Nonlinear free vibration of functionally graded carbon nanotube-reinforced

composite beams
Liao-Liang Ke
a,c
, Jie Yang
b,
*
, Sritawat Kitipornchai
a
a
Department of Building and Construction, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong
b
School of Aerospace, Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, RMIT University, PO Box 71, Bundoora VIC 3083, Australia
c
Institute of Engineering Mechanics, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, PR China
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Available online 19 September 2009
Keywords:
Functionally graded materials
Nanocomposites
Timoshenko beam theory
Nonlinear free vibration
Ritz method
a b s t r a c t
This paper investigates the nonlinear free vibration of functionally graded nanocomposite beams rein-
forced by single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) based on Timoshenko beam theory and von Krmn
geometric nonlinearity. The material properties of functionally graded carbon nanotube-reinforced com-
posites (FG-CNTRCs) are assumed to be graded in the thickness direction and estimated though the rule
of mixture. The Ritz method is employed to derive the governing eigenvalue equation which is then
solved by a direct iterative method to obtain the nonlinear vibration frequencies of FG-CNTRC beams
with different end supports. A detailed parametric study is conducted to study the inuences of nanotube
volume fraction, vibration amplitude, slenderness ratio and end supports on the nonlinear free vibration
characteristics of FG-CNTRC beams. The results for uniformly distributed carbon nanotube-reinforced
composite (UD-CNTRC) beams are also provided for comparison. Numerical results are presented in both
tabular and graphical forms to investigate the effects of nanotube volume fraction, vibration amplitude,
slenderness ratio, end supports and CNT distribution on the nonlinear free vibration characteristics of FG-
CNTRC beams.
2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) have demonstrated exceptional
mechanical, thermal and electrical properties, and are considered
as one of the most promising reinforcement materials for high per-
formance structural and multifunctional composites with tremen-
dous application potentials [1,2]. Since Ajayan et al. [3] rst
studied polymer composites reinforced by aligned CNT arrays,
many investigators [48] have examined material properties of
carbon nanotube-reinforcement composites (CNTRC). Fidelus
et al. [9] investigated thermo-mechanical properties of epoxy-
based nanocomposites based on low weight fractions of randomly
oriented single- and multi-walled CNTs. Hu et al. [10] evaluated
the macroscopic elastic properties of carbon nanotube-reinforced
composites through analyzing the elastic deformation of a repre-
sentative volume element under various loading conditions. Using
molecular dynamics (MD), Han and Elliott [11] simulated the elas-
tic properties of polymer/carbon nanotube composites while Zhu
et al. [12] discussed the stressstrain curves for CNT-reinforced
Epon 862 composites. These studies showed that the addition of
a small amount of carbon nanotube can considerably improve
the mechanical, electrical and thermal properties of polymeric
composites. Their results are very useful and can be applied to
the analysis of the global response of CNTRC in an actual structural
element. Wuite and Adali [13] presented a multi-scale analysis of
the deection and stress behavior of CNT reinforced polymer com-
posite beams. The micromechanics models used in the study in-
clude straight CNTs aligned in one direction, randomly oriented
CNTs and a two parameter model of agglomeration. Vodenitchar-
ova and Zhang [14] studied the pure bending and bending-induced
local buckling of a nanocomposite beam reinforced by a single-
walled carbon nanotube. Recently, Salehi-Khojin and Jalili [15]
considered the buckling of boron nitride nanotube reinforced pie-
zoelectric polymeric composites subjected to combined electro-
thermo-mechanical loadings. Ray and Batra [16] proposed a new
13 piezoelectric composite comprised of armchair SWCNTs
embedded in a piezoceramic matrix for the active control of smart
structures.
It is well-known that the applications of CNTs to nanocompos-
ites have been hindered due to the weak interfacial bonding be-
tween CNTs and matrix. Functionally graded materials (FGMs)
are inhomogeneous composites characterized by smooth and con-
tinuous variations in both compositional prole and material prop-
erties and have found a wide range of applications in many
industries [17]. The static bending, elastic buckling, postbuckling,
0263-8223/$ - see front matter 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compstruct.2009.09.024
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 3 99256169; fax: +61 3 99256092.
E-mail address: j.yang@rmit.edu.au (J. Yang).
Composite Structures 92 (2010) 676683
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Composite Structures
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ compst r uct
linear and nonlinear free vibration of FGM structures have been
extensively investigated [1829]. By using the concept of FGM,
Shen [30] suggested that the interfacial bonding strength can be
improved through the use of a graded distribution of CNTs in the
matrix and examined the nonlinear bending behavior of simply
supported, functionally graded nanocomposite plates reinforced
by SWCNTs subjected to a transverse uniform or sinusoidal load
in thermal environments.
The objective of the present work is to study the nonlinear free
vibration of functionally graded nanocomposite beams reinforced
by the SWCNT within the framework of Timoshenko beam theory
and von Krmn geometric nonlinearity. The material properties of
the FG-CNTRC are assumed to be graded in the thickness direction
and estimated though the rule of mixture in which the CNT ef-
ciency parameter is determined by matching the elastic modulus
of CNTRCs obtained from MD simulation with the numerical re-
sults calculated from the rule of mixture. The governing eigenvalue
equation is derived by using Ritz method and is then solved by a
direct iterative method to obtain the nonlinear vibration frequen-
cies of FG-CNTRC beams with different end supports. A detailed
parametric study is conducted to gain an insight into the inuences
of nanotube volume fraction, vibration amplitude, slenderness ra-
tio, end supports and CNT distribution on the nonlinear free vibra-
tion characteristics of FG-CNTRC beams. The results for UD-CNTRC
beams are also obtained for comparison.
2. Functionally graded carbon nanotube-reinforced composites
Fig. 1 shows the CNTRCs of thickness h where the distribution of
CNTs is non-uniform and graded along the thickness direction in
Fig. 1a (FG-CNTRC) and is uniform in Fig. 1b (UD-CNTRC), respec-
tively. It is assumed that the CNTRC is made from a mixture of
SWCNT and an isotropic matrix. We rst determine the effective
material properties of CNTRC. It was pointed out by many investi-
gators [11,31] that the material properties of the SWCNT and
CNTRC are anisotropic. According to the rule of mixture, the effec-
tive Youngs modulus and shear modulus of CNTRC can be ex-
pressed as [30]
E
11
g
1
V
cnt
E
cnt
11
V
m
E
m
; 1a
g
2
E
22

