fractal and fractional

Article
Fractal Continuum Calculus of Functions on
Euler-Bernoulli Beam
Didier Samayoa 1 , Andriy Kryvko 1 , Gelasio Velázquez 1 and Helvio Mollinedo 2, *

1 SEPI-ESIME Zacatenco, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Unidad Profesional Adolfo López Mateos,
Mexico City 07738, Mexico
2 Engineering Department, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, UPIITA, Av. IPN, No. 2580, Col. La Laguna Ticoman,
Gustavo A. Madero, Mexico City 07340, Mexico
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: A new approach for solving the fractal Euler-Bernoulli beam equation is proposed. The
mapping of fractal problems in non-differentiable fractals into the corresponding problems for the
fractal continuum applying the fractal continuum calculus (Fd3 -CC) is carried out. The fractal Euler-
H
Bernoulli beam equation is derived as a generalization using Fd3 -CC under analogous assumptions
H
as in the ordinary calculus and then it is solved analytically. To validate the spatial distribution
of self-similar beam response, three different classical beams with several fractal parameters are
analysed. Some mechanical implications are discussed.

Keywords: fractal continuum calculus; Hausdorff dimension; Euler-Bernoulli beam; transversal

displacement

1. Introduction
Citation: Samayoa, D.; Kryvko, A.; Fractal geometry has been widely used in many fields of science and technology
Velázquez, G.; Mollinedo, H. Fractal such as: medicine [1,2], hydrology [3,4], materials science [5–7], applied physics [8,9] and
Continuum Calculus of Functions on
mathematical modelling [10–12], among others.
Euler-Bernoulli Beam. Fractal Fract.
The concept of fractal continuum was introduced in 2005 by Tarasov [13] and has
2022, 6, 552. https://doi.org/
become popular in the last two decades. Many different methods of nonlocal and local
10.3390/fractalfract6100552
fractal continua have been formulated [14–26].
Academic Editors: Farooq Ahmad, In this regard, the fractal continuum calculus, introduced by Balankin and
Yeliz Karaca and Naveed Iqbal Elizarraraz [20,21], gives possibility to define generalized differential structures, which
are non-differentiable in ordinary sense. This formulation was validated on fractal materi-
Received: 19 July 2022
als to solve the pressure-transient and Maxwell Equations [21,23]. Recently, this method
Accepted: 27 September 2022
Published: 29 September 2022
was applied to derive the fractal Euler-Bernoulli beam equation using the virtual work
principle [27].
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral In [22,28], fractal continuum calculus was firstly formulated based on classical Menger
with regard to jurisdictional claims in sponge embedded in <3 . Main definitions involve the assumption of a fractal contin-
published maps and institutional affil-
uum Fd3 without pores or empty spaces defined as a three-dimensional object in <3 and
iations. H
endowed with appropriate fractional measure, metric, and norm and a set of rules for
integro-differential calculus, as well as with a proper Laplacian, accounting for the metric,
connectivity, and topological properties of the fractal domain [28].
d
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. This concept enables us to map the fractal domain denoted by F3 H ⊂ <3 (see Figure 1),
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. whose properties are essentially discontinuous in the embedding space <3 , into the fractal
This article is an open access article continuum domain denoted by Fd3 ⊂ <3 (see Figure 2), the properties of which behave
H
distributed under the terms and as analytic envelopes of non-analytic functions in the fractal object under study [20,21].
d
conditions of the Creative Commons The generalization from F3 H to Fd3 using local fractional differential operators is called
H
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
fractal continuum calculus Fd3 -CC, and it has been adopted in order to solve different
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ H
engineering problems [20,23,27].
4.0/).

Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 552. https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract6100552 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/fractalfract

Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 552 2 of 13

The present manuscript shows applications of fractal Euler-Bernoulli equation using

Fd3 -CC to calculate the spatial distribution of rotation and transversal displacement in
H
classical beams with fractal geometry. The generalization from ordinary calculus to fractal
continuum calculus of Euler-Bernoulli beam equation is carried out using the engineering
mechanics approach based mainly on two assumptions: the constitutive law of isotropic
elasticity and the geometry of deformation [29], as an alternative approach to the principle
of virtual work. The total mechanical response caused by the fractal configuration of the
self-similar beams is highlighted.
The paper consists of 5 sections: following the "Introduction", we review the basic
tools required in Section 2. Whereas Section 3 is devoted to the formulation of fractal
Euler-Bernoulli beam equation. Proposed formulation is applied to classical beams and the
structural details are discussed in Section 4. Section 5 closes the paper with conclusions.

