Document Type : Research Article
Authors
1 Department of Mathematics, Government Girls Degree College, Behat-247121, Uttar Pradesh, India
2 Department of Mathematics, Government P.G. College, Gopeshwar-246401, Uttarakhand, India
Abstract
Keywords
Main Subjects
Free Vibration and Buckling Analyses of Nanobeam Embedded in Pasternak Foundation
a Department of Mathematics, Government Girls Degree College, Behat-247121, Uttar Pradesh, India
b Department of Mathematics, Government P.G. College, Gopeshwar-246401, Uttarakhand, India
KEYWORDS |
|
ABSTRACT |
Free vibration; Buckling; Nonlocal; Nanobeam; Euler-Bernoulli beam theory; Pasternak foundation; PDQM; HDQM. |
In this paper, free transverse vibration and buckling analyses of a nanobeam are presented by coupling the Euler-Bernoulli beam (EBT) theory and Eringen’s nonlocal elasticity theory. The nanobeam is embedded in the Pasternak foundation. Hamilton’s energy principle is used to derive governing differential equations. The Lagrange polynomial-based differential quadrature method (PDQM) and a harmonic differential quadrature method (HDQM) are used to convert the governing differential equation and boundary conditions into a set of linear algebraic equations. The first three frequencies and the lowest critical buckling loads for clamped-clamped, clamped-simply supported, and simply supported-simply supported boundary conditions are obtained by implementing the bisection method through a computer program written in C++. The impacts of nonlocal Eringen’s parameter (scaling effect parameter), boundary conditions, axial force, and elastic foundation moduli on frequencies are examined. The effects of nonlocal Eringen’s parameter, boundary conditions, and elastic foundation moduli on critical buckling load are also studied. A convergence study of both versions of DQM is conducted to validate the present analysis. A comparison of frequencies and critical buckling loads with those available in the literature is presented. |
After the invention of carbon nanotubes (Iijima [1]), small-scale structures and devices have been developed due to advancements in nanotechnology and nanoscience. Nanobeams and carbon nanotubes are used in micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS), nano-electromechanical systems (NEMS), microactuators, transistors and microsensors, etc. Due to the wide applications of nanotechnology and nanoscience in modern science and technology, researchers have carried out extensive research on nanomaterials. Nanobeams are used in cancer treatment. To propose new designs, an analysis of the mechanical behavior of nanobeams becomes necessary. This problem can be solved by atomistic mechanics (Baughman et al. [2]), hybrid atomistic-continuum mechanics (Wang et al. [3]), and continuum mechanics approach. The first two approaches are computationally expensive and time-consuming. Therefore, the continuum mechanics approach has been used by researchers to model nano-systems as rods, beams, plates, and shells. In this approach, crystal material architecture is replaced by a continuous medium having homogeneous properties. This continuous medium can predict the overall response of the nanomaterial. Hence, new constitutive laws are required to study the nanoscale size effects. Up to a certain size, classical theories can be used to study the behavior of structures. Eringen’s nonlocal elasticity theory [4-7] has been proposed to incorporate the nanoscale effect. The work related to free vibration and buckling of a nanobeam has been reported in the literature as follows: Lu et al. [8] derived frequency equations and mode functions of a nonlocal Euler-Bernoulli beam. Xu [9] investigated free transverse vibration of nano-to-micron scale beams using the integral equation approach. Wang et al. [10] solved the free vibration problem of micro/nano beams analytically for different combinations of classical boundary conditions. Challamel and Wang [11] presented a small length scale effect for a nonlocal cantilever beam. Murmu and Pradhan [12] used the differential quadrature method to obtain the natural frequencies of a nonuniform cantilever nanobeam. Roque et al. [13] studied the bending, buckling, and free vibration of Timoshenko nanobeams using the meshless method. Mohammadi and Ghannadpour [14] used Chebyshev polynomials in the Rayleigh-Ritz method to study the free vibration of Timoshenko nanobeams. Li et al. [15] investigated the dynamics and stability of transverse vibration of nonlocal nanobeams under variable axial load. Vibration analysis of Euler-Bernoulli nanobeams has been presented by Eltaher et al. [16] using the finite element method. Behra and Chakraverty [17] used orthogonal polynomials in the Rayleigh-Ritz method to obtain frequency parameters and mode shapes of Euler and Timoshenko nanobeams. Rahmani and Pedram [18] presented a closed-form solution for the vibration behavior of functionally graded Timoshenko nanobeams. In another paper, Behra and Chakraverty [19] applied the differential quadrature method to study the free vibration of nanobeams based on various nonlocal theories. Ebrahimi and Salari [20] studied free flexural vibration of functionally graded nanobeams using the differential transform method. Ebrahimi et al. [21] investigated the vibrational characteristics of functionally graded nanobeams using the differential transform method. Tuna and Kirca [22] studied free vibration and buckling of nonlocal Euler-Bernoulli beams utilizing the Laplace transform method. Hamza-Cherif et al. [23] employed a differential transform method to study the free vibration of a single-walled carbon nanotube resting on an elastic foundation under thermal effect. Aria and Friswell [24] used the finite element method to examine the free vibration and the buckling behavior of functionally graded Timoshenko nanobeams. Nikam and Sayyad [25] presented closed-form solutions for bending, buckling, and free vibration of simply supported nanobeams. Arian et al. [26] studied the effect of the thickness-to-length ratio on the frequency ratio of Timoshenko nanobeams and nanoplates. Ufuk [27] used the Ritz method in free transverse vibration analysis of cantilever nanobeam with intermediate support. Wang et al. [28] presented an analytical buckling analysis of micro and nano roads/tubes based on nonlocal Timoshenko beam theory. Reddy [29] reformulated Euler-Bernoulli, Timoshenko, Reddy, and Levinson beam theories using the nonlocal theory for bending, buckling, and vibrations of beams. Pradhan and Phadikar [30] solved buckling, bending, and vibration problems of nonhomogeneous nanotubes using the differential quadrature method. Aydogdu [31] proposed a generalized nonlocal beam theory to study the bending, buckling, and free vibration of nanobeams. Thai [32] presented analytical solutions for bending, buckling, and free vibration of nanobeams based on a nonlocal shear deformation beam theory. Eltaher et al. [33] used Galerkin finite element method to study static deflection and buckling response of functionally graded nanobeams for different combinations of boundary conditions. Ebrahimi and Salari [34] developed a differential transform method solution for vibrational and buckling analysis of functionally graded nanobeams considering the physical neutral axis position. Buckling analysis of two-directional functionally graded Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam has been presented by Nejad et al. [35] using the generalized differential quadrature method. Safarabadi et al. [36] studied the effect of surface energy on the free vibration of rotating nanobeam using the differential quadrature method. Mohammadi et al. [37] used the differential quadrature method to present the hygro-mechanical vibration of a rotating viscoelastic nanobeam resting on a visco-Pasternak foundation subjected to nonlinear temperature variation. An asymptotic solution for critical buckling load of Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam using Eringen’s two-phase nonlocal theory has been presented by Zhu et al. [38]. Khaniki and Hosseini-Hashemi [39] presented a buckling analysis of tapered nanobeam using nonlocal strain gradient theory and the generalized differential quadrature method. Finite element analysis of bending, buckling, and free vibration problems of Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam has been presented by Tuna and Kirca [40] using Eringen’s nonlocal integral model. Buckling analysis of nonuniform nonlocal strain gradient beams has been presented by Bakhshi et al. [41] using the generalized differential quadrature method. Stability analysis of simply supported nonlocal Euler-Bernoulli beam with varying cross-sections and resting on the Pasternak foundation has been presented by Soltani and Mohammadi [42]. Xu and Zheng [43] solved the buckling problem of the nonlocal strain gradient Timoshenko beam in closed form. The differential quadrature method and the differential transform method have been used by Jena and Chakraverty [44] for the buckling analysis of nanobeams. Ragb et al. [45] obtained natural frequencies of a piezoelectric nanobeam resting on a nonlinear Pasternak foundation using different versions of the differential quadrature method. Nazmul and Devnath [46] derived closed-form solutions for bending and buckling of functionally graded nanobeam using the Laplace transform. Karmakar and Chakravarty [47] studied the thermal vibration of an Euler nanobeam resting on the Winkler-Pasternak foundation using the differential quadrature method and the Adomian decomposition method. Zewei et al. [48] used the differential quadrature method in free vibration, buckling, and dynamic stability analyses of Timoshenko micro/nanobeams resting on the Pasternak foundation under axial load. Civalek et al. [49] studied the stability of restrained FGM nonlocal beams using the Fourier series. Jalaei et al. [50] presented an analytical transient response of porous viscoelastic functionally graded nanobeam subjected to dynamic load and magnetic field. Beni [51] investigated free vibration and static torsion of an electromechanical flexoelectric micro/nanotube. Beni and Beni [52] studied the dynamic stability of an isotropic viscoelastic/piezoelectric Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam using the Galerkin method. Numanoğlu et al. [53] presented a thermo-mechanical vibration analysis of Timoshenko nanobeam using the nonlocal finite element method. Karmakar and Chakraverty [54] used the Adomian decomposition method and the homotopy perturbation method to study the thermal vibration of nonhomogeneous Euler nanobeam resting on the Winkler foundation.
