Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

www.elsevier.com/locate/engfracmech

Detection of multiple cracks using frequency measurements

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai 400 076, India
Received 3 April 2002; received in revised form 9 July 2002; accepted 14 July 2002

Abstract
A method for detection of multiple open cracks in a slender EulerBernoulli beams is presented based on frequency
measurements. The method is based on the approach given by Hu and Liang [J. Franklin Inst. 330 (5) (1993) 841],
transverse vibration modelling through transfer matrix method and representation of a crack by rotational spring. The
beam is virtually divided into a number of segments, which can be decided by the analyst, and each of them is considered to be associated with a damage parameter. The procedure gives a linear relationship explicitly between the
changes in natural frequencies of the beam and the damage parameters. These parameters are determined from the
knowledge of changes in the natural frequencies. After obtaining them, each is treated in turn to exactly pinpoint
the crack location in the segment and determine its size. The forward, or natural frequency determination, problems are
examined in the passing. The method is approximate, but it can handle segmented beams, any boundary conditions,
intermediate spring or rigid supports, etc. It eliminates the need for any symbolic computation which is envisaged by Hu
and Liang [J. Franklin Inst. 330 (5) (1993) 841] to obtain mode shapes of the corresponding uncracked beams. The
proposed method gives a clear insight into the whole analysis. Case studies (numerical) are presented to demonstrate
the method eectiveness for two simultaneous cracks of size 10% and more of section depth. The dierences between the
actual and predicted crack locations and sizes are less than 10% and 15% respectively. The numbers of segments into
which the beam is virtually divided limits the maximum number of cracks that can be handled. The dierence in the
forward problem is less than 5%.
2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Transfer matrix method; Vibration based detection of multiple cracks; Vibration modelling of cracked beam; NDT of
cracks

1. Introduction
To help in a continuous safety assessment of a machine or structure it is very necessary to constantly
assess the health of its critical components. This calls for a continuous assessment of changes in their static
and/or dynamic behaviour. The changes have very often their origin in local reduction of structural stiness
caused by cracks or crack-like defects. The development of a crack does not necessarily make a component
instantly useless, but it is a signal that its behaviour has to be monitored more carefully. Such monitoring

Corresponding author. Tel.: +91-22-578-2545/572-7526; fax: +91-22-578-3480/572-6875.

E-mail address: skmaiti@me.iitb.ac.in (S.K. Maiti).

0013-7944/03/$ - see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/S0013-7944(02)00121-2

1554

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

can play a signicant role in assuring an uninterrupted operation in service by the component. This has
made the vibration based monitoring of components consisting of cracks or crack-like defects in service
very important and generated a lot of interest in the study of vibration of components with one or more
cracks. Very good reviews have been presented by Dimarogonas and Paipetis [1], Entwistle and Stone [2],
Wauer [3], Gasch [4], Dimarogonas [5] and Salawu [6].
The method of crack detection can based on longitudinal vibration [79], or transverse vibration [1024],
or a coupling of transverse, longitudinal and torsional vibrations [1,2529]. Majority of the studies consider
open cracks, thereby nonlinearity due to crack closing or material nonlinearity, if any, is neglected. There
are also studies, e.g. Chati et al. [30], Schlums and Dual [31], etc., reported considering closing cracks. It is
shown that the consideration of a fatigue crack as an open crack rather than a closing crack gives rise to an
under prediction of crack size [31].
The method of detection based on transverse vibration of components oers promise for inspection of
high volume and low cost components feasible [32]. The choice of using the natural frequency as a basis in
the development of NDE is most attractive due to the fact that the natural frequencies of a beam can be
measured from one single location in the beam, thus oering scope for development of a fast and global
NDE [5,7,32,33] technique than the conventional ultrasonic, X-ray, etc.
The modelling of vibration and representation of crack plays a very signicant role in the success of
crack detection [34]. The modelling of transverse vibration has been done within the framework of either
the EulerBernoulli or Timoshenko beam theory. The equations have been solved directly, or using the
Frobenius method [24,35], or the Bessel function approach [36,37], Sometimes the transfer matrix method
(TMM) [3841] has been used to simplify the process of solution for complex geometries and continuous
beams.
In the event of a coupling of longitudinal, lateral, transverse and torsional vibrations the crack is represented in terms of a 6
6 matrix. In the case of a coupling of the longitudinal and lateral vibrations this
matrix reduces to a 2
2 matrix. Further, when the axial motion is negligible it can be represented by a
single rotational spring. This favoured the representation of an open crack by a massless rotational spring
and it is found to be very eective for a crack size more than 10% of section depth [17].
The potential of nite element method has also been exploited in this context for handling individual
components or systems. Approaches for prediction of crack are given by Cawley and Adams [10,42],
Thambiratnam and Zhuge [43], Chichalkar [44], Yang et al. [45], etc. Thambiratnam and Zhuge has
proposed an element for analysis of beams on elastic foundation. Various beam geometric features, supporting conditions, external or internal cracks, normal or inclined cracks, etc., have received attention
[23,24,35,43,46,47]. Beams on elastic foundation [43,46,47], discontinuous supports [38,46], etc., have also
been studied.
The crack detection has been mostly facilitated by frequency or mode shape data. To facilitate crack
detection sometimes the problem has been formulated as an optimization problem, e.g. minimization
of dierence between the theoretical and experimental data on a parameter related to the dynamic behaviour [48]. The search engine is based on the system-identication technique [49] or genetic algorithm
[48,50,51]. In the genetic algorithm based search, the theoretical modelling helps to generate a guess data
set.
Most studies concerning crack detection deal with single crack. The case of multiple cracks has not
received the same degree of attention. This type of problems have been addressed by Sekhar [29], Ruotolo
and Surace [48], Ostachowicz and Krawczuk [52], Liang et al. [53], Hu and Liang [54], Tsai and Wang [55],
Kisa and Brandon [56], and Zheng and Fan [57,58]. Theoretically, the approaches can be extended to any
number of cracks and boundary conditions, some of these lead to an increase in size of characteristic
determinant. For example, for a cantilever beam with two cracks, the characteristic determinant is of size
12
12 [52]. For every single additional crack the size of the determinant increases by 4. An improved
analytical method for calculating natural frequencies of a uniform beam with a large number of cracks is

