Document Type: Research Paper
Authors
^{1} School of Engineering, Damghan University, Damghan, Iran
^{2} School of Mechanical Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Keywords

Mechanics of Advanced Composite Structures 6 (2019) 147  158


Semnan University 
Mechanics of Advanced Composite Structures journal homepage: http://MACS.journals.semnan.ac.ir 
Nonlocal Analysis of Longitudinal Dynamic Behavior of Nanobars with Surface Energy Effect
R. Nazemnezhad ^{a,*}, M. Moazzeni ^{b}
^{a} School of Engineering, Damghan University, Damghan, Iran
^{b} School of Mechanical Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
Paper INFO 

ABSTRACT 
Paper history: Received 20181004 Received in revised form 20181210 Accepted 20190425 
Due to considerable stored energy in surfaces of nanoscales in comparison with the stored energy in their bulk, considering the surface energy is necessary for the analysis of various behaviors of nanoscales for more precise design and manufacturing. In this article, the longitudinal dynamic behavior of nanobars in the presence of the surface energy parameters is studied. To this end, the longitudinal dynamic behavior of nanobars is modeled based on the simple theory. To consider the effects of the surface energy parameters, the surface elasticity theory is used. In addition, the nonlocal elasticity theory is implemented to capture the size effect. Then, the governing equation of motion and corresponding boundary conditions are derived from Hamilton’s principle. The governing equation becomes the inhomogeneous cause of considering the surface energy parameters while in none of the previous researches like the investigation of transverse vibration of nanobeams and torsional vibration of nanobars, the surface energy parameters would not cause inhomogeneity of the governing equation. Due to inhomogeneity of the governing equation, the homogeneous case is firstly solved, and frequencies and mode shapes of nanobar are obtained for fixedfixed and fixedfree boundary conditions. Then, using the modal analysis method and Duhamel’s integral, the inhomogeneous governing equation of motion is solved, and the overall dynamic response of nanobar is reported. 



Keywords: Nanobar Surface energy Nonlocal elasticity theory Longitudinal dynamic behavior Simple theory 


© 2019 Published by Semnan University Press. All rights reserved. 
Science and technology have been continuousely in progress, and human is looking for improvement in every field. Hence, in recent years, the researchers have been very interested to work on nanoscale materials and structures due to their unique mechanical, electrical, and physical properties. One of the problems facing nanoscale researchers is the difference in nanoscale properties and behaviors compared to similar systems in macro dimensions. The reason for this difference is due to the fact that various behaviors of nanoscales are sizedependent. To model the dependency of nanoscale properties on their dimensions, various theories such as surface elasticity theory, nonlocal elasticity theory, strain gradient theory, couple stress theory, and modified couple stress theory have been proposed. In theories of nonlocal elasticity, strain gradient, couple stress, and modified couple stress, by defining a parameter, called the small scale parameter, effects of dimensions on various behaviors of nanoscale structures would be considered. In the theory of surface elasticity, the energy of nanostructure surfaces, in addition to the energy generated by its volume would be considered in equations of motion and boundary conditions. The reason is that the atoms located at nanostructure surfaces are exposed to a different environment than those in bulk. This difference would result that the equilibrium positions and energies of surface atoms differ from the atoms in bulk.
Using the above theories, the mechanical behaviors of various nanoscale structures have been studied [13]. Among these studies, longitudinal vibration analysis of nanobars is less paid attention. However, there are some researches using the small scale parameter for longitudinal vibration of nanorods. Aydogdu [4, 5] studied the longitudinal free vibrations of nanorods and embedded nanorods in the elastic environment utilizing the nonlocal elasticity theory and investigated the effect of the nonlocal parameter on longitudinal frequencies. The free longitudinal vibrational behavior of nanorods with variable crosssectional area taking into account the effect of nonlocal parameter had also been investigated [68]. Hsu et al. [9] considered the nonlocal effect on free longitudinal vibration of cracked nanorods. The nonlocal elasticity theory was used to analyze the free longitudinal vibrational behavior of two connected nanorods. The effect of Van der Waals interactions was also considered [10, 11]. In another study, the free longitudinal vibration of nanorods was analyzed by considering the effect of lateral displacement of nanorods modeled based on the nonlocal Rayleigh theory and the nonlocal elasticity theory [12]. Free axial vibration of thick functionally graded sizedependent nanorods was investiagted by Nazemnezhad and Kamali [13]. It is also worth to mention the study analyzing the free longitudinal vibration of nanorods using the strain gradient theory [14]. The other related works can be found in [1519].
Researches done on analysis of the longitudinal or axial vibrational behavior of nanorods/nanobars show that they have used the nonlocal elasticity theory or strain gradient theory. Therefore, there is a question of how the longitudinal dynamic behavior of nanorods/nanobars is based on the theory of surface elasticity? However, there are some studies that consider various mechanical behaviors of nanostructures using the surface elasticity theory [2025].
To cover this issue, in the present study, the longitudinal dynamic behavior of nanobars is investigated by considering the surface energy components. To this end, the longitudinal dynamic behavior of the nanobar is modeled based on the surface elasticity and classical elasticity theory, and the equation of motion and boundary conditions of the nanobar is extracted by using Hamilton’s principle. In the next step, the equation of motion is solved analytically for two boundary conditions; i.e., fixedfixed and fixedfree. Finally, in the results section, the influence of geometrical factors such as the length and radius of nanobar, along with the effect of surface energy components on the longitudinal dynamic behavior of the nanobar has been investigated. In addition, a comparison is made between the effects of the surface energy components on the various behaviors of nanostructures; i.e., longitudinal vibration, transverse vibration, and torsional vibration.
To extract the governing equation of motion for the free longitudinal vibrational motion of nanobars taking into account the surface energy effect, a nanobar with length L and radius R is considered in the xyz coordinates system (Fig. 1).
The next step for problem formulation is selecting an appropriate theory for modeling the longitudinal vibrational behavior of nanobars. To this end, it is assumed that 1) the crosssection of the nanobar originally plane remain plane during deformation, and 2) the displacement components in the nanobar (except for the component parallel to the nanobar longitudinal axis) are negligible. These assumptions introduce the Simple theory of rods. The displacement field of any point of the nanobar based on the Simple theory of rods could be expressed as [26, 27]:
(1) 
in which u, v and w are displacement components of nanobar along the x, y and z directions, respectively, and t is the time. Based on the components of the displacement field, the strains in the crosssection of nanobar are given by:
(2) 
The stresses of the nanobar are also given by:
(3) 
Fig. 1. Schematic of a nanobar with its surface. 
Eqs. (2) and (3) are the strain and stress components of the nanobar volume, respectively. Since Hamilton’s principle requires the strains and stresses of both the surface and volume of nanobar, the components of surface strain and surface stress are obtained.
The surface elasticity theory is implemented to calculate the stress components at the nanobar surface. In the surface elasticity theory of Gurtin and Murdak [28], the surface stresses are expressed as:
(4) 

