Professional Documents
Culture Documents
com/
and Mechanics of Solids
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
Additional services and information for Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://mms.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://mms.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://mms.sagepub.com/content/14/8/747.refs.html
Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at PURDUE UNIV LIBRARY TSS on November 15, 2014
X.-L. G AO
S. K. PARK1
H. M. M A
Abstract: The problem of a pressurized thick-walled spherical shell is analytically solved using a simplified
strain gradient elasticity theory. The closed-form solution derived contains a material length scale parameter and can account for microstructural effects, which qualitatively differs from Lams solution in classical
elasticity. When the strain gradient effect (a measure of the underlying material microstructure) is not considered, the newly derived strain gradient elasticity solution reduces to Lams classical elasticity solution.
To illustrate the new solution, a sample problem with specified geometrical parameters, pressure values and
material properties is solved. The numerical results reveal that the magnitudes of both the radial and tangential stress components in the shell wall given by the current strain gradient solution are smaller than those
given by Lams solution. Also, it is quantitatively shown that microstructural effects can be large and Lams
solution may not be accurate for materials exhibiting significant microstructure dependence.
Key Words: Strain gradient theory, elasticity, Lams solution, thick-walled spherical shell, microstructural effect, length
scale, pressure vessel
1. INTRODUCTION
For the problem of a pressurized thick-walled spherical shell, Lams solution is well known
(e.g., [1]) and has been playing an important role in spherical pressure vessel design (e.g., [2,
3]). However, this solution is based on classical elasticity and cannot capture microstructuredependent size effects due to the lack of a material length scale parameter.
Higher-order strain gradient elasticity theories are capable of explaining the size effects
observed at the micron scale, since they contain additional elastic constants that are related
to the underlying material microstructure and can serve as length scale parameters. For example, Mindlin [4] developed a general strain gradient elasticity theory that contains 18
independent material constants for an isotropic elastic material, with two being the classical
Lam constants. The strain gradient theory proposed by Casal [5, 6] includes four elastic
constants, with two being Lams constants and the other two being the material length scale
Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids 14: 747758, 2009
1
22009
SAGE Publications
Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore
Figure 2 appears in color online: http://mms.sagepub.com
DOI: 10.1177/1081286508097638
Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at PURDUE UNIV LIBRARY TSS on November 15, 2014
2
1
52ii3k 2 j j3k 4 62i j3k 2i j3k 3
2
(1)
where 5 and 6 are the Lam constants, c is a strain gradient coefficient having the dimension
of length squared, and 2i j are the components of the infinitesimal strain, 2 = 2i j ei 5e j , given
by
1
2i j 3 1u i 3 j 4u j 3i 43
2
(2)
8w
3 52ll 9 i j 4 262i j 3 7 ji 3
82i j
Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at PURDUE UNIV LIBRARY TSS on November 15, 2014
(3)
6i jk 3
3
4
8w
3 c 52ll 9i j 4 262i j 3k 3 c7 i j 3k 3 6 jik 3
8
i jk
(4)
where 7 i j are the components of the Cauchy stress, 7 3 7 i j ei 5e j , 6i jk are the components
of the double stress, 6 =6i jk ei 5e j 5ek , and
i jk are the components of the strain gradient,
= 622 , given by
1
i jk 3 2i j 3k 3 1u i 3 jk 4u j 3ik 4
2
(5)
Equations (3) and (4) can be combined to obtain the modified constitutive relations:
i j 7 7 i j 8 6i jk 3k 3 7 i j 8 c7 i j 3kk 3 52ll 9 i j 4 262i j 8 c152ll 9 i j 4 262i j 43kk 3
(6)
where i j are the components of the total stress, = i j ei 5e j (e.g., [13]). The expression of
i j as a combination of 7 i j and 6i jk given in Equation (6) arises naturally from the variation
of the strain energy [12].
As shown in [12], the Navier-like basic governing equation reads
11 8 c6 2 4[15 4 264616 9 u4 8 6curl1curlu4] 4 f 3 0 in
3
(7)
on 8 3
(8a,b)
where u (=ui ei ) is the displacement vector, f is the body force vector, and t and q are, respectively, the Cauchy traction vector and double stress traction vector. In terms of u, the total
stress is obtained from Equations (2) and (6) as
9
(9)
and the double stress 6 is determined from Equations (2) and (4) to be
6 3 c6
516 9 u4I 4 6[6u 4 16u4T ]
(10)
Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at PURDUE UNIV LIBRARY TSS on November 15, 2014
Equations (7) and (8a,b) define the displacement form of the simplified strain gradient
elasticity theory, which, as tensorial expressions, are coordinate-invariant. Clearly, the new
parameter c is explicitly involved in Equation (7) in addition to the two Lam constants 5 and
6. When the strain gradient effect is absent (i.e., c = 0), 6 = 0 (see Equation (10)) and = 7
(see Equations (9) and (3)), and Equations (7) and (8a,b) reduce to the governing equations
and the boundary conditions in terms of displacement in classical elasticity (e.g., [14]).
