Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Composite Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct
Key Laboratory of Liaoning Province for Composite Structural Analysis of Aerocraft and Simulation, Shenyang Aerospace University, Shenyang, LN 110136, China
State Key Laboratory for Structural Analysis of Industrial Equipment, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116023, China
c
School of Mathematical Sciences, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116023, China
d
Physics and Biophysics Department, China Medical University, No. 92, The 2nd North Road, Heping District, Shenyang 110001, China
b
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Available online 16 February 2012
Keywords:
Composite laminated Reddy plate
Modied couple stress
Material length parameter
Scale effect
a b s t r a c t
Based on new modied couple stress theory a model for composite laminated Reddy plate is developed in
rst time. In this theory a new curvature tensor is dened for establishing the constitutive relations of
laminated plate. The characterization of anisotropy is incorporated into higher-order laminated plate theories based on the modied couple stress theory by Yang et al. in 2002. The form of new curvature tensor
is asymmetric, however it can result in same as the symmetric curvature tensor in the isotropic elasticity.
The present model of thick plate can be viewed as a simplied couple stress theory in engineering
mechanics. Moreover, a more simplied model for cross-ply composite laminated Reddy plate of couple
stress theory with one materials length constant is used to demonstrate the scale effects. Numerical
results show that the present plate model can capture the scale effects of microstructure. Additionally,
the present model of thick plate model can be degenerated to the model of composite cross-ply laminated
Kirchhoff plate and Mindlin plate of couple stress theory.
2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
2144
tion can show the scale effects obviously, so many researchers get
many attentions to use the modied couple stress theory to study
the couple stress plate and beam models. Metin [18] developed a
general nonlocal beam theory based on C0 theory where the nonlocal constitutive equations proposed by Eringen [13] are adopted.
The nonclassical ReddyLevinson (RL) beam model based on the
higher order shear deformation theory and C1 couple stress theory
was developed by Ma et al. [19]. The non-classical RL model can
be reduced to the existing classical elasticity-based RL model by
using the material length scale parameter and Poissons ratio are
both taken to be zero. The classical RL beam model [20] is a
third-order beam model satised the condition of shear stress
equal zero on the upper and lower surfaces of the beam. For moderate thickness beam, the accuracy is higher than rst-order shear
beam model. Furthermore the RL plate model can be reduce the
non-classical BernoulliEuler beam model when the normality
assumption is introduced. Recently, Li et al. used directly the model of modied couple stress theory proposed by Tsiatas [16] to
analysis of vibration of micro-scale plates [21]. Jomehzadehei
et al. based on a modied couple stress theory to analysis of the
size-dependent vibration of micro-plates [22]. Ma et al. based on
a modied couple stress theory establish a Mindlin plate model
[23]. Wang et al. based on strain gradient elasticity theory proposed a Kirchhoff micro-plate model [24]. Recently, Reddy et al.
developed models of functionally graded beams and nonlinear formulations based on nonlocal/couple stress theory. The couple
stress theory is used to analysis functionally graded beams by Reddy [25]. The nonlocal nonlinear formulations for beams and plates
was developed by Reddy [26] and Reddy et al. based on modied
couple stress proposed a nonlinear third-order theory of functionally graded plates [27].
Today, by using modied couple stress theory to establish the
model of beam and plate in the microstructures is just starting.
The rst paper is published in 2006, however, up to 2011 relative
many papers have been published. A hot point to study the micro-shale effects may arise.
Existing modied couple stress theory belong to isotropic theory, so the plate models established based on the modied couple
stress theory belong to isotropic theory including the non-classical
Mindlin plate model based on a modied couple stress theory [23].
These models and existing modied couple stress theory cannot
apply to establish anisotropic plate model, especially the study of
couple stress laminated plate theory.
Composite laminate plates are widely used in engineering. Due
to the micro-scale impurities such as bre, and microcracks at
micro-matrix are involved in a laminated composite structures, it
results in classical laminate theory invalid in some problems
related to the micro-scale of laminate composites.
It is well known that the constitute relation of isotropic elasticity can be easily extended to anisotropic elasticity. Unlike the classical elasticity theory, for the modied couple stress theory, this
extension cannot be easy, especially composites laminated plate.
In the couple stress theory, the rotation variables related to micro-scale impurities or defects are formulated into rotation equilibrium equations. The anisotropic elasticity of the couple stress
theory depends on the single component of rotation rather than
the assembly of derivative of rotations. The symmetric curvature
dened on the modied couple stress theory is an assembly of
the derivative of rotations, so it cannot be easily extended to
anisotropic.
The study for couple stress laminated plate is presented in rst
time in this paper. Firstly the isotropic modied couple stress theory is extended to anisotropic modied couple stress theory and it
can degenerate to the isotropic modied couple stress theory. The
contribution of this work is that a new curvature tensor is dened
for establishing the constitutive relations of laminated plate as
2145
2-1
2-2
Unlike the standard couple stress theory, Yang et al. [9] developed modied couple stress theory in which the part of rotation
gradient in the strain tensor is symmetric.
According to the symmetric couple stress theory, the strain tensor and curvature tensor can be dened respectively as
2-3
1
U
2
r : e m : vdv
2-4
where r stress tensor, strain e tensor, m couple stress moment tensor and v curvature tensor. They are dened by
r ktreI 2Ge
m 22 Gv
2-5
(1) The thin plate: the Kirchhoff plate theory. The displacement
eld is assumed as
@w
@x
@w
v x; y; z v 0 x; y z
@y
w wx; y
ux; y; z u0 x; y z
2-6
(2) The medium thickness plate: the Mindlin plate theory. The
displacement eld is assumed as
ux; y; z u0 x; y zhy x; y
v x; y; z v 0 x; y zhx x; y
2-7
w wx; y
where according to the engineering conventional representation, hx, hy are the angles of rotations around the y, x axes of
the cross-section, and for Kirchhoff plate: hx @w
; hy @w
.