2. Mathematical Background
First, we review Menger’s sponge-like sets and their properties and then we summa-
rize Fd3 -CC.
H

2.1. Menger Sponge Fractals

The Menger sponge Mη is a three-dimensional version of the middle-η Cantor fractal
set C η ⊂ [0, 1] ⊂ < and the Sierpinski carpet S η is its two-dimensional version (see
Figure 1), which are self-similar fractals.
The middle-η Cantor set C η is constructed by iterative removal of open middle-η
segments from remaining segments of the previous iteration, starting from the unit interval
[0, 1] = L (divided in segments of size 0 < η < 1) ad infinitum [30].
In similar fashion, the Sierpinski carpet can be constructed by iterative process from
the unit square [0, 1]2 , which is divided into η × η sub-squares of equal size and the interior
of β2 sub-squares are deleted. Iterating this process infinitely many times we obtain the
fractal S η ⊂ [0, 1]2 ⊂ <2 .
Finally, the Menger sponge is constructed starting from the unit cube [0, 1]3 ⊂ <3 ,
which is divided into η × η × η sub-cubes of equal size, after that, the interior of β3 sub-
cubes are deleted. In each of the remaining sub-cubes the same operation is repeated. This
procedure is iterated ad infinitum (see Figure 1).

d
(a) one-dimensional fractal F H
1

d
(c) three-dimensional fractal F H
3

d
(b) two-dimensional fractal F H
2

Figure 1. Construction of three-dimensional fractal Menger sponge, (a) The middle-1/3 Cantor set:
C 1/3 ⊂ <, (b) two-dimensional Cantor Set or Sierpinski carpet: S 1/3 ⊂ <2 , and (c) three-dimensional
Cantor set or Menger sponge: M1/3 ⊂ <3 .
Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 552 3 of 13

Hausdorff dimension of the above fractals is given by [31]:

log(η n − βn )
dH = , (1)
log η

where the value of dH is constant for ξ 0 < L ≤ ξ C , where ξ 0 and ξ C are the lower and upper
cutoffs, respectively [32]; η = L/ξ 0 denotes the size of box needed to cover the fractal mass,
β is the total number of boxes removed from the fractal mass and n = 1, 2, 3, defines the
Hausdorff dimension for the one, two and three-dimensional versions of Cantor middle-η,
respectively [27,31].
The connectivity and topology of Menger sponge are characterized by the chemical
d
fractal dimension d` , as any fractal F3 H can be covered by d` -dimensional boxes [33] of
size at most L/ξ ` , such that [33]:
 
log N ξL
`
d` = . (2)
log ξL
`

The above equation implies that ξ ` is measured with respect to the geodesic metric
d d
on Mη [34]. From Equations (1) and (2) it follows that ξ ` ` ∼ ξ 0 H such that, the geodesic
distances between two points on the fractal L g scales with the Euclidean distance between
these points in the embedding Euclidean space L as L g ∼ Ld g , being d g = dH /d` = 1 the
geodesic dimension of Menger sponge [34]. Another characteristics of the fractal topology
are the fractal dimensions of cross-section areas d Ai given by the intersections between
d
the fractal domain F3 H ⊂ <3 and two-dimensional Cartesian planes in <3 [20,21], where
the index i = 1, 2, 3 denotes the Cartesian plane orthogonal to i-axis. Fractal area of cross
section dA scales with its linear size L and so, for the Menger sponge where η = 1/3 we
have that 2 ≤ d` = dH = 2.72 ≤ 3 and AF is defined as [27,28]:
 dA
L
AF = ξ 02 ; (3)
ξ0

where dA = dH (S 1/3 ) = 1.89. On the other hand, the fractal distance on xi ( L) is given
by [28]:
 ζ i
L
xi ( L ) = ξ 0 , (4)
ξ0

where

ζ i = dH − dA (5)

is the fractal dimension of the coordinate χi . Meanwhile, the fractal mass M scales with
respect to the linear size L ∈ (ξ 0 , ξ C ) as [13]:
 dH
L
M = ρ0 x i ( L ) A F = ρ0 ξ 03 , (6)
ξ0

where ρ0 is the mass density.

The fractal measure of Mη is characterized by its Hausdorff dimension dH , whereas
the fractal metric is controlled by the fractal dimension of the coordinate χi given by
ζ i = dH − dAi along with the chemical dimension d` .
Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 552 4 of 13

d
2.2. Mapping F3 H → Fd3
H

The Fd3 -CC consists in to make an approximation of non-differentiable functions

H
d
defined on fractals F3 H by differentiable analytic envelopes into fractal continuum Fd3
H
in the fractal object under study [20,21,28]. For this reason, Fd3 ⊂ <3 is defined as a
H
three-dimensional region filled with continuous matter and so, its topological dimension
is dt = 3. In addition, it was endowed with the following local fractional differential
operators [28]:
2γ 1/2γ
 
