Are you sure?
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
SANDWICH BEAM WITH FUCTIONALLY GRADED SKINS
(Asian Conference on Mechanics of Functional Materials and
Structures)
Presented
by
Prof. S. K. Dwivedy
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati
Outline
• An Introduction
• Literature Survey
• Objective of present work
• Mathematical modeling
• Results and discussion
• Conclusion
• References
Introduction
• An ordinary sandwich structure consists of two
stiff skins separated by a core. An adhesive
layer is used to bind skins with the core.
MRE
• Magneto rheological (MR) material can be fluid, gel or solid
material like elastomer. The mechanical properties of the MR
materials change when subjected to an external magnetic field.
The MREs are prevailing in many applications for their active
stiffness and vibration control.
FGM
• To overcome disadvantages like delamination in using composite skins
these materials can be replaced by functionally graded Materials.
• FGMs are the materials in which both the composition and the structure
gradually change over the volume, resulting in corresponding changes in the
properties of materials.
• The most familiar FGM is compositionally graded from a refractory ceramic
to a metal. It can incorporate incompatible functions such as the heat, wear
and oxidation resistance of ceramic with the high strength machinability and
bonding capability of metals without severe internal thermal stresses.
• Heat resistance of ceramic material makes the FGM sandwich beam
usefulness in thermal environment.
Applications
• Sandwich panels are in extensive use, for example in aircraft,
automobiles, skis and surfboards etc.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Sandwich
structures
Advantages:
• Good vibration damping capacity.
• Low density of core leading to reduce weight.
Disadvantages:
• Processing is difficult and expensive.
• Difficult to repair.
Literature survey
Year Author Observations
2006 Bhangale and
Ganesan et al [1]
Studied buckling and thermal vibration behavior of a
functionally graded material sandwich beam with
viscoleastic core.
2000 Carlson and Jolly et
al [2]
presented composition, working principle and various
applications of smart materials like MR fluid, foam and
elastomers.
2007 Zang and Li [4] proposed a new material design to improve the performance
of MRE using iron particles coated with magnetizable soft
shell composed of nano ferrite powder and polymer gel.
Mechanical performance of new MRE improved
significantly
2007 Chen et al [6] developed natural rubber based MRE with different
percentages of carbonyl iron particles and determined its
complex shear modulus using DMA.
2005 Howson and Zare
[8]
developed exact dynamic stiffness matrix from the closed
form solution of governing differential equation of three
layered sandwich beam with unequal face sheets.
Objective of the present work
• Performing Free and forced vibration analysis of sandwich
beam with FGM skins and MRE core using FEM.
• Obtaining Time response of sandwich beam at different
magnetic fields and volume fraction indices
Mathematical Modeling
Figure 1: Sandwich beam with MRE core.
The effective material property P
eff
is of FGMs is given by
where, P
m
and P
c
are the temperature dependent properties of metal and ceramic
constituents, respectively. According to volume fraction power law distribution, the
volume fraction V
m
of the metal constituent of the FGM can be written by
= (2)
( , ) ( ) ( ) ( )(1 ( )) (1)
eff m m c m
P T z P T V z P T V z = + ÷
m
V
( ) ( )
2 / 2 ,
n
z h h +
1
c m
V V = ÷
where volume fraction index ‘n’ indicates the material variation profile
through the beam thickness, if ‘h’ is the thickness of the skin, ‘z’ is the
variable distance from midplane which varies from h/2 to h/2. From Eq.
(1) effective Young’s modulus E
eff
and the mass density ρ
eff
for top (i=1)
and bottom (i=3) FGM skins can be written as follows
(3)
where, and are the Young’s moduli of the metallic and ceramic
rich surfaces of top (i=1) or bottom (i=3) FGM skin. and are the
corresponding densities of metallic and ceramic rich surfaces of top
and bottom FGM skins.
2
( )
2
2
( )
2
n
i
effi mi ci ci
i
n
i
effi mi ci ci
i
z t
E E E E
t
z t
t
µ µ µ µ
¹
(
 
