4.6 Article

Multiple circular nano-inhomogeneities and/or nano-pores in one of two joined isotropic elastic half-planes

期刊

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS WITH BOUNDARY ELEMENTS
卷 33, 期 2, 页码 233-248

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enganabound.2008.03.010

关键词

Bonded half-planes; Gurtin and Murdoch's model; Complex Somigiliana traction identity; Multiple circular nano-inhomogeneities or/and nano-pores

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The paper considers the problem of multiple interacting circular nano-inhomogeneities or/and nano-pores located in one of two joined, dissimilar isotropic elastic half-planes. The analysis is based on the solutions of the elastostatic problems for (i) the bulk material of two bonded, dissimilar elastic half-planes and (ii) the bulk material of a circular disc. These solutions are coupled with the Gurtin and Murdoch model of material surfaces [Gurtin ME, Murdoch Al. A continuum theory of elastic material surfaces. Arch Ration Mech Anal 1975:57:291-323; Gurtin ME, Murdoch Al. Surface stress in solids. Int J Solids Struct 1978;14:431-40.]. Each elastostatic problem is solved with the use of complex Somigliana traction identity [Mogilevskaya SC, Linkov AM. Complex fundamental solutions and complex variables boundary element method in elasticity. Comput Mech 1998:22:88-92]. The complex boundary displacements and tractions at each circular boundary are approximated by a truncated complex Fourier series, and the unknown Fourier coefficients are found from a system of linear algebraic equations obtained by using a Taylor series expansion. The resulting semi-analytical method allows one to calculate the elastic fields everywhere in the half-planes and inside the nano-inhomogeneities. Numerical examples demonstrate that (i) the method is effective in solving the problems with multiple nano-inhomogeneities, and (ii) the elastic response of a composite system is profoundly influenced by the sizes of the nano-features. (C) 2008 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