journal article·2008-08-27

The small length scale effect for a non-local cantilever beam: a paradox solved

N Challamel, C M Wang

Nanotechnology· Volume 19· Issue 34
Publisher page

Abstract

Non-local continuum mechanics allows one to account for the small length scale effect that becomes significant when dealing with microstructures or nanostructures. This paper presents some simplified non-local elastic beam models, for the bending analyses of small scale rods. Integral-type or gradient non-local models abandon the classical assumption of locality, and admit that stress depends not only on the strain value at that point but also on the strain values of all points on the body. There is a paradox still unresolved at this stage: some bending solutions of integral-based non-local elastic beams have been found to be identical to the classical (local) solution, i.e. the small scale effect is not present at all. One example is the Euler-Bernoulli cantilever nanobeam model with a point load which has application in microelectromechanical systems and nanoelectromechanical systems as an actuator. In this paper, it will be shown that this paradox may be overcome with a gradient elastic model as well as an integral non-local elastic model that is based on combining the local and the non-local curvatures in the constitutive elastic relation. The latter model comprises the classical gradient model and Eringen's integral model, and its application produces small length scale terms in the non-local elastic cantilever beam solution.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Nonlocal and gradient elasticity in micro/nano structures · Carbon Nanotubes in Composites · Thermoelastic and Magnetoelastic Phenomena

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (28)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/S0020-7225(02)00210-010.1016/S0020-7225(02)00210-0 ↗
2. 10.1063/1.162543710.1063/1.1625437 ↗
3. 10.1063/1.214164810.1063/1.2141648 ↗
4. 10.1063/1.218921310.1063/1.2189213 ↗
5. Wang C M · Nanotechnology · 2006 · 17 · 110.1088/0957-4484/17/1/R01 ↗
6. Wang C M · J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. · 2006 · 39 · 390410.1088/0022-3727/39/17/029 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.ijengsci.2007.04.00410.1016/j.ijengsci.2007.04.004 ↗
8. 10.1063/1.243587810.1063/1.2435878 ↗
9. 10.1142/S021945540700242310.1142/S0219455407002423 ↗
10. Wang Q · Nanotechnology · 2007 · 18 · 07570210.1088/0957-4484/18/7/075702 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.physleta.2006.10.09310.1016/j.physleta.2006.10.093 ↗
12. 10.1016/0020-7225(72)90070-510.1016/0020-7225(72)90070-5 ↗
13. 10.1016/0020-7225(72)90039-010.1016/0020-7225(72)90039-0 ↗
14. 10.1063/1.33280310.1063/1.332803 ↗
15. 10.1016/S0020-7683(01)00039-710.1016/S0020-7683(01)00039-7 ↗
16. Jirásek M · Inelastic Analysis of Structures · 2002
17. Roach G F · Green’s Functions · 1999
18. 10.1016/0956-716X(92)90194-J10.1016/0956-716X(92)90194-J ↗
19. 10.1016/S0167-6636(02)00278-810.1016/S0167-6636(02)00278-8 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2003.06.00110.1016/j.ijsolstr.2003.06.001 ↗
21. 10.1016/S0022-5096(03)00053-X10.1016/S0022-5096(03)00053-X ↗
22. 10.1016/S0020-7683(02)00522-X10.1016/S0020-7683(02)00522-X ↗
23. 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2006.09.03310.1016/j.ijsolstr.2006.09.033 ↗
24. Eringen A C · Res. Mech. · 1987 · 21 · 313
25. Newmark N M · Proc. Soc. Exp. Stress Anal. · 1951 · 9 · 75
26. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1993)119:4(1265)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1993)119:4(1265) ↗
27. 10.1016/S0045-7949(02)00038-X10.1016/S0045-7949(02)00038-X ↗
28. Challamel N · J. Eng. Math. · 2008