Wesley McDonald

AAE546
HW#6

The following is the data for Reference, and Case 1,2,3, frequencies and modes. Also, the matches
for each case are shown below as well as the ratios for width, length, heigh, the remaining data asked
for in the QED exploration.

DATA:
Ref. Freq. Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
Mode 1 570.1 573.6 1140.0 141.8
Mode 2 3539.0 1957 7079.0 884.3
Mode 3 3559.0 3543 7117.0 1694.0
Mode 4 9915.0 6538 10500.0 2477.0
Mode 5 10500.0 8561 19830.0 2774.0
Mode 6 11090.0 1.00E+04 22190.0 4865.0
Mode 7 13110 38810 5136.0
Mode 8 13660 39690 8081.0
Mode 9 17790 48670 8719.0
Mode 10 19290 52530 1.21E+04
Mode 11 21230 60500 1.25E+04
Mode 12 21470 63000 2.45E+08

CASE 1: Ref. Match Ratio: W/Wo:

Length Out of Plane 1 Mode 1 573.6 Mode 1 570.1 1.0 1.0061 0
6 Out of Plane 2 Mode 6 1.00E+04 Mode 4 9915.0 1.0 1.0086 1
h/l^2: In Plane Mode 9 1.78E+04 Mode 5 10500.0 1.0 1.6943 2
0.0028 Twisting 1 Mode 2 1957 Mode 2 3539.0 1.0 0.5530 h/(w*l):
w/l^2: Twisting 2 Mode 4 6538 Mode 6 11090.0 1.0 0.5895 0.0041667
0.111111

CASE 2: Ref. Match Ratio: h/ho:

Length Out of Plane 1 Mode 1 1140.0 Mode 1 570.1 1.0 1.9996 0
6 Out of Plane 2 Mode 5 19830.0 Mode 4 9915.0 1.0 2.0000 1
h/l^2: In Plane Mode 4 10500.0 Mode 5 10500.0 1.0 1.0000 h/(w*l):
0.0056 Twisting 1 Mode2 7079.0 Mode 2 3539.0 1.0 2.0003 0.0166667
w/l^2: Twisting 2 Mode 6 22190.0 Mode 6 11090.0 1.0 2.0009
0.055556

CASE 3: Ref. Match Ratio: l/lo:

Length Out of Plane 1 Mode 1 141.8 Mode 1 570.1 1.0 0.2487 0
12 Out of Plane 2 Mode 4 2477.0 Mode 4 9915.0 1.0 0.2498 1
h/l^2: In Plane Mode 5 2774.0 Mode 5 10500.0 1.0 0.2642 2
0.0007 Twisting 1 Mode 3 1694.0 Mode 2 3539.0 1.0 0.4787 h/(w*l):
w/l^2: Twisting 2 Mode 7 5.14E+03 Mode 6 11090.0 1.0 0.4631 0.0041667
0.013889
5

PART I: Analyzing the Data:

Question:
3
The follwing is the Width Sensitivity plot:

Width Sensitivity Case I

1.8
1.6
1.4
Out of Plane 1
1.2
Out of Plane 2
1.0
In Plane
F/Fo

0.8 Twisting 1
0.6 Twisting 2
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 0 0 1 1 1 1
W/Wo

4
The following is the Height Sensitivity plot:

Height Sensitivity Case II

2.5

2.0
Out of Plane 1
1.5 Out of Plane 2
In Plane
F/Fo

1.0 Twisting 1
Twisting 2
0.5

0.0
0 0 0 1 1 1 1
h/ho
 6

PART I: Analyzing the Data Continued:

Question
5
The following is the Length Sensitivity plot:

Length Sensitivity Case III

1.2
1.0
Out of Plane 1
0.8 Out of Plane 2
F/Fo

0.6 In Plane
Twisting 1
0.4
Twisting 2
0.2
0.0
0 0 0 1 1 1 1

l/lo

6
The following is the Out of Plane Bending plot:

Out of Plane Bending

2.5000

2.0000
f(x) = 360.052906792075 x + 0.001346373561775
1.5000 R² = 0.999978862434945 Out of Plane 1
F/Fo

Out of Plane 2
1.0000 Linear (Out of Plane 2)
0.5000

0.0000
0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006

h/(l^2)
Q? Does the data correlate with (W^0)h/(L^2)? Yes, both data sets lie on top of each other,
and both modes share a linear correlation. This trend can also be seen as the linear
regression value, R^2. is =1, showing a linear correlation. Therefore, the data correlates.
 7

PART I: Analyzing the Data Continued:

Question
7
The following is the In Plane Benging plot:

In Plane Bending
2.0000
1.5000 f(x) = 14.5899613899614 x + 0.108059202059202
R² = 0.990220246709114 In plane
F/Fo

1.0000
Linear (In plane)
0.5000
0.0000
0.000 0.020 0.040 0.060 0.080 0.100 0.120

w/(l^2)
Q? Does the data correlate with W(h^0)/(L^2)? Yes, it is clear from the above plot that a
linear trend is seen. This trend can also be seen as the linear regression value,
R^2, is =0.9902. This shows a linear correlation. Therefore, the data correlates.