(11)
where u is the radial (only non-vanishing) displacement component, depending on the radial
coordinate r. It then follows from Equation (11) that
19u3
du 2u
4 3
dr
r
curlu 3 0.
Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at PURDUE UNIV LIBRARY TSS on November 15, 2014
(12a,b)
d2 u 2 du 2u
4
8 2
dr 2
r dr
r
1
8c
4 d2 u
d4 u 4 d3 u
4
8
dr 4
r dr 3
r 2 dr 2
2
30
(13)
as the equilibrium equation in the absence of body force, which is a fourth-order ordinary
differential equation for c
3 0. Equation (13) can be rewritten as
L11 8 cL4u 3 03
(14)
d2
2 d
2
4
8 2
2
dr
r dr
r
(15)
d2 u 2 du 2u
4
8 2 3 03
dr 2
r dr
r
(16)
which is a homogeneous second-order ordinary differential equation of the Euler type. The
solution of Equation (16), u = u0 (r), is given by
u 0 3 Ar 4
B
3
r2
(17)
(18)
where u0 , as the solution of Equation (16), is given in Equation (17). This is based on the
factorization of differential operators (e.g., [15, 16]). Substituting Equations (15) and (17)
into Equation (18) yields
d2 u 2 du
4
8
dr 2
r dr
1
2
4
r2
c
2
u38
1
c
1
Ar 4
B
r2
(19)
(20)
where C and D are two additional constants. A particular solution of Equation (19) has the
form:
Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at PURDUE UNIV LIBRARY TSS on November 15, 2014
u p 1r4 3 Ar 4
B
3
r2
(21)
which happens to be the same as that given in Equation (17). This agrees with what was stated
in [15]. Combining Equations (20) and (21) then gives the general solution of Equation (19),
and thus of Equation (18) or Equation (13), as
3
3
4 r
4 8 r
C r8 c e c
D r4 c e c
B
u1r4 3 Ar 4 2 4
4
r
r2
r2
(22)
Clearly, it is seen from Equation (22) that the radial displacement explicitly depends on
the strain gradient coefficient c (and thus the underlying material microstructure). Note that
this closed-form solution for the spherical shell problem is quite different from the solution
for the cylinder problem obtained by Gao and Park [12] in terms of two modified Bessel
functions.
With the displacement field known from Equations (11) and (22), the strain field in the
shell wall can then be determined from Equations (2), (11) and (22) as
2 1r4 3
du
1
u
u
1u 4 11u4T 3 er 5 er 4 e 5 e 4 e 5 e
2
dr
r
r
(23)
(24)
where
7 rr
3 15 4 264
7
3 5
du
u
4 25 3
dr
r
7 3 5
du
u
4 215 4 64 3
dr
r
du
u
4 215 4 64 3 7
dr
r
(25)
(26)
where use has been made of the gradient of the Cauchy stress, 677 (see Appendix for the
derivation), and 7 rr = 7 rr (r), 7 = 7 (r) are given in Equations (22) and (25). Here and in
the sequel, the single prime and double prime denote, respectively, the first- and second-order
derivatives with respect to r.
The total stress, , is obtained from Equations (6) and (24) as
Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at PURDUE UNIV LIBRARY TSS on November 15, 2014
7 rr 8 c
2
er 5 er
7
7
2
1
27
27 rr
27
e 5 e 3
8 c 7 4
8 2 4 2
r
r
r
27
47
47 rr
4 rr 8 2 4 2
r
r
r
2
1
27
27 rr
27
e 5 e
8 c 7 4
8 2 4 2
r
r
r
7 rr
(27)
where use has been made of the Laplacian of the Cauchy stress, 6 27 (see Appendix for the
derivation), and 7 rr = 7 rr (r), 7 = 7 (r) are given in Equations (22) and (25).
