THEORETICAL & APPLIED MECHANICS LETTERS 2, 063005 (2012)

Development of flexible telescopic boom model using absolute nodal

coordinate formulation sliding joint constraints with LuGre friction
Hiroki Fujita,a) and Hiroyuki Sugiyamab)
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Tokyo University of Science, Tokyo 102-0073, Japan
(Received 10 September 2012; accepted 25 September 2012; published online 10 November 2012)
Abstract In this investigation, a modeling procedure of a telescopic boom of cranes is developed
using the absolute nodal coordinate formulation together with the sliding joint constraints. Since
telescopic booms are extracted and retracted under various operating conditions, the overall length
of the boom changes dynamically, leading to the time-variant vibration characteristics. For modeling
the telescopic structure of booms, a special care needs to be exercised since the location of the sliding
contact point moves along the deformable axis of the flexible boom and the solution to a moving
boundary problem is required. This issue indeed makes the modeling of the telescopic boom difficult,
despite the significant needs for the analysis. It is, therefore, the objective of this investigation to
develop a modeling procedure for the flexible telescopic boom by considering the sliding contact
condition with the dynamic frictional effect. To this end, the sliding joint constraint developed for
the absolute nodal coordinate formulation is employed for describing relative sliding motion between
flexible booms, while flexible booms are modeled using the beam element of the absolute nodal
coordinate formulation, which allows for modeling the large rotation and deformation of the structure.
⃝c 2012 The Chinese Society of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics. [doi:10.1063/2.1206305]
Keywords telescopic boom, sliding joint, flexible multibody dynamics, absolute nodal coordinate
formulation

Telescopic booms as shown in Fig. 1 are widely Boom 3

Wire rope
used in many types of cranes. Since these booms
are flexible and extracted/retracted under various op- Boom 2
erating conditions, the overall length of the boom
changes dynamically, leading to the time-variant vibra-
tion characteristics.1 This issue indeed makes the mod-
eling of the telescopic boom difficult, despite the signif-
icant needs for the analysis. The dynamic characteris- Boom 1
tics of a beam with time-variant length have been dis-
cussed for many industrial applications that include not
only the telescopic boom of cranes, but also an extensi-
ble ladder of aerial ladder trucks,2 a telescopic flexible Actuator
robotic arms,3 flexible extensible antennas in aerospace
applications,4,5 a tether satellite retracted by retrieval
mechanism,6 a thin steel plate winded by a high-speed
take-up roller,7 and many others. In most studies that Fig. 1. Telescopic boom.
discuss a beam with time-variant length, a special time-
variant length beam element is used in order to reduce
computational time.8 However, in the telescopic boom ing joint constraints for a large deformable beam mod-
of cranes, the outer and inner booms are in contact at eled using the absolute nodal coordinate formulation
a few sliding points and the inner flexible boom being (ANCF) are proposed in the literature11 by introducing
retracted into the outer flexible boom is subjected to arc-length coordinates into the shape function. The arc-
bending motion inside the outer boom. For this rea- length coordinates are defined as slack coordinates used
son, the problem needs to be essentially modeled as a for defining the location of the time-variant joint defini-
moving boundary problem by precisely imposing slid- tion point on a flexible body. This formulation leads to
ing contact conditions between booms, not a problem a systematic numerical procedure that can be used for
of time-variant length beam system. solving moving boundary problems that involve sliding
For modeling sliding joint constraints for flexible joints. Therefore, in this investigation, a modeling pro-
bodies in multibody systems, various types of formu- cedure of a telescopic boom of cranes is developed using
lations have been proposed.9–12 Among others, slid- the absolute nodal coordinate formulation together with
the sliding joint constraints. Furthermore, for describ-
ing the dynamic frictional effect on the sliding point, the
a) Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]. LuGre dynamic friction model is applied to the ANCF
b) Email: [email protected]. sliding the joint constraint.
063005-2 H. Fujita, and H. Sugiyama Theor. Appl. Mech. Lett. 2, 063005 (2012)