This paper aims at providing a numerical solution for free transverse vibration and buckling of a nanobeam under axial load and resting on the Pasternak foundation. Eringen’s nonlocal elasticity theory along with the Euler-Bernoulli beam theory is used to develop the mathematical model. The PDQM and the HDQM are used to obtain the first three frequencies and the lowest critical buckling loads for clamped-clamped (C-C), clamped-simply supported (C-S), and simply supported-simply supported (S-S) beams.
The impacts of nonlocal parameters, axial force, and elastic foundation moduli on frequencies are studied. The effects of nonlocal parameters, boundary conditions, and elastic foundation moduli on critical buckling load are also studied.
Consider an isotropic uniform nanobeam of length cross-section area , density and transverse deflection as shown in Fig. 1. Here, t denotes the time. The beam is resting on the Pasternak foundation and is also subjected to uniform compressive load p.
The fundamental assumptions of the Euler-Bernoulli beam theory (Abbas et al. [55]) are:
This theory does not account for the effect of transverse shear strain and overpredicts natural frequencies.
Fig. 1. Geometry of a Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam
resting on Pasternak foundation
The strain energy of the beam is expressed as (Wang et al. [56]):
|
(1) |
where is normal stress.
Normal strain in terms of deflection is represented as
|
(2) |
Using (2), strain energy given by (1) becomes
|
(3) |
where M is the bending moment and is defined as
|
(4) |
The kinetic energy of the beam is expressed as (Wang et al. [56])
|
(5) |
The potential energy due to the Pasternak foundation is represented as
|
(6) |
where and are the Winkler and the Pasternak (shear) foundation stiffnesses, respectively.
Work done by the compressive load p is expressed as
|
(7) |
Using Hamilton’s principle
|
(8) |
The equation of motion of the beam is obtained as follows:
|
(9) |
Based on Eringen’s nonlocal elasticity theory, the nonlocal stress tensor at a point is given as (Murmu and Adhikari [57])
|
(10) |
where and are classical stress and nonlocal modulus, respectively.
The differential form of the above integral constitutive relation (Murmu and Adhikari [57]) is
|
(11) |
where is a material constant, is the Laplace operator and a is the internal characteristic length.
For Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam, the relationship between local and nonlocal stresses (Eringen [5]) given by Eq. (11) can be rewritten as follows:
|
(12) |
Multiplying the equation (12) by z dA and integrating over the area A, we obtain
|
(13) |
where E is Young’s modulus and
|
(14) |
is the second moment of the area.
By using Eqs. (9) and (13), the equation of motion is obtained as follows:
|
(15) |
where
is the nonlocal parameter and is the frequency parameter.
The buckling problem is obtained by putting in Eq. (15) and is given as follows:
|
(16) |
where is the critical buckling load.
Boundary conditions at the ends and are given as
For C-C beam
|
(17a-17d) |
For C-S beam
|
|
|
For S-S beam
|
(19a-19d) |
|
Using the PDQM and the HDQM, free vibration and buckling problems are reduced to eigenvalue problems which are solved for frequencies and critical buckling loads, respectively.
The displacement and its derivatives are approximated by a weighted linear sum of functional values at grid points as follows:
|
(20) |
|
(21) |
and |
(22) |
and |
(23) |
and
|
(24) |
In this method, the weighting coefficients of the first, second, third, and fourth order derivatives are obtained as follows:
|
(25) |
|
(26) |
and |
(27) |
|
(28) |
|
(29) |
|
(30) |
The Gauss-Chebyshev-Lobatto grid points (Chang [60]) in the range [0, 1] are given below as:
|
(31) |
We obtain a set of equations in unknowns by discretizing the equation of motion (15) at grid points
as follows:
|
(32) |
Similarly, the buckling problem (16) can be discretized as follows:
|
(33) |
By discretizing boundary conditions
(17a-17d) for the C-C beam, we obtain a set of four equations in unknowns
|
(34a-34d) |
|
Equations (32) and (34a-34d) form a set of algebraic linear equations in unknowns. This set represents a generalized eigenvalue problem that is solved to obtain frequencies for the C-C beam.
The boundary conditions for C-S and S-S beams are discretized as
|
(35a-35d) |
and |
|
|
(36a-36d) |
Similarly, critical buckling loads for C-C, C-S and S-S beams can be obtained by using equation (33) and discretizing boundary conditions represented by equations
(17a-17d), (18a-18d), and (19a-19d), respectively.
The first three frequencies and the lowest critical buckling loads are calculated by solving the corresponding eigenvalue problem and the buckling problem, respectively. The Convergence of results for both versions of DQM with an increasing number of grid points is shown in Tables 1 and 2 for
. The value of N has been fixed as 17 as we get results correct to four decimal places. Results are shown in the Tables (3-6).
Tables (3-5) present the first three frequencies while Table 6 shows critical buckling loads for C-C, C-S, and S-S nanobeams for different combinations of parameters. A comparison of frequencies in special cases is presented in Table (7) while a comparison of critical buckling loads in special cases is shown in Table (8). It is evident from the comparison tables that the results are in good agreement with those available in the literature.
