Journal of Sound and Vibration (1978) 56(2), 175-185

NATURAL FREQUENCIES OF RADIAL ROTATING BEAMS

S. PUTTER AND H. MANOR

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Technion--Israel Institute of Technology,
Haifa, Israel

(Receired 18 April 1977, and ht revisedform 10 September 1977)

Lead-lag natural frequencies and mode shapes of a radial beam mounted on a rotating
disc at a 90 ~setting angle are determined. The solution was obtained by means of the finite
element technique, a high precision beam element based on a fifth degree polynomial
being used as displacement function, with deflection and slope at the ends as common
nodal degrees of freedom, and two integrals over the element length as nodeless additional
degrees of freedom. Effects such as shearing force, rotary inertia and varying centrifugal
forces are taken into consideration. Results found in the literature for a cantilever beam
are in good agreement with present results. The case of a beam blade with shroud mass is
also considered.

1. INTRODUCTION
A radial rotating beam mounted in the rim of a disc is usually taken as the mathematical
model for a turbomachinery blade. For the more limited problem of a 90 ~ setting angle,
vibration in the plane of spin (lead-lag), non-linear effects and torsional coupling are avoided.
The most common solutions are for cantilever beams. For this case, it is well known that
when the beam is rotating the natural frequencies increase; their values may be expressed for
small/2 as
,0 5 = COCo+ 4 , ~ ~, (l)

when q5 is a geometric factor called the Southwell coefficient which depends on the R/L ratio
and on the setting angle (a list of symbols is given in Appendix B).
Schilhansl [1] assumed ~tcertain deflection line to occur and introduced it in the differential
equation of a rotating beam, considering only the stiffening effect of centrifugal forces. The
resulting first approximation mode was improved by a second approximation, and for $ the
following equation was found:

qSt = 1.173 + 1.558(R/L) - sin s ~,, (2)

which for our case (~, = 90 ~ reduces to the form

q~, = 0-173 + 1-558 R/L.. (3)

Rao and Carnegie [2] used the Ritz energy method and obtained a solution for the funda-
mental mode, assuming a polynomial shape function for first and second harmonics. For the
particular case represented by expression (3) they obtained practically the same result.
Koren [3], too, assumed a polynomial displacement function and solved the problem by
the Galerkin method. He allowed for longitudinally tapered beams with cross-section and
moment of inertia varying linearly. He presented an explicit geometrical factor only for the
175
176 S. PUTTER AND H. MANOR

case of constant cross-section; for the first mode expression (3) was obtained and for the
second mode he calculated
r = 5.38 + 8.631 R/L. (4)
Pnueli [4] established frequency bounds and suggested an iteration scheme.
Dokainish and Rawtani [5] used the finite element method for solving the problem of
rotating cantilever plates. They considered factors such as aspect ratio, computed modes up
to the fifth, and proposed an expression for the Southwell coefficient which includes correc-
tions depending on ~2 and (R/L) 2.
It follows from their work that results for high rotating speeds should be lower than those
given by equations (3) and (4).
Stafford and Giorgiutiu [6] included shear, rotary inertia and the mutual influence between
axial force and shear on the equation of motion. These are developed for the fixed plane of
rotation and also for flapping movement, with disregard of any coupling between them.
Nagaraj and Shanthakumar [7] used the Galerkin method together with an eighth order
polynomial for solving a more restricted problem, namely a rotating beam without a hub.
Recently, some papers such as references [8] and [9] have been published, mainly concerned
with a cantilever beam subject to rotation of a general character.
In the work reported here, the finite element method has been used, with the blade repre-
sented optionally by a Timoshenko beam; a 6 degree of freedom element which has been
found to be very efficient [10, I1] has been used. In addition to that of a cantilever, other
types of boundary conditions have been considered, to allow inclusion of the shroud mass.

