ARTICLE IN PRESS

NDT&E International 40 (2007) 443450 www.elsevier.com/locate/ndteint

Analysis of free and forced vibration of a cracked cantilever beam

Sadettin Orhan
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Kirikkale University, 71400 Kirikkale, Turkey Received 1 December 2006; received in revised form 26 January 2007; accepted 26 January 2007 Available online 1 March 2007

Abstract Structures are weakened by cracks. When the crack size increases in course of time, the structure becomes weaker than its previous condition. Finally, the structure may breakdown due to a minute crack. Therefore, crack detection and classication is a very important issue. In this study, free and forced vibration analysis of a cracked beam were performed in order to identify the crack in a cantilever beam. Single- and two-edge cracks were evaluated. The study results suggest that free vibration analysis provides suitable information for the detection of single and two cracks, whereas forced vibration can detect only the single crack condition. However, dynamic response of the forced vibration better describes changes in crack depth and location than the free vibration in which the difference between natural frequencies corresponding to a change in crack depth and location only is a minor effect. r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Free vibration; Forced vibration; Crack detection; Harmonic response; Cantilever beam

1. Introduction It is required that structures must safely work during its service life. But, damages initiate a breakdown period on the structures. Cracks are among the most encountered damage types in the structures. Cracks in a structure may be hazardous due to static or dynamic loadings, so that crack detection plays an important role for structural health monitoring applications. Beam type structures are being commonly used in steel construction and machinery industries. In the literature, several studies deal with the structural safety of beams, especially, crack detection by structural health monitoring. Studies based on structural health monitoring for crack detection deal with change in natural frequencies and mode shapes of the beam. The others deal with dynamic response of the beam due to harmonic forcing. The rst group of studies have been performed for long times and the most concepts related to the crack detection have been well established from
Tel.: +90 318 357 3575; fax: +90 318 357 24 59.

E-mail addresses: orhan@kku.edu.tr, sadettinorhan@yahoo.com (S. Orhan). 0963-8695/$ - see front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ndteint.2007.01.010

mathematical theory [1] to impact echo method [2]. When a structure suffers from damages, its dynamic properties can change, especially, crack damage can cause a stiffness reduction, with an inherent reduction in natural frequencies, an increase in modal damping, and a change of the mode shapes. Consequently, there would also be a change in the dynamic response of the structure [3,4]. From these changes the crack position and magnitude can be identied. Since the reduction in natural frequencies can easily be observed, most of the researchers use this feature. On the other hand, in the second group of studies, a harmonic force is applied on the cracked beam and the dynamic response of the beam to this force is evaluated. Studies on crack detection have gradually increased by this time. Since, free vibration analysis has frequently become a topic of many studies, the literature has been well known. Hence, the literature review is focused on forced vibration in this study. Kim and Zhao [5] proposed a novel crack detection method using harmonic response. In their method, displacement and slope modes of a cracked cantilever beam are considered rst, and then the approximate formula for displacement and slope response under

