J. Inst. Eng. India Ser.

C
[Link]

ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION

2D Free Vibration Solution of the Hybrid Piezoelectric Laminated

Beams Using Extended Kantorovich Method
Agyapal Singh1 • Poonam Kumari1 • Prabhakar Bind1

Received: 14 August 2018 / Accepted: 22 May 2019

Ó The Institution of Engineers (India) 2019

Abstract Analytical two-dimensional (2D) piezoelasticity u; w Displacement along x and z, respectively

free vibration solution is presented for the beams under ri , ei Normal stresses and normal strains
different combinations of support conditions, using the sij , cij Shear stresses and shear strains
multi-term multi-field extended Kantorovich method Ei , D i , / Electric field, electric displacements and
(MMEKM). Piezoelasticity-based extended Hamilton electric potential
principle with the mixed variational field is applied to Yi , Gij , mij Young’s moduli, shear moduli and Poisson’s
derive the governing equations in terms of stresses, dis- ratio
placements along with electric displacements and electric eij , gij Constant stress field dielectric permittivities,
potential. Therefore, boundary conditions, both natural and constant strain dielectric permittivities
essential, are satisfied in an exact manner at all points. By sij , dij , q Transformed elastic compliances,
employing MMEKM, the first-order differential–algebraic piezoelectric strain constants and density
system of 8n equations is obtained along the z-direction 
xn , x Natural frequency, non-dimensionalized
(thickness) for each layer and another set along the x-di- frequency parameter
rection (in-plane). The final solution of these first-order
ODEs is obtained in closed form. The numerical results are
verified by comparing against the exact 2D solution
available in the literature for the simply supported bound- Introduction
ary condition case and with 2D finite element results for
other support conditions. New benchmark results for free Laminates integrated with piezoelectric layers are known
vibration are presented for piezoelectric beams subjected to as ‘smart structures.’ Piezoelectric material layers are used
arbitrary boundary conditions. to regulate the static and dynamic behavior of the structures
through actuation and sensing and also used to control the
Keywords Extended Kantorovich method  vibration generated during operation which increases
Piezoelectric beam  Free vibration  2D piezoelasticity  safety, usability and durability of structures [1]. Thus, the
Analytical  Energy harvesting application of piezoelectric composite laminates in struc-
tural components has increased extensively in the field of
civil engineering, automobile, aeronautics and medical
List of Symbols
fields. In engineering and medical fields, we use load cells,
x, z Coordinates in axial and thickness directions
pressure sensors, accelerometers, gyroscopes and ultra-
a, h Span length, thickness of beam
sonic transducers in which piezoelectric beams or disks act
as sensing and actuating mechanism. Piezoelectric beams
& Poonam Kumari are also used in small-scale energy harvesting devices,
kpmech@[Link]
which convert vibrational energy into an electrical voltage
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of or DC power with the help of an electronic circuit.
Technology Guwahati, Guwahati 781039, India

