Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Finite Elements in Analysis and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/finel

Non-classical Timoshenko beam element based on the strain gradient

elasticity theory
Bo Zhang a,b, Yuming He a,b,n, Dabiao Liu a,b, Zhipeng Gan a,b, Lei Shen a,b
a
b

Department of Mechanics, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China
Hubei Key Laboratory of Engineering Structural Analysis and Safety Assessment, Wuhan 430074, China

art ic l e i nf o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 20 November 2012
Received in revised form
24 July 2013
Accepted 12 October 2013
Available online 14 November 2013

This paper presents a novel Timoshenko beam element based on the framework of strain gradient
elasticity theory for the analysis of the static bending, free vibration and buckling behaviors of
Timoshenko microbeams. The element proposed is a two-node element which has 6-DOF (degrees of
freedom) at each node considering both bending and stretching deformations, and 4-DOF considering
only bending deformation. Unlike the classical Timoshenko beam element, the current element satises
the C0 continuity and C1 weak continuity and contains three material length scale parameters to capture
the size effect. Finite element formulations are derived by utilizing the corresponding weak form
equations. Convergence, shear locking and comparison studies are carried out to examine the reliability
and accuracy of the numerical solutions. The shear locking study shows that the present beam element is
free of shear locking. Besides, it is established that there is a good agreement between the present results
with the results in existing literature. To further illustrate the applicability and accuracy of the new
Timoshenko beam element, the static bending, free vibration and buckling problems of microbeams with
various boundary conditions are covered by the analysis. The results show that such small size effects are
signicant when the beam thickness is small, but become negligible with increasing beam thickness.
Some results are believed to be the rst known in the open literature and can be used as a benchmark for
further studies.
& 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Timoshenko beam element
Strain gradient elasticity theory
Material length scale parameters
Size effect

1. Introduction
Microscale and nanoscale devices systems have attracted the
attention of many researchers due to their superior mechanical,
chemical and electronic properties and consequently wide potential applications in microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) and
nanoelectromechanical systems (NEMS) and atomic force microscopes (AFMS) [13]. Experiments on the metals [4,5] and polymers [6] have shown that the size effect cannot be ignored when
the characteristic length of elastic and plastic deformations is
typically on the order of microns. For example, Fleck et al. [4]
found that the shear strength increased by a factor of three as the
wire diameter decreased from 170 m to12 m in the microtorsion test of thin copper wires. In the micro-bending test of thin
nickel beams, Stolken and Evans [5] observed that the normalized
bending hardening had a great increase when the beam thickness
decreased from 100 m to12.5 m. Lam et al. [6] showed that the
bending rigidity increased about 2.4 times as the beam thickness
n
Corresponding author at: Department of Mechanics, Huazhong University of
Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China. Tel.: 86 27 87543438;
fax: 86 27 87544882.
E-mail address: ymhe01@sina.com (Y. He).

0168-874X/$ - see front matter & 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nel.2013.10.004

reduced from 115 m to 20 m in the micro-bending testing of

epoxy polymeric beams. The latest experimental studies can be
found in the literatures published by Liu et al. [79]. It is evident
from these experimental studies that the material properties of
microscale structures are size-dependent, and hence the size effect
must be taken into account in theoretical and experimental
studies.
It is generally known that the classical continuum theory does
not involve the size effect in microscale structures. To overcome
this shortcoming, new higher-order continuum theories, such as
couple stress elasticity theory [1012], strain gradient elasticity
theory [6], surface elasticity theory [13], micropolar elasticity
theory [14,15], and plastic strain gradient theory [4,16,17], have
been proposed and employed to study the mechanical behavior of
microscale structures. As we all know, beams are the critical
components extensively used in MEMS, NEMS and AFMS where
the structural size is in micron or sub-micron scale, and therefore
the static and dynamic behaviors of microbeams have received
considerable attention in the literature. By using a nonlocal
constitutive relation initiated in [14,15], various nonlocal beam
models for analyzing static, buckling and dynamic problems have
been proposed in the academic literature (e.g., [1822]). Considering the difculties in determining the microstructure related

