Two-Dimensional Problem

Solution

Using Airy Stress Function approach, plane elasticity formulation with zero
body forces reduces to a single governing biharmonic equation.
In Cartesian coordinates it is given by
4 4 4
4
 2 2 2  4 4  0
x x y y
and the stresses are related to the stress function by
2 2 2
 x  2 ,  y  2 ,  xy 
y x xy
We now explore solutions to several specific problems in both
Cartesian and Polar coordinate systems
 Cartesian Coordinate
Solutions
Using Polynomials
In Cartesian coordinates we choose Airy stress function solution of polynomial form
 

 A
( x, y ) 
m 0 n 0
mn x
m
y n , Amn  Constants to be Determined

Method produces polynomial stress distributions, and thus would not satisfy general
boundary conditions. However, using Saint-Venant’s principle we can replace a non-
polynomial condition with a statically equivalent polynomial loading. This formulation
is most useful for problems with rectangular domains, and is commonly based on
inverse solution concept where we assume a polynomial solution form and then try
to find what problem it will solve.
Notice that the three lowest order terms with m + n  1 do not contribute to the
stresses and will therefore be dropped. Second order terms will produce a constant
stress field, third-order terms will give a linear distribution of stress, and so on for
higher-order polynomials.
Terms with m + n  3 will automatically satisfy biharmonic equation for any choice of
constants Amn. However, for higher order terms, constants Amn will have to be related
in order to have polynomial satisfy biharmonic equation.
 Example 8.1 Uniaxial Tension
of a Beam y

T T
2c
x

2l

Stress Field Displacement Field (Plane Stress)

u 1 T
 x (l , y ) T ,  y ( x,c) 0 e x  (  x   y ) 
Boundary Conditions: x E E
 xy (l , y )  xy ( x,c) 0 v 1 T
e y  (  y   x )  
Since the boundary conditions specify constant y E E
stresses on all boundaries, try a second-order T T
stress function of the form u x  f ( y ) , v   y  g ( x)
E E
  A02 y 2  x 2 A02 ,  y  xy 0 u v  xy
 2e xy  0  f ( y )  g ( x ) 0
The first boundary condition implies that A02 = T/2, y x 
and all other boundary conditions are identically f ( y )  o y  uo
g ( x ) o x  vo
. . . Rigid-Body Motion
satisfied. Therefore the stress field solution is
given by “Fixity conditions” needed to determine RBM terms
 x T ,  y  xy 0 u (0,0) v(0,0)  (0,0) 0  f ( y )  g ( x) 0
z
 Example 8.2 Pure Bending of
a Beam y

M
M 2c
x

2l
Stress Field Displacement Field (Plane Stress)
Boundary Conditions: u 3M 3M
 y  u  xy  f ( y )
 y ( x,c ) 0 ,  xy ( x,c )  xy ( l , y ) 0 x 2 Ec 3
2 Ec 3
c c v 3M 3M  2
c
 x ( l , y )dy 0 , 
c
x ( l , y ) ydy  M
y

2 Ec 3
y  v 
4 Ec 3
y  g( x)
Expecting a linear bending stress distribution, u v 3M
try second-order stress function of the form  0   3
x  f ( y )  g ( x ) 0
y x 2 Ec
  A03 y 3  x 6 A03 y ,  y  xy 0 f ( y )  o y  uo
3M 2
Moment boundary condition implies that g ( x)  x  o x  vo
A03 = -M/4c3, and all other boundary conditions are 4 Ec 3
identically satisfied. Thus the stress field is “Fixity conditions” to determine RBM terms:
3M v ( l ,0) 0 and u(  l ,0) 0
 x  3 y ,  y  xy 0
2c uo o 0 , vo   3Ml 2 / 16 Ec 3
Example 8.2 Pure Bending of
a Beam
Solution Comparison of Elasticity
with Elementary Mechanics of
Materials y

M
M 2c
x

2l I 2c 3 / 3

Elasticity Solution Mechanics of Materials Solution

M Uses Euler-Bernoulli beam theory to
 x  y ,  y  xy 0 find bending stress and deflection of
I
beam centerline
Mxy M
u  ,v [ 4 y 2  4 x 2  l 2 ] M
EI 8EI  x  y ,  y   xy 0
I
M
v v ( x,0)  [4 x 2  l 2 ]
8 EI
Two solutions are identical, with the exception of the x-displacements
Example 8.3 Bending of a Beam
by Uniform Transverse Loading
w

wl wl
2c
x

y
2l
Stress Field
A23 5
Boundary Conditions:   A20 x 2  A21 x 2 y  A03 y 3  A23 x 2 y 3  y
5
 xy ( x,c ) 0 2 3
 x 6 A03 y  6 A23 ( x 2 y  y )
 y ( x , c ) 0 3
 y 2 A20  2 A21 y  2 A23 y 3
 y ( x , c )   w
c  xy   2 A21 x  6 A23 xy 2

c
x ( l , y )dy 0
3w  l 2 2  3w 2
c  x   2   y  3 ( x 2 y  y 3 )