ARTICLE IN PRESS
444 S. Orhan / NDT&E International 40 (2007) 443450

single-point harmonic excitation is derived. They conclude that the slope response has a sharp change with the crack location and the depth of crack, and therefore, it can be used as a crack detection criterion. Loutridis et al. [6] applied the instantaneous frequency and empirical mode decomposition methods for crack detection in a cantilever beam with single breathing crack, i.e. opens and closes during vibration. They investigated the dynamic behavior of the beam under harmonic excitation, both, theoretically and experimentally. A single-degree-of-freedom mathematical model with varying stiffness is employed to simulate the dynamic response of the beam. They modeled the timevarying stiffness using a simple periodic function. Both, simulated and experimental response data are analyzed by applying empirical mode decomposition and the Hilbert transform. By this way, the instantaneous frequency of each oscillatory mode is obtained. They concluded that the variation of the instantaneous frequency increases with increasing crack depth and the harmonic distortion increases with crack depth following denite trends and can also be used as an effective indicator for crack size. They also stated that the proposed time-frequency approach is superior compared to Fourier analysis. Ruotolo et al. [7] investigated forced response of a cantilever beam with a crack that fully opens or closes, to determine depth and location of the crack. In their study, left end of the beam is cantilevered and right end is free. The harmonic sine force was applied on the free end of the beam. Vibration amplitude of the free end of the beam was taken into consideration. It was shown that vibration amplitude changes, when depth and location of the crack change. Pugno and Surace [8] analyzed the response to harmonic sinusoidal force of a cantilever beam with several breathing cracks of different size and location, using a harmonic balance method. Their conclusion is that the presence of breathing cracks in a beam results in a nonlinear dynamic behavior which gives rise to superharmonics in the spectrum of the response signals, the amplitude of which depends on the number, location and depth of any cracks present. Moreover, they stated that the harmonic balance method reduces the computation times by approximately 100 times compared to direct numerical integration. Sinha and Friswell [9] analyzed the dynamic response of a two-end-free beam with single crack, both experimentally and analytically. They applied a sinusoidal force and measured the response of the beam from the node that is different from force location. Their results showed that frequencies (1 , 2 ) formed in the spectrum graph as in the condition of a cracked shaft in a rotating machinery. Differences in natural frequencies for different crack depth and location have been used for crack detection for a long time. It is reported [10] that the natural frequency shift is not very sensitive to cracks. For example, a modal frequency shift of less than 5% was obtained for a crack depth of 50% of the structure thickness. Thus, researchers have been studied alternative methods. The harmonic

response analysis is one of the alternative methods. Numerical studies have been increased in recent years, especially, by use of nite element package programs. Physical systems can be modeled and simulated close to its real condition, by using these programs. Simulation enables us to gain time and costs. In addition to that different parameters of the studied problem can be tested easily. Due to this feature of the simulation, in this study, free and forced vibration analysis of cracked beam were studied using a nite element program in order to identify the crack in a cantilever beam. Single- and two-edge cracks cases were evaluated. The natural frequencies were calculated by the free vibration analysis. The sinusoidal harmonic force has been applied on the free end of the beam and harmonic response has been obtained on the force application point. Both change in natural frequencies and harmonic responses corresponding to the change in crack depth and location were evaluated for crack detection analysis. 2. Theory The beam with a transverse edge crack is clamped at left end, free at right end and it has a uniform structure with a constant rectangular cross-section. The EulerBernoulli beam model was assumed. The crack is assumed to be an open crack and the damping has not been considered in this study. 2.1. Governing equation of free vibration The free bending vibrations of an EulerBernoulli beam of a constant rectangular cross-section is given by the following differential equation as given in [11]: EI d4 y mw2 y 0, (1) i dx4 where m is the mass of the beam per unit length (kg/m), wi is the natural frequency of the ith mode (rad/s), E is the modulus of elasticity (N/m2) and, I is the area moment of inertia (m4). By dening l4 w2 m=EI Eq. (1) is rearranged as a i fourth-order differential equation as follows: d4 y l4 y 0. i dx4 The general solution for Eq. (2) is y A cos li x B sin li x C cosh li x D sinh li x, (2)

(3)

where A, B, C, D are constants and li is a frequency parameter. Since the bending vibration is studied, edge crack is modeled as a rotational spring with a lumped stiffness. The crack is assumed open. Based on this modeling, the beam is divided into two segments: the rst and second segments are left and right-hand side of the crack, respectively. When this equation is solved by

ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Orhan / NDT&E International 40 (2007) 443450 445