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

1555

proposed by Shifrin and Ruotolo [59]. They represent the cracks by the massless rotational springs. Their
method leads to a characteristic equation of size (n 2) when there are n cracks.
While most of the studies dealing with multiple cracks address the forward problem, i.e. determination of
natural frequencies, Sekhar [29], Ruotolo and Surace [48] and Liang and coworker [53,54], address the inverse analysis, i.e. detection of crack details from the knowledge of dynamic response of the component. The
problem of detection of location and size of a number of cracks in a component simultaneously is much more
involved and complex than the case of a single crack. While solving such a case some of the investigators
consider that crack reduces the section modulus (EI) of a small beam segment around the crack [47]. Some
have obtained the solution employing the TMM [47], modied Fourier series approach [57,58], etc.
Experimental studies have helped to validate some of the models. Mostly cracks have been made by slitcutting in specimens. It is reported that, dierence between experimental and theoretical results decreases as
the slit width reduces for smaller crack sizes (<10% depth). For larger crack sizes the eect is insignicant.
Experimental results have been presented by Cawley and Adams [10] and Ruotolo and Surace [48], on
multiple cracks, and Rizos et al. [17], Cawley and Ray [32], Boltezar et al. [33], Doyle et al. [51] and Lele
and Maiti [60], on single crack.
The TMM is applicable to beams [38,39,61] with a large number of geometric segments, intermediate
supports, etc. This method oers denite advantages over the approaches based on the modal analysis or
FEM [44]. Particularly, size of the characteristic determinant reduces considerably. The size can be reduced
to (n 2), where n is the number of intermediate rigid supports, irrespective of the number of beam segments. How this method can be exploited for handling beams on elastic foundation, or discontinuous
supports, with multiple cracks is open for an investigation. The present study derives motivation from such
an issue.
Liang et al. [53] have approached the problem of multiple cracks by breaking the beam into a number of
segments, each of which can have a crack/damage. The size of crack in a segment decides the extent of the
local eects. They have assumed the eect to be spread uniformly over the whole segment. They have
showed through energy consideration that the changes in natural frequency are linearly related to the
damage parameters. The exact relationship has however been obtained through symbolic computation,
which is basically employed to obtain the mode shapes of the corresponding uncracked beam. Knowledge
of a change in a number of natural frequencies permits determination of the damage parameters and detection of crack details.
The aim of this work is to present a method for modelling transverse vibration of beams with multiple
open cracks by combining the TMM and the rotational spring based representation of a crack, and the
approximate approach of Hu and Liang [54]. The formulation helps to do away with the symbolic computation and obtain the mode shape of the corresponding uncracked beam. Simply supported beam,
cantilever beam, as well as beams on elastic foundation and multiple pin supports are examined. The beams
are considered slender so that the shear deformation and rotational inertia can be neglected. The damping,
if any, present in the beam is neglected. Numerical studies are presented to demonstrate the eectiveness
of the method for crack detection. The natural frequencies required as input are computed using a nite
element program. The forward problems are solved in the passing.
2. Formulation
An uniform beam with n cracks located at n x=L b1 ; b2 ; b3 ; . . . and bn (0 < b1 < b2 < b3 <    <
bn < 1), is shown in Fig. 1. Each of the crack can be represented by a rotational spring with stiness [52]
given by
Ki

Ebh2
72pf ri

1556

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

Fig. 1. Beam with multiple cracks.

where K i is the equivalent spring stiness for crack i, h is height and b is width of cross-section, ri ai =h is
nondimensional crack size and ai is size of the crack. f ri , called exibility function, is given by
2

f ri 0:6384ri  1:035ri 3:7201ri  5:1773ri 7:553ri  7:3324ri 2:4909ri

2
The rotational spring stiness corresponding to double edge cracks is presented in [52].
For an EulerBernoulli beam the governing equation of motion is



o2
o2 yx; t
o2 yx; t
EI
0
qA
2
2
ox
ot2
ox

Through separation of variables yx; t Zx cosxt, the mode shape equation is obtained:
EI

d4 Z
 qAx2i Z 0
dx4

or

d4 Z
 p4 Z 0
dx4

where q is the mass density (kg/m3 ), A, cross-sectional area (m2 ), xi , mode i natural frequency (rad/s), E,
modulus of elasticity (N/m2 ), I, area moment of inertia (m4 ), and
p4

qAx2
EI

The general solution of Eq. (4) can be written as follows:

Zx C1 cospx coshpx C2 cospx  coshpx C3 sinpx sinhpx
C4 sinpx  sinhpx

Using this relation it is possible to relate displacement Z, slope h dZ=dx, bending moment M
EId2 Z=dx2 and shear force V EId2 Z=dx2 at the two ends i and i  1 of an arbitrary segment:
2

Ai

6
Z
6
6
6h7
6 7 6 p4 Di
6
4M 5
6
V i 4 EIp4 Ci
EIp4 Bi

Bi
Ai
4

EIp Di
EIp4 Ci

Ci
EI
Bi
EI
Ai
p4 Di

Di 3
2 3
EI 7 Z
7
Ci 76 h 7
76 7
4 5
EI 7
7 M
Bi 5 V i1
Ai

or

ZR Ri ZL

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

1557

where Ri is called the transfer matrix for the segment i, and

cospli coshpli
;
Ai
2
cospli  coshpli
Ci
;
2p2

9
sinpli sinhpli
>
>
Bi
=
2p
sinpli  sinhpli >
>
;
Di
2p3

li length of the segment

C1

Zi1
;
2

C2 

Mi1
;
2EIp2

C3

hi1
;
2p

C4 

Vi1
2EIp3

Shear force V acting on a section with its outer normal oriented in the positive x-direction is considered
positive downward.
At a crack location, there is continuity in Z, M and V and a jump in h. Utilizing these it is possible to
relate the variables on the two sides of the crack:
2 3
2
32 3
Z
Z
1 0
0
0
6h 7
6 0 1 1=K i 0 76 h 7
6 7 6
76 7
or ZR Si ZL
10
4M 5
40 0
1
0 54 M 5
V i
0 0
0
1
V i1
where Si is the transfer matrix and K i is the rotational spring stiness given by Eq. (1).
For a step in a beam, the transfer matrix is just an identity matrix. This follows from the fact that there is
continuity of deection, slope, moment and shear force at the junction irrespective of the change in crosssections. For an intermediate support the beam has a discontinuity in shear force equal to the support
reaction. This fact can be built into the corresponding transfer matrix.
3. Forward problem
For a given beam with geometric features such as a step, uniform segment, crack, etc., the overall
transfer matrix H , i.e. Z N H Z 1 (Fig. 1), can be obtained from intermediate transfer matrices through
simple multiplication
H Rn 4
4 Sn1 4
4    R2 4
4 S1 4
4 R1 4
4

11

These matrices are obtainable from Eqs. (7), (10), etc. By inserting the specied boundary conditions, it is
possible to obtain a set of simultaneous equations H Z 0. Mostly two parameters out of the four are
zero at the ends. This helps to obtain the characteristic matrix H as a matrix of size 2
2. This makes the
proposed method very favourable. The characteristic equation of vibration is then given by
detH x; b1 ; b2 ; b3 ; . . . ; K1 ; K2 ; K3 ; . . . 2
2 0

12

where x is natural frequency. For a cantilever beam with a single crack, the characteristic equation is as
follows:


2
2

H 1 H11 H 1 H12
11
12
K
K 0

13

2
2
H 1 H21 H 1 H22

21
22
K
K
where
1
H11
p4 C1 C2 p4 B1 D2 A1 A2 p4 D1 B2 ;

2
H11
EIp4 A1 D2

1558

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

1
H12
p4 D1 C2 p4 C1 D2 B1 A2 A1 B2 ;

2
H12
EIp4 B1 D2

1
H21
p4 C1 B2 p4 B1 C2 p4 A1 D2 p4 D1 A2 ;
1
H22
p4 D1 B2 p4 C1 C2 p4 B1 D2 A1 A2 ;

2
H21
EIp4 A1 C2
2
H22
EIp4 B1 C2

Ai , Bi , Ci and Di (i 1; 2) are given by Eq. (8) except li is replaced by Li , where L1 bL, L2 1  bL and
b is the nondimensional crack location. Explicitly Eq. (13) for cantilever and simply supported beams
respectively are as follows:
k
fsinh kcos k cos ke  sin kcosh k cosh ke 2 coshkb sinkb
K
 2 coskb sinhkb  2 sink1  b coshk1  b 2 cosk1  b sinhk1  b g 0