2. T H E F I N I T E E L E M E N T M O D E L

The shape function of the elastic line for a beam element in flexural deformation can be
approximated by the sum
5
w(x) = Y~ ak x*, (5)
k=O
where the corresponding degrees of freedom, as shown in Figure 1, are given by the genera-
lized vector of displacements
{w} r = (~, ,V, w,, w~, w[,,, w;,>, (6)

iDe~ec~eu i

Undeflected elastic line

Figure 1. Schematic representation of beam element.
 NATURAL FREQUENCIES OF ROTATING BEAMS 177
with the definitions
l 1
# = f w(x) dx, r = -J w(x)(x]l)dx. (7)
O o

In conventional treatments of similar beams, shear forces and concentrated bending

moments at the nodes are correlated with linear and angular displacements. Here, however,
~P and ~7 are introduced as equivalents for a constant transversal distributed load and a
varying linearly load, respectively, the product of either of the integrals in equations (7) with
the corresponding load resulting in work done.
The polynomial coefficients vector is defined by the equation
{a}r = (ao, at, a2, a3, a4, as). (8)
Both vectors are related by a transformation matrix, which depends only on the elements'
length:
{w} = [T]-' {a}. (9)
[T] as presented in reference [11], equation (14), includes the shear effect by means of a factor
fl, given by
fl = 2EI/I,:GAI 2, (10)
which is either assumed constant or is averaged over the element.
Material properties such as E and p are also considered constant, but the cross-section A
and moment of inertia I may change linearly according to the relations
A(x)=A,+(Aj-A,)xlI, l(x)= I,+(Ij-l,)xll. (11)
Linear variation of E and p thus may be introduced through A a n d / , respectively.

3. FORMULATION OF PROBLEM
A longitudinally tapered uniform beam is attached to a hub, which rotates with an angular
velocity ~ about a stationary axis, as shown schematically in Figure 2. For a non-rotating
beam, the stiffness matrix, together witfi the shear effect and mass matrix, including rotary
inertia, have been presented in reference [11 ]. Now the centrifugal field must be introduced.
For any arbitrary point along the elastic line, the force produced by this field can be represen-
ted by a component along the undeftected beam and another in a transverse direction.

/..

(o)

Ibl
Figure 2. Rotating radial beam. (a) Cantilever; (b) with shroud mass.
178 S. P U T T E R A N D H . M A N O R

The potential energy of the transverse movement in each element depends on lateral deflection
and is given by the integral
1

uc~ = -~pQ~ f X(x) W2(X) dx. (1 2)

o
Substituting appropriate values for A(x) and w(x), integrating along the element, and bearing
in mind expression (9), one obtains an expression in terms of {w} only, which in quadratic
form reads as follows:
Uc~, = --12-Q2{w}r[mtr]{w}. (13)
This last expression yields the de-stiffening force vector .QX[Mtr]{W).
The axial component of force per unit length at any arbitrary point can be expressed as
q(z) = p~22 A(z)z. (14)
The total cumulative force from the tip to a point mass at a distance z, measured along the
beam from the hub circumference, is given by the integral
R+L

F(z)= f q(z)dz. (15)

R+z
Considering the work done by these axial forces, one can write
!.

= 89f r ( z ) (dwldx) 2 dx, (I 6)

o
which is equivalent to the matrix expression
u~, = 89 T [g] {w). (17)
It should be pointed out that by inserting expression (14) into expression (15), and assuming
a constant cross-section and an homogeneous material, the equation
F(z) = 89 2 + 2R(L - z) - z 21 (18)
is obtained. It can be observed that at least a parabolic variation of axial force is needed along
the beam element for the computing of the geometric matrix. The complete calculation of [g]
is given in Appendix A.
It should be noted also that no additional moment, which could be attributed to the beam's
height, is caused by the centrifugal forces about any cross-section and therefore no more
terms are necessary to account for rotary inertia.
Now, a general matrix expression for the whole blade can be given: namely,
{[K] - .Q2([Mtr] - [a]) - to2([M,,] + [Mro,])} {6} = {0}. (19)
As expected, the squared natural frequencies will be eigenvalues of equation (19), which can
be obtained by several routine ways.
Expression (19) also can be used for the calculation of critical speeds, when they exist, ifthe
equality nt2 = to is introduced; then one obtains
{[K] - to2((l + l/n 2) [~.ltr] -]--[M,o,] -- (l/n 2) [G])} {6} = {0}. (20)
Critical speeds produce resonances, thus reducing the range of practical application in these
regions. A more serious limitation is material strength, which for safe work determines a
certain maximum speed. If the centrifugal effect only is considered for this purpose, and
normal stress in the beam root is given by F==o/A, then the expression for the maximum speed
is
t~' = (1/i) ~ [11V'(RIL) + O.5 + (m/M) ( 1 + RIL) I. (21)
 NATURALFREQUENCIESOF ROTATINGBEASTS 179