applying beam boundary conditions and compatibility relations, the natural frequency of the ith mode for uncracked (Eq. (4)) and cracked (Eq. (5)) beams is nally obtained. r EI wi0 ci , (4) mL4 r EI , (5) wi ri ci mL4 where wi0 is the ith mode frequency of the uncracked beam and ci is a known constant depending on the mode number and beam end conditions (for clamped-free beam, ci is 3.516 and 22.034 for the rst and second mode, respectively). wi is the ith mode frequency of the cracked beam. ri is the ratio between the natural frequencies of the cracked and uncracked beam. L is length of the beam. 2.2. Governing equations of forced vibration The EulerBernoulli beam is discretized into nite beam elements. The equation of motion for the beam element without crack can be written as follows from [12]: n oe e e M e q t K wc e qt F t , (6) where [M](e) is the element mass matrix, [Kwc](e) is the element stiffness matrix, {F(t)}(e) is the element external force vector, {q(t)}(e) is the element vector of nodal degree of freedoms and t is the time instant. The subscript wc represents without crack, the superscript e represents element and dot represents the derivative with respect to the time. The crack is assumed to affect only the stiffness. Hence the equation of motion of a cracked beam element can be expressed as n oe e e M e q c t K c e qc t F t , (7) where {qc(t)}(e) is the nodal degrees of freedom of the cracked element, the subscript c represents the crack and [Kc](e) is the stiffness matrix of the cracked element and is given as K c e T C e T T with Ce C 0 e C c e ,
(e)
1

where [M] is the assembled mass matrix, [K] is the assembled stiffness matrix, {F(t)} is the assembled external force vector, and {q(t)} is the assembled vector of nodal dofs of the system. Let the force vector be dened as (11) F t F ej w t , where w is the forcing frequency, F is the force amplitude vector p (elements of which are complex quantities) and j 1. Thus, the response vector can be assumed as qt q ejwt , (12) where fqg is the response amplitude vector and their elements are complex quantities. Substituting Eqs. (11) and (12) into Eq. (10), the system governing equation as follows: w2 M K fqg fF g. (13)

For a given system properties (i.e. [M] and [K]) the response can be simulated from Eq. (13) corresponding to a given force fF g. 3. Simulated crack congurations In this study, free and forced vibrations of a cantilever beam having a V-shaped edge crack are studied. The length and cross-sectional area of the beam are 500 mm, and 29 20 mm2, respectively. As for the material properties

Lc=375 mm F d

Fig. 1. Single crack on the left side of the force application point (case a).

Lc=400 mm 300 mm F d

(8)

(9)

where [C0] is the exibility matrix of the uncracked beam element, [Cc](e) is the exibility matrix of the crack, and [C](e) is the total exibility matrix of the cracked beam element. Equations of motion of the complete system can be obtained by assembling the contribution of all equations of motion for cracked and uncracked elements in the system. Then the system equation of motion becomes  M f q tg K qt F t , (10)

Fig. 2. Single crack on the right side of the force application point (case b).

Lc=375 mm F d

Fig. 3. Single crack on the bottom surface of the beam (case c).

ARTICLE IN PRESS
446 S. Orhan / NDT&E International 40 (2007) 443450

the modulus of elasticity (E) is 206 800 N/mm2, the density (r) is 7.78E6 kg/mm3 and the Poissons ratio (Z) is 0.3. Five cracks congurations as shown in Figs. 15 are prepared to nd out how the crack affects dynamic behavior of the beam. Crack location from cantilever end was kept constant and crack depth was increased from 4 to 24 mm by increasing 4 mm at each step in order to investigate the effect of crack depth on natural frequencies and forced response of the beam. In addition to these, depth of the crack on the top surface was chosen constant as 4 mm and crack positions were varied as 165, 250, 290, 335, 375, and 415 mm from cantilever end to determine how varying of crack location affects the dynamic behavior of the beam when the force is applied on its free end (case f). The same values are valid for single crack on the bottom surface (case h)

4. Finite element modeling The ANSYS 8.0 nite element program [13] was used for free and forced vibration of the uncracked and cracked beams. For this purpose, the key points were rst created and then line segments were formed. The lines were combined to create an area. Finally, this area was extruded and a three-dimensional V-shaped edge cracked beam model was obtained as shown in Fig. 6. In our previous study [2], we modeled the crack with a 1 mm width on the top surface of the beam and a crack going through the depth of the beam. This model was also used in this study. A 20-node three-dimensional structural solid element under SOLID 95 [14] was selected to model the beam. The beam was discretized into 1510 elements with 2300 nodes. Cantilever boundary conditions can also be modeled by constraining all degrees of freedoms of the nodes located on the left end of the beam. Fig. 6 shows the nite element mesh model of the beam. The subspace mode extraction method was used to calculate the natural frequencies of the beam. Ten modes were selected to extract and rst 10 natural frequencies were calculated for uncracked and cracked beams. One natural frequency was obtained by averaging of the ten frequencies in order to get more sensitive results. The full method was used, with a frequency range taken 0120 Hz as forcing frequency, load step selected 15, and stepped load applied for harmonic analysis. The magnitude of the applied load in the vertical direction was 100 N. The harmonic response of the cracked beam was calculated. These procedures were repeated for the prescribed seven different damage scenarios. 5. Results Free and forced vibration analysis of a cracked beam were done for various crack conditions to obtain natural

