PAMM Proc. Appl. Math. Mech. 10, 525 526 (2010) / DOI 10.1002/pamm.

201010255
1D wave propagation in a rod:
analytic treatment for non-trivial boundary conditions
Cornelia Schwarz
1,2,
, Ewald Werner
2
, and H.J. Dirschmid
3
1
Christian-Doppler-Laboratorium fr Werkstoffmechanik von Hochleistungslegierungen
2
Lehrstuhl fr Werkstoffkunde und Werkstoffmechanik, Technische Universitt Mnchen, Boltzmannstr. 15,
85747 Garching, Germany
3
Institute of Analysis and Scientic Computing, Technische Universitt Wien, Wiedner Hauptstr. 8, 1040 Wien, Austria
An analytic solution method for the one-dimensional wave propagation problem in a rod based on the Laplace transform is
applied to a simple stamping model. While the rod is mounted at its lower end to a spring, it is hit at its upper end by an
impacting mass, the separation of which can be correctly treated by the method.
c 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
1 Introduction
One-dimensional wave propagation problems in solids are still a prevalent mean to obtain approximate solutions for sophisti-
cated problems of dynamics. However, as boundary conditions become non-trivial, nding analytical, closed form solutions
becomes demanding. DAlemberts approach [1] can be applied in many cases, but usually does not provide a closed form
solution in time. Laplace transform approaches are promising, but the method applied for the inverse transformation must
be carefully chosen [2]. In [3], the authors presented a technique that provides a closed form analytic solution for a problem
similar to the one treated in the present work. In this contribution, we sketch the main idea of the solution technique and show
what additional effort has to be made for the treatment of more complicated boundary conditions.
2 Problem formulation and solution
As simple model for a stamping tool, a rod of length L, spatially constant cross-section A and a mass
density is considered. The elastic modulus of the rod material is E, hence its one-dimensional
wave propagation speed is c
0
=

E/. For the sake of simplicity, the mechanical model of the rod
is one-dimensional (longitudinal coordinate x), thus neglecting transversal wave propagation in the
rod. At time t = 0, the rod is mounted at its lower end (x = 0) to the ground by a spring of stiffness
K and is hit at its upper end by a rigid body of mass m moving downwards at a velocity v
m
, cf. the
adjoining sketch.
Damping is not considered since we are interested in the maximum stress in the rod occurring shortly
after the impact in consequence of the non-stiff bedding. Moreover, the weight of the rod is neglected
in the equation of motion, as it is feasible to assume that either the absolute value of the rods weight
is small or the weight of the rod is small in comparison to the weight of the impacting mass.
The following dimensionless variables and abbreviations are used:
:= x/L, t
0
:= L/c
0
, := m/AL, := EA/K, := /L.
Governing equations
Neglecting the small weight of the rod, the equation of motion in terms of the displacement u(x, t) of a cross section of the
rod is:
c
2
0

2
u
x
2
=

2
u
t
2
, with initial conditions u(x, 0) = 0 ,
u
t

t=0
= u(x, 0) = 0 .
At x = 0, the force on the elastic support (the spring), Ku(0, t), must be equal to that on the rod, A(0, t) = EA(0, t). At
the boundary x = L, initially the equation of motion of the falling mass must be regarded. Contact exists, however, only for
that time period when (L, t) = Eu

(L, t) is a compressive stress ( < 0). A separation takes place at that time instant t
c
when (L, t
c
) = 0 and (L, t
c
) > 0. Taking this lift-off of the impacting mass into account, the boundary conditions can
be written as (where H(t) denotes the Heaviside Unit-Step function):
u(0, t) =
u
x

x=0
= u

(0, t) ; EAu

(L, t) = (m u(L, t) +mg) H(t

c
t) , where u(L, 0) = 0 , u(L, 0) = v
m
.