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

length scale parameters, Yang et al. [23] rst modied the classical
couple stress theory [12,13] and proposed the modied couple
stress theory involving only one additional material length scale
parameter. Based on the modied couple stress theory, the static
and dynamic problems of microscale BernoulliEuler beams
[2426], Timoshenko beams [2730], Reddy beams [31], Kirchhoff
plates [3235], Mindlin plates [36,37], Reddy plates [38,39] and
nanoshells [40] have been studied thoroughly by researchers. Note
that the above works only studied the microbeams made of
homogeneous materials. For size-dependent microbeams composed of functionally graded materials (FGM) on the other hand,
Asghari et al. [41,42], Ke and Wang [43], Reddy [44], Ke et al. [45],
imek et al. [46] and Akgz and Civalek [47] investigated the
static bending, linear vibration, dynamic stability and nonlinear
vibration of FG Bernoulli-Euler and Timoshenko microbeams.
Although the rst-order shear deformation theory provides sufciently accurate result for moderately thick FG microbeams, it is
not convenient to use due to requiring a shear correction factor.
To avoid the use of the shear correction factor, Salamat-talab et al.
[48] and Nateghi et al. [49] utilized modied couple stress theory
to model the static, vibration and buckling behaviors of FG
microbeams based on a third-order shear deformation theory.
imek and Reddy [50,51] proposed a unied higher-order beam
theory to examine the static bending, free vibration and buckling
behaviors of FG microbeams based on the modied couple stress
theory. Given space limitations, the research work related to the
modeling and simulation of FG microplates with modied couple
stress are not mentioned here.
It should be pointed out that the afore-cited contributions based on
the modied couple stress consider rotation gradient tensor only and
other gradient tensors are neglected. As one of the most successful
higher-order continuum theories, strain gradient elasticity theory
proposed by Lam et al. [6] introduces three material length scale
parameters to characterize the dilatation gradient tensor, the deviatoric stretch gradient tensor and the symmetric rotation gradient
tensor. The higher-order stress tensor work-conjugate to the new
higher-order deformation metrics and the corresponding constitutive
relations are dened. It is worth noting that the modied couple stress
theory can be viewed as a special case of the strain gradient elasticity
theory when the rst two of material length scale parameters are
taken to be zero. This theory has been employed by many researchers
to analyze the static and dynamic problems of microscale structures.
For instance, Kong et al. [52] and Wang et al. [53] investigated
static bending and free vibration behaviors of BernoulliEuler and
Timoshenko homogeneous microbeams, respectively. The nonlinear
BernoulliEuler and Timoshenko homogeneous microbeams have
been respectively developed by Kahrobaiyan et al. [54] and Ramezani
[55]. Akgz and Civalek [5658] employed strain gradient elasticity
and modied couple stress theories to investigate the bending,
buckling and free vibrations of BernoulliEuler microbeams. Furthermore, they proposed a new size-dependent sinusoidal shear deformation beam model based on strain gradient elasticity theory [59].
Kahrobaiyan et al. [60] developed a FG strain gradient Bernoulli-Euler
beam model. The linear and nonlinear vibration characteristics of
strain gradient Timoshenko microbeams made of functionally graded
materials (FGMs) were studied by Ansari et al. [61,62]. Ansari et al.
[63] also investigate the postbuckling behavior of FG microbeams
subjected to thermal loads. Sahmani and Ansari [64] studied the free
vibration behaviors of FG microplates based on strain gradient
elasticity and higher-order shear deformable plate theory. Zhang
et al. [65] presented a FGM size-dependent curved microbeam model
based on nth-order shear deformation and strain gradient elasticity
theories.
Compared with the conventional elasticity theory, higher-order
continuum theories are more complicated, and heretofore the analytical solutions are available for those microstructure elements

