Archive of Applied Mechanics 72 (2003) 67-650 © Springer-Verlag 2003 Ot 10100,soou9-002-0728-7 Vibration of beams with general boundary conditions due to a moving random load M, Abu-Hilal Summary The transverse vibrations of elastic homogeneous isotropic beams with general boundary conditions due to a moving random force with constant mean value are analyzed. The boundary conditions considered are: pinned-pinned, fixed-fixed, pinned-fixed, and fixed free. Based on the Bernoulli beam theory, the problem is described by means of a partial differential equation. Closed-form solutions for the variance and the coefficient of variation of the beam deflection are obtained and compared for three types of force motion: accelerated, decelerated and uniform. The effects of beam damping and speed of the moving force on the dynamic response of beams are studied in detail. Keywords Vibration, Beam, Moving load, Random load 1 Introduction ‘The general problem of transverse vibrations of beams due to moving loads is an important research topic in mechanical, industrial and civil engineering. Vibrations of this kind occur in bridges, runways, railways, beams subjected to pressure waves and piping systems subjected to two-phase flow. Several studies have been performed to explore the various aspects of the moving load problem. ‘The dynamic response of a simply supported beam subjected to a moving single and continuous random load, which moves with constant velocity was studied in (1, 2]. Also, the effects of damping on the response of beams were studied there. In [3, 4], was studied the response of simply supported beams at general boundary conditions subjected to a stream of random moving loading systems of Poissonian pulse-type, i.e. with mutually independent, identically distributed force amplitudes arriving at the beam at independent random times. ‘The stream of loading systems was assumed to move with different types of motion: accel- erating, decelerating and at constant velocity. The random vibration of a simply supported elastic beam subjected to random loads moving with constant and time-varying velocity and axial forces was considered in (5). Paper {6] studied the dynamic response of simply sup- ported rotating Euler-Bernoulli, Rayleigh and Timoshenko beams due to random moving loads. In {7}, the vibration problem was treated for a simply supported beam subjected to randomly spaced moving loads with a constant velocity. Assuming that the load sequence is a Poisson process and the inertial effect of moving loads can be neglected, the authors ex- amined the time history, the power spectral density, and the various moments of the re- sponse. The dynamic response of a beam to the passage of a train of concentrated forces with random amplitudes was studied in (8]. Based on the introduction of two influence functions, one of which satisfies the nonhomogeneous, the other the homogeneous differential equa- tions for beam response, the authors obtained explicit expressions for expected value and variance of the beam deflection. In [9], a linear dynamic analysis for determining the coupled flexural and torsional vibration of multispan suspension bridges was presented. The dynamic analysis duly considers the nonlinear bridge-vehicle interactive force, YxCIK—IGur(t . (28) fa iat For the sake of simplification, the cross-correlations of the generalized deffection may be neglected, ie. Gy (tifa) = 0 for j ¢ ky since these components are sufficiently small in comparison to the components for j = k, {1, 2]. Equation (28) is then simplified to the form @(.0) = OXI Gu(tt) (2) Using Eqs. (20) and (27), the variance of the deflection may be written as [ie oxzis(o)ae . (30) After carrying out the integration in Eq, (30), the variance can be written for the accelerated (a> 0) and the decelerated (a < 0) motions of the force as (31) Tit) = 0% f aie OxEL/)Jae = gt) (32) with gi() given in the Appendix. ‘The variance due to a moving load with constant velocity, does not follow automatically from Eq, (32) because of the nature of the error function. Also, setting a = 0 in Eq, (32) to onobtain the variance for the case of constant velocity leads to infinite values of the variance because of the definition of us, us, and ug. In the case of constant velocity, Eq. (23) becomes flyer (33) Substituting this equation into (30) and carrying out the integration yields the variance due to a ‘moving load with constant velocity a(x, Rx) ft) = 3 og AITO where To) = oy f Ce ORBLFCOIAE = gle) (34) with g(¢) given in the Appendix. The coelicient of variation ofthe deflection is defined as anlxt) viet) (35) where o;(x,¢) is the standard deviation of the deflection, vy is the maximum static deflection due to a concentrated force P acting at xux and nay is the position at which vp occur. The constants vp and pax are given in Table I for the studied beams. The coefficient of variation V;(x,t) has a similar form as the dynamic coefficient in the deterministic approach. It can be written as Vilx.t) = VeVinlx.t) (36) where Vp is the coefficient of variation of the random force (white noise) which can be expressed as ra . (37) where «is the first circular natural frequency of the beam. 3 Results and discussion To clarify the previous analysis, the function Vyp(max,) versus the dimensionless time s is given for the considered beams which are: pinned-pinned, fixed-fixed, pinned-fixed, fixed pinned, fixed~free, and free-fixed. The function Vyp(muxsf) is obtained from Eqs. (31), (35), 6) and (37) as ea etn) (38) Veelman; t) where only the first term of the summation is considered (ie., k = 1). The constant 1 is given in Table 1. For the case of accelerated and decelerated motion of the moving force, the time function, T(t) is defined in Eq, (32). For the case of uniform motion, T;(t) is defined in Eq. (34). Table 1. Maximum static deflection, its location and constant 7 ofthe studied beams Pinned-pinned Fixed-fixed _Pinned-fixed Fixed-free Free-fixed % itr a te a Pa " 48 192 85 3 3 anf f + 1 °‘The force enters the beam from the left-hand side at x = 0 and moves to the right with the following three types of motion Accelerated motion A force P starts from rest at position x = 0, Its motion is uniformly accelerated so that it reaches the speed c at x= L, The time ty needed to cross the beam and the corresponding, acceleration are given as: n=, a= (39) oa Decelerated motion {force P moving with constant velocity enter the beam at ret from the eft at position x = @ Its motion along the beam is uniformly decelerated so that it stops at the end of the beam, ie. x= L. The time f; needed to cross the beam and the corresponding deceleration are given as: (40) Uniform motion A force P moving with constant velocity enters the beam at rest from left at position x = 0. During its travel along the beam its velocity remains constant. The time fy needed to cross the beam is given as at (a1) The dimensionless time s is defined for the accelerated/decelerated motion as: = 5 =H inn (42) and by the uniform motion as (43) ‘Thus when s = 0 (t= 0) the force is atthe left-hand side of the beam, ie. x = 0, and when s= 1 « vi = 1,2,3) the force is at the right-hand side of the beam, ise, x = L. Figures 1-6 show the function Vip(qax.