c
x ( l , y ) ydy 0 4c  c 5  4c 3
c BC’s  y  
w 3w w
y  3 y3
c
 xy ( l , y )dy  wl 2 4c 4c
3w 3w
 xy  x  3 xy 2
4c 4c
Example 8.3 Beam Problem
Stress Solution Comparison of
Elasticity
with Elementary Mechanics of
Materials w

wl wl
2c
x

y
2l

Elasticity Solution Mechanics of Materials Solution

w 2 2 w y3 c2 y My w 2
 x  (l  x ) y  (  ) x   (l  x 2 ) y
2I I 3 5 I 2I
w  y3 2   y 0
 y    c 2 y  c 3 
2I  3 3  VQ w
 xy   x(c 2  y 2 )
w It 2I
 xy  x(c 2  y 2 )
2I
Shear stresses are identical, while normal stresses are not
 Example 8.3 Beam Problem
Normal Stress Comparisons of
Elasticity
with Elementary Mechanics of
Materials
x – Stress at x=0
y - Stress

l/c = 2

l/c = 3

l/c = 4 x/w - Elasticity y/w - Elasticity

x/w - Strength of Materials y/w - Strength of Materials

Maximum differences between two theories exist at top Maximum difference between two theories is w and
and bottom of beam, difference in stress is w/5. For most occurs at top of beam. Again this difference will be
beam problems (l >> c), bending stresses will be much negligibly small for most beam problems where l >> c.
greater than w, and differences between elasticity and These results are generally true for beam problems with
strength of materials will be relatively small. other transverse loadings.
 Example 8.3 Beam Problem
Normal Stress Distribution on Beam Ends

w  y 3 c 2 y  3w  1 y 3 1 y 
w  x (l , y )       3
 
I 3 5  2 3 c 5c
wl wl
2c
x

y
2l

End stress distribution does not  x (l , y ) / w

vanish and is nonlinear but gives
zero resultant force.
 Example 8.3 Beam
Problem w

wl wl
2c
x

y
2l

Displacement Field (Plane Stress)

w 2 x3 2 y 3 2c 2 y y3 2 2c 3
u [( l x  ) y  x(  )  x (  c y  )]  f ( y )
2 EI 3 3 5 3 3
w y 4 c 2 y 2 2c 3 y 2 2 y
2
y 4 c2 y 2
v  [(   )  ( l  x )  (  )]  g ( x )
2 EI 12 2 3 2 6 5
w 4 w 2 8
f ( y ) o y  uo , g ( x)  x  [l  (  )c 2 ]x 2  o x  vo
24 EI 4 EI 5
5wl 4 12 4  c 2
Choosing Fixity Conditions u(0, y ) v ( l , y ) 0 uo o 0 , vo  [1  (  ) 2 ]
24 EI 5 5 2 l
w x3 2 y 3 2c 2 y y3 2c 3
u [( l 2 x  ) y  x(  )  x (  c 2 y  )]
2 EI 3 3 5 3 3
w  y 4 c 2 y 2 2c 3 y y 2 y 4 c2 y 2 5wl 4 12 4  c 2
v      [( l 2  x 2 )   ] v (0,0) v max  [1  (  ) 2 ]
2 EI  12 2 3 2 6 5 24 EI 5 5 2 l
5wl 4
x4 l2 4  2 2  5wl 4 12 4  c 2 v
Strength of Materials: max 
  [  (  )c ] x   [1  (  ) 2 ] 24 EI
12 2 5 2  24 EI 5 5 2 l
Good match for beams where l >> c
Cartesian Coordinate Solutions
Using Fourier Methods
Fourier methods provides a more general solution scheme for biharmonic
equation. Such techniques generally use separation of variables along
with Fourier series or Fourier integrals.
4 4 4
( x, y )  X ( x )Y ( y )  2 2 2  4 0
x 4 x y y
Choosing X e x , Y e y   i
 sin x[( A  Cy ) sinh y  ( B  Dy ) cosh y ]
 cos x[( A  C y ) sinh y  ( B   D y ) cosh y ]
 sin y[( E  Gx ) sinh x  ( F  Hx ) cosh x ]
 cos y[( E   G x ) sinh x  ( F   H x ) cosh x ]
 0  0
0 C0  C1 x  C 2 x 2  C3 x 3
0 C 4 y  C5 y 2  C6 y 3  C7 xy  C8 x 2 y  C9 xy 2
Example 8.4 Beam with
Sinusoidal Loading y qosinπx/l

qol/ qol/
2c
x

Stress Field
Boundary Conditions: A  D(c tanh c  1)
 sin  x[( A  C y ) sinh  y  ( B  D y ) cosh  y ] B  C (c coth c  1)
 x (0, y )  x (l , y ) 0
c
 xy ( x,c ) 0 2  qo sinh
 x  sin x[( A sinh  y  C (y sinh  y  2 cosh  y ) C 2 l
 y ( x ,  c ) 0  B cosh  y  D ( y cosh  y  2 sinh y )]   c c c 
2 2   sinh cosh 
l  l l l 
 y ( x, c )  qo sin( x / l )  y    2 sin  x[( A  C y ) sinh  y  ( B  D y ) cosh  y ] c
c 2
 qo sinh