i Fractional norm is given by k A k= ∑3i χ ai , being γ = d` /3 ≤ 1 and

1− ζ i ζ i
χi = ξ 0 xi (7)

d
are the fractional coordinates in fractal continuum domain F3 H ⊂ <3 allied with the
Cartesian coordinates in <n (for i = 1, 2, 3).
2γ 1/2γ
 
d
ii Distance between two points A, B ∈ F3 H is given by ∆( A, B) = ∑3i ∆i being
∆i =k χ ai − χbi k.
iii Local partial derivatives in Fd3 ⊂ <3 so-called Hausdorff derivatives [28] can be
H
expressed in terms of conventional partial derivatives (∂/∂xi ) in <3 as:

f (χi0 ) − f (χi ) f ( xi0 ) − f ( xi )

 
∂ 1 ∂
∇iH f = lim 0 0 = lim
= f ( χi ) = f (8)
χi → χi χi − χi 0
xi → xi ∆ xi , xi
0 ∂χi c1i ∂xi

1− ζ i ζ i −1
where c1i = ζ i ξ 0 xi is the density of admissible states along the i-axis in
Fd3 ⊂ <3 .
H
iv ~ H = ~e1 ∇ζ +~e2 ∇ζ +~e3 ∇ζ , where ~ei ∈ <3
Hausdorff del operator in Fd3 is defined as ∇
H 1 2 3
are basis vectors.
v The divergence is given by:

3
1 ∂f
divH f = ∑ c1i ∂xi , (9)
i

vi and the generalized Laplacian of scalar function is defined as:

!
3
∂2 f γ − ζi ∂ f
∆ FH f = ∇iH · ∇iH f =∑ −2
c1i + (10)
i ∂xi2 xi ∂xi

while the infinitesimal volume element in Fd3 ⊂ <3 can be generally decomposed as:
H

dVdH = dχi ( xi )dA∂i ( x j6=i ) = c1i ( xi )c2i ( x j6=i )dxi dA2i = c3 ( xk )V3 = c3 dx1 dx2 dx3 (11)

where dA2i = dx j dxk and dA∂i are the infinitesimal area elements on the intersection
between Fd3 and two-dimensional plane normal to i-axis in <3 and in Fd3 ⊂ <3 ,
H H
respectively, c2i ( x j6=i ) is the density of admissible states in the plane of this intersection,
and c3 = c1i c2i .
vii The measure in the fractal continuum is defined by the following relations
3− d 1− ζ
dV3 c3 ∼ξ 0 H LdH , dA2i c2i ∼ LdAi and dχi = dxi c1i ∼ξ 0 i Lζ i .
R R R R
Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 552 5 of 13

On the other hand, the concept of elastic fractal continuum is governed by the
Equations [27]

divH σij + bi = 0,   

∂υ j
ε ij = 21 ∇H H
j υi + ∇ i υ j =
1 1
2 c1
∂υi
∂x j + ∂xi ,
σij = Cijkl ε kl , (12)
ui = ûi ,
σij n j = t̂i ,

where σij is the Cauchy stress tensor and bi is the body force; ε ij is the infinitesimal strain
tensor; Cijkl is the stiffness tensor; n j is the outward unit normal vector; t is the Cauchy
traction vector; x is a material variable, u is the displacement and Ωu and Ωσ are parts of
boundary Fd3 where the displacements and the tractions are applied, respectively. We
H
have c1 = ζ 1 ( x1 /ξ 0 )ζ 1 −1 , and υi ∈ Fd3 are defined by [28] as:
H

  ζ i −1
xi
υi = ζ i ui (13)
ξ0

where υi are the components of the displacement vector in fractal continuum domain.
In Figure 2 the relations between initial and deformed configurations on the mapping from
d
a fractal set to its corresponding fractal continuum, F3 H → Fd3 are presented.
H

Fractal continuum

Fractal set

Figure 2. Geometrical interpretation of mapping of Menger sponge F32.72 into the fractal continuum
3
F2.72 from the original to deformed configurations [22,28].

3. Differential Equations of Euler-Bernoulli Beam Using Fd3 -CC

H
This section is devoted to deduce the Euler-Bernoulli beam equation for fractal beams
by applying concepts reviewed in the behold section.
The fractal Euler-Bernoulli beam theory is based on the following assumptions [35]:
Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 552 6 of 13