V
cnt
E
cnt
22

V
m
E
m
; 1b
g
3
G
12

V
cnt
G
cnt
12

V
m
G
m
; 1c
where E
cnt
11
; E
cnt
22
and G
cnt
12
are Youngs modulus and shear modulus,
respectively, of the carbon nanotube; E
m
and G
m
are the correspond-
ing properties for the isotropic matrix; g
j
(j = 1, 2, 3) is the CNT ef-
ciency parameter accounting for the scale-dependent material
properties and will be determined later by matching the elastic
modulus of CNTRCs observed from the MD simulation results with
the numerical results obtained from the rule of mixture. V
cnt
and V
m
are the volume fractions for carbon nanotube and matrix and are re-
lated by
V
cnt
V
m
1: 2
It is assumed that the volume fraction of carbon nanotube V
cnt
varies linearly along the thickness, i.e.,
V
cnt
1
2z
h
_ _
V

cnt
; 3
where
V

cnt

K
cnt
K
cnt
q
cnt
=q
m
q
cnt
=q
m
K
cnt
; 4
where K
cnt
is the mass fraction of carbon nanotube, and q
cnt
and q
m
are the densities of carbon nanotube and matrix, respectively. Note
that V
cnt
V

cnt
corresponds to the uniformly distributed carbon
nanotube-reinforced composite (UD-CNTRC) as shown in Fig. 1b.
With V
cnt
dened in Eq. (3), both the FG-CNTRC beam and UD-
CNTRC beam have the same value of CNT mass fraction.
Similarly, Poissons ratio v and mass density q can be calculated
by
v V
cnt
v
cnt
V
m
v
m
; 5
q V
cnt
q
cnt
V
m
q
m
: 6
where v
cnt
and v
m
are Poissons ratios of carbon nanotube and ma-
trix, respectively.
3. Nonlinear free vibration analysis
3.1. Energy functional of the FG-CNTRC Timoshenko beam
Consider an FG-CNTRC Timoshenko beam of length L and thick-
ness h as shown in Fig. 2. In accordance with Timoshenko beam
theory, the axial displacement

Ux; z; t and transverse displace-
ment

Wx; z; t are expressed as

Ux; z; t Ux; t zWx; t;

Wx; z; t Wx; t; 7
where U(x, t) and W(x, t) are displacement components in the mid-
plane, W is the rotation of beam cross-section and t is time. The von
Krmn type nonlinear straindisplacement relationships are given
by
e
x

@U
@x
z
@W
@x

1
2
@W
@x
_ _
2
; c
xz

@W
@x
W: 8
The normal stress r
xx
and shear stress s
xz
are related to strains
through linear elastic constitutive law as
r
xx
Q
11
z
@U
@x
z
@W
@x

1
2
@W
@x
_ _
2
_ _
; r
xz
Q
55
z
@W
@x
W
_ _
;
9
where
Q
11
z
E
11
z
1 v
2
z
; Q
55
z G
12
z: 10
(a) (b)
x
y
z
h
x
y
z
h
Fig. 1. Geometry of carbon nanotube-reinforced composites: (a) FG-CNTRC and (b) UD-CNTRC.
L.-L. Ke et al. / Composite Structures 92 (2010) 676683 677
For the FG-CNTRC Timoshenko beam, the potential energy V
and kinetic energy T can be written as
V
1
2
_
L
0
_
h=2
h=2
Q
11
@U
@x
z
@W
@x

1
2
@W
@x
_ _
2
_ _
2
_
_
_
Q
55
@W
@x
W
_ _
2
_
dzdx; 11
T
1
2
_
L
0
_
h=2
h=2
q
@U
@t
z
@W
@t
_ _
2

@W
@t
_ _
2
_ _
dzdx: 12
Dene the stiffness components and inertia related terms as
fA
11
; B
11
; D
11
g
_
h=2
h=2
Q
11
zf1; z; z
2
gdz;
A
55

_
h=2
h=2
jQ
55
zdz;
fI
1
; I
2
; I
3
g
_
h=2
h=2
qzf1; z; z
2
gdz; 13
where j = 5/6 is the shear correction factor. Expressing the poten-
tial energies associated with the linear and nonlinear strain terms
in Eq. (8) as V
linear
and V
nonlinear
, respectively, the maximum poten-
tial energy V
max
of the FG-CNTRC beam can be re-written as
V
max
V
linear
V
nonlinear
; 14
where
V
linear