(5) 
where λ_{0} and μ_{0} are the surface Lamé constants, δ_{αβ} is the Kronecker delta, and τ_{0} is the surface residual stress.
Before using Eqs. (4) and (5), it is worth to note that Wang and Feng [29] have considered free transverse vibration of microbeams incorporating the surface energy effects. They have modeled the residual surface stress as an external work acting on the microbeam. Therefore, the one has done in Ref. [29] was selected for considering the effect of the residual surface stress. This yields:
(6) 
Substituting displacement components (Eq. (1)) into Eqs. (4) and (5) results in the surface stresses as:
(7) 
Now, it is possible to form the potential energy of the nanobar as:
(8) 
The next parameter in Hamilton’s principle is the kinetic energy of the nanobar. This parameter is given by:
(9) 
where and are the density of the volume and surface of nanobar, respectively, V and A indicate the volume and surface of the nanobar and . Now that the necessary components of Hamilton’s principle (Eq. (10)) are obtained, the governing equation of motion and corresponding boundary conditions could be derived by putting Eqs. (6), (8) and (9) into Eq. (10), and performing the integral by parts. This would result in:
(10) 

(11) 

(12) 
where
(13) 

; 
(14) 
Eqs. (11) and (12) are the local governing equation of motion and corresponding boundary condition for a nanobar in the free axial vibration. To obtain their nonlocal form, the nonlocal elasticity theory should be used [30]. Based on the theory:
(15) 

(16) 
where is the nonlocal parameter, is the onedimensional Laplacian operator, and superscript nl denotes the nonlocal.
Multiplying both sides of Eq. (11) by and substituting Eq. (15) into Eq. (11) would result in the nonlocal equation of motion in terms of deflection as follows:
(17) 
where .
According to Eq. (16), the following boundary conditions could be considered:

(18) 