1. The cross-section is infinitely rigid in its own plane. This implies there is no deforma-
tions in the plane of the cross-section.
2. The cross-section of a beam remains plane after deformation: a transverse plane
section perpendicular to the centroidal axis of the beam before deformation remains
plane after bending.
3. The cross-section remains normal to the deformed axis of the beam, i.e., the cross
section is perpendicular to the bent centroidal axis after bending.
Governing equations of the Euler-Bernoulli beam in the mechanics of fractal contin-
uum are obtained under the analogous assumptions like those obtained in classical calculus.
Considering an infinitesimal beam element as is shown in Figure 3a, the following
equilibrium equations can be obtained, for the vertical equilibrium:

dQ
w ( χ1 ) = , (14)
dχ1

and for the moment equilibrium:

dM
Q= , (15)
dχ1

On the other hand, the bending moment M is deduced by the integration of axial
stresses over the cross section as

Z
M= −σχ3 dA, (16)
A

for a geometrical illustration see the Figure 3b. Whereas that the relationship between the
axial strain and the transversal displacement of a beam element is given by

dυ1
ε= . (17)
dχ1

In Figure 3c an infinitesimal beam element is plotted where it can be observed that the
axial displacement υ1 is related to the rotation θ of the cross-section. It is a straightforward
matter to see the axial displacement of each infinitesimally short fibre is

dυ1 = −dθχ3 . (18)

Finally, the rotation θ is related to the transversal displacement υ3 . The geometrical

interpretation of Figure 3d, shows that

dυ3
tan θ = ≈ θ, (19)
dχ1

which is possible because the deformations are sufficiently small so that tan θ ≈ θ. So,
the kinematics equation for the beam members is obtained as

dυ1 dθ d 2 υ3
ε= =− χ3 = − 2 χ3 . (20)
dχ1 dχ1 dχ1
Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 552 7 of 13

(a) w(χ1) (b) χ3

negative compression stress
positive χ3-values
Q M + dM

M χ1 M

M Q + dQ
dχ1 positive tension stress
negative χ3-values

(c) χ3 (d)

θ
dθ R
beam axis

θ
dυ3
υ3 χ1

dχ1

Figure 3. Strains, displacements and rotations on Euler-Bernoulli Beam, (a) equilibrium for in-
finitesimal beam element, (b) axial stress over the cross section, (c) a beam segment in bending and
(d) rotation of the cross section of a beam element.

This expression implies an approximation of the exact curvature of the beam. Math-
ematically, the curvature is defined as κ = 1/R, where R is the radius of curvature of
the beam. In the Euler-Bernoulli beam theory that is presented here, the curvature is
approximated by κ = dθ/dχ1 ≈ d2 υ3 /dχ21 (see Figure 2).
The differential equation for the beam bending is obtained substituting Equation (16)
in Equation (15) and substituting the result in Equation (14), so:

dQ d2 M d2
Z
w ( χ1 ) = = = − σχ3 dA, (21)
dχ1 dχ21 dχ21 A

by applying the Hooke law σ = Eε and Equation (20) in the above equation, we obtain
!Z
d2 d 2 d 2 υ3 d 4 υ3
Z
2
w ( χ1 ) = − 2 Eεχ3 dA = E 2 χ 3 dA = EI , (22)
dχ1 A dχ1 dχ21 A dχ41

where A χ23 dA = I defines the moment of inertia. Then, the governing Equation (22) that
R

relates the deflection with the load applied to beam is obtained.

The generalization of Equations (19) and (22) from ordinary calculus to fractal contin-
uum calculus is carried out using Equations (7) and (13) in order to map the fractal beam
into fractal continuum beam, so the fractal rotation is

dυ3 du
θ ( χ1 ) = = ξ 0ζ 1 −1 ζ3 , (23)
dχ1 dx 1 1

and for the fractal Euler-Bernoulli bending beam

d 4 υ3 4ζ 1 −4 d4 u3
w (χ1 ) = EI = ξ 0 EI . (24)
dχ41 4ζ
dx 1 1
Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 552 8 of 13

It is worth noting that for ζ i = 1, the fractal Euler-Bernoulli beam equation

takes the
form of the ordinary equation of Euler-Bernoulli beam w ( x1 ) = EI d4 u3 /dx14 . Moreover,
the generalized Euler-Bernoulli bending equation is valid only if the bending moment
acts on one of the principal axes of the cross-section and the bending axis acts on a sym-
metric cross-section; otherwise, combined bending occurs in both principal axes of the
cross-section. Therefore, this restriction must be taken into account when applying Euler-
Bernoulli’s bending theory. The resultant axial force on the cross-sectional area is equal
to
R zero only when the neutral axis passes through the centroid of the area, such that
A σdA = 0.

4. Bending of Self-Similar Beams

In this section we apply the fractal Euler-Bernoulli equation on classical beams with
different fractal geometry and several boundary conditions in order to demonstrate its
engineering implications.