4. RESULTS OF COMPUTATION
Table I presents a comparison of first and second natural frequencies for the case of a
homogeneous rotating cantilever beam with constant cross-section. Results obtained by the
present finite element formulation, with 5 equal length elements, are compared with results
that follow from equation (1) when the Southwell coefficient is defined by expression (3) or
(4), and also with results shown in reference [5]. In this last case, a plate with aspect ratio 3
was considered to be an acceptable approximation to the beam problem. The present
method shows good agreement with reference [5] for values of t2' up to about 10.

TABLE 1
Comparison of results for first and second natural frequencies

First Second
Frequency , ^ , , ^
s R/L 0 1 5 0 1 5

2 Present work 3"6118 4.4005 6.6471 22.5263 23-2803 26-0666

Equations (1) and (3) or (4) 3"6131 4.3916 6-6494 22.5175 23.2715 26-0703
Reference [5] 3-6191 4"3944 6"6165 22"5280 23.2817 26-0521
Present work 4"0739 7-4115 14.3554 24-9500 28.9238 40.9206
9 5 Equations (1) and (3) or (4) 4'0850 7"4590 14.5409 24-9002 28"9101 41.2176
Reference [5] 4.0840 7.4504 14.4371 24.9593 28.9615 41.1457
I0 Presentwork 5"0490 13-2580 27.7268 32.1197 -43.2267 71-3856
Equations (I) and (3) or (4) 5"4463 13-6185 28.4370 31.9925 43.4352 73.0686
Reference [5] 5"0620 13.4515 28.1535 32.1764 43.5720 72.9062
20 Present work 6-7757 25.2881 54"6422 51.3531 76.5942 135-617
Equations (1) and (3) or (4) 9.0312 26.5474 54-5470 51.3568 78-0379 141.066
Reference [5]t 1-1584 24.9524 55.4016 51.8142 78.3423 140.729
50 Present work 10'4806 61.6408 135.6517 116.1996 181"9361 332.027
Equations (1) and (3) or (4) 21-0918 65.8776 141-1377 118-0488 188.4490 349-032
Reference [5It -- 31.9941 127-7326 119.2917 189.2367 348.182

t Results seem to be beyond range of adapted formula.

Figure 3 shows the effect ofshearing and rotary inertia according to Timoshenko's bending
theory for the first mode at some preselected parameters: namely, E/t,:G = 3.2, and the normal-
ized inertia coefficient i between 0.025 and 0.05. For low values of R/L, increase in i reduces
the frequencies while for larger values of R/L, its influence is negligible.
Figure 4 shows that for the second mode, the influence o f / i s more pronounced. However,
the effect of reduced frequency at such high velocities is limited by strength considerations,
as given by equation (21), especially where rotary inertia is represented by high i numbers.
Figure 5 presents the changes and trends in the mode shapes as influenced by the parameters
R/L and f2'.
For turbine blades with shrouded masses, appropriate boundary conditions must be
specified. Clamping at the rim edge can be postulated again. But owing to the appreciable
stiffness given by additional material at the outer radius, a different support model will be
imposed there: namely, a laterally clamped-radial sliding node, where displacement along
the beam is allowed to avoid possible buckling. Thus, the shroud does not affect transverse
movement, as it is assumed to be a concentrated mass attached to the node. However, a
centrifugal force still acts on this rotating mass.
180 S. PUTTER A N D H. MANOR
150 I | I I

I00
/ 777
77

5O

~ i ~

I f I I
I0 20 30 40 50

Figure 3. Rotating cantilever beam. First frequency vs. angular velocity for several length/radius ratios.
, Euler beam; . . . . , T i m o s h e n k o beam for E/~:G= 3"2 and i = 0-025; . . . . , T i m o s h e n k o b e a m for
E/xG = 3"2 and i = 0-05.