123
 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C

Therefore, for proper functioning and designing of these to improve its performance. Fu et al. [19] and Li et al. [20]
components, it is very important to know the dynamic presented free vibration analysis of functionally graded
behavior of piezoelectric beams under various boundary (FG) beams with piezoelectric sensors and actuators.
conditions. Nilanjan Chattaraj and Ranjan Ganguli [21–23] presented
Bailey and Hubbard [2] employed distributed parameter Euler–Bernoulli-based 1D nonlinear analytical model to
control theory to design and analyze the active vibration analyze the detailed electromechanical behavior of piezo-
damper for a thin cantilever beam. Using Euler–Bernoulli electric bimorph actuators at the high electric field. Most of
beam theory, Crawley and De Luis [3, 4] developed static the above works on piezoelectric beam are based on one-
and dynamic computational models for beams with highly dimensional theories. Kapuria et al. [24] presented the
distributed actuators and sensors which were either bonded exact 2D piezoelasticity solution for simply supported
on their top surface or embedded in between the elastic beams with damping under harmonic electromechanical
layers. Yang and Lee [5] presented an analytical model to loads. A review of the literature on the free vibration
obtain mode shapes and the fundamental frequencies of a analysis of elastic and piezoelectric beams can be found in
stepped piezoelectric cantilever beam having surface-bon- the recent review articles [25–28]. An extensive literature
ded piezoelectric layers. By developing the constituent survey has revealed that analytical 2D piezoelasticity free
equations for piezoelectric bimorph beam, Low and Guo vibration solution for arbitrary supported beams is not
[6] presented a dynamic model with hysteresis for three- available in the literature [27].
layered piezoelectric bimorph beam. Sunar [7] documented Due to the coupled constitutive relation between elastic
the application of piezoelectric materials in the field of and electric field, the behavior of these types of hybrid
sensing and active control of flexible structures in his beam structures is very complex. Hence, an efficient
review article. Saravanos and Heyliger [8] and Gopinathan solution method is needful to predict the complex behavior
et al. [9] presented a detailed review of several theories and of arbitrarily supported piezoelectric laminated beams
analytical model for the analysis of smart piezoelectric which will also act as a benchmark for assessing other
structures. approximate or numerical method. Analytical techniques
Kapuria et al. [10] developed a new efficient one-di- are preferred because of its simplicity and high accuracy.
mensional coupled model, on the basis of third-order zig- Moreover, the closed-form 2D piezoelasticity solution
zag approximation, for the dynamic analysis of simply helps to understand the electromechanical behavior of
supported piezoelectric composite beams. Further, Kapuria hybrid beams and helps to make a suitable assumption for
et al. [11] presented a new coupled consistent third-order the kinematic and the kinetic field for 1D theories of the
theory (CTOT) to obtain an analytical solution for dynamic beam.
and static analysis of simply supported hybrid piezoelectric The EKM, proposed by Kerr [29, 30], is a very powerful
beams. Using the pseudospectral method, Kekana [12] and elegant analytical method for solving partial differen-
presented the free vibration solution for composite beams tial equations (PDEs). Recently, extended Kantorovich
mounted with piezopatch acting as sensors and actuators. method becomes popular to analyze the dynamic and static
Based on the Euler–Bernoulli beam theory and Rayleigh– behavior of structures. The detailed literature on extended
Ritz approximation, Della and Shu [13] developed a Kantorovich method can be found in a recent review article
micromechanics technique to obtain the free vibration presented by Wu et al. [31] and Singhatanadgid and
solution for beams embedded with piezoelectric material Singhanart [32]. Recently, Kapuria and Kumari [33] pre-
actuators and sensors. Further, Della and Shu [14] extended sented an extended Kantorovich approach for the three-
this approach to develop a dynamic solution for beams with dimensional (3D) piezoelasticity solution of the piezo-
piezoelectric inclusions. Using the transfer matrix, Wang electric plate under cylindrical bending and subjected to
[15] obtained fundamental frequencies and corresponding arbitrary support condition. Kumari et al. [34] also used
mode shapes of a beam with surface-bonded pair of this approach to obtain three-dimensional piezoelasticity
piezoelectric segments. Khdeir et al. [16] presented ana- solution for static analysis of piezoelectric laminated plates
lytical solutions for the free vibration analysis of cross-ply subjected to Levy-type supports. Further, Kumari and
piezolaminated beams embedded with piezoelectric actu- Behera [35] extended this approach to develop 3D free
ators. The state-space approach is applied to obtain fun- vibration solution for a rectangular composite plate under
damental frequencies and corresponding mode shapes for Levy-type support conditions. Recently, Kumari et al.
different combinations of support conditions. Further, [36–38] extended this approach to obtain an analytical
Khdeir and Aldraihem [17] presented a novel zigzag theory solution for the in-plane functionally graded flat panels and
for free vibration analysis of sandwich beams with soft- rectangular plates. Recently, Moeenfard and Maleki [39]
core. Muthalif and Nordin [18] developed an approach to applied extended Kantorovich method to obtain the static
find an optimum shape for cantilever-type energy harvester response of microplates under electrostatic actuation.