4.1. Illustrative Examples

We consider three different beams presented in Figure 4. The fractal parameters of the
beams are given in Table 1; where η represents the mass removed in the corresponding
Cantor set from which the Sierpinski carpet and Menger sponge are constructed, i.e., for
the triadic Cantor set (η = 1/3), the classical Sierpinsky carpet and Menger sponge are
obtained (see Figure 1); while for η = 0, the corresponding Cantor set is the unitary interval
[0, 1], consequently, the Hausdorff dimension of Sierpinski carpet is two and the Menger
sponge has dH = 3, and the beam is a Euclidean solid beam. The beam is self-similar for all
cases where η > 0 (see Figure 4). Besides, each beam has the following data: L = 2.7 m,
h = b = 0.3 m, a = L/3, E = 30 × 109 N/m2 , w = 100 N/m.

Figure 4. Classical beams with fractal geometry and cross-section type Sierpinski carpet, (a) simply
supported, and (b) fixed, and (c) propped cantilever.
Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 552 9 of 13

Table 1. Fractal parameters of the beams.

Parameter η=0 η = 1/9 η = 1/5 η = 2/8 η = 3/9 η = 1/3

dH 3 2.9841 2.9317 2.9182 2.8634 2.7268
dA 2 1.9943 1.9746 1.9689 1.9463 1.8927
ζi 1 0.9898 0.9571 0.9493 0.9171 0.8341
ξ0 0 2.7/34 2.7/34 2.7/34 2.7/34 2.7/34
1− ζ
ξ 0 Lζ 2.70 2.58 2.23 2.16 1.87 1.30
I (· · · × 10−6 ) 675 674.897 673.920 672.363 666.666 666.666

For the simply supported beam the structural analysis is carried out with the following
boundary conditions:

υ3 (0) = M (0) = υ3 ( L) = M ( L) = 0. (25)

Meanwhile for the fixed cantilever beam the boundary conditions are:

υ3 (0) = θ (0) = υ3 ( L) = θ ( L) = 0, (26)

and for the propped beam we have:

υ3 (0) = θ (0) = υ3 ( L) = M ( L) = 0, (27)

4.2. Fractal Response Details

By applying boundary conditions given in Equations (25)–(27) the transversal dis-
placement and rotation for the classical beams studied are obtained:
Simply supported beam. The transversal displacement in fractal coordinates is
given by:
wχ1  3 
υ3 ( χ 1 ) = χ1 − 2Lχ21 + L3 (28)
24EI
d
and the map from F3 H into Fd3 for the displacement is:
H

4−4ζ ζ
wξ 0 1 x11  3ζ 1 2ζ

υ3 ( χ 1 ) = x1 − 2Lζ 1 x1 1 + L3ζ 1 . (29)
24EI
Fixed beam. This beam has two ranges
  
w 5L2 2

 EI
 − 384 χ 1 + 3L 3
192 1 ,
χ for 0 < χ1 ≤ L2

υ3 ( χ 1 ) =   4  (30)
w 2
− 5L 2 + 3L χ3 − 1 χ − L , for L2 < χ1 < L



 EI 384 1χ 192 1 24 1 2

and the fractal displacement in Cartesian coordinates is described by

 4−4ζ 1 h i
wξ 0 1 2ζ 1
2ζ 3ζ 1 L


 EI − 5L
384 x1 +
3Lζ 1
192 x1 , for 0 < x1 ≤ 2

υ3 ( χ 1 ) = (31)
4−4ζ 1
  4 
wξ 0 2ζ 1 2ζ 3ζ

Lζ 1 L
− 5L x1 1 3Lζ 1
x1 1 − 1 ζ
x11 −


 EI 384 + 192 24 2 , for 2 < x1 < L

Propped cantilever beam. Both displacements have three following ranges:

for 0 < χ1 ≤ L3

101L2 2
 
w 401L 3
υ3 ( χ 1 ) = − χ + χ , (32)
EI 6480 1 19440 1
Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 552 10 of 13

L 2L
for 3 < χ1 ≤ 3
"  #
101L2 2 L 4 L 5
  
w 401L 3 1 1
υ3 ( χ 1 ) = − χ + χ − χ1 − + χ1 − , (33)
EI 6480 1 19440 1 24 3 40L 3

2L
for 3 < χ1 ≤ L
"  #
101L2 2 L 4 L 5 2L 5
    
w 401L 3 1 1 1
υ3 ( χ 1 ) = − χ1 + χ1 − χ1 − + χ1 − − χ1 − , (34)
EI 6480 19440 24 3 40L 3 40L 3

and the fractal displacement in Cartesian coordinates is described by

for 0 < x1 ≤ L3

4−4ζ 1
wξ 0
 
101 2ζ 1 2ζ 1 401 ζ 1 3ζ 1
υ3 ( χ 1 ) = − L x1 + L x1 , (35)
EI 6480 19440
L 2L
for 3 < x1 ≤ 3
4−4ζ 1 4 5 #
"
wξ 0
 