+
¦
( = ÷ +

¦
(
\ .
¸ ¸¦
`
(
¦
 
+
( = ÷ +
¦ 
(
\ .
¦
¸ ¸
)
mi
E
ci
E
Axial displacement of the top ( ) and bottom ( ) skins are given as
follows
(4)
, and are thickness of upper face sheet, core layer and lower face
sheet, respectively.
Assuming the axial displacement in the core ( ) to be linearly dependent on
coordinate z, one may write
(5)
Kinetic and potential energy expressions
Strain energy expression for top and bottom skins can be written as follows
(6)
1
u
'
3
u
'
,
i i
u u zu
'
= ÷
2 2
i i
t t
z ÷ s s
1
t
2
t
3
t
2
u
1 3 1 3 1 3 1 3
2
2 2
( ) ( )
2 4 2
u u t t u u t t
u z
t t
u u
 
  + ÷ ÷ +
 
= + + +

 

\ .
\ .
\ .
( )
( )
2 2
2 2
3 2 2
3
2 2
0
2
2
2
2
1
2 12
mi ci i i
ci i
l
ci i
i i i mi ci
i
i mi ci
E E u u
E t
n x x
E t b w w
U t k E E dx
x x
u w
k t E E
x x
 
÷ c c
    
+

  
+ c c
\ .\ . \ .


    c c

= + ÷ +
 

c c
\ . \ .

   c c  
+ ÷
  
c c
\ .
\ .
\ .
}
Strain energy expression for core can be written as follows
(7)
Kinetic energy expression for top and skins are obtained as follows
(8)
Kinetic energy expression for core is given as follows
(9)
2
*
1 3 1 3 2
2 2
2 2 0
( 2 ) 1
2 2
l
u u t t t
U G A dx
t t
 
 
  ÷ + +

= +




\ .
\ .
\ .
}
( ) ( )
2 2 2
1 2
2 2 2
0
1
2
( )
l
mi ci i
i
ci i i ci i
b C w u C
T dx
w u A I
µ µ u
µ µ u
(
(
÷ + ÷
¸ ¸
(
=
(
+ + +
¸ ¸
}
2
1 3 1 3
2 2
2
2
0
2 1 3 1 3
2 2 2 2
2 2
( )
2 4
1
2
( )
)
2
l
u u t t
A
T dx
u u t t
I A w
t t
u
µ
u
µ µ
 
  + ÷
 + +


\ .
=

 
   ÷ +
+ +

 