41 cosh k cos k

14

and
4 sin k sinh k

k
fsinh kcos k  cos ke  sin kcosh k  cosh keg 0
K

15

where k pL, b L1 =L, e 2b  1 and K KL=EI. Putting 1=K 0 (i.e. compliance 0) in Eqs.
(14) and (15) the characteristic equations for the corresponding uncracked beams are obtained. Equation similar to Eq. (15) for a simply supported beam is derived by Narkis [62] through a dierent approach.
It is a bit dicult to derive Eq. (14) using this approach. Eqs. (14) and (15) can be re-written in a short
form
D1

k
D2 0
K

16

where
D1 41 cosh k cos k for a cantilever beam
4 sin k sinh k
for a simply supported beam
D2 corresponds to the portion within { } in Eqs. (14) and (15) respectively.
Solving Eq. (12) or (16) it is possible to solve the forward problem and obtain the natural frequencies. In
case there are n intermediate rigid supports, the size of the characteristic determinant (detH ) increases by
n. That is, the matrix size is then (n 2). The mode shape corresponding to a natural frequency can be
obtained through Eq. (6).
If any of the beam segment is nonuniform, e.g. tapered, it can be handled conveniently by incorporating
the transfer matrix given in Patil and Maiti [61].
4. Procedure for crack detection
For a single span beam with one crack Eq. (12) or (16) can serve as a basis for the detection of its location and size. But for the detection of multiple, say n, cracks the number of unknowns are 2n. It is then
dicult to apply Eq. (16) directly. Here the approximate method of Hu and Liang [54] in conjunction with
the TMM can be employed. This is explained in the following:
The Rayleigh quotient is given by
 2 2
Z L
dZ
1
EIx
dx
2
U
dx2
x2 l 0 R L
17

1
2
V
qAZ dx
2

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

1559

where
U strain energy

1
2

EI
0

o2 Z
ox2

2
dx

1
2

W dx;

W EI

o2 Z
ox2

2

and
1
V kinetic energy
2

qAZ 2 dx
0

For small changes in frequency

Dl DU DV


l
U
V

18

For a beam with a crack located normally to the beam axis and undergoing transverse vibration DV 0.
Considering a crack to aect the mode shape locally and representing this eect by a damage parameter S,
Z
1 L
DU
SW dx
19
2 0
S is assumed to be nonzero only over a span/segment around as crack. Its magnitude depends on crack size.
For a segment without crack S 0 and for a segment with full depth crack S 1. S 1 signies a complete
failure. Eq. (18) can be now written explicitly:
RL
Dx 1 0 SW dx
RL
20
x
2
W dx
0

If a beam is divided into m segments and the segment i is assumed to be associated with a damage
parameter Si ,
Z
m
X
Dx
1
2
w dx Si
21
x
I
i1 0 Li
R
where I0 4 L w dx, Li represents length of segment i. In keeping with Liang et al.s [53] representation, for
nth frequency
m Z
X
Dxn
2
gn nL dn Si ; gn n Wn =I0n
22
xn
L
i1
where gn n, Wn and I0n are associated with the corresponding natural mode shape. This gives a set of linear
simultaneous equations involving Si . For a beam divided into m segments and q number of known frequencies, Eq. (22) gives rise to a set of simultaneous equations:


Dx
2H q
m fSgm
l
23
x q
l
R
where a typical element of H matrix, hij Lj gi nL dn, i 1; 2; . . . q, and j 1; 2; . . . m; i refers to the
mode and j refers to the segment number. For example, for a simply supported beam, the nth mode shape
can be written in terms of sinnpx=l or sinnpn. Therefore
Zn n sinnpn;

Zn0 n np cosnpn;

Zn00 n n2 p2 sinnpn

1560

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

Hence
n2 p2 sinnpn 2
1
gn n R 1
sin2 npn
2
4 0 n2 p2 sinnpn dn 2



Z
1
L
1
2
sin npnL dn
n2  n1 
sin2npn2  sin2npn1
hnj
4
2np
Lj 2
For solving the inverse problem Eq. (23) is useful. The numerical values of damage parameters Si obtained from Eq. (23) furnish information about the state of damage of the segments.

5. Numerical studies
5.1. Forward problem
The proposed method has been tested for beams with cracks of varying sizes at dierent locations. In the
case of the forward problem, the characteristic equation (12) is used. The material and geometric properties
used are included in tables mentioned subsequently. All computations are done using double precision
arithmetic and MATLAB package.
Tables 13 give results for the rst three modes of a single span cantilever beam of length l with two
cracks. Here P pl, where p is the frequency parameter. The rst crack is located at b1 0:1 and the
location of the second crack is varied. Dierent sizes for the second crack are also examined. The frequencies obtained are in good agreement with the results of [51]. There is also good agreement with present
FE results. For FE analysis, the beam is discretised mostly by 8-noded isoparametric elements. Around the
crack tip, quarter point singular elements are used. The computations are done using a package [63].
5.2. Inverse problem/crack detection
The rst n natural frequencies required for the solution of a problem of multiple crack detection are
computed here by using the earlier mentioned package. All calculations are again done using the MATLAB
package. Fig. 2 shows the ow chart of the procedure. In the calculations some of the parameters Si are less
than 0. Since a positive Si represents a reduction in section because of a crack, a negative Si indicates an
increase of area of section. Physically, this is unrealistic. To handle the case Si < 0, the corresponding
segment is treated to be free of any damage and Si is set equal to zero. The calculations are repeated till a set
of all positive damage parameters are obtained.
Taking only one damage parameter Si of a segment i as nonzero at a time and keeping all others as zero,
the change in a natural frequency Dxn due to one such damage in the segment is calculated. A variation of
K with crack location b is obtained using Eq. (16) and Dxn . This is repeated for three or more modes. Since,
the stiness of the spring is independent of the mode, the location where the three or more such curves
intersect gives the crack location and the spring stiness. The crack size is then obtained from the relation
(2).
To facilitate a comparison for predictability, the geometric and material data of Hu and Liang [54] are
used. The beam (Fig. 3a), simply supported at the ends, is divided into ten equal segments (Fig. 3b). The
total number of segments is the same for all the case studies reported here unless otherwise mentioned. The
rst ve natural frequencies (Table 4) are employed to obtain the equations


Dx
2H 5
10 fSg10
1
24
x 5
1

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

1561

Table 1
Comparison of rst natural frequency parameter for cantilever (cl-fr) beam with two cracks (uncracked beam pL 1:8751{1.87104}a )
a2 =h

b2
0.4

0.6

0.8

b 0:1, a1 =h 0:1 pL 1:8605{1.8585}

0.1
1.8468
1.8504{1.8500}
0.3
1.7527
1.7788{1.7892}
0.5
1.5834
1.6391{1.6533}
0.7
1.3947
1.4685