@y
@x
(3) The thick plate: the Reddy plate theory. The Reddy plate theory, known as a third-order plate theory, is based on the displacement eld
@w
ux; y; z u0 x; y zhy x; y cz3 hy
dx
@w
v x; y; z v 0 x; y zhx x; y cz3 hx
dy
wx; y; z w0 x; y
2-8
2146
4l
where c 3h
2 ; l is a parameter to control model: l = 0rst order
model, l = 1 Reddy model, hx, hy are the angle of rotation around
the y-, x-axis of the cross-section respectively (see Fig. 1). The displacement elds shown in (2-6)(2-8) can be found in Book [28].
Substituting Eq. (2-8) into the expression of the rotation as
x 12 curl u, we have,
1
1
2
2
1
1
xy u;z w;x 1 3cz2 w;x 1 3cz2 hy
2
2
1
xz v ;x u;y 0
2
2-10
8
@u
>
>
> @x
>
>
@v
>
>
>
@y
>
<
9
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
=
9
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
=
cxy @u
@@xv
@y
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
@w
>
>
>
cxz >
>
>
>
>
@u
>
>
>
>
@x
@z
>
>
>
:
>
; >
>
>
>
@w
@
v
:
;
cyz
@z
@y
2-11-1
8
9
>
>
< vx =
y
>
:v >
;
xy
9
>
>
=
@ xy
@y
>
>
: @ xx
@y
@ xy
@x
2-11-2
>
>
;
6
6
6
6
>
mxy >
>
> 6
>
>
4
>
>
:
;
myx
81
9
1 3cz2 w;xy 1 3cz2 hx;x
>
>
2
>
>
>
< 1 1 3cz2 w 1 3cz2 h >
=
vy
;xy
y;y
2
v
1
2
2
>
>
>
v
> 2 1 3cz w;yy 1 3cz hx;y >
>
>
xy >
>
>
>
: 1
:
;
; >
vyx
2 1 3cz2 w;xx 1 3cz2 hy;x
8
vx
>
>
>
<
9
>
>
>
=
2-14
r k C k ek
2-15
where
8
h
>
k rkx0
<r
h
>
: ek ek0
x
Ck
6 11
6 Ck
6 21
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
k
C 6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
iT
iT
C k12
C k22
C k66
C k44
C k55
22b C k44
22m C k55
2b C k44
2b C k44
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
k
2m C 55 7
5
2m C k55
9
>
>
>
>
=
2-13
2-17
8
mx
>
>
>
>
< my
and
8 @ xx
>
>
< @x
9
>
>
>
>
>
>
=
2-16
8
ex
>
>
>
>
>
ey
>
>
<
8
u0;x cz3 w;xx z cz3 hy;x
>
>
>
>
3
3
>
>
< v 0;y cz w;yy z cz hx;y
9
>
>
>
>
>
>
=
and
8
ex
>
>
>
>
>
>
< ey
2-9
4l
where c 3h
2 and a comma followed by a subscript denotes differentiation with respect to the subscript (e.g., u,x = @u/@x).
Substituting Eqs. (2-8) and (2-9) into (2-11-2), (2-12), the strain
of the laminated plate can be obtained as follows:
2C 44 2b
2C 55 2m
C 44 2b
C 44 2b
38 @ xx 9
>
@x >
>
>
>
> @x >
>
>
7>
< @yy >
=
7>
7
7
xx >
>
> @@y
>
C 55 2m 7
>
5>
>
>
>
>
>
>
2
:
@ xy ;
C
55 m
@x
2-12
, C k12 C k21
, C k22
Ek v k
1v k12 v k21 v k22 v k22 v k12 v k21 2v k21 v k22 v k12
Gk22 , C k66 Gk12 , v k21 2Ek12 , D
and
Ek1 Ek2 Ek2
1
k
k
k
k
k
k
E1 ; E2 ; G12 ; G22 and v 12 ; v 21 are the elastic constants, shear
rk Q k e
2-18
where
8
h
iT
< rk rk rk sk sk sk mk mk mk mk
x
y xy xz
yz
x
y
xy
yx
:
e ex ey cxy cxz cyz vx vy vxy vyx T
2-19
Q k T kT C k T k
2-20
2147
"
Tk
T k1
2-21
T k2
2
m2
n2
mn
6
7
k
4 n2
m2
mn 5; T 2
mn mn m2 n2
2 2
n2
m
6
2
m n
m2
6 n
T0
; T1 6
4 mn mn
n m
T k1
T0
T1
mn
;
mn
v
3
n2
2-22
m2
"
k
Q
2
2-23
Q kc
ek
22 Q
46
2 ek
2 Q
56
bk
2 Q
44
2 bk
Q
44
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
2 ek 7
2 Q 47 7
7
ek 7
22 Q
57 7
7
bk 7
2 Q
55 5
bk
2 Q
55
2-24
where
2-27
>
>
;
8 @ xx
9
8
9
>
>
>
>
>
< mx >
=
< @x
=
@ xy
2
m my
2G
@y
>
>
>
>
:
;
>
: @ xx @ xy >
;
mxy
2-28
@x
1
2
mv : vdv
m : v 2G2
8 @x
x
>
>
@x
>
<
9T 8 @ x
x
>
>
> @x
>
>
<
= >
@ xy
@y
@ xy
@y
@x
2-25
4m n
3m2 n2 2b C k44 2m C k55
2b C k44
2m C k55
@x
8
9
xx
8
9
2C 44 2b @@x
>
>
>
mx > >
>
>
>
>
>
> >
xy
>
>
< 2C 55 2m @@y
<m >
=
= >
y
@
x
2
2
y
@
x
x
>
>
mxy >
> C 44 b @y C 55 m @x >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
:
>
; >
>
>
:
myx
2 @ xx
2 @ xy ;
C 44 b @y C 55 m @x
1
2
2-31
mv : vdv
2-33
m : v 2G2
8 @x
x
>
>
> @x
<
@ xy
@y
9
>
>
>
=
@ xy
@y
@x
@y
2-34
@x
Obviously, (2-30) is identical to (2-34), so formulations anisotropic plate such as laminated plate and sandwich plate can be
used to isotropic plate by using Q kij C kij ; b m .
