THE USE OF QUASI-COMPARISON FUNCTIONS

WITH THE RAYLEIGH-RITZ METHOD

IN BEAM MODELING PROBLEMS

Brian E. Lindholm, Graduate Research Assistant

Rohcrt L. West, Assistant Professor

Modal Analysis and Structural Imaging Laboratory

Department of Mechanical Engineering
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Blackshurg, VA 24061-0238

Abstract K stiffness matrix

,u mass matrix
I? coefficient vector
A clas of admissible functions known as quasi-xxnpai-
a0 natural freqwlcy
son timctio~~~ can bz used with the Rayleigl-Ritz m&cd to
W beam weight
quickly and accurately solve due differential eigenvaht? problem.
This method inch&s the proper selection of admisible func-
tions and an effective solution technique for the equivalent Basic Theorv
getmalized algetrtic eigenvalue problem. Nahral frequencies
and mcde shap can be found for a variety of bxnday lo order to develop an analytical mcdel of an object, a
::mdition and tension effects. The results of this to%nique can set of goveming partial differential equations must be available
%J nxsd as a basis for comparison with faults from experimental that acc~~~ately and completely desxik the physics of the
dynamics tests. 7% is pwticularly useful when dealing with problem. For a simple l-earn in transverse vitxation, there are
suspension effects. two theories widx conespmding diffwaial equations, fourth
order in space and second order in time, that describe tie
Nomenclature physics. The Eulw-ESernoulli beam thexxy is the cl&sic theory
since its goveming partial differential equation is easily separa-
T kinetic energy term ble and can be explicitly solved using a numba of techniques.
Timushenko later derived a more complete formulation dxt
V potential energy term
WC&S with fewer assumptions, incorporating the effects of
.r distance from beam tip
matory inertia and &ear.
c time
L beam length or differential operator
The Euler-Etemoulli beam equation can be derived using
YWI beam displacement
Eq. l,[l] which is Hamiltons variational equation, with the
Hd beam velocity
ldnetic and pxemial energy terms given in Fq. 2. No rotamry
jqx, f) beam acceleration
inertia or shear effects are present, which makes the m&l
fn (4 beam mass per unit length
inaccurate for beams with a low s1enderne.s ratio (IengdVtbick-
~W beam stiffness
nes) a at wy high frequencies
w tension
Q-1 base stiffness
K point translational stiffness at location x
KU point rotatory sttifness at Ication x
rs
iJ order of system
& boundary condition operator
.I eigenvalue
w eigenvector
n-term approximation of w
z approximation function
41 approximation function coefficients
R RayleigWs quotient

546
 The energy terms of F.q. 22 used in the context of
Hamiltons equation, will gcncratc the equations of motion and
boundary canditim given in F+ 3 and 4.
This is done in a t&miqnc known as the Rayleigh-Ritz method,
which can k applied to any system that can bc characterized by
a self-adjoint (pz.&ivc dcfnite) differential writor L and
bamdary condition operators B, as given in Eqs. 5 and 6.[41 L
is of mder 2~. and Ll is of orda JI. For the fourth order F&r-
Bernoulli equation, p txluals 2.

This formulation is very general, includii the effects of

tension, base stiffness, and springs at both ends of the beam.
including these effects makes the equation of motion and
boundary conditions suitable for use with a variety of problems. These opmato~ are used to specify the cigcnvaluc
problem given in Fq. 7, which ~ovides the wlution ta the
The Lwm m&l developed by Timoshcnko works with system of equations given in !Jqs. 3 and 4, as shown in F& 8,
fewer assumptions than the Euler-Bcmoulli m&l, including the
effects of shear and rotatory inerti. Rds increasesthe xcuracy
of the m&l, particularly if the them has a slendcmcssratio
alme 10 or is excited at very high frequencics.[Zl

While this formulation is more complete, the mcdel

rfsult.5 in hvo diffcrcntial equations, making it diiticult to w. In this m&cd, a series of functions are added together
Fommately, the beam m&led in this study has a slendemezs m appmximate the rcspnse of the system, as shown in Eq. 9.
ratio of 210. At this value, there is no difference between the
results of the Euler-Bernoulli theory and the Timcshenko theory.