c
xy (0, y )dy  qo l /   xy    cos  x[( A cosh  y  C ( y cosh y  2 sinh y ) D 2 l
 B sinh  y  D ( y sinh  y  2 cosh y )]   c c c 
c 2 2   sinh cosh 

c
xy (l , y )dy qo l /  l  l l l 


l
Example 8.4 Beam y qosinπx/l

Problem
Bending Stress qol/ qol/
2
 x  sin  x[( A sinh  y  C ( y sinh  y  2 cosh  y ) 2c
x
 B cosh  y  D ( y cosh  y  2 sinh  y )]
c c
 qo sinh qo cosh l
C 2 l , D 2 l
  c c c    c c c 
2 2   sinh cosh  2 2   sinh cosh 
l  l l l  l  l l l 

A  D ( c tanh  c  1) , B  C ( c coth  c  1) ,  
l
 y y  c  y
 y cosh  2l sinh   c tanh  l  sinh
q c x l l  l  l
 x  o sinh sin  x l / 2
2 l l  c c
c  l sinh cosh
 l l
y y  c  y 
y sinh  2l cosh   c coth  l  cosh 
l l  l  l
 
c c 
c  l sinh cosh
l l 
3qo l 5
For the case l  c : D  , C 0 , A  D , B 0
4c 3  5
3q l 3  y y y  x 3q l 2 x
 x  3o 3  cosh  sinh  sin  3o 2 y sin
4c   l l l  l 2c  l
qo l 2 x
sin y
My 2 3q l 2 x
Strength of Materials Theory :  x    3 l  3o 2 y sin
I 2c / 3 2c  l
 Example 8.4 Beam
Problem y qosinπx/l

qol/ qol/
2c
x

Displacement Field (Plane Stress)

 
u  cos  x{ A(1  ) sinh  y  B (1  ) cosh  y v  sin x{ A(1  ) cosh y  B(1  ) sinh y
E E
 C[(1  ) y sinh  y  2 cosh  y ]  C[(1  )y cosh y  (1  ) sinh y ]
 D[(1  ) y cosh  y  2 sinh  y ]}  o y  uo  D[(1  )y sinh y  (1  ) cosh y ]}  o y  vo


u (0,0) v (0,0) v (l ,0) 0  o vo 0 , u o  [ B(1  )  2C ]
E
D
v ( x,0) 
sin x[2  (1  )c tanh c ]
E
3qo l 5 3qo l 4 x 1   c c
For the case l >> c D  3 5 v ( x,0)   3 4 sin [1  tanh ]
4c  2c  E l 2 l l
4
3q l x
Strength of Materials v ( x,0)  3 o 4 sin
2c  E l
Example 8.5 Rectangular
Domain with Arbitrary
Boundary Loading y
p(x)
Must use series representation for Airy stress
function to handle general boundary loading.
 b a a
  cos  n x[ Bn cosh  n y  Cn n y sinh  n y ]
n 1 x

  cos  m y[ Fm cosh  m x  Gm  m x sinh  m x ]  C0 x 2 b
m 1


 x   2n cos  n x[ Bn cosh  n y  C n ( n y sinh  n y  2 cosh  n y )] p(x)
n 1

  2
m cos  m y[ Fm cosh  m x  Gm  m x sinh  m x] Boundary Conditions
m 1
  x (a, y ) 0 ,  xy (a, y ) 0
 y    cos  n x[ Bn cosh  n y  C n  n y sinh  n y ]  2C 0
2
n  xy ( x,b) 0 ,  y ( x,b)  p ( x)
n 1

   2m cos  m y[ Fm cosh  m x  Gm ( m x sinh  m x  2 cosh  m x)] Using Fourier series theory to handle
m 1
 general boundary conditions, generates a
 xy   2n sin  n x[ Bn sinh  n y  C n ( n y cosh  n y  sinh  n y )] doubly infinite set of equations to solve for
n 1
 unknown constants in stress function form.
   2m sin  m y[ Fm sinh  m x  Gm ( m x cosh  m x  sinh  m x)] See text for details
m 1
Polar Coordinate
Formulation
Airy Stress Function
Approach
Airy Representation
 = (r,θ)
1  1  2 
r  
r r r 2 2 Biharmonic Governing Equation
2   2 1  1 2  2 1  1 2 
  2 4
   2   2 2   2   2 2   0
r  r r r r   r r r r  
  1  
 r   
r  r  
S
r R
y Traction Boundary Conditions
r
Tr  f r ( r, ) , T  f  ( r, )



r

x
Polar Coordinate
Formulation
Plane Elasticity
ProblemStrain-Displacement
u r
er 
r
1 u 
e   u r   
r  
1  1 u r u u 
er     
2  r  r r 