$) versus the dimensionless time s for the studied beams. This function is defined as the ratio of the coefficient of variation ofthe deflection of the beam to the coefficient of variation of the moving force. Also the effects of the speed c of the ‘moving force and the damping £ of the beam are presented in the figures. The effect of the speed is represented by the dimensionless parameter 2, where a= (44) with cy the critical speed, defined as [1] ae (s) ‘The effect of damping is represented by the damping ratio {, Eq, (10) Inthe gues, the function Vyas) spotted forthe cae of uniform motion in the frst column and forthe cases of accelerated and decelerated motions in the second and third columns, respectively. The frst row represents the case of = 0.25 and the second and third rows represent the caves of 25 and 2 ~ 10, respectively. The sold curves represent the dynamic response of the undamped beam ( = 0), the dotted curves represent the damping ratio { = 0.1, and the dashed curves represent the damping tab ¢ = 0.2Uniform modion Accelerated motion Decelerated motion os. we + (SST Ge oe eet COTE Oe ae Fig. 1. Random dynamic response of a pinned-pinned bear versus th values of dimensionless speed (2) and damping: (——) {=0, (-++-)¢ Uniform motion 2a) @= 025 Voom!) Voom Fig. 2. Random dynamic response ofa fixed-fixed beam versus the dimensionless time for different values, ‘of dimensionless speed (2) and damping: (——) {=0, (++) {=0.1, (—) {0.2 Figure 1 shows random dynamic responses of a pinned-pinned beam for various types of motion and different values of damping. From the figure is observed that in the accelerated and decelerated motions the beam has a higher maximum dynamic response Venax = Max{ Vye(Xmax;t)} (46) than in the uniform motion. This response decreases with increasing the speed of the moving load, since the acting time of the load on the beam becomes shorter. In the decelerated motion,Aczelerated motion Decelerted mation Fig. 3. Random dynamic response of a pinned-fixed beam versus the dimensionless time for different values of dimensionless speed (2) and damping: (——) {=0, (--+--) [20.1 (—-) (=02 Accelerated motion Decelerated motion a=05 yfazoas Fig. 4. Random dynamic response of a fixed-pinned beam versus the dimensionless time for different values of dimensionless speed (2) and damping: (——) {=0, (+++) (=0.1, (=) (=02. the response Vas appears at about the instant the force crosses the beam center, in the uniform motion Vmax appears after the force crosses the beam center, and in the accelerated motion, Vaux appears shortly before the force crosses the beam. Therefore, the decelerated motion is more dangerous than the uniform and the accelerated motions. Independent of the type of motion, the maximum dynamic response Vmax appears at an earlier time and decreases with the increasing of damping. Figure 2 shows random dynamic responses ofa fixed-fixed beam for various types of motion and different values of damping, This beam has « similar behaviour to a pinned-pinned beam. 6452 Ya ne Fig, 5. Random dynamic response ofa fixed-free beam versus the dimensionless time for different values ‘of dimensionless speed (3) and damping: (——) [=0, (-----) [=0.1, (—) {=02 Uniform motion Accelerated motion Decelerted motion Fig. 6. Random dynamic response of a free-fited beam versus the dimensionless time for different values of dimensionless speed (2) and damping: (——) {=0, (---) [=0., ( 2 However, the maximum dynamic response Via ofthe fixed-fixed beam is smaller and appears at «an earlier instant. Considering that the maximum static deflection vp ofthe fixed-fixed beam is smaller (ratio 48/192 = 0.25), it can be observed from Figs. 1 and 2 that the standard deviation (max, t) of the fixed-fixed beam is much smaller than ¢, of the pinned-pinned beam. ire 3 shows random dynamic responses of a pinned-fixed beam for various types of ‘motion and different values of damping. It is noted that the maximum dynamic response decreases with increasing speed and damping, For the case « = 0.25, a damping ratio { = 0.2 reduces Vas of the undamped beam to a half, independent of the type of motion. Furthermore,the figure shows that the decelerated motion is more dangerous than the other types of motion considered, since Vaux appears at an earlier time in this motion. Figure 4'shows random dynamic responses of a fixed-pinned beam for various types of ‘motion and