Corresponding author e-mail: schwarz@wkm.mw.tum.de, Phone: +49 89 289 15314, Fax: +49 89 289 15248
c 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
526 Section 13: Applied Analysis
Outline of the analytic solution
In [3], the authors solved the problem without taking into account the separation of the impacting mass. The basic idea is to
calculate the solution of the problem in the Laplace space (t s), which is actually straight-forward, and then to apply the
inverse Laplace transformation. The solution for the Laplace transformed displacement U(, s) is found to be
U(, s) =

t
0
(g +v
m
s)
s
2

(1 st
0
)e
(1)st
0
(1 + st
0
)e
(1+)st
0

, b.s.
t
0
s

e
st
0
(1)
(1 e
st
c
)

1 s t
0
(1 +s t
0
)e
2st
0

g
s
+

t
c
0
u( = 1, t) e
st
dt
1 e
st
c

, a.s.
where = (1 s t
0
) + e
2 s t
0
(1 + s t
0
) , = (1 s t
0
) (1 s t
0
) + e
2 s t
0
(1 +s t
0
) (1 + s t
0
) , and the
abbreviations b.s. and a.s. identify the case before and after separation, respectively.
The critical part of the inverse transform is the inversion of the denominators and . This was presented in great detail and
with special care of a mathematically rigorous justication of the applied techniques in [3].
Additionally to be dealt with now, considering the separation of the impacting mass, the integral term is appearing in the
Laplace space solution after separation. Under the given assumptions and for realistic parameter values, a separation of the
mass takes place exactly at t
c
= 2t
0
, meaning that t
c
is actually known. Moreover, an established transformation rule of the
inverse Laplace transform [4] can be applied to the integral term, namely:
L
1

1
1 e
st
c

t
c
0
u(1, t) e
st
dt

= u
per
(1, t) := u(1, t) , recurrent with period t
c
,
where u(1, t) for 0 < t < t
c
is known as the solution in the real time domain before the separation of the mass, cf. [3].
Subsequent application of the convolution theorem, the shift theorem and the theorem for transformation of integrals, cf. [4],
nally gives the complete solution u(, t) in the real time domain for all times, which, due to the limited space available here,
will be published elsewhere.
3 Results
The results shown correspond to the following parameter values:
E = 220 GPa, = 7750 kg/m
3
, A = 10 cm
2
, L = 1 m, m = 100 kg, v
m
= 10 m/s, g = 10 m/s
2
.
(a) Displacement over time at = 1. (b) Displacement over time at = 0.5. (c) Stress over time at = 0.5.
Fig. 1 Results for values of the spring stiffness corresponding to = 0.05 (dot-dashed) and = 0.5 (solid). The dashed segment at the
beginning of the curves marks the part of the solution before the separation of the impacting mass affects the respective position in the rod.
For times t > t
c
, the displacement and stress development depicted in Fig. 1 resembles strongly the results that were reported
in [2, 3] for the simple one-dimensional model for a valve. The response of the rod-spring system due to excitation by the
impacting mass is, after the separation, equivalent to its response when the rod with initial velocity v
0
> 0 and free upper
end is suddenly elastically xed at its lower end by the spring. The observable peaks in the stress development, especially
pronounced for = 0.05, show that the elastic support modelled by the spring can be more critical for the rod than a one-
sided xed support. Energy transferred to the spring, continuously retransmitted to the rod and superimposed to the stress
wave simply reected at its lower end results in a signicant superelevation of the stress.
References
[1] P. Hagedorn and A. DasGupta, Vibrations and Waves in Continuous Mechanical Systems (John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2007).
[2] E. Werner and F.D. Fischer, Acta Mechanica 111, 171179 (1995).
[3] C. Schwarz, F.D. Fischer, E. Werner, and H.J. Dirschmid, Archive of Applied Mechanics, 80, 324 (2010).
[4] G. Doetsch, Introduction to the theory and application of the Laplace transformation (Springer, 1974).
c 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.gamm-proceedings.com