0.11

1.8564{1.8550}
1.8252{1.8288}
1.7530{1.7599}
1.6422

1.8595{1.8577}
1.8514{1.8509}
1.8305{1.8312}
1.7914

1.8604
1.8597
1.8581
1.8548

b1 0:1, a1 =h 0:3 pL 1:7603(1.7602){1.7737}

0.1
1.7499(1.7496)a 1.7527(1.7506){1.7668}
0.3
1.6762(1.6762)
1.6971(1.6964){1.7175}
0.5
1.5356(1.5354)
1.5831(1.5831){1.6037}
0.7
1.3685(1.3689)
1.4352(1.4356)

1.7573(1.7564){1.7709}
1.7336(1.7337){1.7501}
1.6772(1.6772){1.6943}
1.5868(1.5871)

1.7596(1.7593){1.7730}
1.7536(1.7512){1.7678}
1.7579(1.7321){1.7523}
1.7081(1.6812)

1.7603(1.7601)
1.7598(1.7598)
1.7586(1.7562)
1.7562(1.7558)

b1 0:1, a1 =h 0:5 pL 1:5836(1.5837){1.6004}

0.1
1.5774(1.5774)
1.5791(1.5792)
0.3
1.5318(1.5318)
1.5452(1.5452){1.5659}
0.5
1.4365(1.4426)
1.4702(1.4731){1.4906}
0.7
1.3094(1.3062)
1.3622(1.3623)

1.5818(1.5817)
1.5678(1.5684){1.5863}
1.5333(1.5342){1.5517}
1.4741(1.4762)

1.5831(1.5829)
1.5796(1.5791)
1.5706(1.5708)
1.5530(1.5491)

1.5835(1.5835)
1.5832(1.5826)
1.5826(1.5794)
1.5812(1.5864)

b1 0:1, a1 =h 0:7 pL 1:3901(1.3906)

0.1
1.3868(1.3869)
1.3878(1.3879)
0.3
1.3622(1.3712)
1.3696(1.3721)
0.5
1.3060(1.3061)
1.3268(1.3243)
0.7
1.2216(1.2212)
1.2582(1.2601)

1.3892(1.3884)
1.3819(1.3812)
1.3634(1.3643)
1.3298(1.3303)

1.3898(1.3901)
1.3881(1.3896)
1.3834(1.3831)
1.3743(1.3742)

1.3901(1.3905)
1.3900(1.3900)
1.3896(1.3892)
1.3889(1.3874)

0.2

Data quoted within ( ) are from Ref. [52]; data quoted within { } are by present FE analysis.

Table 2
Comparison of second natural frequency parameter for cantilever beam with two cracks (uncracked beam pL 4:69409{4.60859}a )
a2 =h

b2
0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

b1 0:1, a1 =h 0:1
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7

pL 4:6808{4.5976}
4.6707
4.6093
4.5286
4.4700

0.11

4.6807{4.5975}
4.6797{4.5962}
4.6779{4.5918}
4.6763

4.6634{4.5839}
4.5420{4.4860}
4.3258{4.2779}
4.1055

4.6577{4.5795}
4.4916{4.4465}
4.1702{4.1427}
3.7975

4.6763
4.6399
4.5427
4.3557

b1 0:1, a1 =h 0:3
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7

pL 4:6025{4.5340}
4.5968
4.5599
4.5052
4.4600

4.6025{4.5340}
4.6022{4.5334}
4.6016{4.5306}
4.6010

4.5833{4.5192}
4.4485{4.4128}
4.2054{4.1849}
3.9511

4.5797{4.5161}
4.5172{4.3846}
4.415{4.0820}
4.0941

4.5983
4.5637
4.4715
4.2936

b1 0:1, a1 =h 0:5
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7

pL 4:5045{4.4350}
4.5025
4.4888
4.4646
4.4398

4.5035
4.4965{4.4294}
4.4823{4.4169}
4.4647

4.4828
4.3302{4.2989}
4.0487{4.0387}
3.7430

4.4819
4.3189
3.9972
3.6103

4.5004
4.4679
4.3813
4.2138

b1 0:1, a1 =h 0:7
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7

pL 4:4363
4.4358
4.4322
4.4247
4.4152

4.4341
4.4168
4.3784
4.3237

4.4129
4.2469
3.9357
3.5857

4.4140
4.2517
3.9289
3.5352

4.4324
4.4013
4.3182
4.1574

Data quoted within { } are by present FE analysis.

1562

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

Table 3
Comparison of third natural frequency parameter for cantilever beam with two cracks (uncracked beam pL 7:85475{7.53401}a )
b2

a2 =h

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

b1 0:1, a1 =h 0:1
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7

pL 7:8505{7.5304}
7.8488
7.8385
7.8254
7.8162

0.11

7.8373{7.5200}
7.7465{7.4343}
7.5927{7.1331}
7.4496

7.8322{7.5185}
7.7150{7.4259}
7.5455{7.1845}
7.4125

7.8278{7.5124}
7.6833{7.3865}
7.4775{7.1281}
7.3197

7.8199
7.5853
7.0918
6.5402

b1 0:1, a1 =h 0:3
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7

pL 7:8266{7.5095}
7.8259
7.8214
7.8148
7.8094

7.8112{7.4994}
7.7025{7.4173}
7.5073{7.1167}
7.3133

7.8083{7.4995}
7.6914{7.4167}
7.5230{7.1832}
7.3914

7.8032{7.4900}
7.7427{7.3515}
7.6542{7.0724}
7.4408

7.7958
7.5596
7.0623
6.5023

b1 0:1, a1 =h 0:5
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7

pL 7:7987{7.4306}
7.7986
7.7981
7.7971
7.7960

7.7805
7.6480{7.3651}
7.3926{7.0910}
7.1168

7.7804
7.6641{7.3858}
7.4971{7.1746}
7.3672

7.7745
7.6200
7.3978
7.2258

7.7676
7.5298
7.0281
6.4584

b1 0:1, a1 =h 0:7
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7

pL 7:7804
7.7804
7.7804
7.7803
7.7801

7.7603
7.6107
7.3079
6.9620

7.7622
7.6463
7.4804
7.3517

7.7557
7.5977
7.3696
7.1924

7.7492
7.5104
7.0060
6.4301

Data quoted within { } are by present FE analysis.

The ten damage parameters (S1 ; S2 ; . . . S10 ) are obtained from ve equations employing the pseudo-inverse
technique of the MATLAB.
Solution of Eq. (24) gives the following Si s or fSg matrix after the rst iteration:
fSg fS1 ; S2 ; S3 ; S4 ; S5 ; S6 ; S7 ; S8 ; S9 ; S10 g

f0:00066; 0; 0; 0; 0; 0:05317; 0:00699; 0:03901; 0:00343; 0g

S7 and S9 are less than zero. These are set equal to zero and re-solution is carried out. This gives after the
second iteration
fSg fS1 ; S2 ; S3 ; S4 ; S5 ; S6 ; S8 ; S10 gT
f0:00066; 0:00343; 0; 0:00699; 0; 0:05317; 0:03901; 0gT
The results obtained in the subsequent iterations are as follows:
Iteration 3:
fSg fS1 ; S3 ; S5 ; S6 ; S8 ; S10 gT
103
f1:23876; 0:78202; 0; 0:00006; 0:78198; 1:23879gT
Iteration 4:
T

fSg fS1 ; S3 ; S5 ; S6 g 103
f0:00001; 0:00003; 5:37444; 5:37447g

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

Fig. 2. Flow chart for inverse problem.