123
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C

In this paper, analytical 2D piezoelasticity free vibration where a subscript comma represents differentiation.
solution is presented for the beams under different com- ex ; ez ; czx ; Ex and Ez can be represented in terms of
binations of support conditions, using the multi-term multi- rx , rz , sxy , Dx and Dz as [33]:
field extended Kantorovich method (MMEKM). Piezoe-
lasticity-based extended Hamilton principle with the mixed ex ¼ s11 rx þ s13 rz þ d31 Dz ; ez ¼ s13 rx þ s33 rz þ d33 Dz ;
variational field is applied to derive the governing equa- Ez ¼  ðd31 rx þ d33 rz  e33 Dz Þ ; czx ¼ s55 szx þ d15 Dx ;
tions in terms of stresses, displacements along with electric Ex ¼ e11 Dx  d15 szx
displacements and electric potential. Therefore, boundary ð2Þ
conditions, both natural and essential, are satisfied in an
exact manner at all points. By employing MMEKM, the where sij ¼ sij  d3i d3j ; d3i ¼ d3i =e33 ; eii ¼ 1=eii for
first-order differential–algebraic system of 8n equations is i; j = 1,3. The displacement elements u and w are taken
obtained along the z-direction (thickness) for each layer along x and z axes, respectively. ri and ei denote the normal
and another set along the x-direction (in-plane). The final stress and normal strains components, respectively. sij and
solution for these first-order ODEs is obtained in closed cij denote shear stress and shear strains, and Ei denotes
form. The numerical results are verified by comparing electric field. Di and / denote the electric displacements
against the exact 2D solution, available in the literature, for and electric potential, and q is the density of the material.sij
the simply supported boundary condition case and with 2D represents the transformed elastic compliances, where dij
finite element (FE) results for other support conditions. and eii represent piezoelectric strain constants and dielec-
New benchmark results for free vibration are presented for tric permittivity’s constants at constant stress field,
piezoelectric beams subjected to arbitrary boundary respectively.
conditions. Piezoelasticity-based extended Hamilton principle in a
mixed form, without any internal charge and body force
source, for the bending case can be written as:
Mathematical Modeling Z Z Z
½du ðrx;x þ sxz;z  q€
uÞ þ dwðszx;x þ rz;z  qwÞ€
A hybrid cross–ply laminated beam having total thickness t a h
‘h’ along the z-axis and length ‘a’ along the x-axis, as þ drx ðs11 rx þ s13 rz þ d31 Dz  u;x Þ
shown in Fig. 1, is considered for modeling. The hybrid s31 rx þ s33 rz þ d33 Dz  w;z Þ
þ drz ð
laminated beam has ‘L’ number of perfectly bonded lam-
s55 szx þ d15 Dx  u;z  w;x Þ
þ dszx ð
inas which is generally orthotropic, and a few of them can
be orthotropic piezoelectric/PFRC material which could be þ d/ðDx;x þ Dz;z Þ þ dDx ðd15 szx  e11 Dx  /;x Þ
utilized as distributed sensors and actuators, and these þ dDz ðd31 rx þ d33 rz  e33 Dz  /;z Þdz dx dt ¼ 0
piezoelectric/PFRC laminas are poled along the thickness ð3Þ
direction z. The governing equations hold for each layer
(kth layer) having thickness t(k), and its bottom surface is Here, t is the time variable. The bottom and top surfaces
denoted by zk-1, where the interface of kth and (k ? 1)th of the beam are shear traction free (szx ¼ 0). Dimensionless
ply symbolized as the kth interface. in-plane coordinates considered are n ¼ x=a along the x-
For the plane stress condition, electric field–potential direction, respectively. A thickness coordinate f for a layer
and strain–displacement relations are as follows [10]: along the z-direction is defined which varies from 0 to 1.
The boundary conditions considered at the top and bottom
ex ¼ u;x ; czx ¼ w;x þ u;z ; ez ¼ w;z ; Ez ¼ /;z ;
ð1Þ surfaces are at z ¼ h=2, szx ¼ 0; rz ¼ 0;
Ex ¼ /;x
for open circuit Dz ¼ 0 and for close circuit / ¼ 0. Along
the x-axis, beam can have any type of support such as
simply supported (S): w ¼ 0; rx ¼ 0; free (F):
szx ¼ 0; rx ¼ 0; clamped (C): w ¼ 0; u ¼ 0.

The Generalized EKM

These are eight primary field variables X ¼

½u w rx rz szx / Dx Dz  which are to be solved.
Using multi-term EKM, the field variable for the kth
lamina is expressed as:
Fig. 1 Geometry of a hybrid beam

123
 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C

X
n ^ and put into
The algebraic Eq. (7) is solved to obtain G
Xl ðn; fÞ ¼ fli ðnÞgil ðfÞ for l ¼ 1; 2; . . .. . .:8 ð4Þ Eq. (6) which yields a set of 6n first-order homogeneous
i¼1
ODEs as:
where fli ðnÞ and gil ðfÞ are the unknown functions of n and f,  ;f ¼ AG
G  ð8Þ
respectively. The functions gil ðfÞ are dependent on the kth
layer, while functions fli ðnÞ are valid for all layers. These where A ¼ M 1 ½A þ AK ~ Equation (8) represents a set
^ 1 A.
unknown functions of f and n are to be solved in two of 6n homogeneous first-order ODEs with constant
iterative steps by satisfying all homogenous support coefficient. The general solution of Eq. (8) is obtained by
conditions. applying the approach given in Ref. [35], and the final
solution is:
First Iteration Step Along the Thickness Direction X
6n

GðfÞ ¼ Fi ðfÞCi ð9Þ
Functions fli ðnÞ, along n-direction, are considered for the i¼1

variation dXl where Fi ðfÞ are column vector which depend upon
Xn eigenvector and eigenvalue and Ci unknown constant.
dXl ¼ fli ðnÞ dgil l ¼ 1; 2; . . .. . .. . .8 ð5Þ After applying top and bottom boundary conditions and
i¼1
interface conditions, Eq. (9) yields,
Functions gil ðfÞ are segregated into two column vectors X
6n