Table 1. Convergence of frequency parameter of Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam using PDQM
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
10 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
Mode |
C-C |
|||||
I |
5.0562 |
5.0562 |
5.0562 |
5.0562 |
5.0562 |
5.0562 |
II |
7.4587 |
7.4640 |
7.4640 |
7.4640 |
7.4640 |
7.4640 |
III |
9.6622 |
9.5491 |
9.5481 |
9.5475 |
9.5475 |
9.5475 |
|
C-S |
|||||
I |
4.4727 |
4.4728 |
4.4728 |
4.4728 |
4.4728 |
4.4728 |
II |
6.8302 |
6.8326 |
6.8325 |
6.8325 |
6.8325 |
6.8325 |
III |
9.2086 |
8.9567 |
8.9573 |
8.9560 |
8.9560 |
8.9560 |
|
S-S |
|||||
I |
4.0068 |
4.0068 |
4.0068 |
4.0068 |
4.0068 |
4.0068 |
II |
6.2130 |
6.2169 |
6.2169 |
6.2169 |
6.2169 |
6.2169 |
III |
8.5510 |
8.3685 |
8.3675 |
8.3667 |
8.3667 |
8.3667 |
Table 2. Convergence of frequency parameter of Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam using HDQM
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
10 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
Mode |
C-C |
|||||
I |
5.0650 |
5.0564 |
5.0566 |
5.0563 |
5.0562 |
5.0562 |
II |
7.4664 |
7.4651 |
7.4640 |
7.4641 |
7.4640 |
7.4640 |
III |
9.5614 |
9.5477 |
9.548 |
9.5475 |
9.5475 |
9.5475 |
|
C-S |
|||||
I |
4.4859 |
4.4702 |
4.4737 |
4.4722 |
4.4730 |
4.4728 |
II |
6.8247 |
6.8355 |
6.8316 |
6.8332 |
6.8323 |
6.8325 |
III |
8.9794 |
8.9547 |
8.9572 |
8.9556 |
8.9563 |
8.9560 |
|
S-S |
|||||
I |
3.9863 |
4.0068 |
4.0056 |
4.0068 |
4.0065 |
4.0068 |
II |
6.2266 |
6.2169 |
6.2173 |
6.2169 |
6.2169 |
6.2169 |
III |
8.3869 |
8.3667 |
8.3675 |
8.3667 |
8.3669 |
8.3667 |
Table 3. First three values of frequency parameter of C-C Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
0 |
0.1 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.4 |
|||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
Mode |
-3 |
3 |
-3 |
3 |
-3 |
3 |
-3 |
3 |
-3 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
I |
4.8170 |
4.6427 |
4.7119 |
4.4725 |
4.4740 |
4.0547 |
4.2233 |
3.5302 |
4.0158 |
2.9427 |
|
|
II |
7.9240 |
7.7814 |
7.2571 |
7.0188 |
6.2603 |
5.7842 |
5.5576 |
4.7433 |
5.1047 |
3.8372 |
|
|
III |
11.0512 |
10.9396 |
9.3728 |
9.1401 |
7.6302 |
7.1119 |
6.6414 |
5.7228 |
6.0581 |
4.6072 |
|
10 |
I |
5.0692 |
4.9229 |
5.0431 |
4.8528 |
4.9852 |
4.6988 |
4.9273 |
4.5449 |
4.8830 |
4.4251 |
|
|
II |
8.1452 |
8.0148 |
7.6084 |
7.4037 |
6.8721 |
6.5259 |
6.4215 |
5.9490 |
6.1701 |
5.6052 |
|
|
III |
11.2299 |
11.1237 |
9.7262 |
9.5189 |
8.3129 |
7.9246 |
7.6364 |
7.0905 |
7.3007 |
6.6405 |
|
30 |
I |
5.4780 |
5.3657 |
5.5558 |
5.4172 |
5.6941 |
5.5092 |
5.8005 |
5.5797 |
5.8676 |
5.6238 |
|
|
II |
8.5381 |
8.4262 |
8.1924 |
8.0304 |
7.7561 |
7.5225 |
7.5171 |
7.2384 |
7.3947 |
7.0906 |
|
|
III |
11.5632 |
11.4663 |
10.3357 |
10.1642 |
9.3206 |
9.0525 |
8.9129 |
8.5873 |
8.7377 |
8.3804 |
|
50 |
I |
5.8067 |
5.7145 |
5.9546 |
5.8436 |
6.2073 |
6.0667 |
6.3970 |
6.2356 |
6.5156 |
6.3415 |
|
|
II |
8.8809 |
8.7824 |
8.6724 |
8.5368 |
8.4120 |
8.2313 |
8.2736 |
8.0684 |
8.2043 |
7.9865 |
|
|
III |
11.8693 |
11.7800 |
10.8533 |
10.7058 |
10.0788 |
9.8693 |
9.7993 |
9.5586 |
9.6901 |
9.4338 |
10 |
0 |
I |
4.8370 |
4.6650 |
4.7333 |
4.4975 |
4.4989 |
4.0881 |
4.2529 |
3.5802 |
4.0501 |
3.0273 |
|
|
II |
7.9285 |
7.7862 |
7.2630 |
7.0253 |
6.2695 |
5.7958 |
5.5707 |
4.7642 |
5.1215 |
3.8764 |
|
|
III |
11.0528 |
10.9413 |
9.3756 |
9.1430 |
7.6353 |
7.1181 |
6.6491 |
5.7348 |
6.0682 |
4.6301 |
|
10 |
I |
5.0864 |
4.9416 |
5.0606 |
4.8724 |
5.0033 |
4.7204 |
4.9461 |
4.5687 |
4.9022 |
4.4509 |
|
|
II |
8.1494 |
8.0192 |
7.6135 |
7.4093 |
6.8790 |
6.5340 |
6.4299 |
5.9597 |
6.1797 |
5.6180 |
|
|
III |
11.2315 |
11.1253 |
9.7286 |
9.5215 |
8.3168 |
7.9292 |
7.6415 |
7.0968 |
7.3065 |
6.6482 |
|
30 |
I |
5.4917 |
5.3802 |
5.5689 |
5.4313 |
5.7062 |
5.5226 |
5.8120 |
5.5926 |
5.8787 |
5.6365 |
|
|
II |
8.5417 |
8.4299 |
8.1965 |
8.0347 |
7.7609 |
7.5278 |
7.5224 |
7.2443 |
7.4002 |
7.0970 |
|
|
III |
11.5646 |
11.4678 |
10.3378 |
10.1663 |
9.3234 |
9.0556 |
8.9161 |
8.5908 |
8.7410 |
8.3842 |
|
50 |
I |
5.8182 |
5.7265 |
5.9653 |
5.8548 |
6.2167 |
6.0768 |
6.4056 |
6.2448 |
6.5237 |
6.3503 |
|
|
II |
8.8841 |
8.7858 |
8.6758 |
8.5404 |
8.4158 |
8.2354 |
8.2776 |
8.0727 |
8.2084 |
7.9909 |
|
|
III |
11.8707 |
11.7814 |
10.8551 |
10.7077 |
10.0810 |
9.8716 |
9.8017 |
9.5612 |
9.6926 |
9.4365 |
1000 |
0 |
I |
6.2618 |
6.1852 |
6.2150 |
6.1160 |
6.1165 |
5.9689 |
6.0243 |
5.8288 |
5.9568 |
5.7247 |
|
|
II |
8.3843 |
8.2646 |
7.8372 |
7.6506 |
7.0957 |
6.7842 |
6.6478 |
6.2287 |
6.4003 |
5.9049 |
|
|
III |
11.2317 |
11.1255 |
9.6624 |
9.4509 |
8.1392 |
7.7229 |
7.3664 |
6.7465 |
6.9595 |
6.1704 |
|
10 |
I |
6.3824 |
6.3110 |
6.3694 |
6.2782 |
6.3409 |
6.2093 |
6.3131 |
6.1448 |
6.2922 |
6.0976 |
|
|
II |
8.5725 |
8.4612 |
8.1213 |
7.9545 |
7.5384 |
7.2825 |
7.2080 |
6.8884 |
7.0342 |
6.6758 |
|
|
III |
11.4022 |
11.3009 |
9.9869 |
9.7961 |
8.7172 |
8.3848 |
8.1443 |
7.7062 |
7.8719 |
7.3657 |
|
30 |