Hooke’s Law
PlaneStrain PlaneStress
 r  (er  e )  2er 1 1
er  ( r    ) , e  (    r )
   (er  e )  2e E E
 z  (er  e ) ( r    )  
ez  ( r    )  (er  e )
 r 2er , z  rz 0 E 1 
1 
er   r , ez erz 0
E
General Solutions in Polar
Coordinates
Michell Solution
b 4  2 1  1 2  2 1  1 2 
( r, )  f ( r )e    2   2 2   2   2 2   0
 r r r r   r r r r  
2 1  2b 2 1  2b 2 b 2 (4  b 2 )
f   f   f   f  f 0
r r2 r3 r4
Choosing the case where b = in, n = integer gives the general Michell solution
 a0  a1 log r  a 2 r 2  a3 r 2 log r
 ( a 4  a5 log r  a6 r 2  a7 r 2 log r )
a13 Will use various terms
 ( a11 r  a12 r log r   a14 r 3  a15r  a16 r log r ) cos 
r from this general
b solution to solve
 (b11 r  b12 r log r  13  b14 r 3  b15r  b16 r log r ) sin 
r several plane problems

in polar coordinates
  ( a n1r n  a n 2 r 2n  a n 3 r  n  a n 4 r 2 n ) cos n
n 2

  (bn1r n  bn 2 r 2n  bn 3 r  n  bn 4 r 2 n ) sin n
n 2
 Axisymmetric Solutions
Stress Function Approach: =(r) Navier Equation Approach: u=ur(r)er
(Plane Stress or Plane Strain)
 a0  a1 log r  a 2 r 2  a3 r 2 log r
d 2 u r 1 du r 1
a1 2
  2 u r 0
 r 2a3 log r   a 3  2a 2 dr r dr r
r2 1
a u r C1r  C 2
  2a3 log r  21  3a3  2a 2 r
r Gives Stress Forms
 r 0 A A
 r  2  B ,    2  B ,  r 0
Displacements - Plane Stress Case r r
1  (1  ) 
ur    a1  2(1  )a3 r log r  (1  )a3 r  2a2 (1  )r 
E r 
 A sin   B cos 
Underlined terms represent
4 r
u  a3  A cos   B sin   Cr rigid-body motion
E
• a3 term leads to multivalued behavior, and is not found following the
displacement formulation approach
• Could also have an axisymmetric elasticity problem using  = a4
which gives r =  = 0 and r = a4/r  0, see Exercise 8-15
Example 8.6 Thick-Walled Cylinder
Under Uniform Boundary Pressure
General Axisymmetric Boundary Conditions
p2 Stress Solution  r ( r1 )  p1 ,  r ( r2 )  p2
A
r1 r  2  B r12 r22 ( p2  p1 )
p1 r A
r22  r12
A
   2  B r12 p1  r22 p2
r B
r2 r22  r12
r12 r22 ( p2  p1 ) 1 r12 p1  r22 p2
r  
r22  r12 r2 r22  r12
r12 r22 ( p2  p1 ) 1 r12 p1  r22 p2
   
r22  r12 r2 r22  r12

Using Strain Displacement ur 

1 
r[(1  2) B  2 ]
A
Relations and Hooke’s Law E r
for plane strain gives the 2 2
1    r1 r2 ( p2  p1 ) 1 r12 p1  r22 p2 
   (1  2) r
radial displacement E  r22  r12 r r22  r12 
Example 8.6 Cylinder Problem
Results
Internal Pressure Only
r1/r2 = 0.5

Dimensionless Stress
θ /p
r1
p

r2

r /p

r/r
Dimensionless Distance,
2
r/r2

(   ) max ( r12  r22 ) /( r22  r12 ) p (5 / 3) p

Thin-Walled Tube Case: pro Matches with Strength

 
t r2  r1  1 ro ( r1  r2 ) / 2 t of Materials Theory
 Special Cases of Example 8-6
Stress Free Hole in an Infinite Medium
Pressurized Hole in an Infinite Medium Under Equal Biaxial Loading at Infinity
p 2 0 and r2   p1 0 , p2  T , r2  
T

r1
p r1 T

r12 r12
 r   p1 2 ,    p1 2 ,  z 0
r r
1   p1r12  r12   r12 
ur   r T  1  2  ,   T  1  2 
 