9T 8 @ x
>
> @xx
>
> >
>
=
<
>
>
>
> >
> @xx @ xy >
>
>
>
: @ xx @xy >
; >
:
;
@y
2-32
@y
2-30
2 2
9
>
>
>
=
>
>
>
> @xx @ xy >
> >
>
>
>
: @ xx @xy >
:
; >
;
@y
C k44 n2 C k55 m2
2m C k55 n4
2-29
C k44 m2 C k55 n2
mn C k44 C k55
@y
@ xy
@x
8 @ xx
9
8
9
8
9 > 2G2 @xx
>
>
@x
>
>
>
@x
>
>
>
>
m
x >
>
>
>
>
>
@ xy
>
>
>
>
>
>
@ xy
2
>
>
>
>
>
>
< m = < 2G @y
< @y
=
=
y
2
2G
@ xy
1 @ xx
@
x
2
2
y
@
x
x
@x >
>
>
>
mxy >
>
>
>
> G @y G @x >
>
>
2
@y
>
>
>
>
:
>
; >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
: 2 @ xx
>
myx
2 @ xy ;
@
x
:
;
y
@
x
1
x
G @y G @x
@y
@x
2
2b C k44 m4
@ xy
@y
>
>
: @ xx
8
2 ek
>
>
> Q 44
>
>
>
>
> 2 Q
ek
>
>
45
>
>
>
>
>
2
e
>
Q k55
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
ek
> 2 Q
>
46
<
2 ek
Q 47
>
>
>
>
ek
>
2 Q
>
56
>
>
> 2
>
>
ek
>
Q
>
57
>
>
>
>
>
2
b
> Q k44
>
>
>
>
>
>
: 2 Q
bk
55
9
>
>
=
6 k
k
k
6Q
6 12 Q 22 Q 26
6 k
k
6 Q 16 Q 26 Q k66
6
6
6
Q k44 Q k45
6
6
Qk 6
Q k45 Q k55
6
6
ek
ek
22 Q
22 Q
6
44
45
6
2 ek
2 ek
6
2 Q 45 2 Q 55
6
6
6
e k 22 Q
ek
22 Q
4
57
46
2 ek
2 ek
2 Q 57 2 Q 46
8 k
Q
>
>
> 11
>
k
>
>
>
> Q 22
>
>
k
>
>
> Q 12
>
>
>
>
>
>
Q k16
>
>
>
<
Q k26
>
>
>
> k
>
>
Q 66
>
>
>
>
>
k
>
>
> Q 44
>
>
>
>
Q k45
>
>
>
>
:
Q k55
y
>
:v >
;
8 @ xx
>
>
< @x
@y
Q km
8
9
>
< vx >
=
xy
mn mn 7
7
7
m2
n2 5
mn mn
2-26
dpp dU dW 0
3-1
2148
dW
Vk
k1
f T dudv
k1
8 1 9 8
9
9
>
>
>
< ex >
< hy;x
=
= >
=
0
1
h
ey
e
v 0;y
; e1
;
x;y
y
m
>
>
>
> >
>
: 0 >
:
:
:
; >
;
;
1 ;
u
v
h
h
0;y
0;x
y;y
x;x
cxy
cxy
8 3 9
8
9
w
h
e
>
>
>
;xx
< x >
< y;x
=
=
3
ey
c hx;y w;yy
>
>
>
: 3 >
:
;
;
hy;y 2w;xy hx;x
cxy
e0
m
3 - 2
T T duds
em3
3-3
8
>
< u0;x
3-9-1
@X
fu du0 fv dv 0 fw dw fcx dxx fcy dxy dxdy
Nnx du0 Nny dv 0 Vdw Mn dhn ds
3-4
iT
1
2w;x hy ; 2w;y hx ;
2
T
w;xy hx;x ; w;xy hy;y ; w;yy hx;y ; w;xx hy;x
h
iT 3
2 2 2 2 2
c2
c 2hy w;x ; 2hx w;y ;
xz cyz vx vy vxy vyx
2
T
hx;x w;xy ; hy;y w;xy ; hx;y w;yy ; hy;x w;xx
0 0 0 0 0
v0 cxz0 cyz
vx vy vxy vyx
v2
8 0 9
>
< ex >
=
zk
where
f T and T T are the body force on the plate domain X and
boundary force on the plate boundary oX, respectively.