101 2ζ 1 2ζ 1 401 ζ 1 3ζ 1 1 ζ1 Lζ 1 1 ζ1 Lζ 1
υ3 ( χ 1 ) = − L x1 + L x1 − x − + x1 − , (36)
EI 6480 19440 24 1 3 40Lζ 1 3

2L
for 3 < x1 ≤ L
4−4ζ 1 4 5 5 #
"   
wξ 0 101 2ζ 2ζ 1 401 ζ 3ζ 1 1 ζ Lζ 1 1 ζ1 Lζ 1 1 ζ1 2Lζ 1
υ3 ( χ 1 ) = − L 1 x1 + L 1 x1 − x11 − + x 1 − − x 1 − , (37)
EI 6480 19440 24 3 40Lζ 1 3 40Lζ 1 3

Whereas that rotations are described for simply supported, fixed and propped can-
tilever beams respectively by:
3−3ζ
w ξ 0 1  3ζ 1 2ζ

θ ( χ1 ) = 4x1 − 6Lζ 1 x1 1 + L3ζ 1 , (38)
24EI
 3−3ζ
w ξ0 1
h i


 192EI −5L2ζ 1 x1ζ 1 + 9Lζ 1 x12ζ 1 , for 0 < x1 ≤ L/2

θ ( χ1 ) = (39)
3−3ζ
 3 
w ξ0 1
 
−5L2ζ 1 x1ζ 1 + 9Lζ 1 x12ζ 1 ζ Lζ 1



192EI − 32 x11 − 2 , for L/2 < x1 < L

3−3ζ

w ξ0 1 h i
2ζ 1
−202L2ζ 1 x11 + 401Lζ 1 x1
ζ
, for 0 < x1 ≤ L/3




 6480EI




3−3ζ
  3 4 
 w ξ0 1  
2ζ Lζ 1 810 Lζ 1
−202L2ζ 1 x11 + 401Lζ 1 x1 1 − 1080 x11 −
ζ ζ ζ
θ ( χ1 ) = 6480EI 3 + x11 − 3 , for L/3 < x1 < 2/3L (40)
 Lζ 1




3−3ζ
  3 4 4 

w ξ0 1   
 2ζ Lζ 1 810 Lζ 1 810 2Lζ 1
−202L2ζ 1 x11 + 401Lζ 1 x1 1 − 1080 x11 −
ζ ζ ζ ζ
+ x11 − − x11 − , for 2L/3 < x1 < L


 6480EI 3 Lζ 1 3 Lζ 1 3

Total responses are plotted in Figures 5–7.

Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 552 11 of 13

(a) (b)
·10−6 ·10−6
ζ = 1.00
ζ = 0.98 4 ζ = 1.00
ζ = 0.96 ζ = 0.98
3 ζ = 0.95 ζ = 0.96
ζ = 0.91 ζ = 0.95
2

[degrees]
ζ = 0.83 ζ = 0.91
[m]

ζ = 0.83
2
0
u3 (x1 )

θ(x1 )
1
−2

0 −4

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

x1 [m] x1 [m]

Figure 5. Simply supported beam: (a) lateral displacement and (b) rotation.

(a) (b)
·10−7 ·10−7
ζ = 1.00
4 ζ = 1.00
ζ = 0.98 ζ = 0.98
ζ = 0.96 ζ = 0.96
3 ζ = 0.95 2 ζ = 0.95
ζ = 0.91 ζ = 0.91
[degrees]

ζ = 0.83 ζ = 0.83
[m]

2 0
u3 (x1 )

θ(x1 )

−2
1

−4
0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

x1 [m] x1 [m]

Figure 6. Fixed beam: (a) lateral displacement and (b) rotation.

(a) (b)
·10−7 ·10−7
ζ = 1.00 4 ζ = 1.00
ζ = 0.98 ζ = 0.98
ζ = 0.96 ζ = 0.96
3 ζ = 0.95 ζ = 0.95
ζ = 0.91 2 ζ = 0.91
[degrees]

ζ = 0.83 ζ = 0.83
[m]

2 0
u3 (x1 )

θ(x1 )

1 −2

−4
0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

x1 [m] x1 [m]

Figure 7. Propped cantilever: (a) lateral displacement and (b) rotation.

Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 552 12 of 13

4.3. Discussion of Results

Three cases of the Euler-Bernoulli fractal beam problem with different boundary
conditions have been analysed.
The first case corresponds to a simply supported beam with uniformly distributed
load along the length of the beam, the maximum deflection occurs in the middle of the
beam (L/2), meanwhile the slope equation shows its maximum values at each of the pinned
supports. The equations are consistent with behavior of the standard Euler-Bernoulli beam.
In the second case, the beam is fixed at both ends and has a uniform load distributed
on the right half of the beam. As it was expected, the maximum value of beam deflection
corresponds to the points where the slope is zero. Also, the slope is equal to zero at both
fixed ends.
In the latter case, the beam is fixed at one end, pinned at the other one, and loaded
with a triangular linearly distributed load in the central part of the beam. The slope equals
to zero at the fixed end and have a non-zero value at the pinned end.
Also, it can be seen in Figures 5–7 that the fractal beam shows a greater bending
stiffness as the fractal dimension of coordinate χ1 decreases.

5. Conclusions
The Euler-Bernoulli beam equations were applied to a set of fractal beams with
different boundary conditions, a generalized formulation has been proposed by applying
the fractal continuum calculus, which is given in Equation (24). In addition, it was shown
that when ζ 1 = 1 identical results as for the classical equation are obtained. A comparative
analysis was carried out by solving the standard Euler-Bernoulli beam equations and using
the fractal continuum calculus. The effects of fractality have been investigated using several
values of ζ 1 , as the fractional order is linked to the fractal dimensions of the beam (as it can
be seen in Equation (5), Table 1 and Figures 5–7). Also, a generalized rotational equation
was suggested in Equation (23).
The mapping of the non-differentiable bending functions defined on a fractal beam
using Fd3 -CC was developed. Three cases of beams with different boundary conditions
H
were analyzed; the slope and deflection equations were depicted and compared with the
classical beam. It can be seen that the parameter of the fractal dimension of the beam is
strongly related to the bending stiffness of the beam. It was found that the bending stiffness
of the beam increases when the fractal dimension of coordinate χ1 given by ζ 1 decreases.
The equations for linear elastic isotropic fractal continuum were obtained by applying
the continuum fractal model to a static beam bending case. The mapping of the equations
can be extended to other cases, including the dynamical problems by extending the model
considering the inertia.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, D.S. and G.V.; methodology, A.K. and H.M.; validation,
D.S. and A.K.; formal analysis, D.S., A.K., H.M. and G.V.; investigation, D.S. and G.V.; writing—review
and editing, D.S., A.K. and H.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript
Funding: This work was supported by the Instituto Politécnico Nacional under the research SIP-IPN
grants No. 20220193, 20220455 and 20220493.
Data Availability Statement: All data are contained within the paper, and a report of any other data
is not included.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Razia, B.; Tunc, O.; Hasib, K.; Haseena, G.; Aziz, K. A fractional order Zika virus model with Mittag–Leffler kernel. Chaos Solitons
Fractals 2021, 146, 110898. [CrossRef]
2. Khan, H.; Ahmad, F.; Tunc, O.; Idrees, M. On fractal-fractional Covid-19 mathematical model. Chaos Solitons Fractals 2022,
157, 11937. [CrossRef]
Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 552 13 of 13