(19) 
2.1. Solution Procedure
Since the nonlocal governing equation of motion (Eq. (17)) is an inhomogeneous equation, firstly its general solution requires the solution of its homogeneous part. To this end, Eq. (17) is written as:
(20) 
Eq. (20) indicates the free longitudinal vibrational behavior of nanobars incorporating the surface energy effects. To solve Eq. (20), a harmonic displacement for the nanobar is assumed as:
(21) 
in which ω is the natural longitudinal frequency. Substituting Eq. (21) into Eqs. (18)(20) results in the following equations:
(22) 


(23) 


(24) 
The general solution of the secondorder differential equation (Eq. (22)) is given by:
(25) 
where .
To obtain the mode shapes and natural frequencies associated with each boundary condition type, Eqs. (23) and (24) should be applied to Eq. (25). This gives:
v Mode Shapes:

(26) 


(27) 
v Natural Frequencies:

(28) 


(29) 
Note that .
After determining the nanobar mode shapes and natural frequencies, it is possible to solve the inhomogeneous part of the governing equation of motion (Eq. (11)). For this purpose, the modal analysis method, as well as the orthogonality relation for mode shapes, are used. The general response of nanobar during longitudinal vibrations could be considered as:
(30) 
where is the nanobar mode shape, and is the generalized coordinate. Substituting Eq. (30) into Eq. (17), multiplying the obtained equation by , and integrating over the length of the nanobar would yield:
(31) 
Eq. (31) could be simplified using the orthogonality relation for the mode shapes. The orthogonality relations (which are valid not only among the mode shapes but also among the derivatives of the mode shapes) are given by [26]:
(32) 

(33) 

(34) 
For i=j, the substitution of Eqs. (32) and (34) into Eq. (31) results in:
(35) 
where:
(36) 

Eq. (35) is a secondorder ordinary differential equation with respect to time. The solution of Eq. (35) using Duhamel’s integral [31] is given by:
(37) 
By obtaining a relation for generalized coordinates (Eq. (37)), the general response of nanobar, regardless of the initial conditions, is given by (substitute Eq. (37) into Eq. (30)):
(38) 
It is necessary to point out that in the use of Eq. (38), the coefficients of the mode shapes (see Eqs. (26)(27)) must be obtained from the orthogonality conditions (Eqs. (32)(34)). This yields:

(39) 


(40) 
Now, by substituting Eqs. (28), (29), (39) and (40) into Eq. (38), the general dynamic response of the nanobar for fixedfixed and fixedfree boundary conditions is given by Eqs. (41) and (42), respectively.
(41) 

(42) 
To verify the accuracy and exactitude of derived equations and solving method, the results of the present study are compared with those reported in the literature. Since no research has ever been found to examine the effects of the surface energy on the longitudinal vibration of nanorods, the present results are compared with those of Refs. [26] and [8]. In Ref. [26], local axial vibration, and in Ref. [8], nonlocal axial vibration of nanobars are studied. The modeling of nanobars is done based on the simple theory of rods. The comparison is listed in Tables 1 and 2. The results reported in Tables 1 and 2 show that the results of the present study are consistent with the other ones, which indicates the accuracy of the derived equations and the solving method.
Firstly, Eq. (38) is defined to present new results and investigate the effects of the surface energy parameters and the nonlocal parameter on the longitudinal dynamic behavior of nanobars.
FR= 


Frequency with surface energy and nonlocal effects 
(38) 

Frequency without surface energy and nonlocal effects 
Then, two categories of results are reported. The results of the first category are concluded from the mathematical relations of natural frequencies (Eqs. (28)(29)), mode shapes (Eqs. (26)(27)), and dynamic responses (Eqs. (41)(42)), and the results of the second category are numerical results that will be presented as tables and figures.
The results concluded from the mathematical relations of natural frequencies, mode shapes, and dynamic responses could be summarized as:
• Eq. (17) shows that considering the surface energy effects causes the inhomogeneity of the nanobar longitudinal governing equation of motion while this is not the case in researches like the investigation of the transverse vibration of nanobeams [3235] and the investigation of the torsional vibration of nanorods [36, 37] incorporating the surface energy effects.
• Eqs. (26) and (27) show that the surface energy components do not have any effect on the longitudinal mode shapes of the nanobar. A literature survey shows that the same result has been reported for the effect of the surface energy components on torsional mode shapes of nanorods [37], but a different result has been observed for the effect of the surface energy components on the transverse vibration of nanobeams [38]. In free transverse vibration of nanobeams, from the three types of boundary condition, fixedfixed, fixedfree and hingedhinged, the surface energy components affect only the mode shapes of the nanobeams with fixedfree boundary condition.
• Eqs. (28) and (29) show that the surface energy and the nonlocal would affect the natural longitudinal frequencies of nanobars with both fixedfixed and fixedfree boundary conditions.
• According to the definition of the parameter c (see Eq. (17)) and Eqs. (28)(29), it could be concluded that only the surface Lamé constants and the surface density would affect the longitudinal frequencies of nanobars. The surface stress does not affect the natural longitudinal frequencies. However, it has been reported in references that all surface energy components affect the natural torsional frequencies of nanorods [37] and the natural transverse frequencies of nanobeams [34].
• Eqs. (36) and (37) show that all surface energy components and the nonlocal parameter would affect the longitudinal dynamic response of the nanobar.
In the second category of results, the numerical results are presented as tables and figures. These results include variations of the natural longitudinal frequencies and frequency ratios versus the frequency number; variations of the natural longitudinal frequencies and frequency ratios versus the length of nanobar; and variations of the natural longitudinal frequencies and frequency ratios versus the radius of nanobar.
The numerical results are for nanobar with radius R, length L, and made of aluminum and silicon with the mechanical properties given in Table 3. The mechanical properties of aluminum are in [111] crystalline direction and silicon in [100] crystalline direction [34].
Table 1. Comparison of natural frequencies of nanobar for various values of its length (E=70 GPa, ρ=2700 kg/m^{3}) 