I |
6.6018 |
6.5387 |
6.6467 |
6.5673 |
6.7290 |
6.6197 |
6.7943 |
6.6607 |
6.8365 |
6.6868 |
|
|
II |
8.9138 |
8.8158 |
8.6131 |
8.4744 |
8.2434 |
8.0509 |
8.0465 |
7.8224 |
7.9472 |
7.7063 |
|
|
III |
11.7214 |
11.6285 |
10.5549 |
10.3941 |
9.6148 |
9.3719 |
9.2465 |
8.9571 |
9.0901 |
8.7759 |
|
50 |
I |
6.7982 |
6.7414 |
6.8920 |
6.8213 |
7.0595 |
6.9652 |
7.1907 |
7.0787 |
7.2751 |
7.1518 |
|
|
II |
9.2178 |
9.1300 |
9.0323 |
8.9127 |
8.8034 |
8.6466 |
8.6831 |
8.5068 |
8.6233 |
8.4372 |
|
|
III |
12.0160 |
11.9299 |
11.0436 |
10.9038 |
10.3143 |
10.1194 |
10.0545 |
9.8326 |
9.9536 |
9.7182 |
Table 4. First three values of frequency parameter of C-S Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
0 |
0.1 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.4 |
||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
Mode |
-3 |
3 |
-3 |
3 |
-3 |
3 |
-3 |
3 |
-3 |
3 |
|
1 |
0 |
I |
4.0655 |
3.7797 |
3.9825 |
3.6454 |
3.7920 |
3.3102 |
3.5875 |
2.8782 |
3.4149 |
2.3753 |
|
|
|
II |
7.1586 |
6.9764 |
6.5937 |
6.3298 |
5.7313 |
5.2570 |
5.1121 |
4.3304 |
4.7087 |
3.5081 |
|
|
|
III |
10.2760 |
10.1435 |
8.7705 |
8.5286 |
7.1604 |
6.6543 |
6.2284 |
5.3495 |
5.6740 |
4.2981 |
|
|
10 |
I |
4.4351 |
4.2257 |
4.4020 |
4.1661 |
4.3280 |
4.0326 |
4.2531 |
3.8955 |
4.1945 |
3.7858 |
|
|
|
II |
7.4343 |
7.2727 |
6.9738 |
6.7535 |
6.3289 |
5.9920 |
5.9283 |
5.4830 |
5.7039 |
5.1771 |
|
|
|
III |
10.4861 |
10.3616 |
9.1342 |
8.9213 |
7.8214 |
7.4461 |
7.1736 |
6.6556 |
6.8449 |
6.2233 |
|
|
30 |
I |
4.9708 |
4.8292 |
4.9924 |
4.8377 |
5.0270 |
4.8478 |
5.0497 |
4.8500 |
5.0621 |
4.8483 |
|
|
|
II |
7.9073 |
7.7745 |
7.5880 |
7.4194 |
7.1786 |
6.9553 |
6.9549 |
6.6943 |
6.8427 |
6.5603 |
|
|
|
III |
10.8717 |
10.7604 |
9.7535 |
9.5801 |
8.7899 |
8.5329 |
8.3815 |
8.0736 |
8.1961 |
7.8604 |
|
|
50 |
I |
5.3684 |
5.2589 |
5.4239 |
5.3054 |
5.5165 |
5.3833 |
5.5854 |
5.4409 |
5.6287 |
5.4767 |
|
|
|
II |
8.3066 |
8.1930 |
8.0812 |
7.9428 |
7.8028 |
7.6313 |
7.6607 |
7.4694 |
7.5943 |
7.3922 |
|
|
|
III |
11.2198 |
11.1188 |
10.2733 |
10.1256 |
9.5151 |
9.3149 |
9.2184 |
8.9913 |
9.0909 |
8.8502 |
|
10 |
0 |
I |
4.0985 |
3.8207 |
4.0176 |
3.6910 |
3.8326 |
3.3706 |
3.6352 |
2.9682 |
3.4701 |
2.5278 |
|
|
|
II |
7.1648 |
6.9830 |
6.6016 |
6.3387 |
5.7432 |
5.2724 |
5.1288 |
4.3578 |
4.7301 |
3.5591 |
|
|
|
III |
10.2781 |
10.1457 |
8.7738 |
8.5322 |
7.1665 |
6.6619 |
6.2377 |
5.3641 |
5.6863 |
4.3261 |
|
|
10 |
I |
4.4606 |
4.2552 |
4.4281 |
4.1969 |
4.3555 |
4.0665 |
4.2820 |
3.9330 |
4.2247 |
3.8266 |
|
|
|
II |
7.4398 |
7.2786 |
6.9805 |
6.7608 |
6.3378 |
6.0025 |
5.9391 |
5.4966 |
5.7160 |
5.1932 |
|
|
|
III |
10.4880 |
10.3636 |
9.1371 |
8.9245 |
7.8261 |
7.4516 |
7.1797 |
6.6632 |
6.8519 |
6.2326 |
|
|
30 |
I |
4.9890 |
4.8490 |
5.0104 |
4.8574 |
5.0446 |
4.8674 |
5.0671 |
4.8696 |
5.0794 |
4.8679 |
|
|
|
II |
7.9118 |
7.7792 |
7.5932 |
7.4249 |
7.1847 |
6.9620 |
6.9615 |
6.7018 |
6.8497 |
6.5682 |
|
|
|
III |
10.8735 |
10.7622 |
9.7559 |
9.5826 |
8.7932 |
8.5365 |
8.3853 |
8.0779 |
8.2002 |
7.8650 |
|
|
50 |
I |
5.3829 |
5.2743 |
5.4380 |
5.3205 |
5.5298 |
5.3977 |
5.5983 |
5.4548 |
5.6413 |
5.4903 |
|
|
|
II |
8.3105 |
8.1971 |
8.0855 |
7.9472 |
7.8076 |
7.6363 |
7.6657 |
7.4748 |
7.5994 |
7.3977 |
|
|
|
III |
11.2214 |
11.1205 |
10.2754 |
10.1278 |
9.5177 |
9.3177 |
9.2213 |
8.9943 |
9.0939 |
8.8534 |
|
1000 |
0 |
I |
5.9722 |
5.8895 |
5.9467 |
5.8555 |
5.8927 |
5.7838 |
5.8418 |
5.7162 |
5.8043 |
5.6663 |
|
|
|
II |
7.7595 |
7.6179 |
7.3316 |
7.1437 |
6.7516 |
6.4796 |
6.4040 |
6.0623 |
6.2136 |
5.8240 |
|
|
|
III |
10.4988 |
10.3748 |
9.1193 |
8.9055 |
7.7608 |
7.3758 |
7.0738 |
6.5297 |
6.7169 |
6.0506 |
|
|
10 |
I |
6.1014 |
6.0251 |
6.0888 |
6.0049 |
6.0614 |
5.9620 |
6.0347 |
5.9212 |
6.0145 |
5.8911 |
|
|
|
II |
7.9792 |
7.8496 |
7.6159 |
7.4493 |
7.1431 |
6.9162 |
6.8751 |
6.6047 |
6.7350 |
6.4375 |
|
|
|
III |
10.6963 |
10.5792 |
9.4456 |
9.2540 |
8.2980 |
7.9888 |
7.7712 |
7.3768 |
7.5178 |
7.0703 |
|
|
30 |
I |
6.3339 |
6.2673 |
6.3444 |
6.2712 |
6.3614 |
6.2759 |
6.3727 |
6.2769 |
6.3789 |
6.2761 |
|
|
|
II |
8.3702 |
8.2588 |
8.1045 |
7.9672 |
7.7752 |
7.6017 |
7.6014 |
7.4053 |
7.5161 |
7.3073 |
|
|
|
III |
11.0611 |
10.9555 |
10.0122 |
9.8523 |
9.1366 |
8.9092 |
8.7768 |
8.5113 |
8.6163 |
8.3307 |
|
|
50 |
I |
6.5402 |
6.4806 |
6.5711 |
6.5057 |
6.6239 |
6.5484 |
6.6641 |
6.5807 |
6.6897 |
6.6010 |
|
|
|
II |
8.7117 |
8.6136 |
8.5178 |
8.4001 |
8.2825 |
8.1401 |
8.1644 |
8.0077 |
8.1096 |
7.9452 |
|
|
|
III |
11.3926 |
11.2962 |
10.4963 |
10.3581 |
9.7926
|
9.6096 |
9.5219 |
9.3167 |
9.4065 |
9.1903 |
|
Table 5. First three values of frequency parameter of S-S Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
0 |
0.1 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.4 |
|||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
Mode |
-3 |
3 |
-3 |
3 |
-3 |
3 |
-3 |
3 |
-3 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
I |
3.3637 |
2.8800 |
3.3047 |
2.7837 |