Eiqensvstem Discretization Technicwes

lt is possible to explicitly solve the Euler-Bernoulli
equation for a nwnbx of different boundary condition combine
tions. These solutions are typically wlvcd by separation of
variables, which results in a continuous eigenvalue ~bletn.
Scvcral examples of this are pwented by Mcirovitch.[31
Howcvc~, for the situation in which zevcral springs arc attached
to the txam, explicit solutions cannot lx generated. The
problem ?sthen solved with a discretization tcchniquc.
The ccefficicnts of the functioa.s must be selected to find
a stationary pint of RayleigWsquotient for the system, as
defined in EZq.10. This minimization prwess is cquivalcnt to
the generalized algebraic eigenvahx problem of !?q. I I. Ilte Z
vector gives the ccefticicnts of the hwtions used in the summa-
tion. There will be n solutions to this problem, each correspond-
ing to a natural mcdc of vibration of the system.

Finite Element Method

The nmt pap&r m&cd for disaetizing a contiuous

system is the f&e element m&od. In this methcd, simple
approximating polynomials are wed to approximate the respmsc
of the structure over aall regions on the shwture. TXs
technique is wry paverful, primarily becaw of its flexibility in
de&g with strwhxes of arbitrary shape. Howcvcr, using the
ftite element for vibration problems can require considerable
computational pxvcr to solve accurately fa vibratiaul m&s.
The tinitc element m&cd was not used in this work
Ravleiqh-Ritz Method
Another approach for disc&zing continuous vibrational
systemsis to use a single, very complex, a~oximating function
When this technique is derived using Ray&bs m&cd
as a basis, the functiom wed in the summation have strict
differentiability and boundaty conditions wluircmcnts.[5]
Spxifically, the functions nust be &times differentiable and
nut satisfy the ixundary conditions of the original problem
exactly. These functions arc known as comparison functions.
Driving comparison function for a system with general bound-
ary conditions can be quite diff!cult.

