NivaarExam PrepOfficial exam papers ↗

22-Mec-A2 Kinematics and Dynamics of Machines · December 2018

Question 7 of 7: Stiffening a beam–mass system with a spring

Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)

Notes on this paper

Reference texts (subject). R. L. Norton, Design of Machinery, 6th ed. (number synthesis & mobility Ch. 2, position/velocity Ch. 4–6, cam design Ch. 8, epicyclic trains §9.6–9.9, balancing Ch. 13); J. J. Uicker, G. R. Pennock & J. E. Shigley, Theory of Machines and Mechanisms, 5th ed.; C. E. Wilson & J. P. Sadler, Kinematics and Dynamics of Machinery, 3rd ed.; S. S. Rao, Mechanical Vibrations, 6th ed. (Part B: single-DOF transient Ch. 2–4, multi-DOF Ch. 5–6). Open-book exam; everyone answers Q1, then any three of Part A (Q2–Q5) and one of Part B (Q6–Q7). Every question is solved here.

Question 7 (Part B): Stiffening a beam–mass system with a spring (20 marks)

Question text not reproduced: the examination questions are © Engineers and Geoscientists BC. Open the official past paper (linked at the top of this page) to read the question, then follow the worked solution below.

Given. Clamped–clamped beam of span $3L=0.90$ m, circular section $d=30$ mm, $E=200$ GPa; two equal point masses at the third-points ($x=L$ and $x=2L$); a spring $k=500$ N/m from the midpoint to ground.

Find. the percentage increase of each of the two natural frequencies caused by the spring.

$m$$m$$k$$L$$L$$L$$EI$Mode 1 (symmetric): midpoint moves → spring engaged (+0.011%)Mode 2 (antisymmetric): midpoint is a node → spring inactive (0%)
Clamped-clamped beam (span $3L$) with equal masses at $L$ and $2L$ and a spring $k$ at the midpoint. The spring only stiffens the symmetric mode (midpoint displaces); the antisymmetric mode has a node at the midpoint and is unaffected.

Approach. Model the beam as two mass DOFs (displacements at $L$ and $2L$) plus a massless midpoint DOF carrying the spring. Build the clamped–clamped stiffness (Euler–Bernoulli), condense out the massless DOFs, and compare the two eigenvalues with and without the spring — a ratio in which the (unspecified) mass cancels.

  1. Section and beam stiffness. $I=\pi d^4/64=\pi(0.030)^4/64=3.98\times10^{-8}\ \text{m}^4$, so $EI=200\times10^9\times3.98\times10^{-8}=7.95\times10^{3}\ \text{N}\cdot\text{m}^2$. A point stiffness of this stiff, short span is of order $EI/L^3\sim3\times10^5$ N/m — far larger than $k=500$ N/m.
  2. Two natural modes. By symmetry the modes are a symmetric mode (both masses move the same way; the midpoint deflects) and an antisymmetric mode (masses move oppositely; the midpoint is a node). The mass value $m$ is not given, but each $\omega\propto1/\sqrt m$, so the percentage change is independent of $m$.
  3. Spring acts only on the symmetric mode. The antisymmetric mode has a node at the midpoint, so the spring stores no energy there — its frequency is unchanged (0% increase). The spring adds stiffness only where the symmetric mode deflects (the midpoint).
  4. Percentage increases. Condensing the massless midpoint (with and without $k$) and comparing eigenvalues gives $$\boxed{\ \text{symmetric mode: }+0.011\%\ ,\qquad \text{antisymmetric mode: }0\%\ }.$$ The stiffening is essentially negligible: a $500$ N/m spring is a tiny fraction of the beam’s own $\sim2$ MN/m midpoint stiffness (fixed–fixed point stiffness $192EI/(3L)^3\approx2.1\times10^6$ N/m), so it barely raises even the mode it does affect.

Check: the point-mass value $m$ is not printed, but the requested quantity is a frequency ratio, in which $m$ cancels — so the percentages are exact and mass-independent. The tiny stiffening is the genuine engineering conclusion for a 30-mm solid beam over a 0.9-m span against a 500-N/m spring: to meaningfully stiffen this system the spring would need to be several orders of magnitude stiffer.

QuantityValue
$EI$$7.95\times10^{3}$ N·m$^2$
Symmetric-mode frequency increase$+0.011\%$
Antisymmetric-mode frequency increase$0\%$ (midpoint is a node)
Midpoint beam stiffness (context)$\approx 2.1\times10^{6}$ N/m
Back to the paper →