j ∫ ( )T
∂K i
EI K i dxi , (8)
i/ ri/ Si xi ∂ei
i
S
where EA and EI are, respectively, the axial and bend-
ing stiffness. Using the principle of virtual work in
dynamics, the element equations of motion can be ob-
tained as follows
Fig. 2. Sliding joint constraint.
M i ëi = Qik + Qie , (9)
where Qik is the vector of generalized element elastic
In order to model flexible booms, the finite element
absolute nodal coordinate formulation is used. The forces, Qie is the vector of generalized element external
global position vector r i of an arbitrary point on the forces, and M i is the element mass matrix.
centerline of a planar straight beam element i is defined In order to model relative sliding motion between
as13 flexible booms, sliding joint constraints as shown in
Fig. 2 are used in this investigation. Since the joint
rci = S i (xi )ei , (1) definition point of the sliding joint moves on the de-
formable bodies, prediction of the location of the joint
where S i (xi ) is the element shape function matrix, xi
is the vector of spatial coordinates defined in the ele- definition point requires solutions to a moving bound-
ment coordinate system, and ei is the vector of nodal ary problem between bodies in contact. In order to effi-
coordinates of element i. The nodal coordinate vector ciently model such a sliding contact for beam elements
eij at node j of element i is defined as follows modeled using the absolute nodal coordinate formula-
tion, an arc-length coordinate is introduced in the shape
[ ( ij )T ]T
( ij )T function matrix.11 Using this slack coordinate, the loca-
ij ∂r
e = r . (2) tion of the sliding joint k on a flexible body i is defined
∂xi along the beam centerline and the shape function of the
In this case, the global position vector is expressed as element is then defined as a function of the arc-length
coordinate sik as11
r i = rci + y i j i , (3)
i
r ik = S i (sik )ei . (10)
where j is a unit vector perpendicular to the tangent of
the beam centerline as shown in Fig. 2. The orientation That is, xi = sik , which is an unknown time-variant ma-
of the beam cross section is uniquely defined by the terial point that defines the constraint definition point
orthonormal orientation matrix Ai = [ii j i ] and k along the beam centerline. Using Eq. (10), the con-
straint equations between flexible booms i and j mod-
∂rci ∂rci /∂xi
ii = = , j i = I˜ ii , (4) eled using the absolute nodal coordinate formulation
∂si |∂rci /∂xi | can be defined as
[ ]
where si represents the arc-length coordinate along the iik
· (r ik
− r jk
)
beam centerline at the deformed configuration and I˜ C(ei , ej , sik ) = = 0, (11)
is a matrix that rotates the vector ii by 90◦ counter- j ik · (r ik − r jk )
clockwise. The strain associated with the longitudinal
stretch can be obtained as14 where r ik is a position vector at the constraint definition
point k on flexible boom i, which is defined as a function
( dsi )2 − ( dxi )2 1 ( i2 )
of nodal coordinates ei and the arc-length coordinate
εil = = J − 1 , (5)
2( dxi )2 2 sik . The vector iik is a tangent vector to the beam
  centerline and j ik is a vector perpendicular to iik .
where J i = ∂si /∂xi = ∂rci /∂xi . Furthermore, the
Using Eq. (11), the variational equations of motion
material measure of curvature can be expressed as14 of beams connected by a sliding joint constraint can be
T ∂ii expressed as11
Ki = ji = κi J i , (6) ( )
∂xi δeT M ë + CeT λ − Q + δsT CsT λ = 0,
where κi is the spatial measure of curvature given as (12)
C(e, s) = 0,
 i
i T ∂i
i  ∂i 
=  i  = |rc′ × rc′′ | / |rc′ | ,
i 3
κ =j (7) where Ce = ∂C/∂e, Cs = ∂C/∂s, and λ is a vector of
∂s i ∂s Lagrange multipliers. It is important to note here that
where rc′ = ∂rc /∂x. the Lagrange multipliers need to fulfill CsT λ = 0, and
The generalized elastic forces of the longitudinal this implies that all the Lagrange multipliers are not
stretch and bending are then obtained as follows independent. Such a special equation is derived due to
∫ ( i )T the introduction of slack parameters s to the equations
∂εl of motion with which there is no mass and forces as-
Qk = −EA
i
εil dxi −
x i ∂e i sociated. Since a constraint force associated with the
063005-3 Development of flexible telescopic boom model Theor. Appl. Mech. Lett. 2, 063005 (2012)