E r  r   r 
 max (  ) max   (r1 ) 2T
 Example 8.7 Infinite Medium
with a Stress Free Hole Under
Uniform Far Field Loading
Boundary Conditions
 r (a, )  r (a, ) 0
T
y  r (, )  (1  cos 2)
2
T
T a T   (, )  (1  cos 2)
2
x
T
 r (, )  sin 2
2
Try Stress Function
 a 0  a1 log r  a 2 r 2  a3 r 2 log r
 (a 21r 2  a 22 r 4  a 23 r  2  a 24 ) cos 2

a 6a 4a T  a 2  T  3a 4 4a 2 
 r a3 (1  2 log r )  2a 2  12  (2a 21  423  224 ) cos 2  r   1  2    1  4  2  cos 2
r r r 2 r  2 r r 
a 6a T a 2  T  3a 4 
  a3 (3  2 log r )  2a 2  12  (2a 21  12a 22 r 4  423 ) cos 2     1  2    1  4  cos 2
r r 2 r  2 r 
6a 2a T  3a 4 2a 2 
 r (2a 21  6a 22 r 2  423  224 ) sin 2  r   1  4  2  sin 2
r r 2 r r 
 Example 8.7 Stress
Results
T  a 2  T  3a 4 4a 2 
 r   1  2    1  4  2  cos 2
y 2 r  2 r r 
T a T T a 2  T  3a 4 
 max   (a, / 2) 3T
x
    1  2    1  4  cos 2
2 r  2 r 
T  3a 4 2a 2 
 r  1  4  2  sin 2
2  r r 

90 3
120 60

2
  ( a, ) / T

, /T
150 30
1    ( a, ) / T

180 0

r 
 ( , ) / T
210 330 a 2

240 300
270

  (a, ) T (1  2 cos 2)

r/a
  (a,0)  T ,   (a,30 o ) 0
Superposition of Example
8.7
Biaxial Loading Cases
T2

T1 = +

T1
T2
Tension/Compression Case
Equal Biaxial Tension Case T1 = T , T2 = -T
T1 = T2 = T
 3a 4 4a 2 
 r12   r12   r T  1  4  2  cos 2
 r T  1  2  ,   T  1  2   r r 
 r   r 
 3a 4 
 max (  ) max   (r1 ) 2T    T  1  4  cos 2
 r 
 3a 4 2a 2 
 r  T  1  4  2  sin 2
 r r 
  (a,0)   (a, )  4T ,   (a,  / 2)   (a,3 / 2) 4T
Review Stress
Concentration Factors
Around Stress Free Holes
T

r1 T T a T
x

K=2 K=3

T
T T

45o
T T
=
T T

K=4
T
Stress Concentration Around
Stress Free Elliptical Hole – Chapter
10
Maximum Stress Field
 b 
  max S  1  2 
 x S  a 
y

a 25
x
b

Stress Concentration Factor

20

15 ()max/S

10

5
Circular Case
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Eccentricity Parameter, b/a
Stress Concentration Around
Stress Free Hole in Orthotropic
Material – Chapter 11

x(0,y)/S

S S Orthotropic Case Carbon/Epoxy

x

Isotropic Case
2-D Thermoelastic Stress Concentration

Problem Uniform Heat Flow Around

Stress Free Insulated Hole – Chapter 12
q Stress Field
1 Eqa  a a 3 
y  r     sin 
2 k  r r 3 
1 Eqa  a a 3 
      sin 
a
x 2 k  r r 3 
1 Eqa  a a 3 
 r     cos 
2 k  r r 3 
Eqa
 max   (a, )  sin 
k
 max (a, / 2) Eqa / k

Maximum compressive stress on hot side of hole   / 2

Maximum tensile stress on cold side    / 2
Steel Plate: E = 30Mpsi (200GPa) and = 6.5in/in/oF (11.7m/m/oC),
qa/k = 100oF (37.7oC), the maximum stress becomes 19.5ksi (88.2MPa)
 Nonhomogeneous Stress Concentration
Around Stress Free Hole in a Plane
Under Uniform Biaxial Loading with
Radial Gradation of Young’s Modulus –
Chapter 14
3.5

n
r b/a = 20 b/a = 20
E ( r )  Eo  
a  = 0.25 3  = 0.25
n = -0.2

Stress Concentration Factor, K

n = 0 (homogeneous case)
2.5
n = 0.2
homogeneous case
n = 0.4
2
n = 0.6

1.5

1
-0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Power Law Exponent, n

Elasticity Theory, Applications and Numerics

M.H. Sadd , University of Rhode Island
Three Dimensional Stress Concentration
Problem – Chapter 13 S

Normal Stress on the x,y-plane (z = 0)

z
 4  5 a 3 9 a5 
y  z (r ,0) S  1  3
 
5 
 2 ( 7  5 ) r 2 ( 7  5 ) r 
x a

27  15 ( z ) max
 z (a,0) ( z ) max  S  0.3  2.04
2(7  5) S
S

3.5 2.2

3
Normalized Stress in Loading Direction

2.15

Stress Concentration Factor

2.5
2.1
2 Two Dimensional Case: (r,/2)/S
2.05
1.5
2
1
1.95
0.5
Three Dimensional Case: z(r,0)/S ,  = 0.3
1.9
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Poisson's Ratio
Dimensionless Distance, r/a
 Wedge Domain
y Problems
Use general stress function solution to include
terms that are bounded at origin and give
uniform stresses on the boundaries
 r 2 (a 2  a 6   a 21 cos 2  b21 sin 2)
r  r 2a 2  2a 6   2a 21 cos 2  2b21 sin 2