547
 A derivation based on energy terms, however, reveals
that the solution technique of Eq. II will work even if the
functions used in the summation are only p-times differentiable
and match the tamday conditions in sihxticns in which
displacement 1 slopes are tixed.[61 These functions are known
as admiisible functions. This lads to a difficulty of a different
nature. There are now so many allowable bmctions that deter-
mining which fimctiom will work test is difficult.
implementation SDecifics
Quashm~arkwn Functions
While the reqnirements for a function to be admissible
are weak, there are strong rquirements that a set of admissible
functions must n~eetif they are to accurately approximate the
response of the structure. The szt of admissible functions must
tc linearly independent and complete. Two examples of sets of
functions that satisfy thex requirements are the Fourier series
and a polynomial seriesof increasing order. Either one of these
series can exactly match a given function if enough tams are
bxluded in the s&es.
More specitical~y,the Fouria sexiesand the polynomial
series t& converge to the solution in the limit. Unfortunately,
thix require performing an infinite mm&r of intcgmtions and
solving for the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of an infinitely
large matrix. For one of these series with a finite nnmlxx of
terms, the end condition of the solution will be matched pearly.
For example, the fist flexural mcde of a free-free beam has a
positive slope at one end and a negative slope at the other. All
of the cosine tem~shave no slopz at either end, while the sine
terms have the same slopes at both ends. Adding a finite
number of these te- will nevtx result in different slopes at the
end. Similarly, the second flexural mcde of the &am has a
positive displacement at one end and a negative displacement at
the other. Since the sine turns have no displacement at either
end and the cosine terms all have dis$cement +l at bath ends,
a finite numba of terms will again fail to generate a function
with different dispkaements at each end. While compari~m
functions will, by definition, match all txnmdary conditions,
admissible functions can easily fail in this task
Meirovitch propcad the uxxept of quasi-comparison
function to resolve this problem.[7] In thii technique, admissi-
ble functions are spzcitically selected such that linear combine
tions can bz used tc match any possible linear boundary condi-
tion. In the papa, a rod experience axial vibration was nstxi
az the example. The variable cross-sectionred was fmed at one
end and spring kxded at the other. The admissible functions
tlsed to mlxiel the xsponse of the rod were the mcde shapes of a
uniform red with fxd-fixed ends and with fix&free ends. A
linear combination of a fmec-tixed mcde shape and a free-free
mcde shap can be uxd m match any linear boundary condition
causzd by the spring, thus forming the equivalent of a cornpa-
son function with only two terms. The quasiGcomparisn
functions wae companxi in convergence rate to actual camp-
548
km functions and the fmite clement method. In all caxs it
slightly outperformed the cmpCsn function method and
signiticantly outperformed the tinite element methai.
The barn m&led in this study was m&led with
qua.+comparison functions. In an interview, Meirotitch
suggested using combinations of tix mcdes generated by free
free and fmed-fixed tamdary condition% A mtimnm of four
tams are needed to match any pzsible boundary condition.
Wkile these mde shape can lx solved analytically, they contain
hypzrbiic trigonometric terms that result in difficult integmtions
over the tam. Therefore, linear combinations of the m&s
resulting from pinncz-pinned and slide-slide boundary conditions
were used. With thex mcde shapes, boundary conditions could
still be mcdelled with four tams, but all of the mcde shapesare
camped of simple sine and cosine terms. This greatly simpli-
ties the integrations required while retaining the pJwer of the
qua+comparizan function method. Using thess m&s is
equivalent to a Fourier series with half-periodic tenm included,
as SW in Eq. 12.
Development of BEAM3.EXE
Since the ultimate objective of this work was to perform
optimization experiments on the beam and its Lxundary condi-
tions, it was necessaryto develop a m&l solution technique
with which a large number of m&l solutions could te calm-
lated very quickly. In accomplishing this, the Rayleigh-Ritz
method was nsed with quasi-compaison functions, as discussed
in the previous sections, to approximate the m& shapesand
natural frequencies of the beam.
%e Rayleigh-Ritz integrations, from w. 11, were
performed symbolically using Mathematica.[8] Having these
itegIzds in clcsed form allowed the integmtions m be jxrfnncd
quickly and accurately with 8 minimum of effort. The integra-
tion mlutiom were implemented in a Pascalprogram desiaed to
work with Matlab MAT files, which store m&ices in Matlab