Y extracted/retracted simultaneously with a single actu-

P l Q ator. In this figure, point P on boom 1 and point R on
X boom 3 are connected by a wire rope through a pulley
l
attached to point Q of boom 2. For this reason, when
Y R
boom 2 is extracted by a hydraulic actuator, boom 3
P Q
is also extracted. In order to model such a coupling
X motion, let the distance between points P and Q be
l1 , while the distance between points Q and R be l2 as
R l
Boom 1 Boom 2 Boom 3 shown in Fig. 3. The sum of l1 and l2 is equal to the
length of the wire rope L = l1 + l2 which is constant in
Fig. 3. Extraction/retraction mechanism. time. Therefore, the constraint equation can be written
as follows
C(e1 , e2 , e3 ) = L − l1 (e1 , e2 ) − l2 (e2 , e3 ) = 0, (19)
relative motion along the joint axis always equals zero,
a constraint equation associated with the dependent La- where ei is a nodal coordinate vector of flexible boom i
grange multiplier can be defined as C d (ei , ej , sik ) = 0, and the distance l1 and l2 can be defined as
while the remaining constraint equation is defined as    2 
C n (ei , ej , sik ) = 0. These equations are, respectively, l1 (e1 , e2 ) = rP1 − rQ
2
, l2 (e2 , e3 ) = rQ 3
− rR .(20)
written as follows When flexible booms are subjected to sliding mo-
ikT tion, frictional effect comes into play and the modeling
C (e , e , s ) = i (r − r ) = 0,
d i j ik ik jk
T (13) of friction is crucial for accurate prediction of the dy-
C n (ei , ej , sik ) = j ik (r ik − r jk ) = 0,
namic behavior of the telescopic boom. In particular,
from which, the variational equations of motion can be the sliding friction between booms can cause stick-slip
re-written as motion and, therefore, an appropriate friction model
T T
needs to be employed to account for the dynamic fric-
δeT (M ë + Cen λn + Ced λd − Q) + tional effect. In this investigation, LuGre dynamic fric-
δsT (Csn λn + Csd λd ) = 0, (14) tion model15 is employed for modeling the stick-slip fric-
tion behavior resulting from the transient sliding be-
where λn and λd are Lagrange multipliers associated tween ANCF flexible booms.
with C n (ei , ej , sik ) = 0 and C d (ei , ej , sik ) = 0, re- In the LuGre dynamic friction model, the state of
spectively. By differentiating C d (ei , ej , sik ) = 0 with friction is described by the following differential equa-
respect to time, one can obtain the following equations tions defined in terms of the internal friction parameter
z as15
ṡ = B ė, s̈ = B ë + γs , (15)
σ0 |vr | z
ż = vr − , (21)
where B is a velocity transformation matrix defined g(vr )
by B = −(Csd )−1 Ced . Using the preceding equation,
Eq. (14) can be written as where vr is a relative tangential velocity between booms
i and j at the sliding point k given as
δeT [M ë + (Cen + Csn B)T λn − Q] = 0, (16) T
vr = iik (ṙ ik − ṙ jk ). (22)
where the dependent Lagrange multiplier is systemati-
cally eliminated from the equations of motion using the In Eq. (21), σ0 is the frictional parameter and the func-
following identity tion g(vr ) describes the dependency of the slip velocity
on the friction coefficient as originally given by the fol-
Ced + Csd B = 0. (17) lowing exponential function15
g(vr ) = µc + (µs − µc ) e−|vr /vs | ,
α
Consequently, one can obtain the following standard (23)
form of the differentialalgebraic equations of motion
where µc and µs are, respectively, the kinetic and static
that include the independent Lagrange multiplier
friction coefficients, while vs and α are, respectively, the
M ë + H T λn = Q, Stribeck velocity and an exponent to characterize the
(18) transition curve from the static to kinetic friction coef-
H ë = Q̂d ,
ficients. The tangential frictional force is then defined
where H = Cen + Csn B and λn defines the constraint as
force applied in a direction perpendicular to the sliding Ft = (σ0 z + σ1 ż) λn , (24)
axis Q̂d is a quadratic velocity vector obtained by dif-
ferentiating the constraint equation twice with respect where the normal contact force is defined by the La-
to time. grange multiplier λn associated with the sliding joint
As shown in Fig. 3, telescopic booms are con- constraint. σ1 in Eq. (24) is a coefficient associated with
nected by a wire rope such that booms 2 and 3 are ż to model the viscous friction. Since the frictional force
063005-4 H. Fujita, and H. Sugiyama Theor. Appl. Mech. Lett. 2, 063005 (2012)

of the LuGre model is defined by the differential equa- Boom 1

tion, the hysteresis of the frictional force as well as the . m Sliding joint 2
stick-slip friction can be modeled without switching the S1
Boom 2
static and kinetic friction states.
. m
The final form of the equations of motion of the Sliding joint 4
telescopic booms can then be defined as follows S2
S3
. m
M ë + CeT λ = Q, Sliding joint 1

CsT λ = 0, S4
(25) Sliding joint 3
C(e, s, t) = 0,
Boom 3
ż = F (z, e, ė),
where the constraint equations include the sliding joints, Fig. 4. Definition of sliding joint.
distance constraints associated with wire ropes, and
driving constraints associated with the actuation of Strick Slip Strick Slip
20