The dW in the plate on the modied couple stress theory can be
expressed as
dW
and
3-9-2
@X
3-5
Substituting (3-5) into (3-4), we have
dW
Z
1 @fcy @fcx
dw
fu du0 fv dv 0 fw
2 @x
@y
X
Z
1
fcx dhx fcy dhy dxdy
Nnx du0 Nny dv 0
2
@X
1
V fcx ny fcy nx dw M n dhn ds
2
3-6
3-7
where
1
3 3
em e0
m zem z em
v v0 z2 v2
n R
P
dU k
rkT dem mkT dvdxdydz
Vk m
k1
k1
n
R zk1 kT 0
R P
3
3
mkT dv0 z2 dv2 dz dxdy
X
rm dem zde1
m z dem
zk
dU
n
P
k1
8
8
9T
9T
9T
08
> Nx >
>
>
< Nx1 >
< Nx3 >
=
=
=
R B<
0
1
3
X @ Ny
dem Ny1
dem Ny3
d em
>
>
>
>
>
>
:
:
:
;
;
;
N xy
Nxy1
Nxy3
1
8
9
8
9T
Q x2 >T
>
>
>
Q
C
>
>
>
>
x
>
>Q >
>
>
C
>
>
>
y2 >
>
>
>
>
>
>
C
>Qy >
>
>
>
<
<
=
=
C
Y
x2
C
Y x Y y dv0
dv2 Cdxdy
>
>
>
>
C
Y y2 >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
C
Y xy >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
C
>
>
>
>
Y
xy2 >
:
>
;
A
>
>
Y yx
:
;
Y yx2
2
Substituting Eqs. (2-15), (3-8) and (3-9) into the Eq. (3-2), we
have,
3-8
3
N x du0;x N y dv 0;y N xy du0;y dv 0;x
6 Q 3cQ dhy Q 3cQ dhx Q 3cQ dw;x Q 3cQ dw;y 7
x
x2
y
x2
y
6
7
y2
x
y2
7
Z 6
6 N xy1 cN xy3 12 Y x 32 cY x2 dhx;x N xy1 cN xy3 12 Y y 32 cY y2 dhy;y
7
7dxdy
6
6 N x1 cN x3 1 Y yx 3 cY yx2 dhy;x N y1 cN y3 1 Y xy 3 cY xy2 dhx0 y
7
X6
7
2
2
2
2
1
6
7
1
3
3
4 cN x3 2 Y yx 2 cY yx2 dw;xx 2 Y xy 2 cY xy2 cN y3 dw;yy
5
1
2 Y x 3cY x2 Y y 3cY y2 cN xy3 dw;xy
3-10
4l
3h2
3
Nx;x N xy;y du0 Ny;y Nxy;x dv 0
7
6 N N
1
3
6
x1;x
xy1;y 2 Y yx;x Y y;y Q x cN x3;x N xy3;y 2 Y yx2;x Y y2;y 3Q x2 dhy 7
7
R 6
1
3
7
dU X 6
6
Ny1;y Nxy1;x 2 Y xy;y Y x;x Q y cNy3;y Nxy3;x 2 Y xy2;y Y x2;x 3Q y2 dhx 7dxdy
7
6
5
4 Q x;x Q y;y 12 Y yx;xx Y xy;yy Y y;xy Y x;xy
cNx3;xx Ny3;yy 2Nxy3;xy 32 Y yx2;xx Y xy2;yy Y y2;xy Y x2;xy 3Q x2;x Q y2;y dw
3
2
mNx nN xy du0 nNy mNxy dv 0 12 Y yx m2 Y xy n2 dw;n 12 Y xy Y yx mn 14 Y x Y y dw;t
7
6 1
7
6 2 Y x m2 N y1 Nx1 12 Y xy 12 Y yx mn 12 Y y n2 Nxy1 dhn N y1 12 Y xy n2 12 Y x Y y mn Nx1 12 Y yx m2 dhs
7
6
1
7
6
1
1
1
R 6 2 Y yx;x Q x 4 Y x;y Y y;y m 2 Y xy;y Q y 4 Y x;x Y y;x n dw
7
@ X 6 3
7ds
6 2 c Y y2 n2 Y x2 m2 23 Ny3 Nx3 Y yx2 Y xy2 mn 23 Nxy3 dhn 23 N y3 Y xy2 n2 Y y2 Y x2 mn 23 Nx3 Y yx2 m2 dhs 7
7
6
7
6 2 N N
1
2
1
x3;x
xy3;y Y yx2;x 2 Y x2;y Y y2;y 2Q x2 m 3 N y3;y N xy3;x Y xy2;y 2 Y x2;x Y y2;x 2Q y2 n dw
5
4
3
2
2
2
2 2
2
1
3 Nx3 Y yx2 m 3 Ny3 Y xy2 n dw;n 3 Nx3 Ny3 Y xy2 Y yx2 mn 3 Nxy3 2 Y x2 Y y2 dw;t
2
3-11
2149
where Nx, Ny, Nxy, Nxi, Nyi, Nxyi, Qx, Qy, Qx1, Qy1 are the classical tractions of the plate, Yx, Yxy, Yx2, Yy2, Yxy, Yyx, Yxy2, Yyx2 are the traction
of couple stress moment of the plate. They are
8
9
8 9
k
n Z h2
< Na = X
<1 =
k
N a1
r
z dz; a x; y; xy
a
: N ; k1 hk : z3 ;
2
a3
k
X
n Z h2
Qb
1
k
b xz; yz
s
b z2 dz;
k
Q b2
h2
k1
k
X
n Z h2
Yc
k 1
dz; c x; y; xy; yx
m
c
k
Y c2
z2
h
k1
3-12
8
u0 u
>
>
>
>
0
>
v
0 v
>
>
>
>
>
w
w
>
<
@w
@@sw
@s
>
>
@w
>
@@nw
>
@n
>
>
>
>
> hn hn
>
>
:
hs hs
3-15
fu 0
@x
@y
@Ny @N xy
fv 0
@y
@x
!
@Q x @Q y 1 @ 2 Y x @ 2 Y y @ 2 Y xy @ 2 Y yx
@x
@y 2 @x@y @x@y @y2
@x2
"
!