  2a 2  2a 6   2a 21 cos 2  2b21 sin 2

 r  a 6  2b21 cos 2  2a 21 sin 2
x

Quarter Plane Example ( = 0 and  = /2)

y

S  
 r  (  2  cos 2  sin 2)
  (r ,  / 2) 0 2 2 2
 r (r ,  / 2) S S S  
   (  2  cos 2  sin 2)
2 2 2
r S 

x
 r  (1  cos 2  sin 2)
2 2
  (r ,0)  r (r ,0) 0
 Half-Space Examples
Uniform Normal Stress Over x  0
Boundary Conditions
  (r ,0)  r (r ,0) 0
T
 r (r , ) 0 ,   (r , )  T
x
 Try Airy Stress Function
r
 a6 r 2   b21r 2 sin 2

  2a 6   2b21 sin 2

 r   a 6  2b21 cos 2

Use BC’s To Determine Stress Solution

y
T
 r  (sin 2  2)
2
T
   (sin 2  2)
2
T
 r  (1  cos 2)
2
Half-Space Under
Concentrated Surface Force
System (Flamant Problem)
Y
x X
Boundary Conditions
  (r ,0)  r (r ,0) 0
  r (r , ) 0 ,   (r , ) 0
r
C
Forces  Xe
C
1  Ye 2 

Try Airy Stress Function

 (a12 r log r  a15 r) cos 
 (b12 r log r  b15 r) sin 
y

Use BC’s To Determine Stress Solution

2
 r  [ X cos   Y sin ]
r
    r 0
 Flamant Solution Stress
Results
Normal Force Case
  cos   
2Yx y 2
2

x r
2Y ( x 2  y 2 ) 2
 r  sin  or in Cartesian
r 2 2Yy 3
 y  r sin  
   r 0 components ( x 2  y 2 ) 2
2Yxy 2
 xy  r sin  cos   
( x 2  y 2 ) 2
Y

r = constant xy/(Y/a)

Dimensionless Stress

y=a y/(Y/a)

y
 y 2Y / a
Dimensionless Distance, x/a
Flamant Solution Displacement
Results
Normal Force Case
u r 1 2Y
r   (  r    )   sin 
r E Er Y 
ur  [(1  )(   ) cos   2 log r sin ]
u 1 u 1 2 Y E 2
  r   (     r )  sin 
r r  E Er Y 
u  [  (1  )(   ) sin   2 log r cos   (1  ) cos ]
1 u r u u 1 E 2
r      r 0
r  r r  Note unpleasant feature of 2-D model that
displacements become unbounded as r  
Y

0.1

On Free Surface y = 0 0

-0.1

Y
u r ( r ,0) u r ( r , )   (1  ) -0.2

2E -0.3
Y
u ( r,0)   u ( r , )   [(1  )  2 log r ] -0.4

E
-0.5

-0.6

-0.5 0 0.5
Comparison of Flamant Results with
3-D Theory - Boussinesq’s Problem
Cartesian Solution
P Px  z 1  2  Py  z 1  2  P  z2 
u    , v     , w   2(1   )  
x 4R  R 2 R  z  4R  R 2 R  z  4R  R 2 
P  3x 2 z z R x 2 (2 R  z )  
 x   3  (1  2)   2 

2R 2  R  R R  z R( R  z )  
y
z P  3y 2 z z R y 2 (2 R  z )  
 y   3  (1  2)   2 

2R 2  R  R R  z R( R  z )  
3Pz 3 P  3 xyz (1  2)( 2 R  z ) xy 
 z  5
,  xy    
2R 2R 2  R 3 R( R  z ) 2 
Free Surface Displacements
3Pyz 2 3Pxz 2
P(1  )  yz  ,   
u z ( R,0)  2R 5
xz
2R 5
2R
Cylindrical Solution
Corresponding 2-D Results
P  rz (1  2)r   r  P   3r z  (1  2) R 
2

P ur  
u (r ,0)  [(1  )  2 log r ] 4R  R 2 R  z  2R 2  R 3 Rz 
E
(1  2) P  z R 
P  z 2    
3-D Solution eliminates the
uz   2(1  )  2  2R  R R  z 
2 
4R  R 
3Pz 3 3P rz 2
unbounded far-field behavior u  0  z  ,  rz 
2R 5 2R 5
Half-Space Under Uniform
Normal Loading Over –a  x  a
p

x
a a 1 2Y
2  x  r cos 2   sin  cos 2 
r
2Y
 y  r sin 2   sin 3 
r
2Y
 xy  r sin  cos   sin 2  cos 
r

2p
y dx d x   cos 2  d


r dY = pdx = prd /sin 2p
d y   sin 2  d

d  2p
d xy  sin  cos  d

2 p 2 p
 1
2
 x  cos  d    [2(  2  1 )  (sin 2 2  sin 21 )]
2
2 p 2 2 p
 y  
 1
sin  d  
2
[2(  2  1 )  (sin 2 2  sin 21 )]