Elavation
angle/(Ο)
booms. The forth equation in Eq. (25) is the differen-
tial equations associated with the LuGre friction. The 10
preceding equation can be further reduced to the follow- 0
ing index-1 differential-algebraic equations of motion by -10
eliminating the dependent Lagrange multipliers as well 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
2.0

coordinate/m
as the arc-length coordinates using the velocity trans-

Arc-length
formation techniques 1.5
1.0
M ë + GT λn = Q, 0.5
Gë = Qd , (26) 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
ż = F (z, e, ė). Time/s
The preceding equations are solved by Newmark fam-
ily integration scheme with geometric projection tech- Fig. 5. Stick-slip motion of sliding booms.
niques to ensure the constraint equations at the position
and velocity levels.
Several numerical examples are presented in order sliding out of boom 1 due to the effect of gravity, while
to demonstrate the use of the modeling procedure for the boom 2 keeps the stick state until at t = 5.4 s. The
a telescopic boom system using the absolute nodal co- sliding motion starts when the static frictional force ex-
ordinate formulation. A telescopic boom used in this ceeds the maximum static frictional force. Furthermore,
investigation consists of three flexible booms and speci- as the elevation angle of boom 1 increases, boom 2 gets
fications of booms are same as those provided in Ref. 1 stick again at t = 8.3 s until boom 2 starts sliding into
where the length of each boom is 2.0 m. The overall boom 1 again at t = 13.5 s. Such a stick-slip motion be-
length in the fully extracted state is 5.0 m, while that in tween the two flexible booms connected by sliding joints
the retracted state is 2.5 m. Four sliding joints are used is properly modeled using the LuGre friction model im-
for modeling sliding motion between the three booms plemented for the ANCF sliding joint constraint.
as shown in Fig. 4. The boom 1 and 3 have one sliding The global position of the tip of the boom in the
point within the boom span, while the boom 2 has two vertical direction is presented in Fig. 6. The boom 1
sliding points within the span to connect with boom 1 is fixed to be horizontal and the extracting speed and
and 3 as shown in Fig. 4. the tip load are, respectively, assumed to be 0.25 m/s
In order to discuss whether the stick-slip friction and 10 kN. It is observed from this figure that the deflec-
can be properly modeled with the LuGre dynamic fric- tion increases as the booms are extended. Furthermore,
tion model introduced to the ANCF sliding joint con- the frequency of the tip vibration becomes lower as the
straints, the boom 3 is removed for simplicity and the booms are extended. Since the over-hanged length of
elevation angle of boom 1 is dynamically changed as de- the telescopic boom becomes longer with time, the fre-
picted in Fig. 5 such that boom 2 can slide out of and quency decreases with time as shown in Fig. 6. The
into boom 1 due to the effect of gravity. The param- change in frequency is presented as a function of time
eters of the LuGre friction model are determined such in Fig. 7. The frequency at the initial configuration is
that the maximum static coefficient of friction and the 27.0 Hz, while the frequency decreases to 10.2 Hz when
kinetic coefficient of friction become 0.15 and 0.1, re- the boom is fully extended at the final configuration.
spectively. The change in the arc-length coordinate s1 The bending deflection of the tip of the boom 3
that defines the location of the time-variant constraint measured with respect to the moving coordinate system
definition point of the sliding joint between booms 1 attached to its left end is shown in Fig. 8. The x-axis
and 2 is shown in Fig. 5. It is observed from this fig- of the moving coordinate system is defined to connect
ure that as the elevation angle decreases, boom 2 starts the two joint definition points on the boom 3 as shown
063005-5 Development of flexible telescopic boom model Theor. Appl. Mech. Lett. 2, 063005 (2012)

0 0.01

0
-0.05 F=5 kN
-0.01
Position/m

Position/m
-0.10
-0.02
-0.15 -0.03 F=10 kN
F=20 kN
-0.20 -0.04
V / . m . s-1
Boom extraction -0.05 θ=0Ο
-0.25
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time/s Time/s

Fig. 6. Vertical position of the tip of the boom 3 defined Fig. 10. Effect of the tip load.
with respect to the global coordinate system.

0
28

24

Position/m
Frequency/Hz

-0.01
20

16 -0.02

12 Boom extraction
-0.03
8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Time/s
Time/s
Fig. 11. Vertical position of the tip of the boom 3 defined
Fig. 7. Change of frequency in time. with respect to the moving coordinate system (Booms 1 and
2 are rigid and boom 3 is flexible.)

0
Angular velocity/(rad . s-1)

0.4 θ=35Ο
θ=70Ο
Position/m

-0.01 0.3

0.2
-0.02

Boom extraction 0.1

-0.03
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time/s 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time/s
Fig. 8. Vertical position of the tip of the boom 3 defined
with respect to the moving coordinate system. Fig. 12. Angular velocity of the elevation angle of boom 1.