1
2
_
L
0
A
11
@U
@x
_ _
2
2B
11
@U
@x
@W
@x
D
11
@W
@x
_ _
2
_
A
55
@W
@x
W
_ _
2
_
dx; 15
V
nonlinear

1
2
_
L
0
A
11
@U
@x
@W
@x
_ _
2
B
11
@W
1
@x
@W
@x
_ _
2
_

1
4
A
11
@W
@x
_ _
4
_
dx: 16
For a beam undergoing harmonic motion, its maximum kinetic
energy T
max
can be written as
T
max

X
2
2
_
L
0
I
1
U
2
2I
2
UW I
3
W
2
I
1
W
2
dx; 17
where X is the nonlinear frequency of the beam.
By introducing the following dimensionless quantities
f
x
L
; u; w
U; W
h
; I
1
; I
2
; I
3

I
1
I
10
;
I
2
I
10
h
;
I
3
I
10
h
2
_ _
; w W;
g
L
h
; a
11
; a
55
; b
11
; d
11

A
11
A
110
;
A
55
A
110
;
B
11
A
110
h
;
D
11
A
110
h
2
_ _
;
x XL

I
10
A
110

; 18
where A
110
and I
10
are the values of A
11
and I
1
of a homogeneous
beam made from pure matrix material, the dimensionless form of
Eqs (15)(17) can be expressed as
V

linear

1
2
_
1
0
a
11
@u
@f
_ _
2
2b
11
@u
@f
@w
@f
d
11
@w
@f
_ _
2
_
a
55
@w
@f
gw
_ _
2
_
df; 19
V

nonlinear

1
2
_
1
0
a
11
g
@u
@f
@w
@f
_ _
2

b
11
g
@w
@f
@w
@f
_ _
2

a
11
4g
2
@w
@f
_ _
4
_ _
df;
20
T

max

x
2
2
_
1
0
I
1
u
2
2I
2
uw I
3
w
2
I
1
w
2
df
_ _
; 21
where
V

linear

V
linear
D
0
; V

nonlinear

V
nonlinear
D
0
; T

max

T
max
D
0
; D
0

A
110
h
2
L
:
22
The energy functional for the FG-CNTRC Timoshenko beam can
then be obtained as

linear
V

nonlinear
T

max
: 23
3.2. Ritz methods
The Ritz method [32] is employed in the present study to derive
the governing eigenvalue equation for nonlinear free vibration of
FG-CNTRC Timoshenko beams. The beams with three different
end supports, i.e., hinged at both ends (HH), clamped at both ends
(CC), or clamped at left end and hinged at right end (CH) are con-
sidered. The Ritz trial functions that satisfy the geometric bound-
ary conditions on both ends of the beams take the form of
HH beam :
uf

N
j1
A
j
f
j
1 f;
wf

N
j1
B
j
f
j
1 f;
wf

N
j1
C
j
f
j1
;
_

_
24a
CC beam :
uf

N
j1
A
j
f
j
1 f;
wf

N
j1
B
j
f
j
1 f;
wf

N
j1
C
j
f
j
1 f;
_

_
24b
CH beam :
uf

N
j1
A
j
f
j
1 f;
wf

N
j1
B
j
f
j
1 f;
wf

N
j1
C
j
f
j
;
_

_
24c
Fig. 2. Geometry of an FG-CNTRC beam.
678 L.-L. Ke et al. / Composite Structures 92 (2010) 676683
where N is the total number of polynomial terms; A
j
, B
j
, C
j
are un-
known coefcients. Substituting Eq. (24) into energy functional
(23), and applying a standard Ritz procedure to minimize the total
energy functional with respect to unknown coefcients
@

@A
j
0;
@

@B
j
0;
@

@C
j
0; 25
leads to nonlinear governing equation in matrix form
K
L

1
2
K
NL1

1
3
K
NL2
_ _
d x
2
Md 0; 26
where d fA
j
g
T
fB
j
g
T
fC
j
g
T
_ _
T
, j = 1, 2, . . ., N; M is the mass ma-
trix, K
L
is the linear stiffness matrix, K
NL1
and K
NL2
are nonlinear
stiffness matrices that are linear and quadratic functions in d,
respectively. K
L
, K
NL1
, K
NL2
and M are 3N 3N symmetric matrices
whose elements are given in Appendix A.
For nonlinear free vibration of FG-CNTRC beams, the energy bal-
ance equation V T = 0 must be satised at any time. It should be
noted that unlike UG-CNTRC and homogeneous isotropic beams,
an FG-CNTRC beam has bending-extension coupling effect (i.e.
B
11
0) due to the unsymmetric material distribution in thickness
direction and there exist partial derivative terms with odd powers
such as
@W
@x
@W
@x
_ _
2
in Eq. (17). This implies that when
@U
@t