The boundary conditions of the current spherical shell problem (see Figure 1) are
8
4
23
4
4
er
7 rr 8 7 8 2 17 rr 8 7 4
7 rr 8 c 7 rr
r
r
r3ri
4 4
23
7 rr 8 c 7 rr 4
er
7 rr 8 7 8 2 17 rr 8 7 4
r
r
r3ro
3 8 po er 3
(28b)
c 7 rr
e
r3ri r
3 03
(28c)
e
c 7 rr
r3ro r
3 0
(28d)
pi er 3
(28a)
Note that Equations (28a) and (28b) follow from the traction boundary conditions given in
Equation (8a), with the prescribed traction being t 3 pi er on the inner surface (r 3 ri ) and
t 3 8 po er on the outer surface (r 3 ro ). Equations (28c) and (28d) are obtained from the
double stress traction boundary conditions specified in Equation (8b), with the prescribed
double stress traction being 0 (i.e., q 3 0) on both the inner surface (r 3 ri ) and the outer
surface (r 3 ro ). Also, Equations (26) and (27) have been used in reaching Equations (28a
d). When c = 0 (i.e., in the absence of the strain gradient effect), Equations (28ad) reduce
to the two traction boundary conditions used in classical elasticity to derive Lams solution
(e.g., [1]).
Substituting Equations (22) and (25) into Equations (28ad) then yields
1
A 1835 8 264 4 B
46 12c6
4 5
ri3
ri
2
r
25 25 c 4 c6 12c6 12c32 6
i
4 C 8 2 4
e c
8
4 4 8
3
3
5
ri
ri
ri
ri
ri
1
1
2
25 25 c 4 c6 12c6 12c32 6 8 ric
3 pi 3
D 8 2 8
4
4
4
e
ri
ri3
ri3
ri4
ri5
Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at PURDUE UNIV LIBRARY TSS on November 15, 2014
(29a)
46 12c6
4 5
ro3
ro
2
r
25 25 c 4 c6 12c6 12c32 6
o
4 C 8 2 4
e c
8
4 4 8
3
3
5
ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
1
2
25 25 c 4 c6 12c6 12c32 6 8 roc
3 po 3
e
D 8 2 8
4
4 4 4
ro
ro3
ro3
ro
ro5
1
1
B
4
2
4C
ri
1
8126c32 4 126ri c 8 15 4 664 cri2 4 15 4 264ri3 e c
4
cri
8 ri
2
1
32
3
126c
e c 3 03
4
126r
c
4
15
4
664
cr
4
15
4
264r
i
i
i
cri4
1
126
ri4
126
ro4
2
4C
(29b)
(29c)
ro
2
1
32
3
4
126r
c
8
15
4
664
cr
4
15
4
264r
8126c
e c
o
o
o
cro4
8 ro
1
126c32 4 126ro c 4 15 4 664 cro2 4 15 4 264ro3 e c 3 0
4
cro
(29d)
Equations (29ad) form a system of four linear algebraic equations for determining the four
constants A, B, C and D, which depend on the material properties 5, 6 and c, the geometrical
parameters ri and ro , and the applied pressures pi and po . For given values of 5, 6, c, ri , ro ,
pi and po , Equations (29ad) can be readily solved by using a computer program to obtain
the four constants A, B, C and D. The displacement field (u) will then be determined from
6) and total stress (
)
Equations (11) and (22), and the Cauchy stress (77 ), double stress (6
from Equations (24), (26) and (27), respectively.
Clearly, the involvement of c (the strain gradient coefficient) explicitly in Equations
(29ad) and (22) and subsequently in Equations (24)(27) shows that the current solution can
account for microstructure-dependent effects, which is qualitatively different from Lams
classical elasticity solution that contains 5 and 6 only. Note that Lams constants, 5 and 6,
are related to Youngs modulus, E, and Poissons ratio, , by (e.g., [1])
53
E
3
11 4 411 8 24
63
E
211 4 4
(30)
To illustrate the newly derived solution, a sample problem with specified geometrical
parameters, pressure values and material properties has been solved, with the numerical results presented here. The material properties used are E = 135 GPa, = 0.3, and c = 0.05
6m2 , which are the same as those used in [12, 17]. For comparison, two other values of c are
also considered, as shown in Figure 2. The geometrical parameters used are ri = 1 6m and
ro = 5 6m, and the pressures are taken to be pi = 10 MPa, po = 0 MPa in the calculations.
Figure 2 shows the stress distributions along the shell wall given by both the current
strain gradient solution (with c
3 0) and Lams classical elasticity solution (with c = 0),
Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at PURDUE UNIV LIBRARY TSS on November 15, 2014
which are determined using Equation (27) together with Equations (22), (25) and (29ad).