3. Zhou, H.W.; Yang, S.; Idrees, M. Fractional derivative approach to non-Darcian flow in porous media. J. Hydrol. 2018, 566, 910–918.
[CrossRef]
4. Chang, A.; Sun, H.G.; Zhang, Y.; Zheng, C.; Min, F. Spatial fractional Darcy’s law to quantify fluid flow in natural reservoirs. Phys.
A 2019, 519, 119–126. [CrossRef]
5. Carpinteri, A. Fractal nature of material microstructure and size effects on apparent mechanical properties. Mech. Mater. 1994, 18,
89–101. [CrossRef]
6. Shen, L.; Ostoja-Starzewski, M.; Porcu, E. Bernoulli–Euler beams with random field properties under random field loads: Fractal
and Hurst effects. Arch. Appl. Mech. 2014, 84, 1595–1626. [CrossRef]
7. Davey, K.; Rasgado, A. Analytical solutions for vibrating fractal composite rods and beams. Appl. Math. Model. 2011, 35,
1194–1209. [CrossRef]
8. Golmankhaneh, A.; Tunc, C. Analogues to Lie Method and Noether’s Theorem in Fractal Calculus. Fractal Fract. 2019, 3, 25.
[CrossRef]
9. Gowrisankar, A.; Golmankhaneh, A.K.; Serpa, C. Fractal calculus on fractal interpolation functions. Fractal Fract. 2021, 5, 157.
[CrossRef]
10. Tunc, O.; Atan, O.; Tunc, C.; Yao, J.-C. Qualitative Analyses of Integro-Fractional Differential Equations with Caputo Derivatives
and Retardations via the Lyapunov–Razumikhin Method. Axioms 2021, 10, 58. [CrossRef]
11. Bohner, M.; Tunc, O.; Tunc, C. Qualitative analysis of caputo fractional integro-differential equations with constant delays. Comp.
Appl. Math. 2021, 40, 214. [CrossRef]
12. Parvate, A.; Seema, S.; Gangal, A.D. Calculus on fractal subsets of real line-I: Formulation. Fractals 2009, 17, 53–81. [CrossRef]
13. Tarasov, B.E. Continuous medium model for fractal media. Phys. Lett. A 2005, 336, 167–174. [CrossRef]
14. Tarasov, B.E. Wave equation for fractal solid string. Mod. Phys. Lett. B 2005, 19, 721–728. [CrossRef]
15. Ostoja-Starzewski, M. Towards thermomechanics of fractal media. Z. Angew. Math. Phys. 2007, 58, 1085–1096. [CrossRef]
16. Ostoja-Starzewski, M. Continuum mechanics models of fractal porous media: Integral relations and extremum principles. J. Mech.
Mater. Struct 2009, 4, 901–912. [CrossRef]
17. Ostoja-Starzewski, M. Extremum and variational principles for elastic and inelastic media with fractal geometries. Acta Mech
2009, 205, 161–170. [CrossRef]
18. Li, J.; Ostoja-Starzewski, M. Fractal solids, product measures and fractional wave equations. Proc. R. Soc. A 2009, 465, 2521–2536.
[CrossRef]
19. Li, J.; Ostoja-Starzewski, M. Micropolar continuum mechanics of fractal media. Int. J. Eng. Sci. 2011, 249, 1302–1310. [CrossRef]
20. Balankin, A.S.; Elizarraraz, B.E. Hydrodynamics of fractal continuum flow. Phys. Rev. E 2012, 85, 025302(R). [CrossRef]
21. Balankin, A.S.; Elizarraraz, B.E. Map of fluid flow in fractal porous medium into fractal continuum flow. Phys. Rev. E 2012,
85, 056314. [CrossRef]
22. Balankin, A.S. Stresses and strain in a deformable fractal medium and in its fractal continuum model. Phys. Lett. A 2013, 377,
2535–2541. [CrossRef]
23. Balankin, A.S.; Mena, B.; Patino, J.; Morales, D. Electromagnetic fields in fractal continuum. Phys. Lett. A 2013, 377, 783–788.
[CrossRef]
24. Carpinteri, A.; Corneti, P.; Sapora, A.; Di Paola, M.; Zingzles, M. Fractional calculus in solid mechanics: Local versus non-local
approach. Phys. Scr. 2009, 2009, 014003. [CrossRef]
25. Carpinteri, A.; Corneti, P.; Sapora, A.; Di Paola, M.; Zingzles, M. Wave propagation in nonlocal elastic continua modelled by a
fractional calculus approach. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 2013, 18, 63–74. [CrossRef]
26. Drapaca, C.S.; Sivaloganathan, S. A Fractional Model of Continuum Mechanics. J. Elast. 2012, 107, 105–123. [CrossRef]
27. Samayoa, D.; Damián-Adame, L.; Kryvko, A. Map of a Bending Problem for Self-Similar Beams into the Fractal Continuum Using
the Euler–Bernoulli Principle. Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 230. [CrossRef]
28. Balankin, A.S. A continuum framework for mechanics of fractal materials I: From fractional space to continuum with fractal
metric. Eur. J. Phys. B 2015, 88, 1–13. [CrossRef]
29. Ochsner, A. Classical Beam Theories of Structural Mechanics; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; pp. 7–64.
30. Tunc, C.; Golmankhaneh, A. On stability of a class of second alpha-order fractal differential equations. AIMS Math. 2020, 5,
2126–2142. [CrossRef]
31. Samayoa, D.; Ochoa-Ontiveros, L.A.; Damián-Adame, L.; Reyes de Luna, E.; Alvarez-Romero, L.; Romero-Paredes, G. Fractal
model equation for spontaneous imbibition. Rev. Mex. FÍsica 2020, 66, 283–290. [CrossRef]
32. Balankin, A.S.; Susarrey, O.; García, R.; Morales, L.; Samayoa, D.; López, J.A. Intrinsically anomalous roughness of admissible
crack traces in concrete. Phys. Rev. E 2005, 72, 065101(R). [CrossRef]
33. Ben-Avraham, D.; Havlin, S. Diffusion and Reactions in Fractal and Disordered Systems; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge,
UK, 2002; pp. 21–32.
34. Balankin, A.S. Fractional space approach to studies of physical phenomena on fractals and in confined low-dimensional systems.
Chaos Solitons Fractals 2020, 132, 109572. [CrossRef]
35. Wang, C.M.; Reddy, J.N.; Lee, K.H. Shear Deformable Beam and Plates; Elsevier: Oxford, UK, 2000; pp. 11–16.