8
The following is the Twisting data plot:

Twisting
2.5000
2.0000
f(x) = 118.756710935292 x + 0.021004050108317
Twisting 1
1.5000 R² = 0.99812388379372
F/Fo

Linear (Twisting 1)
1.0000 Twisting 2
0.5000
0.0000
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020

h/(w*l)
Q? Does the data correlate with h/(W*L)? Yes, both data sets lie on top of each other,
and both modes share a linear correlation. This trend can also be seen as the linear
regression value, R^2 is =0.9981, showing a linear correlation. Therefore, the data correlates.
 8

PART I: Analyzing the Data Continued:

Question

Q? Which representation of Jxx: Jxx=(1/3)W(h^3) or (1/12)h(W^3) or

(1/12)W(h^3) + (1/12)h(W^3) correlates best with the data? Conjecture Why?
8 cont.

Twisting (1/3)W(h^3)
2.5000 0.001333 case1
2.0000 0.005333 case2
1.5000 Twisting 1 0.000667 case3
F/Fo

1.0000 Twisting 2
0.5000 Linear (Twisting 2)
0.0000
0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006
Jxx=(1/3)W(h^3)

This plot of Jxx above best correlates with the previous twisting data than the two graphs below.
This form of Jxx is the area moment of inertia for a plate fixed on one side, J=((b*h^3)/3).
The other plots must represent alternate constraints.

Twisting
(1/12)h(W^3)
2.5000
0.533333 case1
2.0000
0.133333 case2
1.5000 Twisting 1
0.066667 case3
F/Fo

1.0000 Twisting 2
0.5000
0.0000
0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600
Jxx= (1/12)h(W^3)

Twisting (1/12)W(h^3) + …
2.5000
2.0000
1.5000 Twisting 1
/Fo

Twisting 2
 Twisting
(1/12)h(W^3)
2.5000
0.533667 case1
2.0000
0.134667 case2
1.5000 Twisting 1
0.066833 case3
F/Fo 1.0000 Twisting 2
0.5000
0.0000
0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600
Jxx= (1/12)W(h^3) + (1/12)h(W^3)

Part II
The following data sets are those of the corresponding mode and freqency data used for Part II
of the homework.
3,4
Length: 5 10 15 20
Mode Freqency Mode Freqency Mode Frequency Mode
CASE: 1 1385 1 766.6 1 659.8 1 Freqency
[1,0+1/2] 4 5954 2 1982 2 1220 2 625.2
[1,1+1/2] 10 15290 5 4312 3 2265 3 944
[1,2+1/2] 2 3066 3 2501 4 2409 4 1540
[2,0+1/2] 5 7919 4 3774 5 2972 6 2379
[2,1+1/2] 11 17210 7 6152 7 4049 7 2692
[2,2+1/2] 3 5941 6 5421 8 5333 11 3300
[3,0+1/2] 7 10950 8 6684 11 5885 13 5303
[3,1+1/2] 13 2.03E+04 10 9100 12 6963 14 5609
[3,2+1/2] 6210

PART II: Analyzing the Data:

Question
1
The following data is the Length vs Frequency of the cases in Part II.

Length vs. Frequency

Length:
25000 5 10 15 20
Freqency Freqency Frequency Freqency 1
[1,0+1/2]
20000 1385 766.6 659.8 625.2 2 [1,0+1/2]
[1,1+1/2] 5954 1982 1220 944 3 [1,1+1/2]
[1,2+1/2]
15000
15290 4312 2265 1540 1036.4 [1,2+1/2]
[2,0+1/2]
Freqency

[2,0+1/2] 3066 2501 2409 2379 2790.33333

[2,1+1/2]
[2,1+1/2] 7919 3774 2972 2692 5707.33333 [2,2+1/2]
10000
[2,2+1/2] 17210 6152 4049 3300 [3,0+1/2]
[3,0+1/2] 5941 5421 5333 5303 [3,1+1/2]
5000 [3,2+1/2]

0
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
 Freqen
[2,1+1/2]
[2,2+1/2]
10000
[3,0+1/2]
[3,1+1/2]
5000
[3,1+1/2] 10950 6684 5885 5609 [3,2+1/2]
[3,2+1/2] 2.03E+04 9100 6963 6210
0
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Length

Q2? Does the data indicate that as L becomes large there is no [m] dependence?
It can be seen that there is no m dependence as Length grows larger. The graphs seem to all
converge on their respective n regardless of m. It could be conjectured that the values
would continue to converge and become nearly colinear length greatly increases,
creating an equilibrium frequency.
10

PART II: Analyzing the Data Continued:

Question

Q3? Does the large L data vary as [n] or [n^2]?

It can be seen below that when the average of each n value, (1,2,3) is graphed vs freqency
that there is an evident quadratic relation. Therefore, [n^2] would be the way the data varies.
I have no conjecture for this result, but with more research this may change.