3.1658 |
2.5340 |
3.0110 |
2.1894 |
2.8756 |
1.7397 |
|
|
II |
6.4002 |
6.1613 |
5.9303 |
5.6234 |
5.1867 |
4.6973 |
4.6355 |
3.8724 |
4.2700 |
3.1268 |
|
|
III |
9.5037 |
9.3445 |
8.1657 |
7.9091 |
6.6878 |
6.1893 |
5.8167 |
4.9733 |
5.2951 |
3.9890 |
|
10 |
I |
3.8803 |
3.5975 |
3.8423 |
3.5496 |
3.7566 |
3.4393 |
3.6674 |
3.3212 |
3.5952 |
3.2226 |
|
|
II |
6.7474 |
6.5458 |
6.3556 |
6.1112 |
5.7831 |
5.4491 |
5.4099 |
4.9893 |
5.1930 |
4.7058 |
|
|
III |
9.7524 |
9.6055 |
8.5461 |
8.3242 |
7.3312 |
6.9668 |
6.7148 |
6.2233 |
6.3968 |
5.8125 |
|
30 |
I |
4.5380 |
4.3706 |
4.5145 |
4.3442 |
4.4624 |
4.2856 |
4.4102 |
4.2264 |
4.3693 |
4.1799 |
|
|
II |
7.3144 |
7.1582 |
7.0147 |
6.8364 |
6.6092 |
6.3938 |
6.3696 |
6.1270 |
6.2407 |
5.9813 |
|
|
III |
10.1995 |
10.0716 |
9.1829 |
9.0058 |
8.2645 |
8.0176 |
7.8563 |
7.5658 |
7.6645 |
7.3497 |
|
50 |
I |
4.9930 |
4.8695 |
4.9753 |
4.8505 |
4.9367 |
4.8087 |
4.8983 |
4.7672 |
4.8686 |
4.7349 |
|
|
II |
7.7737 |
7.6445 |
7.5275 |
7.3847 |
7.2069 |
7.0432 |
7.0251 |
6.8477 |
6.9300 |
6.7448 |
|
|
III |
10.5946 |
10.4807 |
9.7094 |
9.5605 |
8.9588 |
8.7675 |
8.6452 |
8.4312 |
8.5030 |
8.2775 |
10 |
0 |
I |
3.4213 |
2.9699 |
3.3653 |
2.8827 |
3.2345 |
2.6622 |
3.0903 |
2.3780 |
2.9659 |
2.0643 |
|
|
II |
6.4088 |
6.1709 |
5.9411 |
5.6360 |
5.2028 |
4.7189 |
4.6580 |
3.9106 |
4.2987 |
3.1979 |
|
|
III |
9.5063 |
9.3472 |
8.1698 |
7.9137 |
6.6953 |
6.1988 |
5.8281 |
4.9915 |
5.3102 |
4.0240 |
|
10 |
I |
3.9183 |
3.6449 |
3.8814 |
3.5989 |
3.7983 |
3.4934 |
3.7122 |
3.3810 |
3.6427 |
3.2879 |
|
|
II |
6.7547 |
6.5538 |
6.3643 |
6.1210 |
5.7947 |
5.4629 |
5.4240 |
5.0073 |
5.2090 |
4.7272 |
|
|
III |
9.7549 |
9.6080 |
8.5497 |
8.3280 |
7.3369 |
6.9734 |
6.7222 |
6.2327 |
6.4054 |
5.8240 |
|
30 |
I |
4.5619 |
4.3973 |
4.5387 |
4.3713 |
4.4875 |
4.3139 |
4.4362 |
4.2559 |
4.3961 |
4.2104 |
|
|
II |
7.3202 |
7.1643 |
7.0212 |
6.8435 |
6.6170 |
6.4024 |
6.3783 |
6.1367 |
6.2499 |
5.9918 |
|
|
III |
10.2017 |
10.0738 |
9.1858 |
9.0088 |
8.2685 |
8.0220 |
7.8609 |
7.5710 |
7.6695 |
7.3554 |
|
50 |
I |
5.0110 |
4.8889 |
4.9935 |
4.8701 |
4.9553 |
4.8288 |
4.9173 |
4.7878 |
4.8880 |
4.7560 |
|
|
II |
7.7785 |
7.6495 |
7.5328 |
7.3903 |
7.2129 |
7.0496 |
7.0316 |
6.8547 |
6.9367 |
6.7521 |
|
|
III |
10.5965 |
10.4827 |
9.7119 |
9.5630 |
8.9619 |
8.7708 |
8.6487 |
8.4349 |
8.5067 |
8.2814 |
1000 |
0 |
I |
5.7941 |
5.7164 |
5.7828 |
5.7047 |
5.7583 |
5.6791 |
5.7342 |
5.6541 |
5.7158 |
5.6349 |
|
|
II |
7.1930 |
7.0283 |
6.8764 |
6.6866 |
6.4425 |
6.2086 |
6.1822 |
5.9147 |
6.0406 |
5.7519 |
|
|
III |
9.7821 |
9.6366 |
8.5901 |
8.3717 |
7.4005 |
7.0472 |
6.8044 |
6.3352 |
6.5001 |
5.9486 |
|
10 |
I |
5.9169 |
5.8441 |
5.9064 |
5.8332 |
5.8834 |
5.8093 |
5.8609 |
5.7859 |
5.8436 |
5.7680 |
|
|
II |
7.4447 |
7.2968 |
7.1617 |
6.9947 |
6.7835 |
6.5853 |
6.5632 |
6.3429 |
6.4458 |
6.2123 |
|
|
III |
10.0112 |
9.8757 |
8.9209 |
8.7270 |
7.8963 |
7.6105 |
7.4205 |
7.0704 |
7.1906 |
6.8018 |
|
30 |
I |
6.1420 |
6.0771 |
6.1325 |
6.0673 |
6.1120 |
6.0461 |
6.0919 |
6.0254 |
6.0766 |
6.0095 |
|
|
II |
7.8829 |
7.7591 |
7.6474 |
7.5114 |
7.3428 |
7.1885 |
7.1715 |
7.0053 |
7.0822 |
6.9093 |
|
|
III |
10.4272 |
10.3076 |
9.4897 |
9.3298 |
8.6753 |
8.4636 |
8.3273 |
8.0863 |
8.1675 |
7.9111 |
|
50 |
I |
6.3447 |
6.2859 |
6.3361 |
6.2771 |
6.3176 |
6.2580 |
6.2994 |
6.2393 |
6.2855 |
6.2250 |
|
|
II |
8.2582 |
8.1510 |
8.0550 |
7.9392 |
7.7974 |
7.6694 |
7.6555 |
7.5199 |
7.5824 |
7.4427 |
|
|
III |
10.7986 |
10.6912 |
9.9715 |
9.8343 |
9.2876 |
9.1166 |
9.0082 |
8.8202 |
8.8830 |
8.6865 |
Table 6. Critical buckling load parameter of Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam
|
|
|
||||
|
|
0 |
0.1 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.4 |
|
|
C-C |
||||
1 |
0 |
39.5544 |
28.3659 |
15.3518 |
10.3878 |
5.4280 |
|
30 |
69.5544 |
58.3659 |
45.3518 |
40.3878 |
35.4280 |
|
50 |
89.5544 |
78.3659 |
65.3518 |
60.3878 |
55.4280 |
10 |
0 |
40.2376 |
28.9201 |
15.7558 |
10.4530 |
6.0810 |
|
30 |
70.2376 |
58.9201 |
45.7558 |
40.4530 |
36.0810 |
|
50 |
90.2376 |
78.9201 |
65.7558 |
60.4530 |
56.0810 |
1000 |
0 |
101.1910 |
61.2950 |
28.6333 |
13.6863 |
7.8113 |
|
30 |
131.1910 |
91.2950 |
58.6333 |
43.6863 |
37.8113 |
|
50 |
151.1910 |
111.2950 |
78.6333 |
63.6863 |
57.8113 |
|
|
C-S |
||||
1 |
0 |
20.2733 |
16.8759 |
11.2375 |
7.2283 |
4.8300 |
|
30 |
50.2733 |
46.8759 |
41.2375 |
37.2283 |
34.8300 |
|
50 |
70.2733 |
66.8759 |
61.2375 |
57.2283 |
54.8300 |
10 |
0 |
21.0149 |
17.5676 |
11.8463 |
7.7780 |
6.1985 |
|
30 |
51.0149 |
47.5676 |
41.8463 |
37.7780 |
36.1985 |
|
50 |
71.0149 |
67.5676 |
61.8463 |
57.7780 |
56.1985 |
1000 |
0 |
74.4955 |
55.8308 |
25.0525 |
12.7116 |
7.3664 |
|
30 |
104.4950 |
85.8308 |
55.0525 |
42.7116 |
37.3664 |
|
50 |
124.4950 |
105.8310 |
75.0525 |
62.7116 |
57.3664 |
|
|
S-S |
||||
1 |
0 |
9.9709 |
9.0843 |
7.1774 |
5.3282 |
3.9280 |
|
30 |
39.9709 |
39.0843 |
37.1774 |
35.3282 |
33.9280 |
|
50 |
59.9709 |