23

(i.e., microbars, microplates and microshells) with simple geometric

shapes and boundary conditions only. As is well known, a powerful
numerical technique, e.g., the nite element method, is very useful for
implementation of the latter theory. However, the existing nite
element programs are not able to deal with this type of problems.
To the best knowledge of authors, however, only limited investigations
have been reported in the open literatures for the application of nite
element method to predict the mechanical responses of microstructure elements based on the size-dependent continuum theories. For
example, Phadikar and Pradhan [66] presented a nite element
formulation for nonlocal elastic nanobeams and nanoplates based on
nonlocal elasticity theory [14,15]. Pradhan [67] proposed a nite
element formulation for nonlocal elastic Bernoulli-Euler beam and
Timoshenko beam theories. Kahrobaiyan et al. [68,69] employed
modied couple stress theory to develop a size-dependent beam
element which can be used to predict the size dependence observed
in microbeams. By using nite element method initiated in Ref. [66],
Pradhan and Mandal [70] analyzed the vibration, buckling and
bending of carbon nanotubes in thermal environments based on the
nonlocal Timoshenko beam theory. Zhang et al. [71] developed a nonclassical Mindin plate element based on the framework of the
modied couple stress theory for analyzing the static bending, free
vibration and buckling behaviors of size-dependent Mindlin microplates. The element proposed is a four-node rectangular element
which has 15-DOF (degrees of freedom) at each node by considering
both bending and stretching deformations, and 9-DOF with only
considering bending deformation. This element satises the C0 continuity and C1 weak continuity and contains a material length scale
parameter.
In the present study, a non-classical Timoshenko beam element is
developed based on the strain gradient theory to predict mechanical
behaviors of the micro-/nano-scale beams. The rest of the paper is
organized as follows. In Section 2, the strain gradient elastic theory
is rst reviewed, and which are followed by the basic equations of
Timoshenko microbeams and the weak form formulations based on
the reviewed theory, respectively. Subsequently, the nite element
formulations based on the strain gradient elastic theory are in detail
deduced by using the corresponding weak form formulations. The
explicit forms of linear stiffness, mass and geometrical nonlinear
matrices are given in the Appendix. To illustrate the newly developed
beam element, the static bending, free vibration and buckling problems of Timoshenko microbeams are investigated thoroughly in
Section 4. Some of the present results are compared with the
previously published results to establish the validity of the present
approach. The paper concludes in Section 5 with a summary.

2. Theoretical formulations
2.1. Strain gradient elasticity theory
According to the strain gradient theory proposed by Lam et al. [6],
strain energy density is a function of dilatation gradient tensor and
deviatoric stretch gradient tensor in addition to the symmetric
rotation gradient tensor. To characterize these tensors, three independent material length scale parameters in addition to two classical
material constants are introduced to analyze isotropic linear elastic
materials. It then follows that the strain energy in a deformed isotropic
linear elastic material occupying region is given by
U

1
2

s
sij ij pi i 1
1 ms
ij ij d
ijk ijk

where the deformed measures as follows: strain tensor ij, dilatat1

ion gradient tensor i, deviatoric stretch gradient tensor ijk
, and

24

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

symmetric rotation gradient tensor ijs , are dened as

ij

1
u uj;i
2 i;j

i mm;i
1
sijk 
ijk

3
1
ij smmk jk smmi jk smmj
5

1
e ejpq qi;p
4 ipq qj;p

sij

4
5

where a comma followed by a subscript denotes differentiation with

respect to the subscript (e.g., ui,j ui/xj). In what it follows, unless
other stated, the Latin indices take the values 1, 2, 3. ui represents
the displacement vector, mmis the dilatation strain, and sijk is the
symmetric part of the second order displacement gradient tensor
dened by
sijk

1
u uj;ki uk;ij
3 i;jk

ij and eijk are the Knocker symbol and the alternate symbol respectively. Here it should be pointed out that the index notation will
always be used with repeated indices denoting summation 13.
The corresponding stress measures, respectively, are given by
the following constitutive relations:
sij mm ij 2ij

1
ijk

2
2l1 1
ijk

2
2l2 sij

msij

pi 2l0 i

10

where l0, l1 and l2 are the additional independent material length

scale parameters associated with dilatation gradients, deviatoric
stretch gradients and symmetry rotation gradients, respectively.
The parameters and appeared in the constitutive equation
of the classical stress sij denote the bulk and shear modules,
respectively which are given as
E
;

1 1  2

21

11

2.2. Kinematics
Consider a straight Timoshenko microbeam subjected to distributed loads fw(x,t), fu(x,t) and f(x,t) through the longitudinal
axis x of the beam, as shown in Fig. 1, where the xy-plane is
coincident with the geometrical mid-plane of the un-deformed
beam. The displacements based on the Timoshenko beam theory
can be expressed as
ux x; y ux; y  zx; y; uy x; y 0 uz x; y wx; y

12

where u and w are, respectively, the components of the displacement vector of the corresponding point (x, y, 0) on the beam midplane at time t, and is the rotation angle of a transverse normal
about the y-axis (see Fig. 1).
By substitution Eq. (12) into Eq. (2), the nonzero components of
the strain tensor are given as


u

1 w
xx
z
; xz

13
x
x
2 x
Using Eqs. (3) and (13) then leads to
x

2 u
2
z 2 ;
2
x
x

z 

14

Fig. 1. Beam conguration and coordinate system.