Fig. 3. Simply supported beam containing two cracks and its segmentation for analysis.

Iteration 5:
fSg fS1 ; S3 ; S6 gT f0:00941; 0:031318; 0:050402gT

1563

1564

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

Table 4
Natural frequencies of simply supported beam with two cracks
Case no.

Crack location and size

1
2

Uncracked beam
0.25
0.07971

b1

a1 =h

Natural frequencies (Hz)

b2
0.45

a2 =h

x1

x2

x3

x4

x5

0.0986

59.007
58.625

236.029
235.142

531.065
528.096

944.116
942.515

1475.182
1469.103

E 2:8
1010 N/m2 , q 2350 kg/m3 , L 10:0 m, h 0:60 m and B 0:2 m.

All the three damage parameters are greater than zero. This indicates that the beam contains three cracks.
That is, the segments 1, 3 and 6 have cracks.
To predict the crack in segment 1, the set of damage parameter fS1 ; S3 ; S6 g 0:00941; 0; 0 is considered.
This is used to calculate Dx=x for the rst three natural frequencies from Eq. (24):
i

Dx1
0:00304%;
x1

Dx2
0:011445%;
x2

and

Dx3
0:02332%
x3

The changes in the natural frequencies are of negligible order. This can be interpreted that the segment 1
does not have any crack.
To predict the crack in segment 3, the damage parameter set fS1 ; S3 ; S6 g f0; 0:031318; 0g is considered
and the changes Dx=x of the rst three natural frequencies are again calculated from Eq. (24):
ii

Dx1
0:156587%;
x1

Dx2
0:303075%;
x2

and

Dx3
0:156588%
x3

These changes are signicant. They indicate the existence of a crack in the segment 3. Similarly the last set
fS1 ; S3 ; S6 g f0; 0; 0:050402g is considered to locate crack in segment 6. The changes Dx=x in the rst
three natural frequencies are obtained.
iii

Dx1
0:48776%;
x1

Dx2
0:06128%;
x2

and

Dx3
0:379159%
x3

These changes too are signicant and they indicate that element 6 contains a crack.
In order to predict the exact location and size of the crack in segment 3, the frequency changes given by
set (ii) is used to plot the variation of rotational spring stiness with crack location b over the whole beam
assuming existence of a single crack. To save labour, the variations can be plotted over segment 3 alone.
The variation is plotted for each frequency. Typical K vs. b plots are shown in Fig. 4. Thereby the crack
location, given by the intersection of the three curves, and its size, are obtained. The same is repeated for the
set (iii). The results so obtained are given in Table 5.
The above analysis has also been done using the symbolic computation through symbolic toolbox
available in the MATLAB. The processing time is 158 s. The processing time by the proposed scheme, i.e.
without the symbolic toolbox, is just 2.5 s.
The similar results for cantilever beams with two cracks, and separate set of geometric and material data,
are presented in Tables 6 and 7.
5.3. Beams on elastic foundation
It has been reported [64] that, at least for cases where natural frequencies of a beam increase due to a
foundation, change in a frequency corresponding to a change from without crack to with crack congu-

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

1565

Fig. 4. Plot of K vs. b curves for simply supported beam.

Table 5
Comparison of actual and predicted crack location and size for simply supported with two cracks of Table 4
Actual data

Natural frequencies (Hz)

Predicted data

x1

x2

x3

Location b

% error

Stiness K

a=h

% error

Uncracked beam

59.007

236.029

531.065

Crack in 3rd element

0.25
0.07971

58.915

235.314

530.233

0.250

0.0(0.5)a

320.714

0.069

)1.071(0.231)

Crack in 6th element

0.45
0.0986

58.719

235.884

529.051

0.443

)0.7()0.7)

195.631

0.089

)0.96()0.01)

Location b

a=h

Errors quoted in Ref. [54].

rations demonstrates typicality. For a given set of end conditions, this change can be computed rst by
considering the foundation and then by neglecting it. The results obtained by the two approaches are very
close and can be considered to be the same. This fact can be exploited in simplifying the approach for crack
detection in such beams. At least numerical computation for obtaining natural frequencies can be done
without invoking the elastic foundation. This has been done in the case studies presented here. Tables 8 and
9 shows result for two cracks in a simply supported beam on elastic foundation (Fig. 5).

1566

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

Table 6
Natural frequencies obtained by FE analysis for cantilever beam with two cracks
Case no.

Crack location and size

Uncracked beam

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

0.1
0.1
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.2
0.25
0.25
0.35

b1

a1 =h

0.15
0.35
0.25
0.40
0.3
0.5
0.25
0.2
0.35

Natural frequencies (Hz)

b2
Analytical
FEM
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.45
0.5
0.5
0.55
0.55
0.6

a2 =h

x1

x2

x3

x4

x5

0.3
0.15
0.25
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.45
0.5

289.925
288.670
271.931
248.039
265.013
229.482
259.042
222.321
272.689
271.594
264.696

1816.931
1751.346
1649.858
1654.086
1625.863
1405.505
1536.825
1527.623
1624.409
1476.876
1399.212

5087.459
4680.559
4545.492
4611.596
4660.053
4445.952
4558.170
4197.771
4463.050
4435.421
3902.912

9969.389
8641.52
8513.229
8581.089
8296.765
7336.405
7527.449
7122.095
8064.036
7866.328
8407.615

16480.12
13370.73
12708.17
12927.16
13811.38
12451.00
13005.59
12681.79
13511.55
12674.92
11214.34

E 210 GPa, q 7860 kg/m3 , h 0:020 m, B 0:012 m and L 0:24 m.

Table 7
Comparison of actual and predicted crack location and size for cantilever beams of Table 6
Case no.

Actual data

Natural frequencies (Hz)

Predicted data

a=h

x1

x2

x3

% error

a=h

% error

0.1
0.4

0.15
0.3

278.649
284.462

1779.577
1752.797

5022.165
5000.407

0.067
0.417

)3.3
1.7

0.17017
0.24004

2.0
)6.0

0.1
0.4

0.35
0.15

252.719
286.500

1778.804
1757.798

5042.086
5057.842

0.138
0.453

3.8
5.3

0.35893
0.2109

0.893
6.09

0.1
0.5

0.25
0.25

269.239
286.954

1736.110
1772.268

4939.163
5052.409

0.047
0.438

)5.3
)6.2

0.22921
0.18761

)2.079
)6.239

0.15
0.45

0.40
0.5

252.688
273.482

1778.773
1533.036

5042.048
4945.268

0.138
0.477

)1.2
2.7

0.35908
0.46802

)4.092
)3.198

0.2
0.5

0.3
0.4

272.283
277.939

1809.357
1609.985

4857.243
4983.808

0.259
0.469

5.9
)3.1

0.29970
0.39939

)0.03
)0.06

0.2
0.5

0.5
0.4

239.561
273.940

1780.849
1629.290

4482.823
4832.764

0.2558
0.428

5.58
)7.2

0.50369
0.40967

0.369
0.967

0.25
0.55

0.25
0.3

277.064
286.805

1811.410
1695.515

4919.637
5017.985

0.259
0.561

0.9
1.1

0.25543
0.28921

0.054
)1.079

0.25
0.55

0.2
0.45

289.919
284.154

1815.800
1592.381

5067.216
4958.972

0.184
0.575

)6.6
2.5

0.14268
0.40052

)5.732
)4.948

10

0.35
0.6

0.35
0.5

272.793
283.083

1731.028
1550.699

4693.480
4935.122

0.344
0.582

)0.6
)1.8

0.3828
0.43993

3.28
)6.007

5.4. Beams on multiple pin supports

For a beam on number of supports (more than 2), the mode shape for each segment has to be given
separately. For example, for a beam on three pin supports (Fig. 6), the mode shape for the segments 1 to 2
and 3 to 4 can be written in terms of Z, h, M and V at their left ends. That is, using Eqs. (6) and (9), noting
that Z1 0, M1 0 and Z3 0,

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

1567

Table 8
Natural frequencies obtained by FE analysis for beams with two cracks on elastic foundations and end supports
Case no.