59.0843 |
57.1774 |
55.3282 |
53.9280 |
10 |
0 |
10.8828 |
9.9963 |
8.0893 |
6.2400 |
4.8399 |
|
30 |
40.8828 |
39.9962 |
38.0893 |
36.2400 |
34.8399 |
|
50 |
60.8828 |
59.9962 |
58.0893 |
56.2400 |
54.8399 |
1000 |
0 |
64.8087 |
53.6346 |
25.8330 |
12.3344 |
6.9380 |
|
30 |
94.8087 |
83.6346 |
55.8330 |
42.3344 |
36.9380 |
|
50 |
114.8087 |
103.6346 |
75.8330 |
62.3344 |
56.9380 |
Table 7. Comparison of frequency parameter of Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam
Boundary condition |
Reference |
|
|
|
Mode I |
Mode II |
Mode III |
C-C |
Demir [61] |
0 |
0 |
0 |
4.73004 |
7.8532 |
11.0856 |
|
Ebrahimi and Salari [34] |
|
|
|
4.7299 |
7.8525 |
10.9934 |
|
Present |
|
|
|
4.7300 |
7.8532 |
10.9956 |
|
Demir [61] |
0 |
0 |
0.05 |
4.69433 |
7.64178 |
10.4625 |
|
Present |
|
|
|
4.6943 |
7.6418 |
10.4042 |
|
Demir [61] |
0 |
0 |
0.2 |
4.27661 |
6.03520 |
7.28636 |
|
Present |
|
|
|
4.2766 |
6.0352 |
7.3840 |
|
Demir [61] |
10000 |
0 |
0.2 |
10.08260 |
10.31634 |
10.64047 |
|
Present |
|
|
|
10.0826 |
10.3163 |
10.6723 |
|
Rahbar-Ranji and Shahbaztabar [62] |
2.5 |
2.5* |
0 |
5.3200 |
8.3815 |
11.4280 |
|
Present |
|
|
|
5.3224 |
8.3821 |
11.4282 |
|
Rahbar-Ranji and Shahbaztabar [62] |
10000 |
2.5* |
0 |
10.1943 |
11.0546 |
12.8252 |
|
Present |
|
|
|
10.1943 |
11.0546 |
12.8251 |
C-S |
Wang, Zhang, and He [10] |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3.9266 |
7.0686 |
10.2102 |
|
Ebrahimi and Salari [34] |
|
|
|
3.9265 |
7.0679 |
10.2081 |
|
Present |
|
|
|
3.9266 |
7.0686 |
10.2102 |
|
Wang, Zhang, and He [10] |
0 |
0 |
0.3 |
3.2828 |
4.7668 |
5.8371 |
|
Present |
|
|
|
3.28284 |
4.7668 |
5.8371 |
|
Wang, Zhang, and He [10] |
0 |
0 |
0.5 |
2.7899 |
3.8325 |
4.6105 |
|
Present |
|
|
|
2.7899 |
3.8325 |
4.6105 |
S-S |
Demir [61] |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3.14159 |
6.28319 |
9.42394 |
|
Present |
|
|
|
3.1416 |
6.2832 |
9.4248 |
|
Demir [61] |
0 |
0 |
0.05 |
3.12251 |
6.13706 |
8.96310 |
|
Present |
|
|
|
3.1225 |
6.1371 |
8.9639 |
|
Demir [61] |
0 |
0 |
0.2 |
2.89083 |
4.95805 |
6.45140 |
|
Present |
|
|
|
2.8908 |
4.9581 |
6.4520 |
|
Demir [61] |
10000 |
0 |
0.2 |
10.01741 |
10.14776 |
10.40748 |
|
Present |
|
|
|
10.0174 |
10.1478 |
10.4076 |
|
Rahbar-Ranji and Shahbaztabar [62] |
10000 |
2.5* |
0 |
10.0842 |
10.5806 |
11.9042 |
|
Present |
|
|
|
10.0842 |
10.5806 |
11.9042 |
Table 8. Comparison of the lowest non-dimensional critical buckling load
parameter for Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam without foundation
Boundary condition |
Reference |
|
|
C-C |
Ghannadpour, Mohammadi, and Fazilati [63] |
0 |
39.4784 |
|
Pradhan and Phadikar [30] |
|
39.4784 |
|
Nejad, Hadi and Rastgoo [35] |
|
39.4784 |
|
Zhu, Wang and Dai [38] |
|
39.47842 |
|
Present |
|
39.4784 |
|
Ghannadpour, Mohammadi, and Fazilati [63] |
0.2 |
15.3068 |
|
Nejad, Hadi and Rastgoo [35] |
|
15.3068 |
|
Present |
|
15.3069 |
C-S |
Ghannadpour, Mohammadi, and Fazilati [63] |
0 |
20.1907 |
|
Pradhan and Phadikar [30] |
|
20.1907 |
|
Nejad, Hadi and Rastgoo [35] |
|
20.1907 |
|
Zhu, Wang and Dai [38] |
|
20.19073 |
|
Present |
|
20.1907 |
|
Ghannadpour, Mohammadi, and Fazilati [63] |
0.2 |
11.1697 |
|
Nejad, Hadi and Rastgoo [35] |
|
11.1697 |
|
Present |
|
11.1697 |
S-S |
Sari, Al-Kouz and Atieh [64] |
0 |
9.8696 |
|
Reddy [29] |
|
9.8696 |
|
Ebrahimi and Salari [34] |
|
9.8696044 |
|
Eltaher, Emam and Mahmoud [33] |
|
9.86973 |
|
Wang and Cai [3] |
|
9.8696 |
|
Nejad, Hadi and Rastgoo [35] |
|
9.8696 |
|
Zhu, Wang and Dai [38] |
|
9.86960 |
|
Present |
|
9.8696 |
|
Sari, Al-Kouz and Atieh [64] |
0.1 |
8.9830 |
|
Reddy [29] |
|
8.9830 |
|
Eltaher, Emam and Mahmoud [33] |
|
8.98312 |
|
Present |
|
8.9830 |
|
Sari, Al-Kouz and Atieh [64] |
|
8.2426 |
|
Reddy [29] |
|
8.2426 |
|
Eltaher, Emam and Mahmoud [33] |
|
8.24267 |
|
Present |
|
8.2426 |
|
Sari, Al-Kouz and Atieh [64] |
0.2 |
7.0762 |
|
Reddy [29] |
|
7.0761 |
|
Eltaher, Emam and Mahmoud [33] |
|
7.07614 |
|
Nejad, Hadi and Rastgoo [35] |
|
7.076 |
|
Present |
|
7.0761 |
|
Sari, Al-Kouz and Atieh [64] |
|
6.6085 |
|
Reddy [29] |
|
6.6085 |
|
Present |
|
6.6084 |
The first three frequencies and critical buckling loads are also presented through graphs via Figs. (2-9). The effect of nonlocal parameter
along with the shear foundation parameter on frequency is shown in Figs. (2-3) for
for C-C and C-S beams, respectively.
|
Fig. 2. (a)First mode (b) second mode (c) third mode of C-C nanobeam for |
|
Fig. 3. (a)First mode (b) second mode (c) third mode of C-S nanobeam for |
Figure 4 shows the variation of frequency with respect to nonlocal parameters for different combinations of Winkler and shear foundation parameters.
|
Fig. 4. (a)First mode (b) second mode (c) third mode of S-S nanobeam for |
The effect of the nonlocal parameter along with the Winkler foundation parameter on frequency is shown in Figs. (5-6) for C-C and C-S beams for fixed values of load parameter and shear foundation parameter.