Frequency (THz) 
Mode number 
L (nm) 

FixedFree 
FixedFixed 

Ref. [26] 
Ref. [8] 
Present work 
Ref. [26] 
Ref. [8] 
Present work 

0.80 
0.80 
0.80 
1.60 
1.60 
1.60 
1 
10 
2.40 
2.40 
2.40 
3.20 
3.20 
3.20 
2 

4.00 
4.00 
4.00 
4.80 
4.80 
4.80 
3 

5.60 
5.60 
5.60 
6.40 
6.40 
6.40 
4 

7.20 
7.20 
7.20 
8.00 
8.00 
8.00 
5 

0.40 
0.40 
0.40 
0.80 
0.80 
0.80 
1 
20 
1.20 
1.20 
1.20 
1.60 
1.60 
1.60 
2 

2.00 
2.00 
2.00 
2.40 
2.40 
2.40 
3 

2.80 
2.80 
2.80 
3.20 
3.20 
3.20 
4 

3.60 
3.60 
3.60 
4.00 
4.00 
4.00 
5 

0.27 
0.27 
0.27 
0.53 
0.53 
0.53 
1 
30 
0.80 
0.80 
0.80 
1.07 
1.07 
1.07 
2 

1.33 
1.33 
1.33 
1.60 
1.60 
1.60 
3 

1.87 
1.87 
1.87 
2.13 
2.13 
2.13 
4 

2.40 
2.40 
2.40 
2.67 
2.67 
2.67 
5 

Table 2. Comparison of natural frequencies of nanobar for various values of the nonlocal parameter (E=70 GPa, ρ=2700 kg/m^{3}) 

Mode number 
Frequency (THz) 

FixedFixed 
FixedFree 

Present work 
Ref. [8] 
Present work 
Ref. [8] 