@W
@t

@W
@t
0,
the energy balance equation does not yield equal and opposite
roots for FG-CNTRC beams while it produces equal and opposite
roots for both UG-CNTRC and homogeneous isotropic beams. The
similar phenomenon was also observed for cracked functionally
graded beams by Kitipornchai et al. [29] and asymmetric cross-
ply composite beams by Singh and Rao [33,34].
It is clear from the above discussions that the nonlinear fre-
quency of FG-CNTRC beams cannot be solved by directly using
the classic methods for homogeneous beams but can be obtained
by computing the periods of both positive and negative deection
cycles due to the fact that the energy required in each deection
cycle is same. The direct iterative method described below is used
in this paper to solve the nonlinear free vibration problem in Eq.
(26)
Step 1: By neglecting the nonlinear matrices K
NL1
and K
NL2
, a
linear eigenvalue and the associated eigenvector are obtained
from Eq. (26). The eigenvector is then appropriately scaled up
such that the maximum transverse displacement is equal to
the given vibration amplitude. First, the given amplitude w
max
is assumed to be positive. Note that for both clampedclamped
and hingedhinged beams, w
max
= w(0.5), while for clamped-
hinged beams, w
max
= w(0.53).
Step 2: Using the obtained eigenvector to calculate K
NL1
and
K
NL2
, a new eigenvalue and eigenvector are obtained from the
updated eigensystem (26).
Step 3: The eigenvector is scaled up again and step 2 is repeated
until the relative error between eigenvalues obtained from two
consecutive iterations is within 0.1%. Then, the nonlinear half-
cycle frequency x
+
is obtained for the positive deection cycle.
Based on the amplitude and deformation in positive deection
cycle, the energy V

max
can be computed from Eqs. (19) and (20).
Step 4: For a negative vibration amplitude w
min
, repeat steps 1
3 to nd the energy V

max
in negative deection cycle. The non-
linear half-cycle frequency x
-
has been obtained for the nega-
tive deection cycle if V

max
V

max
, otherwise new values
must be chosen for negative vibration amplitudes and the iter-
ation procedure is continued till the new negative amplitude
and deformation yield the same energy with that at positive
amplitude.
After the nonlinear half-cycle frequencies x
+
and x

at positive
and negative deection cycles is obtained, the corresponding the
periods C
+
and C

may be expressed as
C

p
x

; C

p
x

: 27
Finally, the nonlinear frequency of the FG-CNTRC beams is ob-
tained as
x
2p
C

: 28
4. Numerical results
Table 1 compares the dimensionless linear fundamental fre-
quencies x XL

I
10
=A
110
_
of CC, CH and HH FGM beams with
varying total number of polynomial terms N in the trial functions.
The parameters used in this example are E
1
= 70 GPa, v
1
= 0.33,
q
1
= 2780 kg/m
3
, E
2
/E
1
= 5 and L/h = 6 where E
1
and E
2
denote
Youngs modulus at the top and bottom surfaces of the beam,
respectively. The analytical solutions given by Ke et al. [35] are also
provided for a direct comparison. It is seen that the accuracy of the
present results is improved with an increasing number of polyno-
mial terms and is monotonically convergent to analytical solutions
at N = 8 or 10. Hence, N = 8 is used in all of the following numerical
calculations.
Table 2 gives nonlinear frequency ratio x
nl
/x
l
at different max-
imum vibration amplitudes W
max
/H for HH, CH and CC isotro-
pic homogeneous beams with L/h = 100 and h = 0.3 in. Here,
H

I=h
_
is the radius of the gyration of the beam with I and A
being the cross-section area and area moment of inertia, x
nl
and
x
l
are the dimensionless nonlinear and linear frequencies, respec-
tively. The present results agree very well with the nite element
results [36].
We next present the results for the nonlinear free vibration of
FG-CNTRC Timoshenko beam with different boundary conditions
in Tables 47, Figs. 3 and 4 where the results for UD-CNTRC coun-
terparts are also given for a direct comparison. Linear fundamental
frequencies x
l
are listed In Tables 47 as well. Unless otherwise
stated, the beam thickness h = 0.1 m, slenderness ratio L/h = 10,
V

cnt
0:12; 0:17; 0:28. Poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) is se-
lected for the matrix material with v
m
0:3, q
m
= 1190 kg/m
3
,
E
m
= 2.5 GPa at room temperature (300 K). The armchair (10, 10)
Table 1
Dimensionless linear fundamental frequency of FGM beams.
N HH CC CH
2 0.20364 0.95748 0.34784
3 0.20362 0.37053 0.26160
5 0.18005 0.36936 0.26108
8 0.17998 0.36934 0.26107
10 0.17998 0.36934 0.26107
12 0.17998 0.36934 0.26107
Ref. [35] 0.17970 0.3686
Table 2
Comparisons of nonlinear frequency ratio x
nl
/x
l
for isotropic homogeneous beams.
Wmax=H HH CC CH
Present Ref. [36] Present Ref. [36] Present Ref. [36]
1.0 1.1192 1.1181 1.0303 1.0300 1.0592 1.0595
2.0 1.4180 1.4178 1.1152 1.1147 1.2179 1.2193
3.0 1.8092 1.8094 1.2419 1.2420 1.4402 1.4448
4.0 2.2451 2.2455 1.3983 1.3987 1.6958 1.6720
L.-L. Ke et al. / Composite Structures 92 (2010) 676683 679
SWCNTs are used as the reinforcements with E
cnt
11
600 GPa,
E
cnt
22
10 GPa and v
cnt
= 0.19. Han and Elliott [11] obtained the elas-
tic properties of this type of PMMA/CNT composites through MD
simulation. Since CNT efciency parameters g
j
(j = 1, 2, 3) need
to be determined before the effective material properties of the
FG-CNTRC beam can be calculated using the rule of mixture, we
estimate the CNT efciency parameters g
1
and g
2
by matching
the Youngs moduli E
cnt
11
and E
cnt
22
of CNTRCs obtained by the rule
of mixture to those given by Han and Elliott [11]. It is shown in
Table 3 that the Youngs moduli obtained from the rule of mixture
and MD simulation can match very well if g
1
and g
2
are properly
chosen, and the efciency parameters will change with CNT vol-
ume fractions. As there are no MD results available for shear mod-
ulus G
12
in Ref. [11], it is assumed g
3
= g
2
.
Tables 46 gives the nonlinear fundamental frequency ratio x
nl
/
x
l
for HH, CH and CC CNTRC beams with V