I I I I I J

3OO

200

100

0 IO 20 30 40 50
9.'
Figure 4. Rotating cantilever beam. Second frequency cs. angular velocity for several length/radius ratios.
, Euler beam; . . . . , T i m o s h e n k o beam for E/A-G= 3-2 and i = 0-0025; . . . . , T i m o s h e n k o beam for
E/rG = 3-2 and i = 0-05.
 NATURAL FREQUENCIES OF ROTATING BEAMS 18 l

I I I I

.~'~

.~.~-t ~ .~-

~ " ' ~ " ~ - ' ~ --"

- I I I [
0.2 0.4 0"6 0"8

Figure 6. Rotating beam with shroud mass. First frequency vs. angular velocity and shroud mass/beam
mass ratio, R/L = 1. Curves for strength parameter ~/ali2E included, co"= 22-3733 (computed).

In Figure 6 four curves are given which express the stiffening of such beams when angular
speed increases. Different relations of shroud mass to blade mass were considered, when the
R[L ratio remained constant and equal to unity Lines presented refer to the first frequency,
with, as before, 5 equal elements and a constant cross-section. Shear effect and rotary inertia
were not included. Several material limit strength curves are also presented in Figure 6.
Graphs for the second natural frequency are given in Figure 7.
Frequencies were computed for numerous values of ~', R]L and m]M. An attempt was
made to fit these results into a linear expression and obtain a representation of the Southwell
coefficient valid for the range 0 ~< ~ ' ~< 10. It was found that for engineering purposes the
following equations may be used:

~b~ "~ 3.1 + 5.9 (R/L) + 23.8 (m/M), qb2 "~ 14.8 + 22.6 (R]L) + 91(m/M). (22)

300 J i l

2012

oz/#
I00
eo

I I t I
0 10 20 30 40 50
,Q'
Figure 6. Rotating beam with shroud mass. First frequency vs. angular velocity and shroud mass]beam
mass ratio, R/L = 1. Curves for strength parameter v/~--Eincluded. ~o = 22-3733 (computed).
182 S. P U T T E R A N D H . M A N O R
600

400

200

,o6

0 I0 20 50 40 50

9:
Figure 7. Rotating beam with shroud mass. Second frequency vs. angular velocity and shroud mass]beam
mass ratio. RIL = 1. COo= 61.6729 (computed).

5. CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study may be summarized as follows.
(a) For a cantilever beam, calculations have been made and the results show good
agreement with those from other studies. Rotary inertia and shearing effect were also
considered. Where critical speeds exist, they can be computed by means of equation
(20).
(b) The effect of shroud mass in a rotating beam was also treated and results presented
graphically. Corresponding linear Southwell coefficients for practical purposes are
proposed.
(c) Approximate rotating speed limits were introduced, in respect to the strength
limit of the material.