Substituting Eq. (10) into Eq. (5) yields



1 2 w
sxy syx 

4 x2
x

15

By means of Eqs. (4), (6), and (12), the nonzero components of

1
deviatoric stretch gradient tensor ijk
can be achieved
 2

 2
2 
u

w

1
1
1
4
;
xxx
25
 z 2 ; xzx
1
2
zxx xxz 15
2
2
x
x
x
x
 2

1 u
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
z 2 ;
yyx zzx xyy yxy xzz zxz 
5 x2
x
1
1
1
yzy zyy yyz

1
15


2 w

2
;
x
x2

1
zzz

1
5


2 w

2
:
x
x2

16

The non-zero stresses sij are obtained by substituting Eq. (13)

into Eq. (7)




u

z
; syy szz
z
;
sxx 2
x
x
x
x


w
 :
17
sxz
x
It is observed that sxz depends only on 1-direction. To take the
non-uniformity of the shear strain into account over the beam
cross-section, a correction factor ks, which depends on the shape
of beam cross-section, is multiplied into the stress component sxz
as the following relation:


w

18
sxz ks
x
The use of Eq. (14) in Eq. (10) then leads to
 2

2
2 u
2
px 2l0
; pz 2l0

z
x
x2
x2

19

And by inserting Eq. (15) into Eq. (9), the non-zero higher-order
stresses msij are


1 2 2 w
20
msxy msyx  l2

2
x
x2

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

Using Eq. (16) in Eq. (8) then leads to

 2

2
1
1
4 2 u

z
; 1
1
xxx 5 l1
xzx zxx xxz
x2
x2
2 2
l
5 1


2 2
2 w

1
1
l  2 2
;
1
yzy
zyy yyz
15 1
x
x


2 2
2 w

1
:
zzz
l1  2 2
5
x
x

1
1
1
1
1
yyx
1
zzx xyy yxy xzz zxz 


2
8
15 l1


w

;

2
x
x2
2


2 u
2

z
;
x2
x2

21

2.3. Equations of motion

t1

where U is the virtual strain energy, W is the virtual work done

by external forces, and K is the virtual kinetic energy.
The rst variation of the total strain energy in the Timoshenko
microbeam on the time interval [t1,t2] is (see Eq. (1))
Z t2 Z
Z t2
s
Udt
sij ij pi i 1
1
ms
23

ij ij ddt
ijk
ijk
t1

Note that the volume integral of a sufciently smooth function

F(x,y,z,t) over the region can be expressed as
Z Z L
Z
Fx; y; z; td
Fx; y; z; tdxdA
24

where A and L are the cross-sectional areas and length of the

microbeam, respectively.
The rst integral on the right-hand side of Eq. (23) can be
determined as, with the help of Green's theorem,
Z t2 Z
1 1
sij ij P i i ijk
ijk mijs s
ij

t1

t2

Z
0

t1

t2
t1

f u u f w w f dxdt

0
0
1
N 0
u u N w w N N u


u
w
x L
dt
N 1
N 1
j
w

x
x
x x 0

25
where
f u 

f w 

N0

1
1 0
0
0
0
0
4T 0
xxz  2T yzy  T yyz  3T zzz 8T xzx  M xy
15
2

1 1
1
1
1
1
T T 1
yyx 2T xyy 2T xzz  2T xxx  P x
5 zzx

N1

where
Z
N0
sxx dA;
xx

0
N xx
2 P 0
1 2
0
0
0
0
x

2T 0
xxx 2T xyy  T yyx  2T xzz  T zzx
2
5 x2
x
x

26

2 0
N0
1 2
1 M xy
0
0
0
0
0
xz

4T
8T
3T

2T

T


xxz
xzx
zzz
yzy
yyz
15 x2
2 x2
x
27

N 1
2 P 1
1 2
1
1
1
1
xx
x


2T 1
xyy T yyx  2T xxx T zzx 2T xzz
x
5 x2
x2
0
2
1 Mxy
0
0
0
0

4T 0
xxz  3T zzz  2T yzy 8T xzx  T yyz
15 x
2 x

P x0

T 0
xxx

N 1
xx

M 0
xy

P 1
x

px dA;

Z
A

N 0
xz

sxx zdA;

px zdA;

P 0
z

33
34

Z
A

sxz dA:

35

Z
A

36

pz dA:

Z
A

msxy dA:

37

1
A xxx dA;

1
T xxx

1;z
A xxx zdA;

0
0
T xzx
T 0
zxx T xxz

0
0
0
0
0
T 0
T yyx
zzx T xyy T yxy T xzz T zxz
1
1
1
1
1
T 1
T yyx
zzx T xyy T yxy T xzz T zxz
0
0
0
T zyy
T yyz

T yzy

Z
A

1
yzy dA;