\ .
\ .
\ .
}
Finite Element Formulation for Free vibration analysis
• For the finite element formulation, a 2 noded linear element is proposed. The
discretized element displacement vector consists of two nodal displacement
vectors as follows
(10)
• Using the expressions for kinetic energy ang potential energy and following
standard procedure of finite element method the general equation of motion
is obtained as follows
= 0 (11)
where, [M] and [K] are global mass and stiffness matrices of the sandwich
beam.
{ } { }
1 3 1 3
T
e
i i i i j j j j
q u u w u u w u u =
 { }  { }
M q K q +
Results and Discussion
• Based on the above discussed finite element formulation a MATLAB code
has been developed and results are compared with the available literature.
• Free vibration time responses and frequency responses for different
boundary conditions of sandwich beam are discussed.
• The FE code is validated with the results presented in [8] for different
boundary conditions and is shown in Table 1 indicating good agreement.
Table 1: Comparison of first two modal frequencies [Hz] with Howson and
Zare
Mode numbers Present code
Howson and
zare [8]
Cantilever
1 33.748 33.7513
2 198.932 198.992
Simply
supported
1 57.132 57.135
2 219.193 219.585
Fixed Fixed
1 34.626 34.5965
2 93.271 93.1000
Table 2: Complex shear modulus of MRE core with 90% carbonyl iron
particles used in composite sandwich beam.
B
0
(Tesla)
0 0.2 0.6
(MPa)
4.1395 6.0465 8.6977
0.2458 0.3020 0.3
The material properties used in the analysis are taken from [9] and are given
as follows. Young’s modulus
A sandwich beam of length 0.1 m, width 25 mm, skin thickness 3 mm and
core thickness 20 mm has been considered.
For the cantilever sandwich beam the variation of fundamental frequency
with volume fraction (n) for different magnetic field is given in Table 3 which
shows the natural frequency increases with increase in these parameters.
1 1 3 3
207.7877GPa, 322.271GPa, 207.7877 GPa, 322.271GPa,
m c m c
E E E E = = = =
3 3 3 3
1 1 3 3
8166kg/m , 2370kg/m , 8166kg/m , 2370kg/m .
m c m c
µ µ µ µ = = = =
G
q
Table 3: Variation of fundamental frequency (Hz) with volume fraction and
magnetic field.
Free vibration time response of sandwich beam
• Time response of sandwich beam can be obtained by using Newmark Beta
method [10].
• Figure 2, 3, 4 shows the time response of cantilever, simply supported and
Fixedfixed sandwich beam with volume fraction index n=10 and at
different magnetic fields, respectively
• It is shown that by increasing magnetic flux density the amplitude of the
time response decreases and natural frequency increases.
Natural Frequency
Mode n 0T 0.2T 0.4T 0.6T
1 0
141.3 149.02 156.37 158.86
10
178.4 185.81 193.03 195.5
100
190.88 200.202 209.146 212.17
Figure 2: Time response of
cantilevered sandwich beam at
different magnetic fields.
Figure 3: Time response at the mid
span of simply supported sandwich
beam at different magnetic fields.
Figure 4: Time response at mid span of FixedFixed sandwich beam at
different magnetic fields.
Conclusions
• FEM formulation for dynamic analysis of sandwich beam with FGM skins
and MRE core has been derived.
• Free vibration time response of the sandwich beam was obtained using
Newmark Beta method.
• From the time responses it is observed that the system attains steady state
in less time when magnetic field is applied compared to the system without
magnetic field.
• This is due to the fact that application of magnetic field increases the shear
modulus of the core which increases natural frequency of the sandwich
beam.
References
•
1. Bhangale R.K. and Ganesan N., Thermoelastic Buckling and Vibration
Behavior of a Functionally Graded Sandwich Beam with Constrained
Viscoelastic Core, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 295, p. 294, 2006.
2. Carlson J.D. and Jolly M.R., MR Fluid, Foam and Elastomer Devices,
Mechatronics, Vol. 10, p. 555, 2000.
3. Sun Q, Zhou JX and Zhang L., An Adaptive Beam Model and Dynamic
Characteristics of Magneto Rheological Materials, Journal of Sound and
Vibration, Vol. 261, p. 465, 2003.
4. Zhang X. and Li W., An Effective Permeability Model to Predict Field
Dependent Modulus of Magneto Rheological Elastomers,
Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, Vol. 29,
p. 1, 2007.
5. Chen L., Gong X.L. and Li W.H., Effect of Carbon Black on the
Mechanical Performances of Magneto Rheological Elastomers, Journal of
Polymer Testing, Vol. 27, p. 340, 2008.
6. Chen L., Gong X. L, Jiang W.Q., Yao J., Deng H. and Li W., Investigation
on Magnetorheological Elastomers Based on Natural Rubber, Journal of
Material Science , Vol. 42, p. 5483, 2007.
7. Xiang W.K, Guang M., Zhang WM and Zhu SS., Experimental
Investigation on Vibration Characteristics of Sandwich Beams with
Magneto Rheological Elastomers Cores, J. Central South University
Technology, Vol. 15 (s1), p. 239, 2008.
8. Howson W.P. and Zare A., Exact Dynamic Stiffness Matrix for Flexural
Vibration of ThreeLayered Sandwich Beams, Journal of Sound and
Vibration, Vol. 282, p. 753, 2005.
9. Huang XL, and Shen HS., Nonlinear Vibration and Dynamic Response
of Functionally Graded Plates in Thermal Environments. International
Journal of Solids and Structures, Vol. 41, p. 2403, 2004.
10.Dixit U.S., Finite Element Methods for Engineers, Cengage learning India
Pvt Ltd, 2009.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?