Crack location and size

Uncracked beam

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

0.2
0.2
0.2
0.25
0.30
0.32
0.4
0.4
0.45

b1

a1 =h

0.15
0.15
0.15
0.25
0.35
0.40
0.25
0.45
0.25

Natural frequencies (Hz)

b2
Analytical
FEM
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.62
0.65
0.65
0.65

a2 =h

x1

x2

x3

x4

x5

0.15
0.25
0.35
0.40
0.35
0.28
0.25
0.45
0.5

49.224
49.039
48.595
48.246
47.671
47.072
47.021
47.181
47.896
45.624
46.215

188.107
187.557
186.746
186.741
186.736
185.181
183.304
180.877
185.152
178.577
180.247

422.158
419.573
415.921
412.682
407.572
403.079
407.960
418.065
417.625
412.901
415.006

750.178
742.124
740.932
740.917
740.889
741.997
735.612
716.950
725.847
686.454
702.017

1172.015
1152.584
1147.389
1138.838
1125.764
1110.963
1099.087
1119.032
1145.719
1130.309
1118.332

E 210 GPa, q 7860 kg/m3 , h 0:02 m, B 0:012 m and L 0:24 m.

Table 9
Comparison of actual and predicted crack location and size for beams of Table 8
Case no.

Actual data

Natural frequencies (Hz)

Predicted data

Location b

a=h

x1

x2

x3

Location b

% error

a=h

0.2
0.5

0.15
0.15

46.817
46.506

187.049
187.321

421.359
419.301

0.256
0.443

5.6
)5.7

0.10749
0.19898

)4.251
4.898

0.2
0.5

0.15
0.25

46.818
46.141

187.060
187.137

421.372
416.746

0.256
0.443

5.6
)5.7

0.10607
0.27926

)4.393
2.926

0.2
0.5

0.15
0.35

46.867
45.517

187.368
186.824

421.253
412.385

0.117
0.444

)8.3
)5.6

0.08738
0.37736

)6.262
2.736

0.25
0.5

0.25
0.4

46.766
45.059

186.653
186.594

420.898
409.183

0.255
0.443

0.5
)5.7

0.14862
0.42309

)10.13
2.309

0.3
0.5

0.35
0.35

46.428
45.305

184.043
186.718

417.864
410.902

0.251
0.443

)4.9
)5.7

0.29998
0.39665

)5.002
4.665

0.32
0.62

0.40
0.28

45.599
46.295

181.119
187.215

416.615
417.825

0.303
0.557

)1.7
)6.3

0.42193
0.24915

2.193
)3.085

0.4
0.65

0.25
0.25

46.395
46.214

187.265
185.344

418.526
421.198

0.443
0.651

4.3
0.1

0.22692
0.29262

)2.308
4.262

0.4
0.65

0.45
0.45

46.088
44.249

187.111
178.923

416.380
419.139

0.443
0.657

4.3
0.7

0.2886
0.54059

)16.14
9.059

10

0.45
0.65

0.25
0.5

46.183
44.745

187.158
180.545

417.040
419.660

0.443
0.656

)0.7
0.6

0.27147
0.4928

2.147
)0.720

Z 1 x

h1
V1
sinpx sinhpx 
sinpx  sinhpx ;
2
2EIp3

Z 2 x 

0 6 x 6 L1

M3
h3
V3
cospx  coshpx sinpx sinhpx 
sinpx  sinhpx ;
2EIp2
2p
2EIp3

% error

25
L1 6 x 6 L
26

1568

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

Fig. 5. Beam on continuous elastic foundation.

Fig. 6. Beam on three pin supports.

Using the transfer matrix of the rst segment, and Z1 0 and M1

3
2
2
C1
D1
B
A
1
1
2 3
2 3
6
6 B1
EI
EI 7
Z
7 Z
6
6
6
6
B1
C1 7
6h7
6h7
4
7
6
6 7 6
6 7 6 p D1
A1
7
6 A1
4M 5
EI
EI 74 M 5
6
6
7
6
6
A1
B1 5 V 1 4 EIp4 D1
V 2 4 EIp4 C1 EIp4 D1
EIp4 B1
2

EIp4 C1

p4 D1

D1
EI
C1
EI
B1

07
72 3
7 h
07
74 V 5
7
7 R 1
05

EIp4 C1

A1

EIp4 C1

27

A1

6 B1
Z
6
6
6h7
6 7 6
6 A1
4M 5
6
6
V 3 4 EIp4 D1
2

A1

0 at left hand support,

3
D1
EI 7
7

C1 7
7 h
EI 7
7 V 1
7
B1 5

28

and Z3 0, V1 B1 =D1 =EIh1 . R is the reaction at the intermediate support. The constants A1 ; B1 ; . . .
are obtained from Eq. (7) by putting li L1 . Similarly, using the transfer matrix of second segment and Eq.
(28)
3
32
3
2
2
D1
C2
D2
D2
B
0
B
A
D
D
1
2
2
2 3
11
12
72 3
6
6
6
EI
EI
EI 7
EI 7
Z
7
76
72 3
6
6
h
h
7
7
6
6
6
C
B
C
C2 7
6h7
1
2
2 76
4
7
74 5
6
6
0 74 V 5 6 D21 D22
A1
6 7 6 p D2
A2
V
7
7
6
4M 5
EI
EI
EI 76
EI 7
7
6
6
7 R 1 6D
76
7 R 1
6
A2
B2 54 EIp4 D1 B1 0 5
V 4 4 EIp4 C2 EIp4 D2
4 31 D32 B2 5
D41 D42 A2
EIp4 C1 A1 1
EIp4 B2 EIp4 C2 p4 D2 A2
and Z4 0, M4 0,

R  D11  D12

B1
D1 =EI


1
h1
D2 =EI

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

1569

The constant A2 ; B2 ; . . . are obtained from Eq. (7) by putting li L2 . Thus all the parameters (V1 ; h3 ; M3 ; V3
are R) are available in terms of h1 . Hence the mode shapes involves only one arbitrary constant h1 . It can be
assigned any value, e.g. unity for convenience. From the mode shapes gn x is obtained. In turn the coecients of the linear simultaneous equation (24) are obtained.
The crack location and size has been predicted following exactly the steps given for the simply supported
beam earlier. The results for a uniform beam on three pin supports are presented in Tables 10 and 11. The
whole beam has again been divided into 10 segments (i.e. ve segments per span). The error in the prediction of crack location is less than 10% and it is less than 15% in the case of prediction of crack size.