0.0025 
1 
1.58 
1.58 
0.8 
0.8 

2 
3.05 
3.05 
2.34 
2.34 

3 
4.34 
4.34 
3.72 
3.72 

4 
5.42 
5.42 
4.91 
4.91 

5 
6.29 
6.29 
5.88 
5.88 
0.0100 
1 
1.53 
1.53 
0.79 
0.79 

2 
2.71 
2.71 
2.17 
2.17 

3 
3.49 
3.49 
3.15 
3.15 

4 
3.98 
3.98 
3.77 
3.77 

5 
4.3 
4.3 
4.16 
4.16 
Table 3. Mechanical properties of aluminum and silicon nanobars.
Mechanical properties 
aluminum 
silicon 
Volume Elasticity Modulus (GPa) 
70 
210 
Surface Lamé constants (N/m) 
5.1882 
10.6543 
Volume Density (kg/m^{3}) 
2700 
2370 
Surface Density (kg/m^{2}) 
5.46×10^{7} 
3.17×10^{7} 
Surface Stress (N/m) 
0.9108 
0.6048 
In Table 4, values of the first four classic frequencies and frequency ratios of nanobar made of aluminum and silicon are listed for fixedfixed and campedfree boundary conditions. Table 4 shows that 1) since the frequency ratios represent values less than one for both silicon and aluminium nanobars with fixedfixed and fixedfree boundary conditions, it can be concluded that the surface energy and the nonlocal parameter have a decreasing effect on the natural longitudinal frequencies of the nanobar; 2) The classical frequencies of the nanobar and the nonlocal parameter effect depend on the frequency number and the type of boundary condition, but the effect of the surface energy components on the natural longitudinal frequencies of the nanobar is independent of the boundary condition type. In other words, the surface energy reduces all the nanobar classical frequencies with the same ratio for all boundary condition types; 3) the frequency ratios of aluminum and silicon nanobars are different when the surface energy effect is considered, but this is not the case for the frequency ratios when the nonlocal parameter effect is considered. This indicates that the effect of surface energy components on the natural longitudinal frequencies depends on the values of the mechanical properties of the nanobar while it is the other way round for the dependency of the nonlocal parameter effect on the values of the mechanical properties of the nanobar.
To consider the effects of another factor on natural longitudinal frequencies of nanobars, in Table 5, the fundamental frequencies and frequency ratios are listed for various values of the nanobar length. What Table 5 shows are exactly the results previously observed in Table 4. In summary, it can be stated that the effect of the surface energy components on the natural frequencies for various values of the nanobar length is independent of the boundary condition type while the nonlocal parameter effect depends on not only the nanobar length but also on the boundary condition type. The surface energy and the nonlocal parameter reduce the classical frequencies of the nanobar by the same ratio and different ratio, respectively. The other point of Table 5 is that the nonlocal parameter effect is independent of the nanobar material, while this is not the case for the surface energy effect. It is worth noting that the longitudinal frequencies of the nanobar are dependent on its length, and the larger the length of the nanobar, the lower the frequency. This can also be concluded from Eqs. (28) and (29) previously presented for natural frequencies of nanobar. This is because the parameter of the nanobar length is the denominator in the mentioned relations.
In Table 6, the other geometric factor of the nanobar, radius, is considered. To this end, the fundamental frequencies and frequency ratios of nanobar made of aluminum and silicon and for the fixedfixed and fixedfree boundary conditions are given for various values of the nanobar radius. Table 6 reports different results than those reported in Tables 4 and 5. The results presented in Table 6 are: 1) for various values of the nanobar radius, the surface energy reduces the natural frequencies of nanobar by the same ratio for both boundary condition types, and its effect depends on the nanobar material while this is the opposite if the nonlocal parameter effect; 2) although the values of the classical frequencies are independent of the nanobar radius, the frequencies incorporating the surface energy effect depends on the value of the nanobar radius. The larger the nanobar radius, the lower the surface energy effect on the longitudinal frequencies. This decrease in the surface energy effect is due to the fact that by increasing the radius, the energy stored at the surface increases by a lower rate in comparison with the energy stored in the volume.
In the following, the point was examined that between two parameters (surface Lamé constants and surface density) affecting the natural longitudinal frequencies of the nanobar how the influence of each parameter is. For this purpose, in Fig. 2, variations of the fundamental frequency ratio versus the nanobar radius are plotted for various cases. The first result concluded from Fig. 2 is that the effects of the surface energy parameters on the longitudinal frequencies are not the same. Even the type of effect (increasing or decreasing) of the surface energy parameters is not the same. For silicon nanobars, both surface Lamé constants and surface density have a decreasing effect, and when their effects are simultaneously considered, they have a higher reducing effect than the one considered separately. Another interesting point is that however, the surface density has a much smaller value than the surface Lamé constants (refer to Table 3), but its decreasing effect is more. Nevertheless, for aluminum nanobars, the surface Lamé constants have an increasing effect, and the surface density has a decreasing effect.
Table 4. The first four classic frequencies and frequency ratios of aluminum and silicon nanobars with fixedfixed and fixedfree boundary conditions (L=10 nm). 


Silicon 
Aluminum 
Frequency number 



FR 
Classic frequency (THz) 
FR 
Classic frequency (THz) 


FixedFixed 



0.8420 
2.9572 
0.9042 
1.5996 
1 
0.0 

0.8420 
5.9145 
0.9042 
3.1992 
2 


0.8420 
8.8717 
0.9042 
4.7989 
3 


0.8420 
11.8289 
0.9042 
6.3985 
4 


0.9139 
2.9572 
0.9139 
1.5996 
1 
2.0 ( ) 