G and G,^ where G  contains these particular six variables Kdi ðfÞCi ¼ 0 ð10Þ
which come in the support and interface conditions along i¼1
f-direction, and G ^ contains the remaining variables:
 1  where the coefficient matrix Kd is a function of x. For
G ¼ g . . .g g . . .gn g1 . . .gn g1 . . .gn g1 . . .gn g1 . . .gn
n 1
nontrivial solutions, its determinant should be zero and x
1 1 2 2 4 4 5 5 6 6 8 8
  can be obtained by root finding of the equation j detðKd Þj ¼
G^ ¼ g1 . . .gn g1 . . .gn
3 3 7 7
0 using bisection method. The un-damped natural fre-
Substitute Eqs. (4) and (5) in Eq. (3) and perform the quencies x01 ¼ xn are determined by using the approach
integrations along n-direction. Since variations for dgil are of Kapuria and Acharya [40].
arbitrary, the coefficients of dgil must vanish (equal to zero)
which generates the following set of 8n governing Second Iteration Step Along the x-axis
differential–algebraic equations for each layer:
;f ¼ AG
 þ A^G
^ Now gil ðfÞ is known from the first step, and arbitrary
MG ð6Þ
variation is considered along the x-direction. Therefore, the
^ ¼ A~G
KG  ð7Þ variation for this case is written as:
where M6n6n ; A6n6n ; A^6n2n ; K2n2n and A~2n6n are Xn
dXl ¼ gil ðnÞ dfli l ¼ 1; 2; . . .. . .::8 ð11Þ
known matrices. Nonzero elements of the matrices are i¼1
given below:

     
Mi1 j1 ¼ Mi4 j4 ¼ f5i f1j a ; Mi2 j2 ¼ Mi3 j3 ¼ f4i f2j a Mi5 j5 ¼ Mi6 j6 ¼ f8i f6j a ;
t i j E
D    
Ai1 j2 ¼ f f ; Ai1 j4 ¼ t s55 f5i f5j a ; A^i1 j2 ¼ t d15 f5i f7j a ;
a 5 2;n a    
j
A^i2 j1 ¼ t s13 f4 f3 a ;
i
Ai2 j3 ¼ t s33 f4i f4j a ; Ai2 j6 ¼ t d33 f4i f8j a ;
t D i j E t D i j E  
Ai3 j4 ¼ f f ; A^i4 j1 ¼ f f ; Ai5 j3 ¼ t d33 f8i f4j a ;
a 2 5;n a a 1 3;n a
 i j  i j t D i j E
A^i5 j1 ¼ t d31 f8 f3 a ; Ai5 j6 ¼ t e33 f8 f8 a ; A^i6 j2 ¼ f f ;
a 6 7;n a
  1D i j E  i j
Ki1 j1 ¼ s11 f3i f3j a ; A~i1 j1 ¼ f f ; A~i1 j3 ¼  s13 f3 f4 a ;
a 3 1;n a
   i j 1D j E
Ki2 j2 ¼ e11 f7i f7j a ; A~i1 j6 ¼  d13 f3 f4 a ; A~i2 j5 ¼  f7i f6;n ;
    a  a
A~ ¼  d15 f i f j ;
i2 j4 7 5 a A ¼ qx2 t f i f j ;
i4 j1 1 1 a Ai3 j2 ¼ qx2 t f2i f2 a j

123
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C

Fig. 2 Flowchart of applied

multi-term EKM approach

Fig. 3 Configuration of
piezoelectric beam and elastic
beam

123
 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C

Similarly, like the first step, fli ðnÞ are segregated into symmetric 4-ply laminate [0°/90°/90°/0°] of graphite–
two column vectors F and F, ^ where F carries these epoxy (Material 1) with layers of equal thickness 0.225 h,
particular six variables which come in the support as shown in Fig. 3. Beam (b) is an elastic composite beam
conditions at edges n = 0, 1 and F^ contains the with symmetric 4-ply laminate [0°/90°/90°/0°] of Material
remaining two variables. 1 and each lamina of equal thickness 0.25 h, as shown in
  Fig. 3.
F ¼ f11 . . .f1n f21 . . .f2n f31 . . .f3n f51 . . .f5n f61 . . .f6n f71 . . .f7n
  The material properties like Young’s moduli (Yi ), shear
F^ ¼ f41 . . .f4n f81 . . .f8n moduli (Gij ), Poisson’s ratios (mij ), constant strain electric
Substitute Eqs. (4) and (11) into Eq. (3) and perform permittivities (gij ), and piezoelectric strain constants (dij )
integration along the z-axis on the known functions gil ðfÞ. are taken from Ref. [10] as:
Since variations for dfli are arbitrary, the coefficients of dfli [Y1, Y2, Y3, G12, G23, G31, m12 , m13 , m23 ]: Material 1:
must vanish (equal to zero) which generates the following [(181, 10.3, 10.3, 7.17, 2.87, 7.17) GPa, 0.28, 0.28, 0.33],
set of 8n governing differential–algebraic equations: PZT-5A: [(61, 61, 53.2, 22.6, 21.1, 21.1) GPa, 0.35, 0.38,
0.38], [(g11 , g22 , g33 ); (d31, d32, d33, d15, d24)] = [(1.53,
N F;n ¼ BF þ B^F^ 1.53, 1.5) 9 10-8 F/m; (-171, -171, 374, 584,
ð12Þ
LF^ ¼ B~F 584) 9 10-12 m/V]. The densities of materials 1 and PZT-
5A are 1578 and 7600 kg/m3, respectively. The natural
where N6n6n ; B6n6n ; B^6n2n ; L2n2n and B~2n6n are frequency xn , the modal displacements, stresses and elec-
known matrices. The nonzero terms of these matrices are trical state variables are non-dimensionalized as:
given as:

     
Ni1 j1 ¼ Ni3 j3 ¼ gi3 g1j h ; Ni2 j2 ¼ Ni4 j4 ¼ gi5 g2j h ; Ni5 j5 ¼ Ni6 j6 ¼ gi7 g6j h ;
     
Bi1 j3 ¼ s11 gi3 g3j h ; B^i1 j1 ¼ s13 gi3 g4j h ; B^i1 j2 ¼ d31 gi3 g8j h ;
1D j
E    
Bi2 j1 ¼  gi5 g1;f ; Bi2 j4 ¼ s55 gi5 g5j h ; Bi2 j6 ¼ d15 gi5 g7j h ;
tD E h
1 i j 1D j
E  
Bi3 j4 ¼ g g ; B^i4 j1 ¼  gi2 g4;f ; Bi5 j6 ¼  e11 gi5 g5j h ;
t 5;f 1 h tD Eh
  1  
Bi5 j4 ¼ d15 gi7 g5j h ; B^i6 j2 ¼  gi1 g8;f j
; Li1 j1 ¼ s33 gi4 g4j h ;
tD E h
  1 i j  
B~i1 j3 ¼  s13 gi4 g3j h ; B~i1 j2 ¼ g g ; Li1 j2 ¼ d33 gi8 g4j h ;
  t 4 2;f h  
Li2 j2 ¼  e33 gi8 g8j h ; Li2 j1 ¼ Li1 j2 B~i2 j3 ¼  d31 gi8 g3j h ;
D
1 i j E    
B~i2 j5 ¼ gg ; Bi3 j1 ¼ aqx2 gi1 g1j h ; Bi4 j2 ¼ aqx2 gi2 g2j h ;
t 8 6;f h

The same procedure is followed as in the first step, and a pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

 ¼ xn aS
x q0 =Y0 ; ð  ¼ ðu; wÞ=maxðu; wÞ
u; wÞ
set of 6n first-order homogeneous ODEs are obtained for fli ,
which are solved in a similar fashion as mentioned in the ðrx ; szx Þ ¼ ðrx ; szx ÞSh=Y0 maxðu; wÞ;
previous step.  ¼ / d0 =maxðu; wÞ; D
/ x ¼ Dx Sh=d0 Y0 maxðu; wÞ
The flowchart of iterative procedure for multi-term
where S (a/h) denotes span-to-thickness ratio. Max (u,
extended Kantorovich method is shown in Fig. 2.
w) denotes the largest value of (u, w) through the thickness
for a particular mode. Y0 = 10.3 GPa, q0 = 1578 kg/m3
Numerical Results and d0 ¼ d33 pm/V. The length of piezoelectric beam is
assumed equal to unity for all cases, and thickness of beam
In this section, various numerical results are presented and is taken according to span-to-thickness ratio (S = a/h). For
discussed for a hybrid beam (a) consisting of a laminate S = 5, 10, 20, the values of ‘h’ are 0.2, 0.1, 0.05,
substrate having a piezoelectric (PZT-5A) layer of thick- respectively.
ness 0.1 h (a = 1) bonded at the top of the beam. The Dimensionless natural frequencies for the first three
piezoelectric substrate is grounded at the bottom and top bending modes of the hybrid beam are given in Table 1 for
surfaces. The composite substrate of the beam has the simply supported boundary conditions. Presented