Moving coordinate x3
system 0
δ
θ=70Ο
Position/m

-0.01
y3
Boom 3 θ=35Ο

-0.02
Boom 2 F=10 kN θ=0Ο
Y
V / . m.s-1
-0.03
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
X Time/s

Fig. 9. Moving coordinate system. Fig. 13. Effect of the boom elevation angle.
063005-6 H. Fujita, and H. Sugiyama Theor. Appl. Mech. Lett. 2, 063005 (2012)

t/. s of the elevation angle of 70◦ is shown in Fig. 14.

In summary, a modeling procedure of a telescopic
boom of cranes is developed using the absolute nodal co-
ordinate formulation together with the sliding joint con-
t/. s
straints. Furthermore, LuGre dynamic friction model is
introduced to the ANCF sliding joint to account for the
stick-slip motion between the sliding booms. It is shown
t/. s that change in the bending frequency associated with
the dynamic change in the length of the telescopic boom
can be modeled using the modeling procedure developed
in this investigation. Furthermore, it is observed that
t/. s the amplitude of vibration increase with time when the
telescopic boom is dynamically extended. It is shown
t/ s that the vibration coupling between the flexible booms
resulting from the relative sliding motion can contribute
to the increase in vibration of the telescopic boom.
Fig. 14. Motion of the telescopic boom. This work was supported by Kato Construction Machine
Research & Development Promotion Fund.

in Fig. 9. It is observed from this figure that the boom

is deflected with small elastic vibration and the ampli- 1. M. Heikki, and M. Jari, Comput. Struct. 81, 1597 (2003).
tude of the elastic vibration decreases with time within 2. K. Koike, K. Fujita, and T. Koseki, in: Proceedings of the
2 s and then the amplitude of vibration starts increas- JSME Dynamics and Design Conference. (Tokyo, 2002). (in
ing until the maximum length is reached. The similar Japanese)
vibration behavior is observed even when the tip load is 3. J. Yuh, and T. Young, ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Measure. Control
changed from 5 kN to 20 kN as shown in Fig. 10. In or- 113, 34 (1991).
4. B. Tabarrok, C. M. Leech, and Y. I. Kim, J. Franklin Institute
der to discuss more on this vibration behavior, the boom 297, 201 (1974).
1 and boom 2 are changed to rigid bodies such that the 5. A. K. Banerjee, and T. R. Kane, AIAA J. Guid., Control Dyn.
vibration coupling between booms resulting from the 12, 140 (1989).
relative sliding motion is eliminated and only boom 3 is 6. K. Kawaguchi, Y. Terumichi, and S. Kaczmarczyk, et al., J.
modeled as a flexible body. In this special case, there Sys. Design Dyn. 1, 497 (2007).
is no vibration excited after the residual vibration is 7. H. Sugiyama, N. Kobayashi, and Y. Komaki, ASME J. Vib.
damped out at approximately 2 s as shown in Fig. 11. Acoust. 127, 44 (2005).
This implies that the vibration coupling between the 8. L. Vu-Quoc, and S. Li, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng.
120, 65 (1995).
flexible booms resulting from the relative sliding mo- 9. R. S. Hwang, and E. J. Haug, Mech. Struct. Mach. 18, 543
tion can contribute to the increase in vibration of the (1990).
telescopic boom. 10. O. A. Bauchau, and C. L. Bottasso, Multibody Syst. Dyn. 5,
In the next example, the elevation angle of boom 1 is 251 (2001).
changed from 0◦ to 35◦ and 70◦ with the prescribed an- 11. H. Sugiyama, J. L. Escalona, and A. A. Shabana, Nonlinear
gular velocity given in Fig. 12. Figure 13 shows the de- Dyn. 31, 167 (2003).
flection of boom 3 measured with respect to the moving 12. J. J. Munoz, and G. Jelenic, Int. J. Solids Struct. 41, 6963
(2004).
coordinate system attached its left end. It is observed
13. A. A. Shabana, Dynamics of Multibody Systems (3rd ed),
from this figure that the deflection becomes smaller as (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005).
the elevation angle is larger since the effect of gravity 14. H. Sugiyama, H. Koyama, and H. Yamashita, ASME J. Com-
that contributes to the transverse deflection of the boom puta. Nonlinear Dyn. 5, 041001-1-8 (2010).
becomes smaller as the elevation angle increases. Fur- 15. C. Canudas-de-Wit, H. Olsson, and K. J. Astrom, et al., IEEE
thermore, the motion of the telescopic boom in the case Trans. Automat. Control 40, 419 (1995).