2
2
2
2
@ Nx3 @ Ny3
@ N xy3 3 @ Y yx2 @ 2 Y xy2 @ 2 Y x2 @ 2 Y y2
2
c
@x2
@y2
@x@y 2
@x2
@y2
@x@y @x@y
@Q x2 @Q y2
1 @fcy @fcx
fw 0
3
@x
@y
@y
2 @x
@Nxy1 @N x1 1 @Y y @Y yx
@N xy3 @N x3
Qx c
@y
@x
@x
@y
@x
2 @y
3 @Y y2 @Y yx2
1
3Q x2 fcy 0
2 @y
2
@x
@Nxy1 @N y1 1 @Y x @Y xy
@Nxy3 @N y3
Qy c
@x
@y
@y
@x
@y
2 @x
3 @Y x2 @Y xy2
1
3Q y2 fcx 0
@y
2 @x
2
3-13
Traction boundary conditions are
mN x nNxy Nnx
nNy mN xy Nny
1
@Y x @Y y
@Y yx
m Qx
2
@y
@y
@x
4
@Nx3 @N xy3
cm 3Q x2
@x
@y
3
@Y x2 @Y y2
@Y yx2
2
@y
@y
@x
4
1 @Y y @Y x
@Y xy
2
n Qy
@x
@y
4 @x
@Ny3 @Nxy3 3 @Y y2 @Y x2
@Y xy2
V
cn 3Q y2
2
@y
@x
@x
@y
4 @x
1 2
1 2
1
1
m Y x n Y y mn Ny1 Nx1 Y xy Y yx
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
Nxy1 c n Y y2 m Y x2 mn Ny3 Nx3 Y yx2 Y xy2 N xy3 Mn
2
3
1
m2 Nx1 n2 Ny1 m2 Y yx n2 Y xy mnY x Y y
2
3
3
c n2 Ny3 m2 Nx3 mnY y2 Y x2 n2 Y xy2 m2 Y yx2 Ms
2
2
1 2
3
2
2
2
m Y yx n Y xy c n Ny3 m Nx3 m2 Y yx2 n2 Y xy2 0
2
2
1
1
3
Y x Y y mnY xy Y yx c mn Y xy2 Y yx2 Nx3 Ny3
4
2
2
3
Nxy3 Y x2 Y y2 0
4
3-14
8
>
Q k11
>
>
>
>
k
>
>
> Q 22
>
>
>
k
>
> Q 12
>
>
>
>
> Q k16
>
<
Q k26
>
>
>
>
Q k66
>
>
>
>
> Qk
>
>
44
>
>
> k
>
>
Q
>
>
> 45
:
Q k55
m4 C k11 n4 C k22
n4 C k11 m4 C k22
C k12
0
;
C k66
C k44 m2
C k55 n2
0
C k44 n2 C k55 m2
8 2 k
e
Q
>
44
>
>
>
>
2 ek
>
Q
>
45
>
>
>
>
2 ek
>
Q
>
55
>
>
>
>
ek
> 2 Q
>
46
<
2 ek
Q 47
>
>
>
ek
>
2 Q
>
56
>
>
>
> 2 ek
>
Q 57
>
>
>
> 2 bk
>
>
Q 44
>
>
>
:
bk
2 Q
55
m4 2b C k44
0
n4 2b C k44
0
3-16
0
0
0
ek
2 Q
44
2 ek
Q
55
" k
#
8
Qm
>
k
>
>
Q
>
>
>
Q kc
>
<
2
Q k Q k12
>
6 11
>
k
>
> Qm 6 Qk Qk
>
4 12
22
>
>
:
Q k66
7
7;
5
3
Q k2
7
6
2 ek 7
Q kc 6
4 2 Q 2 5
bk
2 Q
2
2
3-17
where
" k
#
8
Q 44
>
k
>
>
Q
>
2
>
>
Q k55
>
>
>
"
#
>
<
ek
Q
44
k
e
Q2
>
ek
>
Q
>
55
>
"
#
>
>
ek
ek
>
Q
Q
>
44
55
>
k
b
>
:Q2
ek
ek
Q
Q
44
55
3-18
where 2 2b .