native form. The beam and suspensionparameters were sat to
the prmam using a MAT file, and the mass and stiffness
matrices were retmned to Matlab using a MAT tile.
Having the Pascalprogrun wmk with MAT fdes enabled
M&b to call it directly from any routine. This was specifically
done to allow the Matlab optimization tcalt~x[9l to Lx used in
optimization experiments with the m&l.
Clifficullies Encountered and Solved
The progrant went through four major revisions before
finally being usal for the work The fust version hansfared
data with ASCII files rather than MAT fdes, and this relatively
inaccurate data storage form combined with mamix illxondition- presence of large, negative eigenvalues in the eigensystem
ing caused imaginary frequencies for mass and stiffness matrices solution, which correspond to imaginary frequencies. Th&
hug- than 1 I by 1 I. IXe second version, which worked occumed when a bigh numlxr of terms were present in the
directly with MAT tiles, was useful with systems as large as 19 &es. TIE exact numlxr of tams required for the singuIariw to
by 19. TIE third version of the program W&S formulated with take place was determined by the accuracy with which mmtters
direct design parameters mtber than the Eaditional combined were stored in the compter. The early text file program went
team pmmetm, such as El and nz. Finally, the fourth version singular at I3 terms, the Matlabbaxd solver went singular at 21
solved the eigenvalue problem direcdy using a Jacobi based tams, and the Pascal-based solver went singular at 29 terms.
symmewic eigensystem solvex. The utilization of symmetiy and
inaased precision available witb the Pascal compiler enabled Due to the Rayleigh-Ritz formulation of the beam, the
the progmn to work with systems as large zz 27 by 27. eigensystem should be either Ix&ix defnite or positive s&mi-
defmite. As a m.sult, negative eigenvalucs should not can.
The primary Alice of difficulty in solving the beam Therefore, when negative eigenvalws did cccw, the results of
poblem was iIl.conditioning that cccurred in the mass and the entire solution were suspect. The illanditioning of the
stiffness matxices. According to the Rayleigh-Ritz tbeoty, the mauices discwsed in the Ixevious section is probably the cause
discretized mzss and stiffness mat&x are Ixsitive derinite, of this problem. In order to alleviate this effect, an eigensystem
though the stiffness ma& is positive semi-definite if both es& solver specifk to symmetric, Izusitive semi-definite systems was
of the beam are free. However, if the series of functions used developed and incorpxated into the final version of tJx prc-
for approximation is not Iinealy indepzndenL positive detinite gmm.[lOl[lll Table 2 shows bow the symmetric solver
ness can lx lost. A lwk at the eigenvalues of the rna~ matrix performed in comparison to the Matlab eigensolver. Tbe
(which remains constant for a given number of tams) shows imaginary frequencies resulting from the negative eigenvalues
how the cigenvalues of the matix approach zero as the munlxr generated by Matlab are higbIighted to emphasize how it faiIs to
of tams in the series is incwased. This is indicative of a matrix calculate correct results for tbis Insitive deftite system
appmaching singukwity. Table I shows this wend.
Table 2: Comparison of eigensystem solvers
Table 1: Ill-conditioning of mass matrix
Matlab PC?.%%?1 Matlab PSCZII
Z7 n=9 = 11
0 2.6e-13 1206 1407
-- -. 0.0000000036 .7e-11 I 2.2e.12 1407 1623
-- 0.0000001101 0.0000003242 17.5 17.5 1623 1855
0.0000032794 0.0000076425 0.0000163275 46.2 46.2 1655 2106
0.0001576016 0.0002632472 0.0003195041 94.5 94.5 2107 2360
igew 0.0031573992 0.0032649727 0.0037480720 156 156 2432 2791
eS 0.0156133142 0.0163376762 0.0156133142 233 233 2625 3223
0.0290391704 0.0279616558 0.0261046567 326 326 3719 4449
0.0310666269 0.0310595565 0.0309071244 434 434 4699 5376
0.0456667222 0.0312169659 0.0312170274 536i 556 6791 10902
.- 0.0460192954 0.0312263043 556 697 13129 13880
-. -. 0.0462079125 697 651 51569 65016
651 1021 K7554i 69862
The reason for this tendency towards singularity is not
1021 1206 -- --
immediately apparent. It probably cccws because the whole
wavelength tams ccmpris~ the equivalent of a truncated Fourier
series. The baIf.wavelengtb terms, added through the WE of Small negative eigenvalues sometimes still resuhed from
quasi-comparison hmctions, comprise additional terms that can the use of the Pascal-based eigemolver, but these were slight
also te approximated with the Fomia series. As the numbs of pmxbatim from zero caused by rounding and tnmcation errors
terms is increased, this approximation becomes closa and closer during the solution pro-xss. These small negative values were
until a match with the added terms is obtained. At this In% safely rounded to zero for purIwses of this study, as they were
hear indepadence is lost and the ma& lxcomes singukir. clearly errors cccurring at the very limits of ma&ix precision.