REFERENCES
Io M.J. SCHILItANSL1958 Journa! of Applied Mechanics 25, 28-30. Bending frequency of a rotating
cantilever beam.
2. J'. S. RAO and W. CARNEGIE1970 Tile AeronattticalJournal of the Royal Aeronautical Society 74,
161-165. Non-linear vibrations of rotating cantilever beams.
3. A. KOREN 1971 ~I.SC. Thesis, Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, (LLT.). Vibration and
stresses in rotating blade (in Hebrew).
4. D. PNUELI 1972 Journal of Applied Mechanics 39, 602-604. Natural bending frequency com-
parable to rotational frequency in rotating cantilever beam.
5. M.A. DOKAINISHand S. RAWTANI1971 International Journal of Numerical ]llethods hz Engineer-
h~g 3, 233-248. Vibration analysis rotating cantilever plates.
6. R. O. STAFFORDand V. GIORGItrrIu 1975 International Journal of AIechanical Sciences 17, 719-
727. Semi-analytic methods for rotating Timoshenko beams.
 NATURAL FREQUENCIESOF ROTATINGBEAMS 183
7. V. T. NAGARAJand P. SHANTHAKLrMAR1975 Journal of Soundand Vibration 43, 575-577. Rotor
blade vibrations by the Galerkin finite element method.
8. P. W. LIKINS, F. J'. BARBERAand V. BADDELEY 1973 Anwrican Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics Journal 11, 1251-I258. Mathematical modeling of spinning elastic bodies for
modal analysis.
9. R. M.LAURENSON1976AmericanlnstituteofAeronauticsandAstronauticsJournal14, 1444--1450.
Modal analysis of rotating flexible structures.
10. S. PtrrrER and H. MANOR 1975 Israel Journal o f Technology 13, 134-142. Flexure analysis of
axially-loaded beam by finite element method with integral parameters.
11. S. POr;~R and H. MA~qOR1975 Israel Journal of Technology 13,316--324. Shear effect and rotary
inertia in bending of beams.

APPENDIX A
The development of the geometrical matrix, when axial force varies parabolically along
the element, as shown in Figure A1, is presented here. This matrix was used in the computer
program developed for the present work. It should be emphasized that for a tapered beam a
third degree function would be more adequate; in such a case the use of more elements may
compensate for this error.

Figure A1. Variation of axial force.

An expression for the axial force can be given as

F(x) = F[I + 2 ~ ( x / t - 89 + 4 ~ ( x / O ( l - x/O ], (Al)

where

F = (Ft + F~)12, ~ = (Fj - Ft)/(Fj + Fl), r = 2F,,,I(Ft + Fj) - I. (A2)

Introducing expression (A1) into equation (16) and integrating over the element, gives the
work done by axial forces as

Ucx = 89 r [g~l {a}. (A3)

As [g] is given by the equation

[gl = [T]r [g.] [T], (A4)

184 S. PU-I-rER A N D It. MANOR

the final result is

-560(1 ~ + S~/ 364//

l0 1 (+

2080 ( 26( 207~/

1+
7 k -~- + - ~ ] 41 --~-]

[g] = F

Sym.

( 36r 10( ( . 46r

-10

( 3( 208r 4411 205r . )

9~ 12
2~0_1 +~-~+ 319 ] -~k + ~ + ' 2 - ~ ' ]

4 0 ( 1+
611) l2 32~\
-~- ~23( 1--~-~+
3( 22~3~) 13
(A5)
23(1 3( 208~p
--7- l+
42 k + ~ + - ~ }
4 1 (+ 1-~6(1 + -~-)
26'' r
6-3 - 2 55]
4 I + ~ + 27r
6"~ -~-]

APPENDIX B: LIST OF SYMBOLS

A cross-sectionof beam i normalized inertia parameter de-
{a} vectorofa~ fined by v"-]/ALz
ak coefficient in polynomial of elastic [K] stiffness matrix including shear
line effect
E Young's modulus L,I length of beam or element, res-
F axial force pectively
G shear modulus [M], [m] mass matrix for a wholestructure or
[al,[e] geometric matrix for a whole an element, respectively
structure or an element, respec- beam mass
tively IH shroud mass
I momentof inertia ll order of subharmonic
 NATURAL FREQUENCIES OF ROTATING BEAMS 185
q axial load per unit length q~ Southwell coefficient
R radius of hub V setting angle
IT] transformation matrix t2 angular velocity
Uc potential energy associated with 12' normalized O defined as
centrifugal field I2Iv'EI/pAL "~
w deflection of neutral axis co bending frequency of rotating beam
{w} vector ofgeneralized displacements coo bending frequency of non-rotating
x longitudinal co-ordinate in element beam
z longitudinal co-ordinate in rotating co" normalized co defined as
beam co/v'El/pAL"
,8 shear form factor Subscripts
{6} assembled displacement vector for b refers to bending
complete beam i,y refer to nodes of element
~c shear coefficient k running number
p mass density rot rotary
cr allowable stress tr transverse