cnt
0:12; 0:17; 0:28.
All these beams exhibit a typical hard-spring behavior, i.e., the
nonlinear frequency increases as the vibration amplitude in-
creases. An increase in the nanotube volume fraction V

cnt
leads to
higher linear and nonlinear frequencies for both UD- and FG-
CNTRC beams. Both linear and nonlinear frequencies of UD-CNTRC
beams are larger than those of FG-CNTRC beams. This is because
the UD-CNTRC beam contains more CNTs hence is stiffer and stron-
ger than its FG-CNTRC counterpart. The nonlinear frequency ratio
of HH and CH UD-CNTRC beams is larger than that of FG-CNTRC
beams but the results for CC CNTRC show the other way around.
Table 7 shows the effect of slenderness ratio L/h on the linear
frequency and nonlinear frequency ratio of clampedclamped
CNTRC beam with V

cnt
0:12. Both linear and nonlinear frequency
ratio decrease as slenderness ratio increases. At the same slender-
ness ratio, the FG-CNTRC beam has a lower linear frequency but a
higher nonlinear frequency ratio than the UG-CNTRC beam. The ef-
fect of slenderness ratio on the nonlinear frequency ratio tends to
be very small for long CNTRC beams L=h P 30. The results of H
H and CHbeams are very similar to those of CC beams and there-
fore, are not shown for brevity.
Fig. 3 plots the nonlinear frequency ratio versus dimensionless
amplitude curves for CNTRC beams with L/h = 10. Results show
that at vibration amplitudes of same magnitude but opposite sign,
nonlinear frequency ratios of HH and CH FG-CNTRC beams are
different, i.e., the curves are unsymmetrical. This is, as discussed
before, due to the bending-stretching coupling effect that makes
energy balance equation does not yield equal and opposite roots.
For CC FG-CNTRC beams and all UD-CNTRC beams, the nonlinear
frequency ratio is independent of the sign of vibration amplitude
hence, their curves are symmetrical. It can also be observed that
the difference between the curves for FG-CNTRC beams and UD-
CNTRC beams is great for HH beam while is relatively small for
CC and CH beams.
Fig. 4 gives nonlinear fundamental mode shapes for CNTRC
beams with various V

cnt
at w
max
= 0.4. It is found that the nanotube
volume fraction V

cnt
has an insignicant effect on the nonlinear
mode shape for all beams. The mode shapes of FG-CNTRC beams
are very close to those of UD-CNTRC beams. The maximum ampli-
tude occurs at the midpoint of the HH and CC beams but not for
the CH beam.
In order to examine the effect of different CNT distributions on
both linear and nonlinear frequencies of FG-CNTRC beams, a sym-
metrically linear distribution of CNT volume fraction V
cnt
is
considered
V
cnt

4jzj
h
V

cnt
29
It is evident from Eq. (29) that this FG-CNTRC beam has the
same and largest CNT volume fraction on the top and bottom
surfaces (z = h/2) but V
cnt
= 0 at the neutral plane (z = 0). Fig. 5
Table 3
Comparison of Youngs modulus for PMMA/CNT composites reinforced by (10, 10)
SWCNT at the temperature T
0
= 300 K.
V

cnt
MD (Ref. [11]) Rule of mixture
E
11
(GPa) E
22
(GPa) E
11
(GPa) g
1
E
22
(GPa) g
2
0.12 94.6 2.9 94.6 1.2833 2.9 1.0556
0.17 138.9 4.9 138.9 1.3414 4.9 1.7101
0.28 224.2 5.5 224.2 1.3238 5.5 1.7380
Table 4
Dimensionless nonlinear frequency ratio x
nl
/x
l
for HH CNTRC beams (L/h = 10).
V

cnt
x
l
w
max
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
FG-CNTRC 0.12 1.2296 1.0061 1.0320 1.0873 1.1786 1.2999
0.17 1.5327 1.0046 1.0255 1.0765 1.1584 1.2725
0.28 1.8089 1.0067 1.0333 1.0942 1.1886 1.3138
UD-CNTRC 0.12 1.2576 1.0278 1.1070 1.2278 1.3791 1.5522
0.17 1.5695 1.0259 1.1000 1.2135 1.3565 1.5206
0.28 1.8297 1.0299 1.1151 1.2439 1.4046 1.5874
Table 5
Dimensionless nonlinear frequency ratio x
nl
/x
l
for CC CNTRC beams (L/h = 10).
V

cnt
x
l
w
max
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
FG-CNTRC 0.12 1.6063 1.0165 1.0646 1.1405 1.2397 1.3582
0.17 2.0557 1.0146 1.0574 1.1252 1.2143 1.3204
0.28 2.3250 1.0179 1.0701 1.1521 1.2587 1.3887
UD-CNTRC 0.12 1.6678 1.0154 1.0605 1.1318 1.2251 1.3381
0.17 2.1423 1.0136 1.0533 1.1165 1.2001 1.3036
0.28 2.3624 1.0176 1.0687 1.1490 1.2544 1.3829
Table 6
Dimensionless nonlinear frequency ratio x
nl
/x
l
for CH CNTRC beams (L/h = 10).
V