Table 10
Natural frequencies obtained by FE analysis for beams with two cracks on three pin supports
Case no.

Crack location and size

Uncracked beam

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45

b1

a1 =h

0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.15
0.25
0.35
0.15

Natural frequencies (Hz)

b2
Analytical
FEM
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.60
0.60
0.70
0.65

a2 =h

x1

x2

x3

x4

x5

0.15
0.25
0.35
0.50
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.15

520.8528
516.916
502.730
496.523
486.858
464.7114
509.704
504.645
490.712
513.937

813.6716
798.657
784.273
777.6449
768.4461
751.3703
795.208
795.861
786.783
794.137

2083.412
2022.936
2022.736
2022.702
2022.521
2021.883
1983.040
1940.238
1934.542
2003.986

2636.817
2510.160
2502.486
2499.195
2494.133
2483.061
2488.788
2461.339
2431.647
2493.895

4687.676
4400.137
4288.776
4245.431
4176.365
4023.732
4314.053
4287.657
4211.034
4377.027

E 210 GPa, q 7860 kg/m3 , h 0:02 m, B 0:012 m and Lspan 0:3 m.

Table 11
Comparison of actual and predicted crack location and size for beams of Table 10
Case no.

Actual data

Natural frequencies (Hz)

Predicted data

Location b

a=h

x1

x2

x3

Location b

0.25
0.75

0.25
0.15

512.536
514.983

806.890
806.069

2079.232
2080.462

0.2705
0.7812

2.05
3.12

0.21935
0.18520

)3.065
3.52

0.25
0.75

0.25
0.25

509.595
511.717

804.491
801.839

2077.754
2078.821

0.269
0.7855

1.9
3.55

0.25487
0.23239

0.487
)1.761

0.25
0.75

0.25
0.35

508.970
502.678

798.280
798.851

2077.440
2074.278

0.211
0.735

)3.9
)1.5

0.26558
0.32000

1.558
)3.0

0.25
0.75

0.25
0.50

511.020
478.481

800.935
779.121

2078.470
2062.117

0.2135
0.7495

)3.65
)0.05

0.24121
0.47113

)0.879
)2.887

0.30
0.60

0.15
0.25

518.217
516.704

811.522
813.347

2082.087
2051.294

0.2735
0.652

)2.65
5.2

0.12174
0.18844

)2.826
)6.156

0.35
0.60

0.25
0.30

518.952
510.680

812.122
812.875

2082.457
2004.652

0.274
0.6165

)7.6
1.65

0.10279
0.35617

)14.72
5.617

0.40
0.70

0.35
0.35

507.973
507.528

812.664
802.806

1983.701
2076.715

0.3835
0.733

)1.65
3.3

0.39982
0.27493

4.982
)7.507

0.45
0.65

0.15
0.15

520.667
520.223

813.164
813.622

2081.147
2078.539

0.426
0.617

)2.4
)3.3

0.06924
0.08802

)8.076
)6.198

% error

a=h

% error

1570

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

6. Discussion and conclusions

A technique, combining the TMM and representation of an open edge crack oriented normally to the
axis by a rotational spring, has been proposed to solve the problem of detection of multiple cracks in beams
with varying end conditions (xed and simple supports) and intermediate support conditions (pin support
and elastic foundation). Smaller size of the characteristic equation that is typical of the TMM is fully
exploited. The steps to obtain the mode shapes for multi-segment uncracked beam which are crucial for
obtaining the function gn x associated with a span are given. This has helped to extend the scope of the
approximate method given by Hu and Liang [54] for a single segment beam to multi-segment beams.
Additionally, this has helped to eliminate the symbolic computation [53] to determine the uncracked beam
mode shapes. Thereby the problem solving time reduces to an enormous extent. The method gives a clear
insight into the whole analysis. The accuracy of results in the inverse, or crack detection, problem is good.
The maximum dierence in the prediction of location is less than 10% and the dierence in the size is less
than 15%. The maximum dierence of results in the forward, or natural frequency determination, problems,
which are solved in the passing, is less than 5% with the published and/or nite element data. The method
however suers from one important limitation. That is, the maximum number of cracks that can be detected is less than equal to the number of segments into which the beam is virtually divided. This limitation
is inherent in the approximate approach given by Liang et al. [53]. The other shortcomings emanate from
the assumptions; the method cannot be applied to beams where rotational inertia, shear deformation and
damping eects are signicant.
The present procedure is based on the fact that the eect of a damage parameter extends over a segment
length, which is dictated by the analyst. There is a need to see how this length can be rationally decided.
There is also a scope for examining the limitation on the number of cracks that can be handled in a multicrack problem.
References
[1] Dimarogonas AD, Paipetis SA. Analytical methods in rotor dynamics. In: Applied Science, London. 1983. p. 14493.
[2] Entwistle RD, Stone BJ. Survey of the use of vibration methods in assessment of component geometry. Vib Noise-Meas Predict
Control, Inst Engng 1990;90:2107.
[3] Wauer J. On the dynamics of cracked rotors: A literature survey. Appl Mech Rev 1990;43(1):137.
[4] Gasch R. A survey of the dynamic behavior of a simple rotating shaft with a transverse crack. J Sound Vib 1993;160(2):31332.
[5] Dimarogonas AD. Vibration of cracked structures: state of the art review. Engng Fract Mech 1996;55:83157.
[6] Salawu OS. Detection of structural damage through changes in frequency: a review. Engng Struct 1997;19(9):71823.
[7] Adams RD, Cawley P, Pye CJ, Stone BJ. A vibration technique for non-destructively assessing the integrity of structures. J Mech
Engng Sci 1978;20:93100.
[8] Springer WT, Lawrence KL, Lawley TJ. The eect of a symmetric discontinuity on adjacent material in a longitudinally vibrating
uniform beam. Exp Mech 1978;27:16871.
[9] Dentsoras A, Dimarogonas AD. Resonance controlled fatigue crack propagation in a beam under longitudinal vibrations. Int J
Fract 1983;23:1522.
[10] Cawley P, Adams RD. The location of defects in structures from measurements of natural frequencies. J Strain Anal
1979;14(2):4957.
[11] Gudmundson P. Eigenfrequency changes of structures due to cracks, notches or other geometrical changes. J Mech Phys Solids
1982;30(5):33953.
[12] Gudmundson P. The dynamic behaviour of slender structures with cross-sectional cracks. J Mech Phys Solids 1983;31(4):32945.
[13] Christides S, Barr AD. One dimensional theory of cracked BernoulliEuler beam. J Vib, Acoust, Stress Reliab Des 1984;111:814.
[14] Yuen MM. A numerical study of the eigenparameters of a damaged cantilever. J Sound Vib 1985;103(3):30110.
[15] Chang HY, Petroski HY. On detecting a crack by tapping a beam. Int J Press Vess Pip 1986;22:4155.
[16] Qian GL, Gu SN, Jiang JS. The dynamic behaviour and crack detection of a beam with a crack. J Sound Vib 1990;138(2):23343.
[17] Rizos PF, Aspragathos N, Dimarogonas AD. Identication of crack location and magnitude in a cantilever beam from the
vibration modes. J Sound Vib 1990;138(3):3818.