123
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C

Table 1 Lowest five natural frequencies of piezoelectric simply Table 2 Lowest three natural frequencies of the piezoelectric com-
supported composite beam (a) posite beam (a) under clamped–simply supported boundary
conditions
Modes S EKM Exact 2D [11] 2D FE (Abaqus)
Modes S C–S
1 5 5.5165 5.5165 5.5165
EKM 2D FE
10 7.4119 7.4119 7.4119
20 8.3308 8.3308 8.3307 1 5 6.1456 6.2829
2 5 13.5887 13.589 13.5890 10 9.5316 9.6206
10 22.0661 22.066 22.0662 20 12.1196 12.1471
20 29.6476 29.647 29.6476 2 5 13.8817 14.1829
3 5 22.0016 22.002 22.0023 10 23.3668 23.6842
10 38.0200 38.020 38.0211 20 34.0563 34.2091
20 57.6204 57.620 57.6218 3 5 22.2271 22.5827
10 38.7888 39.2901
20 61.1997 61.6108
results are compared with exact 2D results of Kapuria et al.
[11]. It is noticed that the presented results match excel- Table 3 Lowest three natural frequencies of the piezoelectric com-
lently with Ref. [11]. Since there is no 2D analytical free posite beam (a) under clamped–free boundary conditions
vibration solution for a beam with other combination of Modes S C–F
support conditions, present numerical results are compared
with 2D FE (Abaqus) for other combination of boundary EKM 2D FE
conditions. 1 5 2.3545 2.3860
The 2D FE solution is obtained using the Abaqus soft- 10 2.8586 2.8629
ware. In the 2D FE analysis, eight-node brick elements of 20 3.0436 3.0411
type CPS8RE for piezoelectric layers and CPS8R for 2 5 8.2096 8.6002
elastic layers with reduced integration are used. Converged 10 12.9698 13.1635
results are obtained with a mesh size of 50 (length) 9 18 20 17.0363 17.0052
(thickness), as shown in Figs. 4 and 5. 3 5 16.6309 17.2238
The lowest three natural frequencies are presented in 10 28.1884 28.7445
Tables 2, 3, and 4 for different combinations of support
20 41.3175 41.5772
conditions: clamped–simply supported (C–S), clamped–
free (C–F) and clamped–clamped (C–C)) for three span-to-
thickness ratios (S = 5, 10 and 20). The present results are Table 4 Lowest three natural frequencies of the piezoelectric com-
posite beam (b) under clamped–clamped boundary conditions
compared with 2D FE solution. It is observed that the
present EKM results match excellently with 2D FE results. Modes S C–C
It is observed that for the thick beam, S = 5, the difference EKM 2D FE
between the present and 2D FE results is more than mod-
erately thick to thin beams for all modes and all boundary 1 5 7.0624 7.2014
conditions. 10 11.2637 11.8480
Boundary conditions have a significant effect on fun- 20 16.3091 16.3476
damental frequencies. One can easily observe from 2 5 14.2002 14.7325
Tables 2, 3 and 4 that first fundamental frequency is the 10 24.5828 25.1293
highest for C–C case for all three values of S (a/h) and 20 38.6841 38.4834
lowest for C–F case. For higher modes, such as 2 and 3, the 3 5 22.5344 23.1754
frequencies are near to S–S case for C–C and C–S condi- 10 39.6405 40.5910
tions, whereas, for C–F boundary condition, the 20 64.5903 65.3785

Fig. 4 Two-dimensional FE
model with mesh discretization
50 (length) 9 18 (thickness)

123
 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C

Fig. 5 Two-dimensional FE
model of hybrid beam (S = 10)
under S–S boundary conditions

Fig. 6 Effect of span-to-

thickness ratio (S) on frequency
parameter of beam (a) for
different boundary conditions

frequencies for all modes and all S (5, 10, 20) are the in excellent agreement with 2D FE results for both mode
lowest. It is observed that as the thickness-to-span ratio shapes. Similarly, the longitudinal variation of displace-
(S) increases, the non-dimensionalized natural frequency ments ( u), normal stress (rx ) and shear stress (
szx ) is pre-
parameters increase for all types of boundary conditions sented in Fig. 9 for piezoelectric beam (a) (S = 10) under
and the increment is more pronounced at higher modes as C–F and C–C cases, respectively. For these cases also,
compared to the first mode which can also be observed present EKM results match excellently with the 2D FE
from Fig. 6 where the non-dimensionalized frequency results.
parameters are plotted against thickness-to-span ratio The through-thickness distributions of in-plane dis-
(S) numbers for S–S, C–C, C–S and C–F cases. placement ( u) and stresses (rx and szx ) are compared in
In Fig. 7, the longitudinal variation of field variables ( u; Fig. 10 for beam (a) and beam (b) (S = 10) subjected to C–
    
w, rx , szx , Dx , /) is presented for the first mode of beam C and C–F boundary conditions. It is observed that the
(a) (S = 10) under S–S boundary conditions. Similarly, the piezoelectric layer (PZT-5A), on the top of the elastic
longitudinal variation of field variables ( u; w, x ,
 rx , szx , D beam, significantly affects the behavior and natural fre-

/) for the third mode of beam (a) (S = 10) under S–S quency of the beam. The first-mode non-dimensionalized
boundary conditions is plotted in Fig. 8. Converged results natural frequency parameter for beam (b) (elastic beam,
of single-term EKM are presented for both cases which are S = 10) is x CC = 14.3008 and x  CF = 3.62942 for C–C and