2 p 2 p
 xy   
 1
sin  cos  d  [cos 2 2  cos 21 ]
2
Half-Space Under Uniform
Normal Loading - Results 0.5

0.45

xy /p

Dimensionless Maximum Shear Stress

0.4
Concentrated Loading
max/(Y/a)
Dimensionless Stress

0.35

0.3

0.25
Distributed Loading
0.2 max/p
y/p
0.15

0.1

0.05

Dimensionless Distance, x/a 0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Dimensionless Distance, y / a

max - Contours
Generalized Superposition Method
Half-Space Loading Problems
p(s)

a a
t(s)

2y a p( s )( x  s ) 2 2 a t ( s )( x  s ) 3
 x 
  2
 a [( x  s )  y ] 2 2
ds 
   a [( x  s ) 2  y 2 ]2
ds

2 y3 a p( s) 2y2 a t ( s )( x  s )
 y 
   a [( x  s ) 2  y 2 ]2
ds 
   a [( x  s ) 2  y 2 ]2
ds

2y2 a p( s )( x  s ) 2y a t ( s )( x  s ) 2
 xy 
   a [( x  s ) 2  y 2 ]2
s 
   a [( x  s ) 2  y 2 ]2
ds
Photoelastic Contact Stress
Fields

(Point Loading) (Uniform Loading)

(Flat Punch Loading) (Cylinder Contact Loading)

 Notch/Crack Problem
y

r

 
x Stress Free Faces

 = 2 - 


Try Stress Function:  r [ A sin   B cos   C sin(  2)  D cos(  2)]
   (  1)r   2 [ A sin   B cos   C sin(   2)  D cos(  2)]
 r  (  1)r   2 [ A cos   B sin   C (  2) cos(  2)  D(  2) sin(   2)]

Boundary Conditions:   (r ,0)  r (r ,0)   (r ,2)  r (r ,2) 0 

n
sin 2(  1) 0     1 , n 0,1, 2, 
2
At Crack Tip r  0: StressO(r   2 ) , Displaceme nt O(r   1 )
Finite Displacements and Singular Stresses at Crack Tip  1<  <2   = 3/2
 Notch/Crack Problem
Results
y

3 1  3  3 5  
 r  A(sin   5 sin )  B (cos   cos )
4 r  2 2 2 3 2 
r 3 1  3  3  
  A(sin   3 sin )  B (cos   cos )


 4 r  2 2 2 2 
x Stress Free Faces
3 1  3  3 1  
 = 2 -   r  A(cos   cos )  B (sin   sin )
4 r  2 2 2 3 2 
3 A  B 
 r  cos (3  cos  )  sin (1  3 cos  )
2 r 2 2 r 2
3 A  3B 
Transform to  Variable    cos (1  cos  )  sin (1  cos  )
2 r 2 2 r 2
3 A  B 
 r  sin (1  cos  )  cos (1  3 cos  )
2 r 2 2 r 2

• Note special singular behavior of stress field O(1/r)

• A and B coefficients are related to stress intensity factors and are useful in fracture
mechanics theory
• A terms give symmetric stress fields – Opening or Mode I behavior
• B terms give antisymmetric stress fields – Shearing or Mode II behavior
Crack Problem Results
Contours of Maximum Shear Stress

Mode I (Maximum shear stress contours) Mode II (Maximum shear stress contours)

Experimental Photoelastic Isochromatics

Courtesy of URI Dynamic Photomechanics Laboratory
Mode III Crack Problem –
Exercise 8-41
y  Contours for Mode III Crack Problem
z

r ●


x

Anti-Plane Strain Case

u v 0 , w  w( x, y )
2  2 w 1 w 1  2 w
 w 2   2 2
0
r r r r 
 A  A  z - Stress Contours
w  A r sin ,  z  cos ,  zr  sin
2 2 r 2 2 r 2

Stresses Again Or 

 1/ 2
 Curved Beam Under End
Moments

b
b/a = 4

Dimensionless Stress, a /M

a r
Theory of Elasticity

2
Strength of Materials
M M

 r (a )  r (b) 0
 r (a )  r (b) 0
b
 dr 0
a


b
 rdr  M
a


 a0  a1 log r  a 2 r 2  a3 r 2 log r

Dimensionless Distance, r/a
4M a 2b2 b r a
 r  [ 2 log( )  b 2 log( )  a 2 log( )]
N r a b r
2 2
4M a b b r a
   [  2 log( )  b 2 log( )  a 2 log( )  b 2  a 2 ]
N r a b r
 r 0
 Curved Cantilever
Beam P


r

Dimensionless Stress, a/P

a
b

 = /2 b/a = 4
 r ( a, )  r (b, ) 0
Theory of Elasticity
 r ( a , )   r (b, ) 0 Strength of Materials
b

a
r ( r ,0)dr  P
b b Dimensionless Distance, r/a

a
 ( r,0)dr   ( r,0) rdr 0
a
b

a
 ( r,  / 2)dr   P P
 r  (r  3 
a 2b2 a 2  b2
) sin 
b N r r

a
 ( r,  / 2) rdr  P ( a  b) / 2
P a 2b2 a 2  b2
   (3r   ) sin 
b
N r3 r

a
r ( r ,  / 2)dr 0
P a 2b2 a 2  b2
B  r   (r  3  ) cos 
 ( Ar 3   Cr  Dr log r ) sin  N r r
r
Disk Under Diametrical
Compression
P