cnt
x
l
w
max
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
FG-CNTRC 0.12 1.3944 1.0160 1.0621 1.1396 1.2417 1.3519
0.17 1.7641 1.0139 1.0554 1.1243 1.2149 1.3174
0.28 2.0318 1.0164 1.0646 1.1436 1.2488 1.3629
UD-CNTRC 0.12 1.4556 1.0207 1.0805 1.1735 1.2927 1.4303
0.17 1.8506 1.0187 1.0727 1.1570 1.2657 1.3922
0.28 2.0814 1.0231 1.0895 1.19203 1.3229 1.4749
Table 7
Effect of slenderness ratio L/h on nonlinear frequency ratio x
nl
/x
l
of CC CNTRC
beams V

cnt
0:12.
L/h x
l
w
max
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
FG-CNTRC 10 1.6063 1.0165 1.0646 1.1405 1.2397 1.3582
15 1.4061 1.0098 1.0386 1.0846 1.14608 1.2203
20 1.2200 1.0075 1.0299 1.0659 1.1141 1.1729
30 0.9333 1.0062 1.0244 1.0539 1.0935 1.1420
40 0.7422 1.0057 1.0226 1.0501 1.0872 1.1326
UD-CNTRC 10 1.6678 1.0154 1.0605 1.1318 1.2251 1.3381
15 1.5075 1.0084 1.0334 1.0736 1.1275 1.1935
20 1.3444 1.0061 1.0242 1.0536 1.0933 1.1422
30 1.0671 1.0045 1.0181 1.0403 1.0704 1.1077
40 0.8657 1.0042 1.0163 1.0363 1.0634 1.0970
680 L.-L. Ke et al. / Composite Structures 92 (2010) 676683
compares the linear fundamental frequencies x
l
and the nonlinear
frequency ratio versus dimensionless amplitude curves for HH, C
H and CC FG-CNTRC beams V

cnt
0:12 with different CNT distri-
butions, where cases 1 and 2 stands for unsymmetrical distribution
(Eq. (3)) and symmetrical distribution (Eq. (29)), respectively. It
should be mentioned that these two FG-CNTRC beams and the
UD-CNTRC beam have the same CNT mass fraction. It is observed
that both linear and nonlinear frequencies in case 2 are higher than
those in case 1 and UD-CNTRC. This is because case 2 makes better
use of CNTs with more CNTs distributed in high bending stress re-
gions and much less CNTs in low stress regions close to the neutral
axis. Its bending stiffness, therefore, is larger than case 1 and UD-
CNTRC. Numerical results also show that at a given nonlinear fre-
quency ratio, beams reinforced by symmetrically or uniformly dis-
tributed CNTs vibrate with the same positive and negative
amplitudes due to the absence of bending-extension coupling in
these two beams.
(a)
(b)
(c)
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
UD:
V
*
cnt
= 0.12
V
*
cnt
= 0.17
V
*
cnt
= 0.28
FG:
V
*
cnt
= 0.12
V
*
cnt
= 0.17
V
*
cnt
= 0.28
w
min

n
l
/

l
w
max
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
UD:
V
*
cnt
= 0.12
V
*
cnt
= 0.17
V
*
cnt
= 0.28
FG:
V
*
cnt
= 0.12
V
*
cnt
= 0.17
V
*
cnt
= 0.28
w
min

n
l
/

l
w
max
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
UD:
V
*
cnt
= 0.12
V
*
cnt
= 0.17
V
*
cnt
= 0.28
FG:
V
*
cnt
= 0.12
V
*
cnt
= 0.17
V
*
cnt
= 0.28
w
min

n
l
/

l
w
max
Fig. 3. Nonlinear frequency ratio versus amplitude curves for CNTRC beams: (a) H
H, (b) CC and (c) CH.
(a)
(b)
(c)
0. 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1. 0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
UD:
V
*
cnt
= 0.12
V
*
cnt
= 0.17
V
*
cnt
= 0.28
FG:
V
*
cnt
= 0.12
V
*
cnt
= 0.17
V
*
cnt
= 0.28
w
x/L
0. 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1. 0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
UD:
V
*
cnt
= 0.12
V
*
cnt
= 0.17
V
*
cnt
= 0.28
FG:
V
*
cnt
= 0.12
V
*
cnt
= 0.17
V
*
cnt
= 0.28
w
x/L
0. 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1. 0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
UD:
V
*
cnt
= 0.12
V
*
cnt
= 0.17
V
*
cnt
= 0.28
FG:
V
*
cnt
= 0.12
V
*
cnt
= 0.17
V
*
cnt
= 0.28
w
x/L
Fig. 4. Nonlinear mode shapes of CNTRC beams at wmax 0:4: (a) HH, (b) CC and
(c) CH.
L.-L. Ke et al. / Composite Structures 92 (2010) 676683 681
5. Conclusions
The nonlinear free vibration of FG-CNTRC beams is studied
within the framework of Timoshenko beam theory and von
Krmn type displacementstrain relationship. The material prop-
erties of FG-CNTRC are assumed to be graded in the thickness and
estimated though the rule of mixture. The Ritz method and a direct
iterative method are employed to obtain the nonlinear vibration
frequencies of FG-CNTRC beams with different end supports. The
effects of CNT volume fraction, vibration amplitude, slenderness
ratio, end supports and CNT distribution on the nonlinear free
vibration characteristics of FG-CNTRC beams are discussed in de-
tail. Numerical results show that:
(1) An increase in CNT volume fraction V