123
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C

Fig. 7 Longitudinal variation

of displacements, stresses and
electrical variables for the first
modes of beam (a) under S–S
boundary conditions

Fig. 8 Longitudinal variation

of displacements, stresses and
electrical variables for the third
modes of beam (a) under S–S
boundary conditions

123
 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C

Fig. 9 Longitudinal variation

of displacements and stresses
for the first modes of beam
(a) under C–F and C–C
boundary conditions

C–F conditions, respectively. Then the inclusion of presented for the laminated piezoelectric beams under
piezoelectric (PZT-5A) layer, of thickness 0.1h, on the top different combinations of support conditions. The present
of beam decreases the natural frequency parameter to numerical results are compared with the 2D exact solution
 CC = 11.2637 and x
x CF = 2.8586 for C–C and C–F con- for simply supported support conditions and with 2D FE
ditions, respectively. results for other combination of boundary conditions. It is
noticed that the present EKM results match excellently
with 2D FE results. It is also determined that as the span-
Conclusion to-thickness ratio increases, the non-dimensionalized nat-
ural frequency parameters increase and the increment is
A coupled 2D piezoelasticity solution is presented for the
more pronounced for clamped–clamped boundary condi-
free vibration analysis of a piezoelectric beam. The fun-
tion. It is observed that the piezoelectric layer (PZT-5A),
damental frequencies and corresponding mode shapes are
on the top of the elastic beam, significantly affects the

123
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C

Fig. 10 Effect of piezoelectric

layer on through-thickness
distributions of in-plane
displacements and stresses and
electrical variables for C–C and
C–F boundary conditions

behavior and natural frequency of the beam. The presented 5. S.M. Yang, Y.J. Lee, Modal analysis of stepped beams with
results can be utilized for assessing 1D theories. piezoelectric materials. J. Sound Vib. 176(3), 289–300 (1994)
6. T.S. Low, W. Guo, Modeling of a three-layer piezoelectric
bimorph beam with hysteresis. J. Microelectromech. Syst. 4(4),
230–237 (1995)
References 7. M. Sunar, S.S. Rao, Recent advances in sensing and control of
flexible structures via piezoelectric materials technology. Appl.
1. I. Chopra, Review of state of art of smart structures and inte- Mech. Rev. 52(1), 1–16 (1999)
grated systems. AIAA J. 40(11), 2145–2187 (2002) 8. D.A. Saravanos, P.R. Heyliger, Mechanics and computational
2. T. Bailey, J.E. Hubbard, Distributed piezoelectric-polymer active models for laminated piezoelectric beams, plates, and shells.
vibration control of a cantilever beam. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 8(5), Appl. Mech. Rev. 52(10), 305–320 (1999)
605–611 (1985) 9. S.V. Gopinathan, V.V. Varadan, V.K. Varadan, A review and
3. E.F. Crawley, J. De Luis, Use of piezoelectric actuators as ele- critique of theories for piezoelectric laminates. Smart Mater.
ments of intelligent structures. AIAA J. 25(10), 1373–1385 (1987) Struct. 9(1), 24 (2000)
4. E.F. Crawley, E.H. Anderson, Detailed models of piezoceramic 10. S. Kapuria, P.C. Dumir, A. Ahmed, An efficient coupled layer-
actuation of beams. J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 1(1), 4–25 (1990) wise theory for dynamic analysis of piezoelectric composite
beams. J. Sound Vib. 261(5), 927–944 (2003)