D
=

P
Flamant Solution (1)

+ +

Flamant Solution (2) Radial Tension Solution (3)

Disk Problem – Superposition
of Stresses y
P
2P
 (x1)  cos 1 sin 2 1 r1
r1 1
2P
 (y1)  cos 3 1
r1 x

2P r2
(xy1)  cos 2 1 sin 1 2
r1

2P
 (x2)  cos  2 sin 2  2 P
r2
2P 2P  (R  y) x 2 ( R  y) x 2 1 
 (y2)  cos3  2  x    
r2   r14 r24 D
2P
(xy2 )  cos 2  2 sin  2 2P  ( R  y)3 ( R  y)3 1 
r2  y    
  r14 r24 D
2P  ( R  y)2 x ( R  y)2 x 
2P  xy  
 (x3)  (y3)  ,  (xy3) 0   r14 r24 

D
r1, 2  x 2  ( R  y ) 2
y
Disk Problem – Results
P
x-axis (y = 0) y-axis (x = 0)
r1 2
1 2P  D 2  4 x 2  2P
 x ( x,0)   x (0, y )  Constant
D  D 2  4 x 2  D
x
2P  2 2 1
2P  4D 4   y (0, y )     
2
r2  y ( x,0)   2 2 2
 1   D  2y D  2y D
D  ( D  4 x ) 
 xy (0, y ) 0
 xy ( x,0) 0

(Theoretical max Contours) (Photoelastic Contours)

(Courtesy of URI Dynamic Photomechanics Lab)
Applications to Granular Media
Modeling
Contact Load Transfer Between Idealized Grains

P P

Four-Contact Grain
(Courtesy of URI Dynamic Photomechanics Lab)
Contact Between Two Elastic Solids

Generates:
- Contact Area (w)
- Interface Tractions (pc)
- Local Stresses in Each Body
pc
w

Creates Complicated Nonlinear Boundary Condition:

Boundary Condition Changing With Deformation; i.e. w
and pc Depend on Deformation, Load, Elastic Moduli,
Interfacial Friction Characteristics
2-D Elastic Half-Space Subjected
to a Rigid Indenter

Rigid Indenter
Local stresses and
deformation determined
from Flamant solution
x
See Section 8.4.9 and
a a
Exercise 8.38
uy 1   x a
  2 a t ( s ) log x  s ds  a
u x 
2 E  -a p ( s ) ds  
x
p ( s ) ds  E -a  1

2 a 1   x a
 a
y u y 
E -a p ( s ) log x  s ds  
2 E  -a
t ( s ) ds x
t ( s ) ds  2

a1 and a2 are rigid body motion constants

du x 1 
 p( x)
dx E
Frictionless Case (t = 0) du y 2 a p( s)
E -a x  s
 ds
dx
 2-D Elastic Half-Space Subjected
Frictionless Flat Rigid Indenter
Rigid Indenter
p( s)
a
P u y u yo constant -a x  s ds 0
P
a a x Solution p( x) 
 a2  x2
uy 1 
u x  P sin  1 ( x / a ) , x  a
E
y 2  x  x2  
1/ 2

u y  log    2  1   u yo , x  a
P E  a  a  
p( x) 
Unbounded Stresses  a2  x2
2 Py a ( x  s) 2
at Edges of Indenter x  x  2  ds
Frictionless Rigid Punch Loading on a Half-Space  a 2 2
a  s [( x  s )  y ] 2 2 2

2 Py 3 a 1
 y 
2  a 2 2
a  s [( x  s )  y ] 2 2 2
ds

Max Shear 2 Py 2 a ( x  s)
Stress Contours
 xy 
2  a 2 2
a  s [( x  s )  y ] 2 2 2
ds
y
 2-D Elastic Half-Space Subjected
Frictionless Cylindrical Rigid Indenter
Rigid Indenter

P
a p( s) E
R
u y proportional to  x 2 / 2 R -a x  s ds 
2R
x

x
a a Solution
uy 2P 4 PR
p( x)  a2  x2 a2 
y a 2 E
2P
p( x)  a2  x2 4 Py a a 2  s 2 ( x  s) 2
a 2  x  2 2
 a 
a [( x  s ) 2  y 2 ]2
ds

-a a x 4 Py 3 a a2  s2
Elliptical Distributed Normal Loading on a Half-Space
 y  2 2
 a  a [( x  s ) 2  y 2 ]2
ds

4 Py 2 a a 2  s 2 ( x  s)
 xy  2 2
 a  a [( x  s ) 2  y 2 ]2
ds

Max Shear
Stress Contours
y