0.7475 
5.9145 
0.7475 
3.1992 
2 


0.6001 
8.8717 
0.6001 
4.7989 
3 


0.4904 
11.8289 
0.4904 
6.3985 
4 


0.7694 
2.9572 
0.8263 
1.5996 
1 
2.0 

0.6294 
5.9145 
0.6759 
3.1992 
2 


0.5053 
8.8717 
0.5426 
4.7989 
3 


0.4129 
11.8289 
0.4434 
6.3985 
4 


FixedFree 




0.8420 
1.4786 
0.9042 
0.7998 
1 
0.0 

0.8420 
4.4359 
0.9042 
2.3994 
2 


0.8420 
7.3931 
0.9042 
3.9991 
3 


0.8420 
10.3503 
0.9042 
5.5987 
4 


0.9762 
1.4786 
0.9762 
0.7998 
1 
2.0 ( ) 

0.8321 
4.4359 
0.8321 
2.3994 
2 


0.6691 
7.3931 
0.6691 
3.9991 
3 


0.5410 
10.3503 
0.5409 
5.5987 
4 


0.8219 
1.4786 
0.8827 
0.7998 
1 
2.0 

0.7006 
4.4359 
0.7524 
2.3994 
2 


0.5634 
7.3931 
0.6050 
3.9991 
3 


0.4554 
10.3503 
0.4891 
5.5987 
4 

Table 5. The fundamental frequency and frequency ratio of aluminum and silicon nanobars with fixedfixed and fixedfree boundary conditions for various values of nanobar length. 

Silicon 
Aluminum 
Length (nm) 


FR 
Classic frequency (THz) 
FR 
Classic frequency (THz) 

FixedFixed 

0.8420 
2.9572 
0.9042 
1.5996 
10 
0.0 

0.8420 
1.9715 
0.9042 
1.0664 
15 


0.8420 
1.4786 
0.9042 
0.7998 
20 


0.8420 
1.1829 
0.9042 
0.6398 
25 


0.9139 
2.9572 
0.9139 
1.5996 
10 
2.0 ( ) 

0.9588 
1.9715 
0.9588 
1.0664 
15 


0.9762 
1.4786 
0.9762 
0.7998 
20 


0.9846 
1.1829 
0.9846 
0.6398 
25 


0.7694 
2.9572 
0.8263 
1.5996 
10 
2.0 

0.8073 
1.9715 
0.8670 
1.0664 
15 


0.8219 
1.4786 
0.8827 
0.7998 
20 


0.8290 
1.1829 
0.8902 
0.6398 
25 


FixedFree 



0.8420 
1.4786 
0.9042 
0.7998 
10 
0.0 

0.8420 
0.9857 
0.9042 
0.5332 
15 


0.8420 
0.7393 
0.9042 
0.3999 
20 


0.8420 
0.5914 
0.9042 
0.3199 
25 


0.9762 
1.4786 
0.9762 
0.7998 
10 
2.0 ( ) 

0.9892 
0.9857 
0.9892 
0.5332 
15 


0.9939 
0.7393 
0.9939 
0.3999 
20 


0.9961 
0.5914 
0.9961 
0.3199 
25 


0.8219 
1.4786 
0.8827 
0.7998 
10 
2.0 

0.8329 
0.9857 
0.8944 
0.5332 
15 


0.8368 
0.7393 
0.8987 
0.3999 
20 


0.8387 
0.5914 
0.9006 
0.3199 
25 


Table 6. The fundamental frequency and frequency ratios of aluminum and silicon nanobars with fixedfixed and fixedfree boundary conditions for various values of the nanobar radius. 

Silicon 
Aluminum 
Radius (nm) 


FR 
Classic frequency (THz) 
FR 
Classic frequency (THz) 

FixedFixed 

0.8420 
0.2957 
0.9042 
0.1600 
1 
0.0 

0.9643 
0.2957 
0.9760 
0.1600 
5 


0.9819 
0.2957 
0.9876 
0.1600 
10 


0.9990 
0.2957 
0.9990 
0.1600 
1 
2.0 ( ) 

0.9990 
0.2957 
0.9990 
0.1600 
5 


0.9990 
0.2957 
0.9990 
0.1600 
10 


0.8411 
0.2957 
0.9033 
0.1600 
1 
2.0 

0.9634 
0.2957 
0.9750 
0.1600 
5 


0.9809 
0.2957 
0.9866 
0.1600 
10 


FixedFree 



0.8420 
0.1479 
0.9042 
0.0800 
1 
0.0 

0.9643 
0.1479 
0.9760 
0.0800 
5 


0.9819 
0.1479 
0.9876 
0.0800 
10 


0.9998 
0.1479 
0.9998 
0.0800 
1 
2.0 ( ) 