Lc2=375 mm Lc1=250 mm d F

Fig. 4. Two cracks on the top surface of the beam (case d).

Lc2=375 mm Lc1=250 mm F d

Fig. 5. Two cracks on the bottom surface of the beam (case e).

Fig. 6. Finite element modeling of the cracked beam.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Orhan / NDT&E International 40 (2007) 443450 447

frequencies and dynamic responses of the beam. These results were used to relate depth and location of the crack. Harmonic response was measured at the point where the force is applied for all simulated crack positions. The average natural frequency for uncracked beams is 605 Hz. The harmonic response for uncracked beam is obtained as 0.05 m at 97.2 Hz, which is the third natural frequency of the uncracked beam. The change in the natural frequencies with crack depth for the cases a and c is shown in Fig. 7. The natural frequencies decrease for both conditions when the crack depth increases. When a single crack is on the top surface, the natural frequencies are slightly greater than those obtained when the crack is on the bottom surface. In Fig. 8, the change in the natural frequency with crack depth is given for two different single crack locations with respect to the force application point (cases a and b), i.e. right- or left-hand side of the force application point. When the crack is on the left-hand side of the force application point, the natural frequencies are greater than those when the crack is on the other side of the force application point. Change in harmonic response with forcing frequency for case a is shown in Fig. 9. The dominant harmonic response is obtained at 96 Hz, which is the third natural frequency of the cracked beam. The harmonic response increases when the crack depth increases as shown in detail (Fig. 9(a)). When the crack depth increases then stiffness decreases, thus, displacement also increases. Due to this fact,

0.16 0.14 Deflection (m) 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96 104 112 120 Forcing frequency (Hz)
A

0.16 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 88

20 mm 16 mm

d=24 mm

12 mm 8 mm 4 mm

96 Detail A. Between the frequencies 88 and 104 Hz.

104

Fig. 9. Harmonic response of the beam for case a.

590 Natural frequency (Hz) 580 570 560 550 540 530 520 4 8 12 16 Crack depth (mm) 20 24
Single crack on the bottom surface (Case c) Single crack on the top surface (Case a)

0.16 0.14 Deflection (m) 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96 104 112 120 Forcing frequency (Hz)
L=375mm ;d=4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24 mm (Case a) L=400 mm; d=4, 8,12, 16, 20, 24mm (Case b)

Fig. 7. Natural frequencies versus crack depth for cases a and c.

Fig. 10. Harmonic response of the beam for cases a and b.

590 Natural frequency (Hz) 580 570 560 550 540 530 520 4 8

Single crack on the left hand side of the force application point (Case a).

Single crack on the right hand side of the force application point (Case b)

12 16 Crack depth (mm)

20

24

Fig. 8. Change in the natural frequency for cases a and b.

harmonic results are reasonable. In Fig. 10, the harmonic response for cases a and b are given. The response for case a is clearly greater than that for case b. When the crack is on the left-hand side of the force application point, the harmonic response of the beam at the force application point is greater than in the other case. In Fig. 11, the harmonic response for case c are given. When the crack depth increases, the harmonic response also increases and the effect obtained is slightly greater than in case a. The natural frequencies of the beam increase for case f when the crack location goes far from the cantilever end. The similar situation is true for case h as shown in Fig. 12. The average natural frequencies for case h are greater than

ARTICLE IN PRESS
448 S. Orhan / NDT&E International 40 (2007) 443450

0.25 0.20 Deflection (m) 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96 104 112 120 Forcing frequency (Hz) Deflection (m)

0.16 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96 104 112 120 Forcing frequency (Hz)

0.16 0.14
Lc=165 mm 250 mm 335 mm 290 mm 415 mm

0.25 0.20

0.12 d=24 0.10 0.08 20 0.06 0.04 8 0.02 0.00 88 4 12 16

0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00

96 Details for forcing frequencies between 88 and 104 Hz.

104

88 96 104 Detail for forcing frequency between frequencies 88 and 104 Hz.
Fig. 11. Response of the beam for case c.