different values of damping. This beam behaves similarly to a pinned-fixed beam. However, there are some differences in their behaviour due to the direction of motion. So, the ‘maximum dynamic response ofthe fixed-pinned beam appears at a later instant since the fixed support at the left-hand side prevents rotational motion. Figure 5 shows random dynamic responses of a fixed-free beam for various types of motion and different values of damping. Independent of the type of motion, the speed and the dam- Ping, the maximum dynamic response always appears atthe instant that the load reaches the right end of the beam. In the accelerated motion, the maximum dynamic response Vinx is @ litde higher than Vig. in the uniform motion. Inthe decelerated motion, however, the dynamic response Vaux is about double the maximum response in the uniform motion. Figure 6 shows random dynamic responses of a free-fixed beam for various types of motion and different values of damping. This beam responds earlier than the beams discussed before because the load starts its motion from a free end. The maximum dynamic response of this beam is higher in the accelerated motion than in the other two types of motion. Although the dynamic responses plotted in Figs. 5 and 6 are for the same beam, there are essential differ- ences in these responses which are to be explained by the direction of load motion. 4 Conclusions ‘The dynamic response of elastic homogeneous isotropic uniform Bernoulli-Euler beams with general boundary conditions subjected to a random moving concentrated force is investigated. ‘The effect of support type, type of load motion, direction of load motion, damping and variation of speed were studied. The maximum dynamic response due to the load considered decreases with increasing speed and damping, Furthermore, this response (Vmax) is in the accelerated and decelerated motions higher than in the uniform motion. OF the beams studied those in the decelerated motion respond earlier than those in accelerated motion. The fixed- fixed, pinned-fixed, and the fixed-pinned beams behave, in general, similarly to the pinned- pinned beam. The fixed-free and free-fixed beams behave quite differently. The dynamic response Vip(naat) for the uniform motion is between the two responses due to the accel- erated and decelerated motions of the moving load. The dynamic response Vp of the free-fixed bbeam is highest in the accelerated motion, while all other types of beams considered here have their highest responses in the decelerated motion. ‘Appendix tin Ff au, / 6(x— alf(x)de = fla), i aS (e aie [urge — Fyerx C05(204t) + ae Sin(20at)] i — iuguge™ erf(uyit + 2;) — erf(z,)] + uquge™ erf (ut + 25) — erf(zs)] + Re{—2zye"" ferf(zyt + 24) — erf(z4)] + zsoe™ [erf(zit + 25) — erf(zs)] + we [erf(zit + 26) — erf(ze)] + iuane™[erf(usit + 25) — erf(z9)] — uquse™ ferf(uyt + 210) — erf(z10)] + 2zsre™ [erf(z2t + 211) — erf(zu1)] ~ 2zne% [erf(zst + 212) — erf(zi2)] — zne™[erf(zat + 213) — erf(2is)] — ze ferf(zat + 214) — erf(zi4)] + z32€™ lerf(zst + 21s) — erf(zis)] +2 ert(xt +6) —rfeu))}}Bi 2a Tar WT ITAL BAG, w= (B+G), w= (BG), us Ez ze =i), 2, = uyu,(cos6, +isin8,), 2) = uu,(cosO; — isin O,), 4 = Vis [Econ — wee + (Cae + x0), 25 = V2us|Exon — Kee + ee + i(Cane + Rue — ae), 25 = Vius|fene — Kee — ae + i(Ceoe + MAC + Ou), —Bius(Sa0og + KC) 26 = 2us(Cueoe — Kae), Fy = —2uslerae + (See + Kee)], Z10 = Bus[Sere — KuE — ica], 211 = usus[ 204 + me) 608 0) + weesin By ~ (25404 + ae) sin By — wyceos 64}), 212 = Ustts|(20,c_ — Kec) COS Os — Kyesin O> + if (2Cee04 — Kec) sin Oy + xyCCOS O2}). 