|
Fig. 5. First three modes of C-C nanobeam for |
|
Fig. 6. First three modes of C-S nanobeam for |
Figure 7 shows the effect of the nonlocal parameter along with the shear foundation parameter on critical buckling loads for two different values of the Winkler foundation parameter for C-C, C-S, and S-S beams.
|
Fig. 7. Critical buckling load (a) C-C (b) C-S (c) S-S |
Figure 8 depicts a three-dimensional variation of critical buckling load for different values of the Winkler foundation parameter and nonlocal parameter keeping the shear foundation parameter constant for C-C, C-S, and S-S beams.
|
Fig. 8. Critical buckling load (a) C-C (b) C-S (c) S-S |
Figure 9 presents a three-dimensional variation of critical buckling load for different values of shear foundation parameter and nonlocal parameter keeping the Winkler foundation parameter constant for C-C, C-S, and S-S beams.
|
Fig. 9. Critical buckling load (a) C-C (b) C-S (c) S-S |
Free transverse vibration and buckling of an Euler-Bernoulli nanobeam resting on the Pasternak foundation have been studied on the basis of Eringen’s nonlocal elasticity theory. The PDQM and the HDQM are used to obtain the first three values of the frequency parameter and the lowest critical buckling load. A computer program in C++ is developed to calculate the results. In this analysis, C-C, C-S, and S-S boundary conditions have been considered. The study shows that nonlocal parameters, boundary conditions, axial force parameters, and elastic foundation moduli have considerable impacts on the results. So, it is concluded from the present study that
Nomenclature
|
Cross-section area of the beam |
|
Clamped edge |
|
Weighting coefficients of mth order |
|
Flexural rigidity |
|
Young’s modulus of the plate material |
|
Second moment of area |
|
Nonlocal modulus |
|
Foundation parameters |
|
Winkler and shear foundation stiffnesses |
|
Length of the beam |
|
Bending moment |
|
Number of grid points |
p |
Compressive load |
|
Critical buckling load |
|
Simply supported edge |
|
Time |
|
Kinetic energy of the beam |
|
Strain energy of the beam |
|
Transverse deflection |
|
Non-dimensional transverse deflection |
|
Potential energy due to Pasternak foundation |
|
Work done by the compressive load |
|
Nonlocal parameter |
|
Circular frequency |
|
Density of beam material |
|
Normal stress |
|
Normal strain |
|
Frequency parameter |
|
The Laplace operator |
Algorithm of C++
Step 1: Generation of grid points
Step 2: Generation of weighting coefficients
Step 3: Discretization of governing equation at grid points
Step 4: Implementation of boundary conditions
Step 5: Implementation of bisection method to obtain frequencies and critical buckling loads.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest between the authors.
Acknowledgment
The authors are thankful to the learned reviewers for their critical comments to improve the quality of the paper.
References
[1] Iijima, S., 1991. Helical microtubules of graphitic carbon. Nature, 354, pp.56-58.
[2] Baughman, R.H., Zakhidov, A.A., De Heer, W.A., 2002. Carbon nanotubes--the route toward applications. Science, 297, pp.787-792.
[3] Wang, X., Cai, H., 2006. Effects of initial stress on non-coaxial resonance of multi-wall carbon nanotubes. Acta Materialia, 54(8), pp.2067-2074.
[4] Eringen, A.C., 1972. Linear theory of non-local elasticity and dispersion of plane waves. International Journal of Engineering Science, 10(5), pp.425-435.
[5] Eringen, A.C., 1972. Nonlocal polar elastic continua. International Journal of Engineering Science, 10 (1), pp.l-16.
[6] Eringen, A.C., Edelen, D.G.B., 1972. On nonlocal elasticity. International Journal of Engineering Science, 10(3), pp.233-248.
[7] Eringen, A.C., 1983. On differential equations of nonlocal elasticity and solutions of screw dislocation and surface waves. Journal of Applied Physics, 54(9), pp.4703-4710.
[8] Lu, P., Lee H., Lu C., Zhang P., 2006. Dynamic properties of flexural beams using a nonlocal elasticity model. Journal of Applied Physics, 99(7), pp.073510(1-9).
[9] Xu, M., 2006. Free transverse vibrations of nano-to-micron scale beams. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 462(2074), pp.2977-2995.
[10] Wang, C., Zhang, Y., He, X., 2007. Vibration of nonlocal Timoshenko beams. Nanotechnology, 18(10), pp.105401(1-9).
[11] Challamel, N., Wang, C. M., 2008. The small length scale effect for a non-local cantilever beam: A paradox solved. Nanotechnology, 19(34), pp.345703(1-7).
[12] Murmu, T., Pradhan, S., 2009. Small-scale effect on the vibration of nonuniform nanocantilever based on nonlocal elasticity theory. Physica E, 41(8), pp.1451-1456.
[13] Roque, C., Ferreira, A., Reddy, J., 2011. Analysis of Timoshenko nanobeams with a nonlocal formulation and meshless method. International Journal of Engineering, 49(9), pp.976-984.
[14] Mohammadi, B., Ghannadpour, S., 2011. Energy approach vibration analysis of nonlocal Timoshenko beam theory. Procedia Engineering, 10, pp.1766-1771.
[15] Li, C., Lim, C.W., Yu, J.L., 2011. Dynamics and stability of transverse vibrations of nonlocal nanobeams with a variable axial load. Smart Materials and Structures, 20(1), pp.015023(1-7).
[16] Eltaher, M.A., Alshorbagy, A.E., Mahmoud, F.F., 2013. Vibration analysis of Euler-Bernoulli nanobeams by using finite element method. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 37, pp.4787-4797.
[17] Behera, L., Chakraverty, S., 2014. Free vibration of Euler and Timoshenko nanobeams using boundary characteristic orthogonal polynomials. Applied Nanoscience, 4(3), pp.347-358.
[18] Rahmani, O., Pedram, O., 2014. Analysis and modeling the size effect on vibration of functionally graded nanobeams based on nonlocal Timoshenko beam theory. International Journal of Engineering Science, 77, pp.55-70.
[19] Behera, L., Chakraverty, S., 2015. Application of Differential Quadrature method in free vibration analysis of nanobeams based on various nonlocal theories. Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 69(12), pp.1444-1462.
[20] Ebrahimi, F., Salari, E., 2015. Size-dependent free flexural vibrational behavior of functionally graded nanobeams using semi analytical differential transform method. Composites Part B Engineering, 79, pp.156-169.
[21] Ebrahimi, F., Ghadiri, M., Salari, E., Hoseini, S.A.H., Shaghaghi, G.R., 2015. Application of the differential transformation method for nonlocal vibration analysis of functionally graded nanobeams. Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 29(3), pp.1207-1215.
[22] Tuna, M., Kirca, M., 2016. Exact solution of Eringen’s nonlocal integral model for vibration and buckling of Euler-Bernoulli beam. International Journal of Engineering Science, 107, pp.54-67.
[23] Hamza-Cherif, R., Meradjah, M., Zidour, M., Tounsi, A., Belmahi, S., Bensattalah, T., 2018. Vibration analysis of nano beam using differential transform method including thermal effect. Journal of Nano Research, 54, pp.1-14.
[24] Aria, A.I., Friswell, M.I., 2019. A nonlocal finite element model for buckling and vibration of functionally graded nanobeams. Composites Part B, 166, pp.233-246.
[25] Nikam, R.D., Sayyad, A.S., 2020. A unified nonlocal formulation for bending, buckling and free vibration analysis of nanobeams. Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures, 27(10), pp.807-815.
[26] Arian, B., Hamidreza, S., Nima, K., 2020. Effect of the thickness to length ratio on the frequency ratio of nanobeams and nanoplates. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, 58(1), pp.87-96.
[27] Ufuk, G., 2022. Transverse free vibration of nanobeams with intermediate support using nonlocal strain gradient theory. Journal of Structural Engineering & Applied Mechanics, 5(2), pp.50-61.