Utillzatlon of Svmmetry Beam Parameters

A saond difficulty that occmred duibtg the quasi- A fmal difficulty encountered in accurately modeling the
comparison function m&lii of the beam mcde sbapzs was the beam was determining the achnl beam parameters to use in the

549
modeling mdy. Since the m&l was ultimately intcodcd to Lx each additional term crates anotber row and column to the
wed in comparisom with an actual steel tx%m, parameters for a ~y~tcmmatrice. This pushes all of the frequcncics down except
prticu!ar beam wed in the lab were &m&d. Table 3 gives for tbe new one ad&d. The frequencies nevcx drop below the
the best &mates available for the pxameters. actual dutiw.s frequencies if tbc solution is cowergent.

Table 3: Beam Parameters Theorem 1: The Inclusion Principle

1. Length = 54.75 in. (Iape measure)

2. Thickness = 0.2605 in. (micrometer)

3. Width = 3.00 in. (tape measure)

AB,,s ,t,> s Aa,25 A,? 5 5 AB< 5 A< s Ati.1
4. Denstiy z 0.282 lbf/in (table value for 304
stainless, an austenkic stainless steel) Table 5 shows the quic!%ss with which convergence is
w&cd wing the quasi&compaison functions For tbc freefree
5. Elastic modulus = 26.0 x 10 (table value Lxxmdary conditions, it appears that only 15 terms are required
for 304 stainless) to acc!xatcly mcdel the tirst five fleaxal mcde-sof tbc txam.
*t 19 tern, the natural hequencics converge to machine
Improved pmmctcrs for density and elastic modulus precision. The rirst two m&s listed, til) and r(Z), are the two
could be obtained with more n.ccwatematerial identiticatioo rigid lady modes of tbc free-free beam. Figure I show the tinst
ml/or actual property testing performed on the beam itself. The four m& sbap obtained with I9 te-.
stain& steel beam has 304 stamped on tbc back and cxbibited
the classic non-ferromagnetic bcbavior of an anstenitic (face- Table 5: Free-free Convergence Study
centcredsubic) steel.
Natural frequency of mode [Hz]
Validation of Ravleiah-Ritz model tl r(l) G9 1 2 3 4
In order to use tbc quasi-cmnparison analytical m&l to 5 0.00 4.89 17.53 48.69 127.56 --
approximate the behavior of the barn, it had to bc validated.
7 0.00 1.67 17.50 46.53 95.56 204.7(
Ilk was done by comparing results from tbc m&l m known
analytical salutioru for camin combinations of simple lxxndary 9 0.00 0.44 17.50 46.26 94.56 156.11
conditions. Natural frequcncics were us03 as tix basis for 11 0.00 0.10 17.50 48.23 94.55 156.3f
comparison. Mode sbap could have been used as well. 13 0.00 0.02 17.50 46.23 94.55 156.31
15 0.00 0.00 17.50 48.23 94.55 156.3C
Validation bv Analvtical Solution
theorv 0.00 0.00 17.50 46.23 94.55 156.3t
Analytical results were available for tbrec different sets
of bxndxy conditions, as found in Meirovitcb. T&e combin+
tions are given in Table 4.

Table 4: Analytical Cases Tested

1. free-free (no external stiffnesses)

2. pinned-pinned (infinite translational stiff-

nesses at both ends)

3. fixed-free (infinite translational and rotatory

stiffnesses at one end)
The free-free end condition was the one most beavily
cam&d, because it most closely approximattx the conditions
likely to lx found in the study. It was used as the basis of a
cmwgcmz mdy. By Theorem I, with corrcspmding FQ. 13.
the RaylcigbRitz m&cd converges to the tnc sduti~~~ &!n
& as terms arc addal to the series. This bapp~ txxause
FIgwe 1: Free-free Mode Shapes
TIE pbmez-pinned boundary conditions were stiied in a
slightly different manner. Table 5 aixvc &owed how tbc results
converged with an increasing numbzx of tams in tbc series. Tbc
next study foxed on how the results conwgcd with incxasing
stiffnesscs. Table 6 shows tbis convcxgen~. Figure 2 shows tix

550
UK& shapzs for stiffoess values of I.54 lbflin. The d&shed lbxs
near zero represent the mm when compared to the theoretical
shapes.