123
 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C

11. S. Kapuria, P.C. Dumir, A. Ahmed, Coupled consistent third- 28. Y. Kumar, The Rayleigh–Ritz method for linear dynamic, static
order theory for hybrid piezoelectric composite and sandwich and buckling behavior of beams, shells and plates: a literature
beams. J. Reinf. Plast. Compos. 24(2), 173–194 (2005) review. J. Vib. Control 24(7), 1205–1227 (2018)
12. M. Kekana, Calculation of eigenvalues of a piezoelastic beam 29. A.D. Kerr, An extension of the Kantorovich method. Q. Appl.
using the pseudospectral method. Smart Mater. Struct. 15(4), Math. 26(2), 219–229 (1968)
1079 (2006) 30. A.D. Kerr, An extended Kantorovich method for the solution of
13. C.N. Della, D. Shu, Vibration of beams with embedded piezo- eigenvalue problems. Int. J. Solids Struct. 5(6), 559–572 (1969)
electric sensors and actuators. Smart Mater. Struct. 15(2), 529 31. C.P. Wu, K.H. Chiu, Y.M. Wang, A review on the three-di-
(2006) mensional analytical approaches of multilayered and functionally
14. C.N. Della, D. Shu, Vibration of beams with piezoelectric graded piezoelectric plates and shells. Comput. Mater. Contin.
inclusions. Int. J. Solids Struct. 44(7–8), 2509–2522 (2007) 8(2), 93–132 (2008)
15. R.T. Wang, Structural responses of surface-mounted piezoelectric 32. P. Singhatanadgid, T. Singhanart, The Kantorovich method
beams. J. Mech. 26(1), 47–59 (2010) applied to bending, buckling, vibration, and 3D stress analyses of
16. A.A. Khdeir, E. Darraj, O.J. Aldraihem, Free vibration of cross plates: a literature review. Mech. Adv. Mater. Struct. 26(2), 1–19
ply laminated beams with multiple distributed piezoelectric (2017)
actuators. J. Mech. 28(1), 217–227 (2012) 33. S. Kapuria, P. Kumari, Extended Kantorovich method for three-
17. A.A. Khdeir, O.J. Aldraihem, Free vibration of sandwich beams dimensional elasticity solution of laminated composite structures
with soft core. Compos. Struct. 154, 179–189 (2016) in cylindrical bending. J. Appl. Mech. 78(6), 061004 (2011)
18. A.G. Muthalif, N.D. Nordin, Optimal piezoelectric beam shape 34. P. Kumari, S. Behera, S. Kapuria, Coupled three-dimensional
for single and broadband vibration energy harvesting: modeling, piezoelasticity solution for edge effects in Levy-type rectangular
simulation and experimental results. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. piezolaminated plates using mixed field extended Kantorovich
54, 417–426 (2015) method. Compos. Struct. 140, 491–505 (2016)
19. Y. Fu, J. Wang, Y. Mao, Nonlinear vibration and active control of 35. P. Kumari, S. Behera, Three-dimensional free vibration analysis
functionally graded beams with piezoelectric sensors and actua- of levy-type laminated plates using multi-term extended Kan-
tors. J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 22(18), 2093–2102 (2011) torovich method. Compos. B Eng. 116, 224–238 (2017)
20. Y.S. Li, W.J. Feng, Z.Y. Cai, Bending and free vibration of 36. A. Singh, P. Kumari, R. Hazarika, Analytical solution for bending
functionally graded piezoelectric beam based on modified strain analysis of axially functionally graded angle-ply flat panels.
gradient theory. Compos. Struct. 115, 41–50 (2014) Math. Probl. Eng. 2018, 2597484 (2018)
21. N. Chattaraj, R. Ganguli, Electromechanical analysis of piezo- 37. P. Kumari, A. Singh, R.K.N.D. Rajapakse, S. Kapuria, Three-
electric bimorph actuator in static state considering the nonlin- dimensional static analysis of Levy-type functionally graded
earity at high electric field. Mech. Adv. Mater. Struct. 23(7), plate with in-plane stiffness variation. Compos. Struct. 168,
802–810 (2016) 780–791 (2017)
22. N. Chattaraj, R. Ganguli, Effect of self-induced electric dis- 38. P. Kumari, A. Singh, Three-dimensional analytical solution for
placement field on the response of a piezo-bimorph actuator at FGM plate with varying material properties in in-plane directions
high electric field. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 120, 341–348 (2017) using extended kantorovich method. Rec. Adv. Struct. Eng. 1,
23. N. Chattaraj, R. Ganguli, Multi-objective optimization of a triple 611–621 (2019)
layer piezoelectric bender with a flexible extension using genetic 39. H. Moeenfard, S. Maleki, Characterization of the static behavior
algorithm. Mech. Adv. Mater. Struct. 25(9), 785–793 (2018) of electrically actuated micro-plates using extended Kantorovich
24. S. Kapuria, P.C. Dumir, A. Ahmed, Exact 2D piezoelasticity method. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 231(12),
solution of hybrid beam with damping under harmonic elec- 2327–2339 (2017)
tromechanical load. ZAMM J. Appl. Math. Mech. 84(6), 391–402 40. S. Kapuria, G.G.S. Achary, Exact 3D piezoelasticity solution of
(2004) hybrid cross–ply plates with damping under harmonic electro-
25. V. Gupta, M. Sharma, N. Thakur, Mathematical modeling of mechanical loads. J. Sound Vib. 282(3–5), 617–634 (2005)
actively controlled piezo smart structures: a review. Smart Struct.
Syst. 8(3), 275–302 (2011)
26. M. Hajianmaleki, M.S. Qatu, Vibrations of straight and curved Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
composite beams: a review. Compos. Struct. 100, 218–232 jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
(2013)
27. A.S. Sayyad, Y.M. Ghugal, Bending, buckling and free vibration
of laminated composite and sandwich beams: a critical review of
literature. Compos. Struct. 171, 486–504 (2017)

123