0.9998 
0.1479 
0.9998 
0.0800 
5 


0.9998 
0.1479 
0.9998 
0.0800 
10 


0.8418 
0.1479 
0.9040 
0.0800 
1 
2.0 

0.9641 
0.1479 
0.9758 
0.0800 
5 


0.9816 
0.1479 
0.9874 
0.0800 
10 


Fig. 2. Variations of fundamental FR versus the nanobar radius for various cases of surface energy effect. 
When the effects of two factors are simultaneously considered a lower decreasing effect is achieved, which is less than the decreasing effect of the surface density parameter. This denotes that the decreasing effect of the surface density is dominant over the increasing effect of the surface Lamé constants. Due to the difference in the sign of the surface Lamé constants, it could be concluded that if the sign is positive, it has an increasing effect on the natural longitudinal frequencies, while it is the other way round for the negative sign of the surface Lamé constants.
In the final section of this study, the steadystate response of the middle of the fixedfixed nanobar made of aluminum and silicon is shown in Fig. 3. In Fig. 3, the length and radius of the nanobar are considered to be 10 and 1 nm, respectively, and the following nondimensional parameters are used:
(38) 

Fig. 3 shows that the surface energy changes the steadystate response of the nanobar longitudinal dynamic behavior, and its effect depends on the material of the nanobar, the values of the surface energy parameters and their signs.
In this paper, the dynamic behavior of the nanobar is considered analytically by considering the effects of surface energy components and nonlocal parameter for fixedfixed and fixedfree boundary conditions. Due to considering the surface energy effect, the nanobar governing equation of motion is obtained inhomogeneous. For this reason, the homogeneous response is obtained first, and then the inhomogeneous response is calculated. The following results could be highlighted in the present study:
Fig. 3. The steadystate response of the middle of nanobeam with the fixedfixed boundary condition, a) aluminum, b) silicon. 
References
[1] Nazemnezhad R. Surface energy and elastic medium effects on torsional vibrational behavior of embedded nanorods. International Journal of Engineering (IJE), IJE TRANSACTIONS C: Aspects 2018; 31(3): 495503.
[2] HosseiniHashemi S, BakhshiKhaniki H. Analytical solution for free vibration of a variable crosssection nonlocal nanobeam. International Journal of Engineering (IJE), IJE TRANSACTIONS B: Applications 2016; 29(5): 68896.
[3] TadiBeni Y, Jafaria A, Razavi H. Size effect on free transverse vibration of cracked nanobeams using couple stress theory. International Journal of Engineering (IJE), IJE TRANSACTIONS B: Applications 2015; 28(2): 296304.
[4] Aydogdu M. Axial vibration analysis of nanorods (carbon nanotubes) embedded in an elastic medium using nonlocal elasticity. Mechanics Research Communications 2012; 43: 3440.
[5] Aydogdu M. Axial vibration of the nanorods with the nonlocal continuum rod model. Physica E: Lowdimensional Systems and Nanostructures 2009; 41(5): 8614.
[6] Goushegir SMH, Faroughi S. Analysis of axial vibration of nonuniform nanorods using boundary characteristic orthogonal polynomials. Modares Mechanical Engineering 2016; 16(1): 20312.
[7] Şimşek M. Nonlocal effects in the free longitudinal vibration of axially functionally graded tapered nanorods. Computational Materials Science 2012; 61: 25765.
[8] Kiani K. Free longitudinal vibration of tapered nanowires in the context of nonlocal continuum theory via a perturbation technique. Physica E: Lowdimensional Systems and Nanostructures 2010; 43(1): 38797.
[9] Hsu JC, Lee HL, Chang WJ. Longitudinal vibration of cracked nanobeams using nonlocal elasticity theory. Current Applied Physics 2011; 11(6): 13848.
[10] Karličić D, Cajić M, Murmu T, Adhikari S. Nonlocal longitudinal vibration of viscoelastic coupled doublenanorod systems. European Journal of MechanicsA/Solids 2015; 49: 18396.
[11] Murmu T, Adhikari S. Nonlocal effects in the longitudinal vibration of doublenanorod systems. Physica E: Lowdimensional Systems and Nanostructures 2010; 43(1): 41522.
[12] Nazemnezhad R, Kamali K. Investigation of the inertia of the lateral motions effect on free axial vibration of nanorods using nonlocal Rayleigh theory. Modares Mechanical Engineering 2016; 16(5): 1928.
[13] Nazemnezhad R, Kamali K. Free axial vibration analysis of axially functionally graded thick nanorods using nonlocal Bishop's theory. STEEL AND COMPOSITE STRUCTURES 2018; 28(6): 74958.