As displayed in Figure 2, the magnitudes of both the tangential stress, (= ), and
the radial stress, rr , given by the strain gradient solution are smaller than those given by
Lams classical elasticity solution (with 7 7 from Equation (27) when c = 0) in all cases
considered. Also, Figure 2 shows that the differences between the current strain gradient
solution and Lams solution are negligibly small when c is very small (e.g., c = 0.01 6m2
here), but are significant when c becomes larger (e.g., c = 0.25 6m2 here). The former agrees
with the fact that Lams solution is the special case of the current strain gradient solution
with c = 0, while the latter indicates that the effect of material microstructure (measured by
c) can be large. As a result, Lams solution may not be accurate for materials that exhibit
significant microstructural effects.
4. SUMMARY
An analytical solution based on a simplified strain gradient elasticity theory is derived for a
thick-walled spherical shell subjected to internal and external pressures. The newly obtained
solution contains a material length scale parameter in addition to two classical elastic constants and can capture microstructural effects, which is qualitatively different from Lams
solution. The current strain gradient solution recovers Lams solution in classical elasticity
when the strain gradient effect is not considered.
To illustrate the new solution, a sample problem is solved. The numerical results show
that the magnitudes of the stress components in the shell wall given by the strain gradient
Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at PURDUE UNIV LIBRARY TSS on November 15, 2014
solution are smaller than those given by Lams solution. Also, it is revealed that microstructural effects can be large and Lams solution may lead to inaccurate results when the shell
material exhibits significant microstructure dependence.
Acknowledgement. The work reported here is funded by a grant from the U.S. National Science Foundation, with Dr.
Clark Cooper as the program manager. This support is gratefully acknowledged.
APPENDIX
It is shown here that the double stress has the expression (see Equation (26)):
1
er 5 er 5 er 4 17 rr 8 7 41er 5 e 5 e 4 er 5 e 5 e 4 e 5 er 5 e
6 3 c[7 rr
r
4 e 5 er 5 e 4 4 7 1e 5 e 5 er 4 e 5 e 5 er 4]3
(A.1)
7 rr 8 c
7 rr
27
47
47 rr
4 rr 8 2 4 2
r
r
r
2
er 5 er
2
1
27
27 rr
27
e 5 e
7 8 c 7 4 8 2 4 2
r
r
r
2
1
27
27 rr
27
e 5 e
4 7 8 c 7 4 8 2 4 2
r
r
r
(A.2)
(A.3)
(A.4)
with being a scalar field and A being a second-order tensor field. Note that in the spherical
coordinate system (r, , ),
6 3
1 8
1 8
8
er 4
e 4
e
8r
r 8
r sin 8
(A.5)
It can be shown, after lengthy derivations involving the coordinate transformations between the spherical coordinate system with the base vectors {er , e , e } and the Cartesian
coordinate system with the base vectors {e1 , e2 , e3 }, that
Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at PURDUE UNIV LIBRARY TSS on November 15, 2014
61er 5 er 4 3
4
13
er 5 e 5 e 4 er 5 e 5 e 4 e 5 er 5 e 4 e 5 er 5 e 3
r
61e 5 e 4 3
1
[8e 5 er 5 e 4 1cot 4e 5 e 5 e 8 er 5 e 5 e
r
4 1cot 4e 5 e 5 e ]3
1
61e 5 e 4 3 8 [e 5 er 5 e 4 1cot 4e 5 e 5 e 4 er 5 e 5 e
r
4 1cot 4e 5 e 5 e ]
(A.6)
er 5 er 5 er 4
677 1r4 3 7 rr
Equation (A.7) gives the gradient of the Cauchy stress in the spherical coordinate system,
which is a third-order tensor. It is seen from Equation (A.7) that 677 has 7 non-zero components for the current spherical shell problem, while it has 5 non-zero components for the
cylinder problem [12]. Using Equation (A.7) in Equation (4) will immediately give the expression for 6 listed in Equation (A.1).