Table 6: Pinned-pinned Convergence Study

Natural frequency of modes [Hz]

M) @J 1 2 3 4
0.00 0.00 17.50 48.23 94.55 156.30
3.63 6.67 19.32 48.91 94.90 156.51
Figure 3: Fixed-free Mode Shapes
6.73 16.87 31.60 55.34 98.16 158.44
7.61 29.07 60.12 94.50 131.84 161.21 Validation bv Other ComputatIonal Model
7.71 30.69 68.53 120.47 185.28 261.03
7.72 30.87 69.46 123.47 192.89 277.72 Wlile zero and infinite stiffness tanday conditiow ale
easily tested analykally, imermediate values are not. To
7.72 30.67 69.47 123.50 192.97 277.87 validate the m&l oo intermediate values, another nomaical
package known as BEAM VI was nsed. BEAM I is a pagn,,,
based on transfer matrices that wlve~ team problenx[lZJ III
this approach, a finite number of onifom lxam sections are
joined together with joints of known stiffne~.

The cases from Tables 6 and 7 were nm on BEAM VI,

where they generated identical results. Alw, BEAM VI was
used m validate the analytical mcdel on cases in which base
stiffoess was present. Table 8 gives the wsolts of centi tax
stiffoes on the beam. Again, results were identicaJ for
BEAM VI and the aoalyticai mcdel.

Table 6: BEAM VI Base Stfffness study

Figure 2 Pinned-pinned Mode Shapes

Finally, the &?&free &mJary conditions were studied Natural frequency of modes [Hz]
in a mamm similar to the pinne&pimted bamdary conditioos.
The tnnslational stiffoess was held war iofnity while the 0) w 1 2 3
rotatory stfffllcss as increased from n30 to near intiity. me 17.50 48.23 94.55
0.00 0.00
convergence for tbjs case is tab&ted in Table 7. Figue 3
21.07 21.07 27.39 52.64 96.87
shows the male shqes for a rotatory stiffoess of 1~6 lbf-in, with
the da&d lines mar zero representing the enor when compared 66.64 66.64 68.91 82.26 115.68
to thw~etical vahs. 210.74 210.74 211.47 216.19 230.98

Table R Fixed-free Convergence Study Since the results from the qoasi-comparison fooction
based Rayleigh-Ritz model very closely mat&d the results from
Natt~4freqwncy of modes [Hz] koovm analytical solutions and results from BEAM VI, it can be
stiffness concluded that the mxlel is effective for mcdeling the bxn and
[lbffin] any external stiffnews added to the ends of the beam
el) a 1 2 3 4
0 ~ 0.00 0.00 17.50 48.23 94.55 156.30
Gravitational Tension Convemence
10 3.63 6.87 19.32 48.91 94.90 156.51
1e2 6.73 18.87 31.60 55.34 98.16 158.44 Ibe convwgeoce and validation studies discosxd above
7.61 29.07 60.12 94.50 131.84 181.21 fccosed on variations of the fre&free beam problem for which
le3
iodependent solution were available. However, io the physical
le4 7.71 30.69 68.53 120.47 185.26 261.03 equiment in which the actual stainless steel beam was to be
le6 7.72 30.87 69.46 123.47 192.89 277.72 tested, there was a teosioo effect caused by gravity loading.
theory 7.72 30.87 69.47 123.50 192.97 277.87 This tension is described io Eq. 14, where W is the weight of the
- beam and x is the distance measured from the top of the barn.

551
 Table l& Recommendations for Future Work

Replace the quasi-comparison functions

This ternion effect could not lx compared to other with a complete and independent set of
solutions, since no other solutions were available, but it could functions that allow for varying displace-
still lx tcstcd for conwxgcce. Table 9 shows that the gmvity ments and slopes at the ends, such as
effect converged very slowly on the quaskomparison function Forsythe polynomials. This should solve
mcdel. The reasons for this m convergence are not known. the ill-conditioning problem encountered.

