as the stiffness increases. It can be shown that this curve approaches the value

Figure 9. Plots of the first three frequency parameters of the system in Figure 1 as functions of the stiffness
parameter ake ; ame=1 and bM=0.
160 . ̈̈

Figure 10. Plots of the first three frequency parameters of the system in Figure 1 as functions of the mass
parameter ame ; ake=1 and bM=0.

b=1·247917 as ake reaches infinity, which corresponds to the first eigenfrequency

parameter of a clamped-free beam carrying a tip mass M such that M=mL. The second
curve increases in a uniform manner as the stiffness parameter gets larger and reaches
b=4·031139 which is the second eigenfrequency parameter of the beam with a tip mass
mentioned above. The third curve originating in the second eigenfrequency of the bare
cantilever increases and reaches, for ake :a, the value b=7·134132 which is the third
eigenfrequency of the cantilever beam with the tip mass such that M=mL [11].
In Figure 10, the first three eigenfrequency parameters of the system in Figure 1 are
shown as functions of the nondimensional mass parameter ame , where the stiffness
parameter is kept constant as ake=1 and a tip mass does not exist, so that bM=0. This
time, the curves originate at the first three eigenfrequencies of the bare cantilever. The first
curve originating in the first eigenfrequency of the bare cantilever diminishes continuously
and vanishes for ame :a. The second and third curves vary very slowly after a sudden
initial decrease. As ame goes to infinity, the second curve approaches the value b=2·010003
which is the first eigenfrequency of a clamped-free beam restrained at the free end by a
linear spring k such that k=EI/L 3 [3]. The third curve remains approximately constant
over the whole range considered and has the limiting value b=4·703794, which represents
the third eigenfrequency of the restrained beam previously mentioned.

5. CONCLUSIONS
The frequency equation of a clamped-free Bernoulli-Euler beam with a tip mass has been
derived with use of the method of Lagrange multipliers for the case in which an additional
spring-mass system is attached to the tip mass. From this equation, which depends on
the eigenfreqencies of the original system (clamped-free beam) and on the modification
parameters like the spring and mass ratios, the frequency equations of some simpler
systems have been derived as limiting cases. The frequency equations obtained have been
solved by the regula-falsi method for various combinations of the physical parameters.
The numerical results, given in the form of tables, have been compared with those obtained
by solution of the Bernoulli-Euler frequency equations. It can be stated that the agreement
is very good.
     161
REFERENCES
1. L. A. P and M. H. C 1976 Journal of Sound and Vibration 44, 499–511. Lateral
displacements of a vibrating cantilever beam with a concentrated mass.
2. J. H. L 1984 Journal of Applied Mechanics 51, 182–197. Vibration frequencies and mode
shapes for a constrained cantilever.
3. M. G̈̈ 1986 Journal of Sound and Vibration 105, 443–449. On the approximate
determination of the fundamental frequency of a restrained cantilever beam carrying a tip heavy
body.
4. M. G̈̈ and H. B 1986 Journal of Sound and Vibration 106, 533–536. A note on the
vibrations of a restrained cantilever beam carrying a heavy tip body.
5. W. H. L and C.-C. H 1988 Journal of Sound and Vibration 123, 15–29. Vibrations of
constrained beams carrying a heavy tip body.
6. R. G. J and J. D. G 1972 Journal of Sound and Vibration 23, 237–244.
The effects of discrete masses and elastic supports on continuous beam natural frequencies.
7. P. A. A. L, E. A. S, J. L. P, L. E. L and R. G 1977 Applied
Acoustics 10, 121–145. On the dynamic behaviour of structural elements carrying elastically
mounted, concentrated masses.
8. E. G and G. R 1984 Journal of Sound and Vibration 92, 83–93. Use of
Lagrange multipliers with polynomial series for dynamic analysis of constrained plates, part I:
polynomial series.
9. J. W. N and L. A. B 1986 American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of
Engineering Mechanics 112(1), 14–30. Vibration of damped plates oscillator systems.
10. L. E and P. A. A. L 1987 Journal of Sound and Vibration 114, 519–533.
Analytical and experimental investigation on continuous beams carrying elastically mounted
masses.
11. Y. H. L and M. W. T 1990 Journal of Sound and Vibration 136, 323–342, Finite
element analysis of elastic beams subjected to moving dynamics loads.
12. R. E. R, P. A. A. L, D. R. A and H. L 1993 Journal of Sound and
Vibration 165, 209–223. Free vibration of Timoshenko beams carrying elastically mounted,
concentrated masses.
13. J. T. W 1968 Journal of Applied Mechanics 35, 327–332. Effect of local
modifications on the vibration characteristics of linear systems.
14. E. H. D 1979 Journal of Applied Mechanics 46, 206–209. On some general properties of
combined dynamical systems.
15. L. M 1967 Analytical Methods in Vibrations. London: Collier-Macmillan Limited.
16. E. P 1988 Technische Mechanik, Band 3: Kinematik und Kinetik. Mannheim B.I. Wissen-
schaftsverlag.
17. S. N 1994 Journal of Sound and Vibration 171, 703–707. Comments on ‘‘reliable
algorithm for solving frequency equations involving transcendental functions’’.

APPENDIX 1
The values of lk and ak (k=1, . . . , 10) are as follows:
k lk ak
1 12·362360 2
2 485·518699 −2
3 3806·545091 2
4 14617·272688 −2
5 39943·826575 2
6 89135·433505 −2
7 173881·338979 2
8 308208·355429 −2
9 508481·645264 2
10 793403·210178 −2
 162 . ̈̈
APPENDIX 2
Derivation of the exact frequency equation of the system in Figure 1 proceeds as follows.
The governing equations of motion and the boundary conditions are
EIw iv (x, t)+mẅ(x, t)=0, me z̈−ke [w(L, t)−z]=0, (A1)
w(0, t)=w'(0, t)=w0(L, t)=0, EIw1(L, t)−Mẅ (L, t)−me z̈=0. (A2)
Assuming harmonic solutions
w(x, t)=Y(x) cos vt, z=Z cos vt, (A3)
one obtains, from equation (A1),
Y(x)=C1 sin bx+C2 cos bx+C3 sh bx+C4 ch bx, (A4)
(ke−me v )Z−ke Y(L)=0,
2
(A5)
where
v 2=(EI/m)b 4 (A6)
Introduction of equation (A4) into the corresponding boundary conditions for Y(x),
Y(0)=Y'(0)=Y0(L)=0, EIY1(L)+Mv 2Y(L)+me v 2Z=0,
ke Y(L)−(ke−mc v 2 )Z=0, (A7)
yields a set of five homogeneous equations for C1 , . . . , C5 , where C5=Z is intro-
duced. For non-trivial solutions to exist, the determinant of the coefficients must vanish,
which in turn results in the following equation for the dimensionless frequency parameter
b=bL:
(ake−ame b4 )[(sin b+sh b)r−(cos b+ch b)g]
+ake ame b4[(sin b+sh b)(cos b−ch b)−(sin b−sh b)(cos b+ch b)]=0. (A8)
Here equations (27) have been used and
r=bM b4(cos b−ch b)+b3(sin b−sh b),
g=bM b4(sin b−sh b)−b3(cos b+ch b). (A9)
Equation (A8) reduces, for bM=0, to the corresponding equation given in reference [17]
for the system in Figure 5.

View publication stats