213 = sis (25,04 + ge) C08 0, + (KC — 2a) Sin Oy + il(iee ~ 20a) €08 0) — (26,0 + Kee) sin 0] 214 ~ utts|(26x004 + K4e) C0801 + (KuC+ 20a) Si By + il(nge + Leage) COs A, — (2E ey + K4C) sin O)), Zis = usis|(2Cgen — mac) COS O3 — (wee — Zena) sin Os + (nee ~ 20044) 608 02 + (2Guene — Kae) sin63)], Zig = Uys [(2E,0r — Kee) COSA: — (KEE + Zergn) sin Oy + i((kye + 204) cos 82 + (264004 — Kuc) sin )}, 217 = Qne[—2Ceunee + i( Go} — xpC)] Zig = Qn[25 coe (oan — Kee) + if Chaz — npc” — iy + Akewan(c + at) }. iy = 2u[-2on(oa + me) + i{ Go} — nEP — 0 - 2etale + at)}), 219 = —2ug|Cfeo} + Wyeognne + KFC], 221 = IuelCho} - Aronnec + KFC], 2 = —2ugl fo} + FP — wy, + Wyeognae — ienae(Lyeoe + Kac + Kua), 2 = Buel Go} + Ke — 8, — 2eoexse — Boal ane — Kee ~ Ka), 224 = al-2Gho} — Ki? — ACeenenne + i(2G 0} — KI?)], aay = uddGho} +2 AC yeoncac + i(2Gak — wie), 23g = us —2Cheo} + 2k — A ergKRE + ACeRODAL — KEP + i(dCooa — KP + Axper + 230} — 20% + Anxa0aet), 217 = ul2ilo} + 20% — Atroume — xooa — Be = iA cima + KEP + Ancora — Wha + 2oy + Amraerant)), 2 = ul2io} - 20% — rome + oon +32 + i( Aono — IP + Axgcou + 20} — 20'y + AxLawant)], ay = wel 2Cf0} — Leo — AC oarne — ACkoneoae + KEP + i(4Cooa — Ke — Arp + Geo} — 20}, — 4n,aOat)] rp = LL — 2g — AP + (1 + 2Ax — AY} B50 = Fpl — 2Ae— Ay +i(1 + 2Ae— AD)251 = 2usuyug[Ax cos 0, — sin 8, ~ i(Ax sin 8 + cos), 232 = 2usuyus[Agcos; + sin 0: + i(Ay sin By — 08 03), (1) = 4 +48 — [gi + ae + Gu + an + 46 + gle + dz + ga + 6] cos(nuct) + [qs + 95 + 47] sin(2xxct) ~ du + de + a+ ain + que + gro + gaa + gaa + qasle + [=a dr + Ge + aus + ais — dai + das — das + qurle™™ sin(eat) + [aio + gale + [gu + qusle 6 + [que + qz0 + gale cos(xxct) + [gir + ari + qasle™ sin(xxct) + [ais + dau + qasle™“ cos(iect) + [que + gas + qarle™™“ sin(xct) c0s(2044t) where uw eon( — Af) + 2Aaee] 9 Sion? 8a} + IC) gy = 2AM =A) _ Gon — AB) + 2Au( nae ~ ow) BicieoR + Ke] ‘ OLE + (ee — wae)"] os —[2AnS acme — (1 — AR) (Kee — an)) = See (L — AR) + 2Aa (Kee + wan) 16[Cpeo + (Kc — Oae)] T6[ERo + (Kee + oan) ) [2Anfueo ~ (I= AZ)( Kee + an] 16[Gi0? + (Kee + Oan)] neat =a —wy(Goeoe + ue) a T6l(Grer + Mie) + 0%)” Teun + ae)” 0 qe doa 4 T6lGion + me +] (264004 + KC) — Kil eamrtelCe TR + wee) +E” ay = tlAante + 2iven + ml ~uylAe (2,0 — xc) — nec] MS Foon + me +e] Plo — me +e] uy = rislAwne + Mate — ea) 9 _ —vol al 2G + ne 2[(2Ekax — uc)? + Re] [20x + me? + (KE = 20.4))] an = wl Deve) + a Hale (25hee + Rie) = Kee = 20a) et “FAlekion + mse) + (re Fa epan + me)? + (mae + 20a) = nalAnlice + 20a) + ron twee] 9 ualdu(2Caen ~ nic) = nie +204 all2Cuon + ve) + (ue + 20a] © Aa ucre = Kae) + (Re = 2048)"] _ a[Ae( Kec — 2erge) + 24004 — Kee] w=! [Ac(2540% — Kee) — Kee — 2c] ay TTR A gg = Ee 4[(26eex — mie)? + (me — 20a)"] A[(26,04 — mie) + (me + 20a)'] gy = Laas + ora) + 24 — Wed © AT(2G on = xc? + (exe + 20K]References 1. Zibdeh, 1 Abu- Hila, Frjba, Ls Vibration of solids and structures under moving loads. Groningen: Noordhoff International Publishing 1972 Frjba, L: Non-stationary response of a beam to a moving random force. | Sound Vib 46 (1976) 325-338 .Zibdeh, Hs Rackwitz, Re Response moments ofan elastic beam subjected to Poissonian moving loads. J} Sound Vib 188 (1995) 479-495, ‘Rackwitz, Rs Moving loads on beams with general boundary conditions. J Sound Vib 195 (1996) 85-102, Zibdeh, Hs Stochastic vibration ofan elastic beam due to random moving loads and deterministic axial forces, Eng Struct 17 (1995) 530-535 . Zibdeh, HL; Juma, H.: Dynamic response of a rotating beam subjected to a random moving load. J Sound Vib 223 (1999) 741-758, Kurihara, M; Shimogo, T: Vibration of an elastic beam subjected to discrete moving loads, ASME J Mech Des 100 (1978) 514-519 Iwankiewicr, Rs Saiady, Pa Vibration of a beam under a random stream of moving forces. J Struct ‘Mech 12 (1984) 13-26 Chatterjee, Pz Datta, Ts Surana, C+ Vibration of suspension bridges under vehicular movement J Struct Eng 120 (1994) 681-703 Zibdeh, H.: Vibration analysis of beams with general boundary conditions traversed by ‘a moving force. | Sound Vib 229 (2000) 377-388, ‘Abu-Hilal, Mz Mohsen, M: Vibration of beams with general boundary conditions due to a moving, harmonic load. J Sound Vib 232 (2000) 703-717