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

1571

[18] Shen MH, Pierre C. Natural modes of BernoulliEuler beams with symmetric cracks. J Sound Vib 1990;138(1):11534.
[19] Pandey AK, Biswas M, Samman MM. Damage detection from changes in curvature mode shapes. J Sound Vib 1991;145(2):321
32.
[20] Liang RY, Choy FK, Hu J. Detection of cracks in beam structures using measurements of natural frequencies. J Franklin Inst
1991;328:50518.
[21] Krawczuk M, Ostachowicz WM. Transverse natural vibrations of a cracked beam loaded with a constant axial force. J Vib
Acoust, Trans ASME 1993;115(4):5248.
[22] Anifantis N, Rizos PF, Dimarogonas AD. Identication of cracks on beams by vibration analysis. ASME Des Div Publ DE
1987;2:18997.
[23] Nandwana BP. On foundation for detection of crack based on measurement of natural frequencies. PhD dissertation, Mechanical
Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, 1997.
[24] Chaudhari TD. Modelling of transverse vibration of geometrically segmented beams to facilitate crack detection. PhD
dissertation, Mechanical Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, 2000.
[25] Papadopoulos CA, Dimarogonas AD. Coupled longitudinal and bending vibration of a cracked shaft. J Vib Acoust, Trans ASME
1988;110:18.
[26] Papadopoulos CA, Dimaragonas AD. Coupled longitudinal and bending vibrations of a rotating shaft with an open crack.
J Sound Vib 1987;117(l):8193.
[27] Papadopoulos CA, Dimarogonas AD. Coupled vibration of cracked shafts. J Vib Acoust, Trans ASME 1992;114:4617.
[28] Ostachowicz WM, Krawwczuk M. Coupled torsional and bending vibrations of a rotor with an open crack. Arch Appl Mech
1992;62:191201.
[29] Sekhar AS. Vibration characteristics of a cracked rotor with two open cracks. J Sound Vib 1999;223(4):497512.
[30] Chati M, Rand R, Mukherjee S. Modal analysis of a cracked beam. J Sound Vib 1997;211:24970.
[31] Schlums DH, Dual J. High resolution crack growth measurements in vibrating beams. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct
1997;20(7):10518.
[32] Cawley P, Ray R. A comparison of the natural frequency changes produced by cracks and slots. J Vib Acoust, Trans ASME
1988;110:36670.
[33] Boltezar M, Strancar B, Kuhelj A. Identication of transverse crack location in exural vibrations of freefree beams. J Sound Vib
1998;211(5):72934.
[34] Dimarogonas AD. Vibration Engineering. St Paul: West Publishers; 1976.
[35] Naguleswaran S. A direct solution for the transverse vibration of EulerBernoulli wedge and cone beams. J Sound Vib
1994;172(3):289304.
[36] Mabie HH, Rogers CB. Transverse vibrations of tapered cantilever beams with end loads. J Acoust Soc Am 1964;36(3):4639.
[37] Auciello NM. Exact solution for the transverse vibration of a beam a part of which is a taper beam and other part is a uniform
beam. Int J Solids Struct 1997;34(17):211529.
[38] Bapat C. Natural frequencies of a beam with non-classical boundary conditions and concentrated masses. J Sound Vib
1987;112(1):17782.
[39] Tsai TC, Wang YZ. Vibration analysis and diagnosis of a cracked shaft. J Sound Vib 1996;192(3):60720.
[40] Khiem NT, Lien TV. A simplied method for natural frequency analysis of a multiple cracked beam. J Sound Vib
2001;245(4):73751.
[41] Li QS. Vibration characteristics of multi-step beams with an arbitrary number of cracks and concentrated masses. Appl Acoust
2001;62:691706.
[42] Cawley P, Adams RD. Defect location in structures by a vibration technique. ASME Design Engng Technical Conf, St. Louis,
Paper 79-DET-46, 1979.
[43] Thambiratnam D, Zhuge Y. Free vibration analysis of beams on elastic foundation. Comput Struct 1996;60(6):97180.
[44] Chinchalkar S. Determination of crack location in beams using natural frequencies. J Sound Vib 2001;247(3):41729.
[45] Yang XF, Swamidas ASJ, Seshadri R. Crack detection in vibrating beams using the energy method. J Sound Vib 2001;244(2):339
57.
[46] Kukla S. Free vibration of a beam supported on a stepped elastic foundation. J Sound Vib 1991;149(2):25965.
[47] Choy FK, Liang R, Xu P. Fault identication in beams on elastic foundation. Comput Geotech 1995;17(2):15776.
[48] Ruotolo R, Surace C. Damage assessment of multiple cracked beams: numerical results and experimental validation. J Sound Vib
1997;206(4):56788.
[49] Kam TY, Lee TY. Detection of cracks in structures using modal test data. Engng Fract Mech 1992;42(2):3817.
[50] Doyle JF. Determining size and location of transverse cracks in beams. Exp Mech 1995:27280.
[51] Doyle JF, Farris TN, Martin MM. Crack identication in frame structures. In: Aliabadi MH, editor. Dynamic fracture
mechanics. Southampton: Computational Mechanics Publications; 1995. p. 23783.
[52] Ostachowicz WM, Krawczuk M. Analysis of the eect of cracks on the natural frequencies of a cantilever beam. J Sound Vib
1991;150:191201.

1572

D.P. Patil, S.K. Maiti / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 70 (2003) 15531572

[53] Liang RY, Hu J, Choy FK. Quantitative NDE technique for assessing damage in beam structures. J Engng Mech, ASCE
1992;118(7):146887.
[54] Hu J, Liang RY. An integrated approach to detection of cracks using vibration characteristics. J Franklin Inst 1993;330(5):84153.
[55] Tsai TC, Wang YZ. The vibration of a multi-crack rotor. Int J Mech Sci 1997;39(9):103753.
[56] Kisa M, Brandon JA. Free vibration analysis of multiple open-edge cracked beams by component mode synthesis. Struct Engng
Mech 2000;10(l):8192.
[57] Zheng DY, Fan SC. Natural frequencies of a non-uniform beam with multiple cracks via modied Fourier series. J Sound Vib
2001;242(4):70117.
[58] Zheng DY, Fan SC. Natural frequency changes of a cracked Timoshenko beam by modied Fourier series. J Sound Vib
2001;246(2):297317.
[59] Shifrin EI, Ruotolo R. Natural frequencies of a beam with an arbitrary number of cracks. J Sound Vib 1999;222(3):40923.
[60] Lele SP, Maiti SK. Modeling of transverse vibration of short beams for crack detection and measurement of crack extension.
J Sound Vib, in press.
[61] Patil DP, Maiti SK. Modelling of geometrically segmented beams to facilitate crack detection using frequency measurements.
In: Proceedings of 18th Canadian Congress of Applied Mechanics, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada, vol. 1, 2001.
p. 756.
[62] Narkis Y. Identication of crack location in vibrating simply supported beams. J Sound Vib 1994;172(4):54958.
[63] Maiti SK. Finite element package for stress and vibration analysis. Mechanical Engineering Department, IIT Bombay, MEDSKM-TR-96-01, 1996.
[64] Patil DP, Maiti SK. Modelling for crack detection in beams on elastic foundation. In: Proceedings of 7th Pan American Congress
of Applied Mechanics, University de LaFrontera, Temuco, Chile, January, 2002.