Next, the gradient of the third-order tensor 677 , which is a fourth-order tensor, can be determined from Equation (A.7), after very tedious derivations involving the coordinate transformations mentioned above, as
2
1
7 rr
27
27 rr
6677 1r4 3 7 rr er 5 er 5 er 5 er 4
1er 5 er 5 e 5 e
8 2 4 2
r
r
r
2
1
7 rr
7
7
7 rr
4 er 5 er 5 e 5 e 4 4
8
8 2 4 2 1er 5 e 5 er 5 e
r
r
r
r
4 er 5 e 5 er 5 e 4 er 5 e 5 e 5 er 4 er 5 e 5 e 5 er
4 e 5 er 5 er 5 e 4 e 5 er 5 e 5 er 4 e 5 er 5 er 5 e
4 e 5 er 5 e 5 er 4 4 7 1e 5 e 5 er 5 er 4 e 5 e 5 er 5 er 4
2
1
4
27 3
27 rr
7
e 5 e 5 e 5 e 4 e 5 e 5 e 5 e
4
4 2 8 2
r
r
r
4
7 3
e 5 e 5 e 5 e 4 e 5 e 5 e 5 e
r
7
7
rr
4
8
1e 5 e 5 e 5 e 4 e 5 e 5 e 5 e
r2
r2
4 e 5 e 5 e 5 e 4 e 5 e 5 e 5 e 43
Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at PURDUE UNIV LIBRARY TSS on November 15, 2014
(A.8)
where use has been made of Equation (A.5) and Equation (A.4), which also holds when
A is a third-order tensor field. It is seen from Equation (A.8) that 6677 has 21 non-zero
components for the spherical shell problem here, while it has only 10 non-zero components
for the cylinder problem [12].
It follows from Equation (A.8) that
2
27 rr
47
47 rr
6 7 1r4 3 6 9 677 1r 4 3
er 5 er
4
8 2 4 2
r
r
r
2
1
4
27
27 rr 3
27
e 5 e 4 e 5 e
4
7 4
8 2 4 2
r
r
r
1
7 rr
(A.9)
Substituting Equations (24) and (A.9) into Equation (6) will immediately yield Equation (A.2).
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
Timoshenko, S. P. and Goodier, J. N. Theory of Elasticity, 3rd edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1970.
Gao, X.-L. An exact elasto-plastic solution for a thick-walled spherical shell of elastic linear-hardening material with
finite deformations. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 57, 4556 (1994).
Gao, X.-L. Strain gradient plasticity solution for an internally pressurized thick-walled spherical shell of an elasticplastic material. Mechanics Research Communications, 30, 411420 (2003).
Mindlin, R. D. Second gradient of strain and surface-tension in linear elasticity. International Journal of Solids and
Structures, 1, 417438 (1965).
Casal, P. La capillarite interne. Cahier du Groupe Francais dEtudes de Rheologie C. N. R. S., VI, 3137 (1961).
Casal, P. La thorie du second gradient et la capillarit. Comptes Rendus de lAcadmie des Sciences Paris A, 274,
15711574 (1972).
Lakes, R. Experimental methods for study of Cosserat elastic solids and other generalized elastic continua. In Continuum Models for Materials with Micro-structure, ed. H. Mhlhaus, Wiley, New York, pp. 122, 1995.
Lam, D. C. C., Yang, F., Chong, A. C. M., Wang, J. and Tong, P. Experiments and theory in strain gradient elasticity.
Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 51, 14771508 (2003).
Zhang, X. and Sharma, P. Inclusions and inhomogeneities in strain gradient elasticity with couple stresses and related
problems. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 42, 38333851 (2005).
Altan, B. S. and Aifantis, E. C. On some aspects in the special theory of gradient elasticity. Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Materials, 8(3), 231282 (1997).
Mindlin, R. D. and Eshel, N. N. On first strain-gradient theories in linear elasticity. International Journal of Solids
and Structures, 4, 109124 (1968).
Gao, X.-L. and Park, S. K. Variational formulation of a simplified strain gradient elasticity theory and its application
to a pressurized thick-walled cylinder problem. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 44, 74867499
(2007).
Vardoulakis, I. and Sulem, J. Bifurcation Analysis in Geomechanics, Blackie/Chapman & Hall, London, 1995.
Gao, X.-L. and Rowlands, R. E. Hybrid method for stress analysis of finite three-dimensional elastic components.
International Journal of Solids and Structures, 37, 27272751 (2000).
Zettl, A. Factorization of differential operators. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, 27, 425426
(1971).
Sandell, D. C. and Stein, F. M. Factorization of operators of second order linear homogeneous ordinary differential
equations. The Two-Year College Mathematics Journal, 8(3), 132141 (1977).
Li, S., Miskioglu, I. and Altan, B. S. Solution to line loading of a semi-infinite solid in gradient elasticity. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 41, 33953410 (2004).
Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at PURDUE UNIV LIBRARY TSS on November 15, 2014