cnt
leads to higher lin-
ear and nonlinear frequencies for both UD- and FG-CNTRC
beams;
(2) Both linear and nonlinear frequencies of FG-CNTRC beam
with symmetrical distribution of CNTs are higher than those
of beams with uniform or unsymmetrical distribution of
CNTs;
(3) Nonlinear frequency ratios of both HH and CH FG-CNTRC
beams are dependent of the sign of the vibration amplitudes,
i.e., their nonlinear frequency ratio versus amplitude curves
are unsymmetrical;
(4) The nonlinear frequency ratios of CC beam, UD-CNTRC
beam and symmetrically CNT reinforced FG-CNTRC beam
are independent of the sign of vibration amplitude and their
curves are symmetrical.
Appendix A
Re-write trial functions in Eq. (24) in the following form
uf

N
j1
A
j
N
1j
; wf

N
j1
B
j
N
1j
; wf

N
j1
C
j
N
2j
; A1
The elements of symmetric linear stiffness matrix K
L

3N3N
are
K
L

j;m

_
1
0
a
11
@N
1j
@f
@N
1m
@f
df; K
L

j;Nm
0;
K
L

j;2Nm

_
1
0
b
11
@N
2j
@f
@N
1m
@f
df;
K
L

Nj;Nm

_
1
0
a
55
g
@N
1j
@f
N
1m
df;
K
L

Nj;2Nm

_
1
0
a
55
gN
2j
@N
1m
@f
df;
K
L

2Nj;2Nm

_
1
0
d
11
@N
2j
@f
@N
2m
@f
a
55
g
2
N
2j
N
2m
df:
The elements of the symmetric mass matrix M
3N3N
are
M
j;m

_
1
0
I
1
N
1j
N
1m
df; M
j;Nm
0;
M
j;2Nm

_
1
0
I
2
N
2j
N
1m
df;
M
Nj;Nm

_
1
0
I
1
N
1j
N
1m
df; M
Nj;2Nm
0;
M
2Nj;2Nm

_
1
0
I
3
N
2j
N
2m
df:
The elements of the symmetric nonlinear stiffness matrices
K
NL1

3N3N
and K
NL2

3N3N
are
K
NL1

j;m
0;
K
NL1

j;2Nm

a
11
g
_
1
0
@w
@f
@N
1j
@f
@N
1m
@f
df;
K
NL1

j;2Nm
0;
K
NL1

Nj;Nm

1
g
_
1
0
a
11
@u
@f
@N
1j
@f
@N
1m
@f
b
11
@w
@f
@N
1j
@f
@N
1m
@f
_ _
df;
(a)
(b)
(c)
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
case1:
l
= 1.2296
case2:
l
= 1.3852
UD :
l
= 1.2576
w
min

n
l
/

l
w
max
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
case1:
l
= 1.6063
case2:
l
= 1.7230
UD:
l
= 1.6678
w
min

n
l
/

l
w
max
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
case1:
l
= 1.3944
case2:
l
= 1.5385
UD:
l
= 1.4556
w
min

n
l
/

l
w
max
Fig. 5. Effect of CNT distribution on the nonlinear frequency ratio versus dimen-
sionless amplitude curves of the CNTRC beams with V

cnt
0:12: (a) HH, (b) CC
and (c) CH.
682 L.-L. Ke et al. / Composite Structures 92 (2010) 676683
K
NL1