Substituting stressstrain relations (3-16)(3-18) into equation
(3-12), for the same materials of each layer, we have,
8
9
8
9
>
>
< Nx >
=
< Nx1 >
=
1
3
1
3
Ny
Ny1
Q 3 e0
J 3 e0
m J 3 em R3 em ;
m I 3 em cS 3 em ;
>
>
>
>
:
;
:
;
Nxy
Nxy1
8
9
>
< Nx3 >
=
>
:
Ny3
Nxy3
Qx
Qy
>
;
1
3
R3 e0
m S 3 em cT 3 em ;
Q2
c0
c2
xz
xz
I2
;
0
cyz
c2
yz
Q x2
Q y2
(
I2
c0
c2
xz
xz
S2
;
0
cyz
c2
yz
3-19
2150
8
9
< v0
=
x
8
9 (
8
9
8
9
( )
)
< v2
=
< v0
=
< v2
=
Yx
Y x2
x
x
x
2
2
2
2
2 Q 2
2 I 2
2 I 2
;
2 S 2
;
0 ;
2 ;
: v0 ;
: v2 ;
:
:
Yy
Y
y2
vy
vy
y
y
8
9
8
9 (
8
9
8
9
(
)
)
< v0
=
< v2
=
< v0
=
< v2
=
Y xy
Y xy2
xy
xy
xy
xy
2b
2b
2b
2b
Q2
I2
I2
;
S2
:
: 0 ;
: 2 ;
: 0 ;
: 2 ;
Y yx
Y yx2
vyx
vyx
vyx
where
2
3
2
3
2
8
J11 J12
I11
Q 11 Q 12
>
>
>
6
6
6
7
7
>
>
6
7
6
7
6
>
Q
;
J
;
I
J
J
Q
Q
3
>
3
22
4 12
5 3 4 12 22
5
4 I12
>
>
>
>
>
J66
Q 66
>
>
>
>
2
3
2
3
2
>
>
>
R
R
T 11
S
S
11
12
11
12
>
>
>
6
6
6
7
7
>
>
6
7
6
7
6
R3 4 R12 R22
>
>
5; S 3 4 S12 S22
5; T 3 4 T 12
>
>
>
>
>
R
S
66
66
>
<
"
#
"
#
"
#
Q 44
I44
S44
>
>
; I2
; S2
;
>
>Q2
>
Q 55
I55
S55
>
>
>
>
2
3
2
3
2
3
>
>
e
e
e
>
e 44
e
eI 44
>
Q
S 44
>
>
4
5
4
5
4
5;
>
Q
;
;
2
2
>
> 2
e
e
e
>
eI 55
e
e 55
>
S
Q
>
55
>
>
>
2
3
2
3
2
3
>
>
e
e
e
e
e
>
e 44 Q
e 55
e
eI 55
eI 44 e
>
Q
S 55
S 44 e
>b
>
b
b
5; I 2 4
5; S 2 4
5
>
Q 4
>
: 2
e
e
e
e
e
eI 44 e
eI 55
e
e 44 Q
e 55
S 44 e
S 55
Q
vyx
3-20
3
I12
7
7;
5
I22
I66
T 12
7
7;
5
T 22
T 66
4-2
By Eq. (4-2), the equations of
@Q x
@x
@Q y
@y
@Q x
@x
@Q
; @yy
can be written as
3-21
k
8
i
i
n h
n
n h
P
P
Q ij z4k1 z4k
e
>
e ij P Q
e k zk1 zk
>
; Q
Q kjj zk1 zk ; Rij
> Q ij
ij
4
>
>
k1
k1
k1
>
>
"
#
>
k
k
>
n
n
n
e
<
P
P
P
Q kij z3k1 z3k
Q ij z5k1 z5k
Q 11 z2k1 z2k
e
e
;
;
I
Jij
S
ij
ij
2
5
3
>
k1
k1
k1
>
>
"
#
>
>
>
n
n
n
e
P
P
P
>
Q kij z5k1 z5k
Q kjj z3k1 z3k
Q kij z7k1 z7k
e
>
e
>
;
;
S
T
: Iij
ij
ij
3
7
5
4-4
where
k1
k1
k1
3-22
Substituting Eqs. (3-16) and (3-17) into Eq. (3-13), the Equilibrium equations in terms of displacements for the composite crossply laminated plate of new modied couple stress theory can be
obtained by using computer algebra systems like Maple.
The equilibrium equations for the cross ply composite laminated Kirchhoff plate of new modied couple stress theory can
be obtained as follows as:
8
Q 11 u0;xx Q 66 u0;yy Q 12 Q 66 v 0;xy J11 w;xxx J12 2J66 w;xyy fu 0
>
>
>
>
>
>
Q Q 12 u0;xy Q 66 v 0;xx Q 22 v 0;yy J22 w;yyy 2J66 J12 w;xxy fv 0
>
< 66
J11 u0;xxx J12 2J66 u0;xyy J12 2J66 v 0;xxy J22 v 0;yyy I11 w;xxxx
>
>
>
2I12 2I66 w;xxyy I22 w;yyyy
>
>
>
>
: 2 e
e
e
e
e 55 Q
e 44 w;xxyy Q
e 55 w;xxxx Q
e 44 w;yyyy fcy;x fcx;y fw 0
Q
4-5
5. Numerical example for scale effect:simply supported plate
4-1
y
h
L
Fig. 2. Simply supported laminated plate under double sinusoidal loading.
2151
Boundary conditions:
8
wj 0
>
>
> C
>
< @ 2 w
@x2 x0 or
>
>
>
x
>
: @h
@y
0; @@yw2
xL
y0
@h
0; @xy
y0 or yL
The stress at x = L/2, y = L/2 in section of the plate can be expressed as follows:
or yL
x0 or xL
5-1
5-5
8
>
< wx; y w0 sin ax sin by
hy hya cos ax sin by
>
:
hx hxa sin ax cos by
5-2
8
>
< l11 w0 l12 hya l13 hxa q0 0
l21 w0 l22 hya l23 hxa 0
>
:
l31 w0 l32 hya l33 hxa 0
5-3
where
l11
l12
l13
l21
p2
2
p
L
p
L
p
L
l31
p2
2
p
L
p2
2
p3
3
p3
3
p2
2
32 p2
4L2
2 p4 e
e
e
e 44 Q
e 55 6ce
e
eI 44 e
eI 55 9c2 e
Q
S 44 e
S 55
2L4
2 p3
4L3
e
e
e
e 55 4 Q
e 44 9c2 e
e
3 Q
S 44 3 e
S 55
e
e
e 55 6ce
eI 55 9c2 e
S 55
Q
2
e
e
e 44 6ce
eI 44 9c2 e
S 44
Q
4
T 11 T 22 2T 12 4T 66
2 p3 e
e
e 44 9c2 e
S 44
Q
2L3
l32
In order to test characteristics of the scale effects of microstructure, models of simply supported laminated cross-ply square plate
are adopted. The sizes of the square plate model: length of a side is
L = 200 lm, thickness is h = 25 lm, bending load is q0 = 1 N/lm2,
the material constants [29]:E2 6:98 GPa;
E1 25E2 ; G12
Ek v k
0:5E2 ; G22 0:2E2 ; m12 m22 0:25; v k21 2Ek12 , in which sub1
scripts 1 and 2 represent the direction of ber and matrix,
respectively.