Fig. 13. The change in amplitude with forcing frequency for case f.

0.16 0.14

605 Natural frequency (Hz) 595 585

Single crack on the bottom surface (Case h)

Deflection (m)

0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00

575 565 555 545 165 190 215 240 265

Single crack on the topsurface (Case f )

16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96 104 112 120 Forcing frequency (Hz)

290

315

340

365

390

415

Crack location (mm)

Fig. 12. The change in natural frequencies with crack locations.

0.16 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 88 96 Details for forcing frequency between 88 and 104 Hz. 104
415 290 250 335 Lc=165

those for case f. In contrast to natural frequencies, the harmonic responses of the beam decrease for case f when the crack location goes far from the cantilever end as shown in Fig. 13. The similar situation is true for case h as shown in Fig. 14. The harmonic response for cases f and h is nearly close to each other. For these cases, if the crack location gets closer to cantilever end, the harmonic response gets greater. This is true because when the crack is close to the cantilever end then, the bending moment from the free end is greater compared to the free end, consequently, the harmonic response is also greater.

Fig. 14. The change in amplitude with forcing frequency for case h.

In Fig. 15, relation between the natural frequency and the crack depth is shown for cases a and d. The natural frequency decreases with increasing crack depth. The single

ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Orhan / NDT&E International 40 (2007) 443450
Single crack on the top surface (Case a) Single crack on the bottom surface (Case c)

449

580 Natural Frequency (Hz) 560 540 520

580 Natural frequency (Hz) 560 540 520

Two cracks on the top surface (Case d)

Two cracks on the bottom surface (Case e)

500 480 4 8 12 16 Crack depth (mm) 20 24

500 480 4 8 12 16 Crack depth (mm) 20 24

Fig. 15. The change in natural frequencies with depth of the crack for cases a and d.

Fig. 17. The change in natural frequency with crack depth for cases c and e.

0.6 Deflection (m) 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96 104 112 120 Forcing frequency (Hz)

Natural Frequency (Hz)

0.7

580 560 540 520 500 480 4 8

Single crack on the top surface (Case a)

Single crack on the bottom surface (Case c) Two cracks on the bottom surface (Case e) Two cracks on the top surface (Case d)

12 16 Crack depth (mm)

20

24

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 72 80 88 96 Details for forcing frequency between 72 and 104 Hz. 104
20 4 16 12 8 d=24 mm

Fig. 18. The change in natural frequency with crack depth for cases a and d.

Fig. 16. The change in amplitude with forcing frequency for case d.

cracks on the top and bottom surface of the beam are given to compare them with each other. In the single crack condition, the natural frequency is greater than in the case of two cracks. The natural frequency for cases a and d is obtained greater than cases c and e. The harmonic response of the beam and its detail for two cracks (case e) are shown in Fig. 19. Dominant peaks appeared at 72, 88, and 96 Hz as in case d. From the harmonic response of the beam, it is not possible to detect two cracks on the top and bottom surface of the beam. Free vibration analysis seems to be the effective way to detect two cracks on the top and bottom surface of the beam. 6. Conclusion Results obtained through this study can be summarized as follows: (1) When the crack location is constant but the crack depth increases: The natural frequency of the beam decreases for a single crack and two cracks on the top and bottom surfaces of the beam. The natural frequency for two cracks on the top surface of the beam is greater than two cracks on the bottom surfaces. The dominant harmonic response is obtained at 96 Hz for a single

crack results in higher natural frequencies than in the case of two cracks with an amount of about 25 Hz. The harmonic response of the beam and its detail for two cracks are shown in Fig. 16. Dominant peaks appeared at 80, 88, and 96 Hz, whereas all dominant peaks for a single crack condition appeared at 96 Hz. The change in natural frequency with the crack depth for cases c and e are given in Fig. 17. Similar to the top surface crack situation, the natural frequency decreases with increasing crack depth. In the single crack condition, the natural frequency is greater than that in the case of two cracks. In Fig. 18, the change in natural frequency with crack depth for the condition of a single crack and two

