4.7 Article

Thermal buckling analysis of rectangular microplates using higher continuity p-version finite element method

期刊

THIN-WALLED STRUCTURES
卷 49, 期 12, 页码 1584-1591

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2011.08.006

关键词

Thermal buckling; Strain gradient elasticity; Higher continuity finite element; Microplate

资金

  1. Islamic Azad University of Kerman Branch

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this article, thermal buckling characteristics of rectangular flexural microplates (FMP) subjected to uniform temperature are investigated using higher continuity p-version finite element framework. Invariant form of the governing equation for a microplate with non-local effects based on modified couple stress theory is extended for thermal buckling analysis of FMP by considering the strain gradient effects. In this case, the constitutive equation for strain gradient model is based on one constant. Galerkin weak form of the governing equation is derived and subsequently solved for a variety of boundary conditions using higher continuity p-version finite elements to extract critical thermal buckling loads. The computational procedure is verified by comparing its predictions to those of the classical theory and analytic microplate studies that are based on the same strain gradient model. Investigations indicate that length scale parameter affects the computed flexural stiffness of a plate, and the effect is directly proportional to the value of gradient coefficient considered for that plate. Hence, there is a strong influence of length scale parameter on value of the thermal buckling load. Depending on boundary conditions and value of length scale parameter used in numerical experiments, the classical plate model severely underestimates (up to 90%) the thermal buckling load for microplates. Therefore, it is concluded and strongly suggested that the classical plate theory should not be used to predict structural response of microplates. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据