Nj;2Nm

b
11
g
_
1
0
@w
@f
@N
2j
@f
@N
1m
@f
df;
K
NL
1
2Nj;2Nm
0;
K
NL2

j;m
K
NL2

j;Nm
K
NL2

j;2Nm
0;
K
NL2

Nj;Nm

3a
11
2g
2
_
1
0
@w
@f
_ _
2
@N
1j
@f
@N
1m
@f
df;
K
NL2

Nj;2Nm
0; K
NL2

2Nj;2Nm
0;
where j; m 1; 2; . . . ; N:
References
[1] Thostenson ET, Ren ZF, Chou TW. Advances in the science and technology of
carbon nanotubes and their composites: a review. Compos Sci Technol
2001;61:1899912.
[2] Esawi AMK, Farag MM. Carbon nanotube reinforced composites: potential and
current challenges. Mater Des 2007;28:2394401.
[3] Ajayan PM, Stephan O, Colliex C, Trauth D. Aligned carbon nanotube arrays
formed by cutting a polymer resinnanotube composite. Science
1994;256:12124.
[4] Cadek M, Coleman JN, Barron V, Hedicke K, Blau WJ. Morphological and
mechanical properties of carbon-nanotube-reinforced semicrystalline and
amorphous polymer composites. Appl Phys Lett 2002;81:51235.
[5] Odegard GM, Gates TS, Wise KE, Park C, Siochi EJ. Constitutive modelling of
nanotube-reinforced polymer composites. Compos Sci Technol
2003;63:167187.
[6] Thostenson ET, Chou TW. On the elastic properties of carbon nanotube-based
composites: modelling and characterization. J PhysAppl Phys
2003;36:57382.
[7] Griebel M, Hamaekers J. Molecular dynamics simulations of the elastic moduli
of polymercarbon nanotube composites. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng
2004;193:177388.
[8] Mokashi VV, Qian D, Liu YJ. A study on the tensile response and fracture in
carbon nanotube-based composites using molecular mechanics. Compos Sci
Technol 2007;67:53040.
[9] Fidelus JD, Wiesel E, Gojny FH, Schulte K, Wagner HD. Thermo-mechanical
properties of randomly oriented carbon/epoxy nanocomposites. Composites
Part A 2005;36:155561.
[10] Hu N, Fukunaga H, Lu C, Kameyama M, Yan B. Prediction of elastic properties
of carbon nanotube reinforced composites. Proc Royal Soc A 2005;461:
1685710.
[11] Han Y, Elliott J. Molecular dynamics simulations of the elastic properties of
polymer/carbon nanotube composites. Comput Mater Sci 2007;39:31523.
[12] Zhu R, Pan E, Roy AK. Molecular dynamics study of the stressstrain behavior
of carbon-nanotube reinforced Epon 862 composites. Mater Sci Eng A
2007;447:517.
[13] Wuite J, Adali S. Deection and stress behaviour of nanocomposite reinforced
beams using a multiscale analysis. Composites Struct 2005;71:38896.
[14] Vodenitcharova T, Zhang LC. Bending and local buckling of a nanocomposite
beam reinforced by a single-walled carbon nanotube. Int J Solids Struct
2006;43:300624.
[15] Salehi-Khojin A, Jalili N. Buckling of boron nitride nanotube reinforced
piezoelectric polymeric composites subject to combined electro-thermo-
mechanical loadings. Compos Sci Technol 2008;68:1489501.
[16] Ray MC, Batra RC. A single-walled carbon nanotube reinforced 13
piezoelectric composite for active control of smart structures. Smart Mater
Struct 2007;16:193647.
[17] Suresh S, Mortensen A. Fundamentals of functionally graded materials:
processing and thermomechanical behavior of graded metals and metal-
ceramic composites. London: IOM Communications Ltd.; 1998.
[18] Yang J, Shen HS. Nonlinear bending analysis of shear deformable functionally
graded plates subjected to thermo-mechanical loads under various boundary
conditions. Composites Part B 2003;34:10315.
[19] Ferreira AJM, Batra RC, Roque CMC, Qian LF, Martins PALS. Static analysis of
functionally graded plates using third-order shear deformation theory and a
meshless method. Compos Struct 2005;69:44957.
[20] Kitipornchai S, Yang J, Liew KM. Random vibration of the functionally graded
laminates in thermal environments. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng
2006;195:107595.
[21] Na KS, Kim JH. Three-dimensional thermomechanical buckling analysis for
functionally graded composite plates. Compos Struct 2009;73:41322.
[22] Wu TL, Shukla KK, Huang JH. Post-buckling analysis of functionally graded
rectangular plates. Compos Struct 2007;81:110.
[23] Ke LL, Yang J, Kitipornchai S. Postbuckling analysis of edge cracked functionally
graded Timoshenko beams under end shortening. Compos Struct
2009;90:15260.
[24] Yang J, Chen Y. Free vibration and buckling analyses of functionally graded
beams with edge cracks. Compos Struct 2008;83:4860.
[25] Matsunaga H. Free vibration and stability of functionally graded circular
cylindrical shells according to a 2D higher-order deformation theory. Compos
Struct 2009;88:51931.
[26] Yang J, Kitipornchai S, Liew KM. Large amplitude vibration of thermo-electro-
mechanically stressed FGM laminated plates. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng
2003;192:386185.
[27] Chen CS. Nonlinear vibration of a shear deformable functionally graded plate.
Compos Struct 2005;68:295302.
[28] Woo J, Meguid SA, Ong LS. Nonlinear free vibration behavior of functionally
graded plates. J Sound Vib 2006;289:595611.
[29] Kitipornchai S, Ke LL, Yang J, Xiang Y. Nonlinear vibration of edge cracked
functionally graded Timoshenko beams. J Sound Vib 2009;324:96282.
[30] Shen HS. Nonlinear bending of functionally graded carbon nanotube-
reinforced composite plates in thermal environments. Compos Struct
2009;91:919.
[31] Zhang CL, Shen HS. Temperature-dependent elastic properties of single-walled
carbon nanotubes: prediction from molecular dynamics simulation. Appl Phys
Lett 2006;89:081904.
[32] Liew KM, Wang CM, Xiang Y, Kitipornchai S. Vibration of Mindlin plates:
programming the p-version ritz method. Oxford: Elsevier Science; 1998.
[33] Singh G, Rao GV. Analysis of the nonlinear vibrations of unsymmetrically
laminated composite beams. AIAA J 1991;29:172735.
[34] Singh G, Rao GV. Nonlinear oscillations of thick asymmetric cross-ply beams.
Acta Mech 1998;127:13546.
[35] Ke LL, Yang J, Kitipornchai S, Xiang Y. Flexural vibration and elastic buckling of
a cracked Timoshenko beam made of functionally graded materials. Mech Adv
Mater Struct 2009;16:488502.
[36] Marur SR, Prathap G. Non-linear beam vibration problems and simplications
in nite element models. Comput Mech 2005;35:35260.
L.-L. Ke et al. / Composite Structures 92 (2010) 676683 683