ARTICLE IN PRESS
450 S. Orhan / NDT&E International 40 (2007) 443450

0.30 Deflection (m) 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96 104 112 120 Forcing frequency (Hz)

0.30
d=8

The natural frequencies are obtained close to each other for all simulated crack situations. On the other hand, the harmonic response at 96 Hz is clearly distinguishable for the single crack on the top and bottom surfaces but this feature is not obtained for two cracks on the top and bottom surfaces. The study results indicate that the harmonic response analysis is more suitable than the free vibration analysis in the case of a single crack on the top and bottom surfaces. On the other hand, free vibration analysis seems to be an effective method compared to the harmonic response analysis in the case of two cracks on the top and bottom surfaces of the beam to detect the cracks.

0.25 0.20 0.15

20 4 16 12

References
[1] Chondros TG, et al. A continuous cracked beam vibration theory. J Sound Vib 1998;215:1734. [2] C am E, et al. An analysis of cracked beam structure using impact echo method. NDT & E Int 2005;38:36873. [3] Ratcliffe CP. Damage detection using a modied Laplacian operator on mode shape data. J Sound Vib 1997;204(3):50517. [4] Matveev VV, Bovsunovsky AP. Vibration-based diagnostics of fatigue damage of beam-like structures. J Sound Vib 2002;249(1): 2340. [5] Kim M-B, Zhao M. Study on crack detection of beam using harmonic responses. In: Proceedings of the 2004 international conference on intelligent mechatronics and automation, August 2004, Chengdu, China, p.726. [6] Douka SLE, Hadjileontiadis LJ. Forced vibration behaviour and crack detection of cracked beams using instantaneous frequency. NDT & E Int 2005;38:4119. [7] Ruotolo R, et al. Harmonic analysis of the vibrations of a cantilevered beam with a closing crack. Comput Struct 1996;61(6): 105774. [8] Pugno N, Surace C. Evaluation of the non-linear dynamic response to harmonic excitation of a beam with several breathing cracks. J Sound Vib 2000;235(5):74962. [9] Sinha JK, Friswell MI. Simulation of the dynamic response of a cracked beam. Comput Struct 2002;80:14736. [10] Han Y, et al. A method for crack detection in structures using piezoelectric sensors and actuators. In: Proceedings of the 2005 international conference on MEMS, NANO and smart systems (ICMENS05). [11] Dado MHA. Comprehensive crack identication algorithm for beams under different end conditions. Appl Acoust 1997;51(4): 38198. [12] Dharmarajua N, et al. Identication of an open crack model in a beam based on forceresponse measurements. Comput Struct 2004;82:16779. [13] ANSYS Release 8.1, ANSYS Inc., 2004. [14] ANSYS Element Manuals, ANSYS Inc., 2004.

0.10 0.05 0.00 64 72

24

80 88 96 Details in between 64 and 104 Hz

104

Fig. 19. The change in amplitude with forcing frequency for case e.

crack on the top and bottom surfaces of the beam. Additional frequencies seem to appear for the two cracks on the top and bottom surfaces. The harmonic response for a single crack on the bottom surface is slightly greater than that for the crack at the top surface of the beam. (2) The crack depth is constant and crack location from cantilever end varied for a single crack on the top and bottom surfaces of the beam: When the crack location increases, the natural frequency also increases. The natural frequency for a crack on the bottom surface of the beam is greater than for a crack on the top surface of the beam. The harmonic response on the free end decreases when the crack location increases from the cantilever end. (3) The crack location with respect to the force application point: For a single crack on the left-hand side of the force application point, the natural frequencies are obtained with greater values in the case of a single crack on the righthand side of the force application point. The harmonic response seems to increase with the crack depth.