We choose the next two types of cross-ply laminated plate with
three-layer as rst one[0/90/0], and second one [90/0/90].
On the micro-materials constants2b ; 2m , for the composite lam@x
xx
inated plate, the curvatures of @@y
and @xy should be taken as independent components which are relative to the micro materials
constants 2b ; 2m to describe the materials microstructural characteristics of the ber and matrix of the laminated plate respectively.
In the couple stress theory, the rotation variables related to microscale impurities or defects are formulated into rotation equilibrium
equations.
For kth layer of composite laminated plate in the local coordinates (x0 , y0 , z0 ), xx is a rotation round the ber and the its partial
xx @ xx
derivative @@x
; @y are dened as the curvatures vx, vxy, the 2b is
introduced constitute relations of the moments mx, mxy and the
curvatures vx, vxy. Thexy is a rotation to perpendicular the ber
@x @x
and its partial derivative @xy ; @yy are dened as the curvatures
2 p3 e
e
e 55 9c2 e
S 55
Q
2L3
c2 p4
where c
4l
.
3h2
8
h
i
>
< rkx pL z pL cz2 w0 Q k11 Q k12 1 cz2 Q k11 hya Q k12 hxa ;
h
i
>
: rky pL z pL cz2 w0 Q k12 Q k22 1 cz2 Q k12 hya Q k22 hxa :
2 p3 e
e
e
e 55 3 Q
e 44 9c2 3 e
e
Q
S 44 e
S 55
4L3
2
e
e
e 55 6ce
eI 55 9c2 e
S 55
Q
4
32 p2
4L2
e
e
e 44 6ce
eI 44 9c2 e
Q
S 44
5-4
2152
l= 0
l=h/4
l=h/2
l=h
0.2
0.18
0.16
w/h
0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
x/L
Fig. 3. The deection of the plate [0, 90, 0] at y = L/2.
0.08
0.025
l= 0
l=h/4
l=h/2
l=h
0.06
0.04
0.015
0.01
0.02
l=0
l=h/4
l=h/2
l=h
0.02
0.005
0
-0.005
-0.02
-0.01
-0.04
-0.015
-0.06
-0.08
-0.02
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
-0.025
0.1
0.2
y/L
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
x/L
(b) at y = L/2
(a) at x = L/2
Fig. 4. The angle of rotation of the plate [0, 90, 0].
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
z/h
z/h
0.2
0.5
l=0
l=h/4
l=h/2
l=h
-0.1
-0.1
-0.2
-0.2
-0.3
-0.3
-0.4
-0.4
-0.5
-1.5
-1
-0.5
x (GPa)
0.5
1.5
-0.5
-0.8
l=0
l=h/4
l=h/ 2
l=h
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
y (GPa)
Fig. 5. The stresses rx and ry in section of the plate [0, 90, 0] at x = L/2, y = L/2.
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
2153
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
Kirchhoff plate
Mindlin plate
Reddy plate
0.03
0.025
w/h
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
x/L
0.2
w/h
0.15
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
Kirchhoff plate
Mindlin plate
Reddy plate
2500
2000
w/h
Kirchhoff plate
Mindlin plate
Reddy plate
1500
0.1
1000
0.05
500
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
x/L
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
x/L
Fig. 6. The deection of the plate to compare Kirchhoff plate, Mindlin plate and Reddy plate couple stress theories [0/90/0].
8
2
e
e
>
e 44 Q
e 55 w;xxyy
>
Q 44 w;xx hy;x Q 55 w;yy hx;y 4 2 Q
>
>
>
>
>
e
>
e 44 w;yyyy 2hx;xxy hx;yyy
>
Q
>
>
>
>
e
>
e
>
>
> Q 55 w;xxxx 2hy;xyy hy;xxx fw 0
<
Q 44 w;x hy I11 hy;xx I66 hy;yy I12 I66 hx;xy
>
>
e
>
2e
>
>
>
Q4 55 2wxyy w;xxx 2hy;yy hy;xx 0
>
>
>
>
>
Q 55 w;y hx I66 hx;xx I22 hx;yy I12 I66 hy;xy
>
>
>
>
e
>
>
Q 44
: 2 e
2w;xxy w;yyy 2hx;xx hx;yy 0
4
>
44
55
44
55
0
44
L
>
4L4
L2
4L2
>
>
>
>
>
>
e 2
>
>
Q 44 p
> p Q 32 e
>
hxa q0 0
< L 55
4L2
!
!!
e
e
>p
2
32 e
Q 55 p2
Q 55
>
p2 32 e
>
w
hya pL2 I12 I66 hxa 0
Q
Q
I
44
0
44
11
66
>
2
2
L
4
>
4L
L
>
>
>
>
!
!!
>
>
e 2
e
>
2e
>p
2
2
32 e
Q 44 p
>
>
w0 pL2 I12 I66 hya Q 55 pL2 3 4Q 44 I22 I66
hxa 0
: L Q 55 4L2
5-7
The stresses at x = L/2, y = L/2 in section of the plate can be
expressed as follows:
8
>
< rkx z pL Q k11 hya Q k12 hxa
>
: rky z pL Q k12 hya Q k22 hxa
5-8
5-6
2154
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
z/h
0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
Kirchhoff plate
Mindlin plate
Reddy plate
-0.4
-0.5
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
x (GPa)
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.1
z/h
0
-0.1
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.2
-0.3
-0.3
Kirchhoff plate
Mindlin plate
Reddy plate
-0.4
-0.5
-1.5
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
0.4
z/h
0.4
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
-1
-0.5
0.5
Kirchhoff plate
Mindlin plate
Reddy plate
-0.4
1.5
-0.5
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
x (GPa)
x (GPa)
Fig. 7. The stress rx in section of the plate at x = L/2 to compare Kirchhoff plate, Mindlin plate and Reddy plate couple stress theories [0/90/0].