[14] Akgöz B, Civalek Ö. Longitudinal vibration analysis of strain gradient bars made of functionally graded materials (FGM). Composites Part B: Engineering 2013; 55: 2638.
[15] Arefi M, Zenkour AM. Employing the coupled stress components and surface elasticity for nonlocal solution of wave propagation of a functionally graded piezoelectric Love nanorod model. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures 2017; 28(17): 240313.
[16] Arefi M, Zenkour AM. Wave propagation analysis of a functionally graded magnetoelectroelastic nanobeam rest on ViscoPasternak foundation. Mechanics Research Communications 2017; 79: 5162.
[17] Arefi M, Zenkour AM. Free vibration, wave propagation and tension analyses of a sandwich micro/nano rod subjected to electric potential using strain gradient theory. Materials Research Express 2016; 3(11): 115704.
[18] Arefi M. Surface effect and nonlocal elasticity in wave propagation of functionally graded piezoelectric nanorod excited to applied voltage. Applied Mathematics and Mechanics 2016; 37(3): 289302.
[19] Arefi M. Analysis of wave in a functionally graded magnetoelectroelastic nanorod using nonlocal elasticity model subjected to electric and magnetic potentials. Acta Mechanica 2016; 227(9): 252942.
[20] Eltaher M, Omar FA, Abdalla W, Gad E. Bending and vibrational behaviors of piezoelectric nonlocal nanobeam including surface elasticity. Waves in Random and Complex Media 2018: 117.
[21] Eltaher M, Khater M, Emam SA. A review on nonlocal elastic models for bending, buckling, vibrations, and wave propagation of nanoscale beams. Applied Mathematical Modelling 2016; 40(56): 410928.
[22] Eltaher M, Agwa M, Mahmoud F. Nanobeam sensor for measuring a zeptogram mass. International Journal of Mechanics and Materials in Design 2016; 12(2): 21121.
[23] Agwa M, Eltaher M. Vibration of a carbyne nanomechanical mass sensor with surface effect. Applied Physics A 2016; 122(4): 335.
[24] Khater M, Eltaher M, AbdelRahman E, Yavuz M. Surface and thermal load effects on the buckling of curved nanowires. Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 2014; 17(4): 27983.
[25] Eltaher M, Mahmoud F, Assie A, Meletis E. Coupling effects of nonlocal and surface energy on vibration analysis of nanobeams. Applied Mathematics and Computation 2013; 224: 76074.
[26] Rao SS. Vibration of continuous systems: John Wiley & Sons; 2007.
[27] Rao D, Rao J. Free and forced vibrations of rods according to Bishop's theory. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1974; 56(6): 1792800.
[28] Gurtin ME, Murdoch AI. A continuum theory of elastic material surfaces. Archive for rational mechanics and analysis 1975; 57(4): 291323.
[29] Wang GF, Feng XQ. Effects of surface elasticity and residual surface tension on the natural frequency of microbeams. Applied physics letters 2007; 90(23): 231904.
[30] Eringen AC, Edelen D. On nonlocal elasticity. International Journal of Engineering Science 1972; 10(3): 23348.
[31] Hesaaraki M, Fotouhi M. Partial Differential Equations. Iran: Sharif Univeristy of Technology Press; 2010.
[32] Nazemnezhad R, HosseiniHashemi S. Nonlinear free vibration analysis of Timoshenko nanobeams with surface energy. Meccanica 2015; 50(4): 102744.
[33] HosseiniHashemi S, Nahas I, Fakher M, Nazemnezhad R. Surface effects on free vibration of piezoelectric functionally graded nanobeams using nonlocal elasticity. Acta Mechanica 2014; 225(6): 1555.
[34] HosseiniHashemi S, Fakher M, Nazemnezhad R, Haghighi MHS. Dynamic behavior of thin and thick cracked nanobeams incorporating surface effects. Composites Part B: Engineering 2014; 61: 6672.
[35] Nazemnezhad R, Salimi M, Hashemi SH, Sharabiani PA. An analytical study on the nonlinear free vibration of nanoscale beams incorporating surface density effects. Composites Part B: Engineering 2012; 43(8): 28937.
[36] Nazemnezhad R, Fahimi P. Free torsional vibration of cracked nanobeams incorporating surface energy effects. Applied Mathematics and Mechanics 2017; 38(2): 21730.
[37] Nazemnezhad R. Investigation of surface effects on free torsional vibration of nanobeams. Amikabir Journal of Mechanical Engineering 2017; 49(2): 7180.
[38] Liu C, Rajapakse R. Continuum models incorporating surface energy for static and dynamic response of nanoscale beams. IEEE Transactions on Nanotechnology 2010; 9(4): 42231.