Table 9: GravitatIonal Convergence Study Replace the Jacobi-based eigensolver of

the Pascal program with a faster QRftridiag
onalization-based routine. This will in-
Natural frequency of mode [Hz]
crease the speed with which solutions are
obtained.
GJ G3 1 2 3 4
7 0.00 2.19 17.86 48.85 95.90 205.52 Reformulate the problem using the aqua-
11 0.00 1.61 17.78 48.64 94.60 156.60 tions resulting from the Timashenko beam
15 0.00 1.39 17.76 48.52 94.76 156.55 model. This would allow the model to be
used with thicker beams and at higher
19 0.00 1.31 17.74 48.47 94.78 756.52
frequencies.
23 0.00 1.27 17.72 48.45 94.74 156.50
27 0.00 1.25 17.70 48.44 94.72 156.49 References
This difficulty with convergence hex led to the question Meirovitch, Leonard, Computational Methcds in Struchxal
of whether or not the quas*om~tin function analytical mcdel Dvnamics, Sijthofl & Noordhcaff, Rcckville, Maryland, ,980,
was appropriate for modeling the gravitational body load. The pp. 23C-232.
effect was left in the m&l because it is Iawn to exist pbysi- Singh, M. P. and Abdelnaser, A. S., Random Vibrations of
tally. An incompletely converged effect will more accurately mmoshenko Seams witi Genemiized Bounda~ Conditions,
m&l the physical structure than no effect at all. 2nd International Conference on Stochastic Structural
Dynamics Bxa Raton, Florida, 1990, pp. 173.192.
Conclusions and Recommendations Meirovitch, Leonard, Anah4ical Methods in Vibrations,
Macmillan Publishing, New Yo& 1967, pp. t6l-t66.
The Rayleigh-Ritz m&cd, when camhined with the
technique of quasiannparison functions, can be used ta quickly Meirovitch, m pp. 286.268.
and accurately solve the equations resulting from the application Meirovitch, Analvtica Methods, pp. 21 l-215.
of the Eula-Etemoulli beam mcdel.
Meirovitch, AnalYtical Methods, pp. 225.233.
Convergence with the Rayleigl-Ritz model was usually Meirovitch, Leonard and Kwak, Moon K., Convergznc? of
obtained with as few as I5 tams. This convergence was still tie Classics Rayleigh-Ritz M&cd and the Finite Element
achieved when additional stiffnesses were added, in eirher the Method, AIAA Journal. Vol. 28 No. 9, August 1990,
form of tmnslational and rotatory springs at the ends or of a tase pp. t509-,516.
stiffness. Analytical results and a sepamtt! computational Mathematics 2.1, Wolfram Research, Urbana, Illinois.
p&age were used to verify that the natural frequencies obtained
by the m&l were accurate. Matlab Optimization Toolbox, Andrew Grace, The
Mathwotis, South Natick, Massachusetts, 1991.
Gravitationally induced tension effects were not as well G&b, Gene H. and Van Loan, Chada F,, w
m&led, primarily due to incomplete convergence. It is not Commutations, Second Edition, Johns Hopkins University
known if increased machine prezzisionwould solve the problem Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 1989, pp. 469.470.
or if the lack of convergence is an indicator of a more fun&-
mental problem. Fox purposes of thii study, however, the effect Press, William H., et al., Numerical Recipes in C,
Cambridge University Press, New York, 1988, pp. 36@366.
was kept in the model.
BEAM VI, L. D. Mitchell, et. al., Department of Mechanical
While the m&l appears m work well, there are several Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
things that could be changed or refined to improve the perfm- University, Blacksburg, Virginia, ,992.
mnce of the m&l. Some of thess suggestions could lx
implemented fairly easily, while otbas would require signifi-
cantly Inore work.

552