I11
@4w
@4w
@4w
2I12 2I66 2 2 I22 4
@x4
@x @y
@y
!
4
4
4
e
e
e
e
e 55 Q
e 44 @ w Q
e 55 @ w Q
e 44 @ w fw
2 Q
@x2 @y2
@x4
@y4
5-9
w0
q0 L 4
5-10
8
2
>
< rkx z Q k11 Q k12 pL w0
>
: rky z Q k12 Q k22 pL 2 w0
5-11
2155
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
z/h
0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
Kirchhoff plate
Mindlin plate
Reddy plate
-0.4
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
y (GPa)
0.4
0.3
0.2
z/h
0.1
0
-0.1
0.5
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.2
-0.3
-0.3
Kirchhoff plate
Mindlin plate
Reddy plate
-0.4
-0.5
-0.8
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
l=0
l=h/2
l=h
0.4
z/h
0.5
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
y (GPa)
0.2
0.4
0.6
Kirchhoff plate
Mindlin plate
Reddy plate
-0.4
0.8
-0.5
-80
-60
-40
-20
y (GPa)
20
40
60
80
Fig. 8. The stress rx in section of the plate at x = L/2 to compare Kirchhoff plate, Mindlin plate and Reddy plate couple stress theories [90/0/90].
2156
[4] Toupin RA. Elastic materials with couple stresses. Arch Rational Mech Anal
1962;11:385414.
[5] Koiter WT. Couple stresses in the theory of elasticity I & II. Proc Koninklijke
Ned Akad Wetensc 1964;67:1744.
[6] Mindlin RD. Inuence of couple-stresses on stress concentrations. Exp Mech
1963;3:17.
[7] Neuber H. On the general solution of linear-elastic problems in isotropic and
anisotropic Cosserat continua. In: Proc. 11th international congress on applied
mechanics. Springer; 1965. p. 1538.
[8] Fleck NA, Hutchinson JW. A phenomenological theory for strain gradient
effects in plasticity. J Mech Phys Solids 1993;41:182557.
[9] Yang F, Chong AM, Lam DCC, Tong P. Couple stress based strain gradient theory
for elasticity. Int J Solids Struct 2002;39:273143.
[10] Anthoine A. Effect of couple-stresses on the elastic bending of beams. Int J
Solids Struct 2000;37:100318.
[11] Papargyri-Beskou S, Tsepoura KG, Polyzos D, Beskos DE. Bending and stability
analysis of gradient elastic beams. Int J Solids Struct 2003;40:385400.
[12] Peddieson J, Buchanan GR, McNitt RP. Application of nonlocal continuum
models to nanotechnology. Int J Eng Sci 2003;41:30512.
[13] Eringen AC. On differential equations of nonlocal elasticity and solutions of
screw dislocation and surface waves. J Appl Phys 1983;54:470310.
[14] Altenbach J, Altenbach H, Eremeyev VA. On generalized Cosserat-type theories
of plates and shells: a short review and bibliography. Arch Appl Mech
2010;80:7392.
[15] Park SK, Gao XL. BernoulliEuler beam model based on a modied couple
stress theory. J Micromech Microeng 2006;16:23559.
[16] Ma HM, Gao XL, Reddy JN. A microstructure-dependent Timoshenko beam
model based on a modied couple stress theory. J Mech Phys Solids
2008;56:337991.
[17] Tsiatas GC. A new Kirchhoff plate model based on a modied couple stress
theory. Int J Solids Struct 2009;46:275764.
[18] Metin Aydogdu. A general nonlocal beam theory: its application to nanobeam
bending, buckling and vibration. Phys E: Low-dimens Syst Nanostruct
2009;41(9):16515.
[19] Ma HM, Gao XL, Reddy JN. A nonclassical ReddyLevinson beam model based
on a modied couple stress theory. Int J Multi-scale Computat Eng
2010;8(2):16780.
[20] Reddy JN. A simply higher-order theory for laminated composite plates. J Appl
Mech 1984;51(12):74552.
[21] Li Yin, Qin Qian, Lin Wang, Wei Xia. Vibration analysis of microscale plates
based on modied couple stress theory. Acta Mech Solida Sin 2010;23(5):
38692.
[22] Jomehzadeh E, Noori HR, Saidi AR. The size-dependent vibration analysis of
micro-plates based on a modied couple stress theory. Phys E: Low-dimens
Syst Nanostruct 2011;43(4):87783.
[23] Ma HM, Gao XL, Reddy JN. A non-classical Mindlin plate model based on a
modied couple stress theory. Acta Mech 2011;220:21735.
[24] Wang BL, Zhao JF, Zhou SJ, Chen X. A size-dependent Kirchhoff micro-plate
model based on strain gradient elasticity theory. Eur J Mech/A Solids 2011
[online].
[25] Reddy JN. Microstructure-dependent couple stress theories of functionally
graded beams. J Mech Phys Solids 2011;59:238299.
[26] Reddy JN. Nonlocal nonlinear formulations for bending of classical and
shear deformation theories of beams and plates. Int J Eng Sci
2010;48(11):150718.
[27] Reddy JN, Kim J. A nonlinear modied couple stress-based third-order theory
of functionally graded plates. Compos Struct 2012;94:112843.
[28] Reddy JN. Mechanics of laminated composite plates: theory and analysis. 2nd
ed. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; 2004.
[29] Pagano NJ. Exact solutions for rectangular bi-directional composites. J Compos
Mater 1970;4:2034.