[28] Wang, C.M., Zhang, Y.Y., Ramesh, S.S., Kitipornchai, S., 2006. Buckling analysis of micro and nano-rods/tubes based on nonlocal Timoshenko beam theory. Journal of Physics D. Applied Physics, 39, pp.3904-3909.
[29] Reddy, J.N., 2007. Nonlocal theories for bending, buckling and vibration of beams. International Journal of Engineering Science, 45, pp.288-307.
[30] Pradhan, S.C., Phadikar, J.K., 2009. Bending, buckling and vibration analyses of nonhomogeneous nanotubes using GDQ and nonlocal elasticity theory. Structural Engineering and Mechanics, 33(2), pp.193-213.
[31] Aydogdu, M., 2009. A general nonlocal beam theory: Its application to nanobeam bending, buckling and vibration. Physica E, 41, pp.1651-1655.
[32] Thai, H.T., 2012. A non-local beam theory for bending, buckling, and vibration of nano beams. International Journal of Engineering Science, 52, pp.56-64.
[33] Eltaher, M. A., Emam S. A., Mahmoud F. F., 2013. Static and stability analysis of nonlocal functionally graded nanobeams. Composite Structures, 96, pp.82-88.
[34] Ebrahimi, F., Salari, E., 2015. A semi-analytical method for vibrational and buckling analysis of functionally graded nanobeams considering the physical neutral axis position. Computer Modeling in Engineering & Sciences, 105, pp.151-181.
[35] Nejad, M.Z., Hadi, A., Rastgoo, A., 2016. Buckling analysis of arbitrary two-directional functionally graded Euler-Bernoulli nano-beams based on nonlocal elasticity theory. International Journal of Engineering Science, 103, pp.1-10.
[36] Safarabadi, M., Mohammadi, M., Farajpour, A., Goodarzi, M., 2015. Effect of surface energy on the vibration analysis of rotating nanobeam. Journal of Solid Mechanics, 7 (3), pp. 299-311.
[37] Mohammadi, M., Safarabadi, M., Rastgoo, A., Farajpour, A., 2016. Hygro-mechanical vibration analysis of a rotating viscoelastic nanobeam embedded in a visco-Pasternak elastic medium and in a nonlinear thermal environment. Acta Mechanica, 227, pp. 2207-2232.
[38] Zhu, X., Wang, Y. and Dai, H.H., 2017. Buckling analysis of Euler–Bernoulli beams using Eringen’s two-phase nonlocal model. International Journal of Engineering Science, 116, pp.130-140.
[39] Khaniki, H.B., Hosseini-Hashemi, S., 2017. Buckling analysis of tapered nanobeams using nonlocal strain gradient theory and a generalized differential quadrature method. Materials Research Express, 4(6), pp.065003.
[40] Tuna, M., Kirca, M., 2017. Bending, buckling and free vibration analysis of Euler–Bernoulli nanobeams using Eringen’s nonlocal integral model via finite element method. Composite Structures, 179, pp.269-284.
[41] Bakhshi, K.H., Hosseini-Hashemi, S., Nezamabadi, A., 2018. Buckling analysis of nonuniform nonlocal strain gradient beams using generalized differential quadrature method. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 57, pp.1361-1368.
[42] Soltani, M., Mohammadi, M., 2018. Stability analysis of non-local Euler-Bernoulli beam with exponentially varying cross-section resting on Winkler-Pasternak foundation. Numerical Methods in Civil Engineering, 2(3), pp.1-11.
[43] Xu, X., Zheng, M., 2019. Analytical solutions for buckling of size-dependent Timoshenko beams. Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 40, pp.953-976.
[44] Jena, S.K., Chakraverty, S., 2019. Differential quadrature and differential transformation methods in buckling analysis of nanobeams. Curved Layer Structures, 6, pp.68-76.
[45] Ragb, O., Mohamed, M., Matbuly, M.S., 2019. Free vibration of a piezoelectric nanobeam resting on nonlinear Winkler-Pasternak foundation by quadrature methods. Heliyon, 5(6), e01856.
[46] Nazmul, I.M., Devnath, I., 2021. Closed-form expressions for bending and buckling of functionally graded nanobeams by the Laplace transform. International Journal of Computational Materials Science and Engineering, 10(2), pp.2150012.
[47] Karmakar, S., Chakraverty, S., 2021. Differential quadrature and Adomian decomposition methods for solving thermal vibration of Euler nanobeam resting on Winkler-Pasternak foundation. Journal of Mechanics of Materials and Structures, 16 (4), pp.555-572.
[48] Zewei, L., Baichuan, L., Bo, C., Xiang, Z., Yinghui, L., 2022. Free vibration, buckling and dynamical stability of Timoshenko micro/nano-beam supported on Winkler-Pasternak foundation under a follower axial load. International Journal of Structural Stability and Dynamics, 22(09), pp.2250113
[49] Civalek, Ӧ., Uzun, B., Yaylı, M. Ӧ., 2022. An effective analytical method for buckling solutions of a restrained FGM nonlocal beam. Computational & Applied Mathematics, 41(2), pp.1-20.
[50] Jalaei, M.H., Thai, H-T., Civalek, Ӧ., 2022. On viscoelastic transient response of magnetically imperfect functionally graded nanobeams. International Journal of Engineering Science, 172, pp.103629.
[51] Beni, Y.T., 2022. Size dependent torsional electro-mechanical analysis of flexoelectric micro/nanotubes. European Journal of Mechanics - A/Solids, 95, pp.104648.
[52] Beni, Z.T., Beni, Y.T., 2022. Dynamic stability analysis of size-dependent viscoelastic/piezoelectric nano-beam. International Journal of Structural Stability and Dynamics, 22(5), pp.2250050.
[53] Numanoğlu, H.M., Ersoy, H., Akgöz, B., Civalek, Ӧ., 2022. A new eigenvalue problem solver for thermo-mechanical vibration of Timoshenko nanobeams by an innovative nonlocal finite element method. Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences, 45(5), pp. 2592-2614.
[54] Karmakar, S., Chakraverty, S., 2022. Thermal vibration of nonhomogeneous Euler nanobeam resting on Winkler foundation. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements, 140, pp.581-591.
[55] Abbas, W., Bakr, O.K., Nassar, M.M., Abdeen, M.A.M., Shabrawy, M., 2021. Analysis of tapered Timoshenko and Euler-Bernoulli beams on an elastic foundation with moving loads. Journal of Mathematics, https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6616707.
[56] Wang, C.M., Reddy, J.N., Lee, K.H., 2000. Shear deformable Beams and Plates: Relationships with classical solutions. Elsevier.
[57] Murmu, T., Adhikari, S., 2010. Nonlocal transverse vibration of double-nanobeam-systems. Journal of Applied Physics, 108, pp.083514(1-9).
[58] Bert, C.W., Malik, M., 1996. Differential quadrature method in computational mechanics: A review. Applied Mechanics Reviews, 49(1), pp.1-28.
[59] Civalek, Ӧ., 2004. Application of differential quadrature (DQ) and harmonic differential quadrature (HDQ) for buckling analysis of thin isotropic plates and elastic columns. Engineering Structures, 26, pp.171-186.
[60] Shu, C., 2000. Differential quadrature and its application in engineering. Springer Science & Business Media.
[61] Demir, C., 2016. Nonlocal vibration analysis for micro/nano beam on Winkler foundation via DTM. International Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 4, pp.108-118.
[62] Rahbar-Ranji, A., Shahbaztabar, A., 2017. Free vibration analysis of beams on a Pasternak foundation using Legendre polynomials and Rayleight-Ritz method. Proceedings of Odessa Polytechnic University, 3(53), pp.20-31.
[63] Ghannadpour, S.A.M., Mohammadi, B., Fazilati, J., 2013. Bending, buckling and vibration problems of nonlocal Euler beams using Ritz method. Composite Structures, 96, pp.584-589.
[64] Sari, M.E.S., Al-Kouz, W.G., Atieh, A., 2018. Buckling analysis of axially functionally graded tapered nanobeams resting on elastic foundations, based on nonlocal elasticity theory. Strojniski Vestnik-Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 64, pp.772-782.