Length vs. Frequency

6000
f(x) = 581.533333333333 x² + 9.33333333333684 x + 445.53333333333
5000

4000
Freqency

data
3000 Polynomial (data)

2000

1000

0
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Length

Q4? As a simple model, suppose the plate is conceived as a collection of cantilevered beams
along the length and simply supported beams across the width. Conjecture on the meaning
of the given relationship. Conjecture why the two terms are additive.
Since the plate is conceived as a collection of cantilevered beams along the length and
simply supported beams across the width, it can be conjectured that the frequency terms
would be summed, and thereby be additive. These terms, (m/L) and (n/W) would then be
 multiplied by their proportionality constants, alpha and beta, respectively.

11

Part III
The following data sets are those of the corresponding mode and freqency data used for
Part III of the homework.

Length Torsional Mode Frequency 1/L 1/(L^2)

6 15 3.34E+04 0.1666667 0.027778
12 11 16680 0.0833333 0.006944
18 7 11110 0.0555556 0.003086
24 7 8334 0.0416667 0.001736

6 12 18 24
Length: Mode Freqency Mode Freqency Mode Frequency Mode
5 17520 3 5889 1 2840 1 Freqency
[1,0+1/2] 26 50810 18 22950 12 1.32E+04 8 1650
[1,1+1/2] 8466
[1,2+1/2] 1 8695 1 4584 3 4145 3
[2,0+1/2] 13 31030 7 11930 5 6931 5 4055
[2,1+1/2] 22 26030 16 1.44E+04 10 5248
[2,2+1/2] 3 12320 5 11400 8 1.13E+04 12 9437
[3,0+1/2] 9 23610 9 13420 10 1.19E+04 14 1.13E+04
[3,1+1/2] 22 4.47E+04 12 19830 14 1.42E+04 16 11560
[3,2+1/2] 12500

PART III: Analyzing the Data:

Question
1 The following graph is that of Length vs Frequency for Part III data:

Length vs. Frequency

60000

50000
[1,0+1/2]
[1,1+1/2]
 Length vs. Frequency
60000
0.0277778 0.0069444 0.003086 0.00173611
50000
6 12 18 24 [1,0+1/2]
Freqency Freqency Frequency Freqency [1,1+1/2]
40000 [1,2+1/2]
[1,0+1/2] 17520 5889 2840 1650 1
[2,0+1/2]
Freqency
[1,1+1/2] 50810 22950 1.32E+04 8466 2 [2,1+1/2]
30000
[1,2+1/2] 3 [2,2+1/2]
[2,0+1/2]
20000
8695 4584 4145 4055 [3,0+1/2]
[2,1+1/2] 31030 11930 6931 5248 5058 [3,1+1/2]
[2,2+1/2]
10000 26030 1.44E+04 9437 6246.66667 [3,2+1/2]
[3,0+1/2] 12320 11400 1.13E+04 1.13E+04 1.18E+04
[3,1+1/2]0 23610 13420 1.19E+04 11560
[3,2+1/2] 5 10
4.47E+04 15
19830 1.42E+04 2012500 25
Length
8
12

PART III: Analyzing the Data:

Question
Q2? Does the data indicate that as L becomes large there is no [m] dependence?
It can be seen that there is a dependence on m in this case, as it does not converge
in such a way as the graph in Part II. From this it can be conjectured that there
will be no overall equilibrium frequency.

Q3? Does the large L data vary as [n] or [n^2]?

It can be seen below that when the average of each n value, (1,2,3) is graphed vs freqency
that there is an evident quadratic relation. Therefore, [n^2] would be the way the data varies.
I have no conjecture for this result, but with more research this may change.

Length vs. Frequency

14000
12000
f(x) = 2172.33333333333 x² − 5328.33333333331 x + 8213.99999999998
10000
Freqency

8000 data
6000 Polynomial (data)

4000
2000
0
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Length
 Q4? The [1,1/2] mode is like a global cantilever beam mode. Do the freqencies
correlate as 1/L^2?

[1,1/2] Mode Correlation

6 50810 0.027778
60000 0.03
12 22950 0.006944
50000 18 13200 0.003086 0.025
40000 24 8466 0.001736 0.02 1/(L^2)
Frequency

[1,1+1/
30000 0.015 1/(L^2) 2]

20000 0.01
10000 0.005
0 0
5 10 15 20 25
Length

Yes, the frequencies correlate as 1/(L^2) can be seen in the figure.

13

PART III: Analyzing the Data:

Question
Q5? Do the torsional frequencies correlate as 1/L?

Correlation of Torsional Frequency

6 3.34E+04 0.166667
4.00E+04 0.18
12 16680 0.083333 0.16
3.50E+04
18 11110 0.055556 0.14
3.00E+04
24 8334 0.041667 0.12
2.50E+04
0.1 1/L
Axis Title 2.00E+04 0.08 Torsion
1.50E+04 0.06
1.00E+04 0.04
5.00E+03 0.02
0.00E+00 0
5 10 15 20 25
Axis Title

As seen above, both frequencies will correlate as (1/L).

14