4.6 Article

Boussinesq problem with the surface effect and its application to contact mechanics at the nanoscale

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOLIDS AND STRUCTURES
卷 50, 期 16-17, 页码 2620-2630

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2013.04.007

关键词

Boussinesq problem; Surface effect; Contact mechanics; Size dependence; Scaling law

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [11090330, 11090331, 11072003]
  2. National Basic Research Program of China [G2010CB832701]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the literature, it has been demonstrated that residual surface stress and surface elasticity are two equally important parts of surface stress theory and that, generally, neither of these aspects can be neglected. In this paper, we develop a non-classical formulation of the Boussinesq problem with the surface effect, in which both the residual surface stress and the surface elasticity are considered. To take into account the surface effect, a Lagrangian description of the governing equations of the surface is adopted. The theoretical and numerical results in this paper show that the contributions of the residual surface stress and the surface elasticity to the stresses and displacements at the surface are not always equal. The residual surface stress mostly influences the normal stress, whereas the surface elasticity is a dominant factor in the in-plane shear stress. As an application of this formulation, the three-dimensional Hertzian contact problem at the nanoscale is studied. It is concluded that the surface effect strengthens the elastic contact stiffness. The smaller the contact region, the larger the contact stiffness. Finally, in terms of the dimensionless surface parameters, the influences of the residual surface stress and the surface elasticity on the stresses and displacements are further studied, and a simple scaling law for the stresses and displacements at the surface is constructed for the first time. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据