T 0
zzz

Z
Z

Z
A

1
A xzx dA;

1
yyx
dA;
1
yyx
zdA;

1
zzz dA:

38

The kinetic energy of the Timoshenko microbeam is given by

 2
 2 #
Z "  2
1 L
u
w

K
m0
m0
m2
dx
39
2 0
t
t
t
where

m0 A;

m2 J;

z2 dA
A

40

The rst variation of the kinetic energy, on the time interval

[t1,t2] is determined to be

Z t2
Z t2 Z L 
2 u
2 w
2
Kdt 
m0 2 u m0 2 w m2 2 dx 41
t
t
t
0
t1
t1
In reaching Eq. (41), it has been assumed that the initial t t1
and nal t t2 congurations of the Timoshenko microbeam are
prescribed so that the virtual displacements vanish at t t1 and
tt2.
The virtual work done by the forces applied on the microbeam
on the time interval [t1,t2] can be expressed as
Z

t2

t1

Z
Wdt
Z

f  N 0
xz

32

1
P x1
1
1
1
1
2T 1
xxx  T yyx  T zzx  2T xyy 2T xzz
5 x
x

2  0
1 0
0
0
0
0
3T zzz  4T xxz  8T xzx T yyz 2T yzy  N 1

xx  M xy
15
2

Hamilton's principle is used herein to derive the equations of

motion. The principle can be stated in an analytical form as [36]
Z t2
U W  Kdt 0
22

t1

N1
w

25

t2 
t1

t2
t1

L
0

f u u f w w f dxdt

N u0 u N u1


u
w
1 x L
dt
N w0 w N 1
N 0
j
w
N
x
x
x x 0

42
28

N 0
u

1 0
P x0
0
0
0
0
T yyx T 0
N xx
zzx 2T xyy 2T xzz  2T xxx 
5 x
x

29

N 1u

1
v
0
0
0
0
2T 0
xxx  T yyx T zzx  2T xyy  2T xzz P x
5

30

N w

1
1 M xy
0
0
0
0
2T yzy
N 0
 4T 0
xxz T yyz 3T zzz  8T xzx
xz
15 x
2 x

where fu and fw are the x and z components of the body forces per
unit length, respectively; f is the body couple per unit length; N u0 ,
Nu1 , N w0 , Nw1 ,N0 and N 1 are external forces respectively work
conjugate to u, u/x, w, w/x, and /x.
Substituting Eqs. (25), (41) and (42) into Eq. (22), and then
setting the coefcient u, w and to zero, lead to the following
governing equations:
u : 

31

N xx0 2 P x0 1 2
2 u
0
0
0

2T xxx
3T yyx
 3T zzx
 f u m0 2 0
2
2
5 x
x
x
t
43

26

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

w : 

2 0
0
N xz
1 2
1 M xy
2 w
0
0
0
4T xzx
 T zzz
 T yyz

 f w m0 2 0

2
x
5 x
2 x2
t

44

:  N0
xz

N1
2 P 1
1 2
1
1
xx
x


3T 1
yyx  2T xxx 3T zzx
5 x2
x
x2

2
1 M xy
2
0
0
4T xzx
 f m2 2 0
 T 0
zzz  T yyz
5 x
2 x
t

45

The corresponding boundary conditions at the beam ends (x 0

and x L) can be obtained as
either u 0 or

either

either w 0 or

either

1
P 0
0
0
x
3T yyx
N xx0  N 0
3T 0
zzx  2T xxx 
u 0
5 x
x
46

u
1
0
0
0
1
0 or 2T 0
xxx  3T yyx  3T zzx P x N u 0
x
5

47

0
1 M xy

1 0
0
0
T T 0
N 0
zzz  4T xxz
xz  N w 0
5 x yyz
2 x
48

w
1
1 0
0
0
1
0 or 4T 0
M  Nw
0
xxz  T yyz T zzz 
x
5
2 xy

L
0

f u u f f w w dx



x L
1 u
1 w
N 0
N 0
N 0 N 1
j
u u N u
w w N w

x
x
x x 0

56

49

1
P 1
2
1
1
0
x
either 0 or
 4T 0
T 0
2T 1
xxx  3T yyx  3T zzx
xxz T yyz
x
5 x
5 zzz
1 0
0
 N 1
xx  M xy  N 0
2

For the free vibration analysis of Timoshenko microbeams, a weak

form may be derived from the dynamic form of the principle of virtual
work under the assumptions of the Timoshenko beam theory


Z L
2 u 2 u
u u
2 2
2 w

k3 2
k1 2
k2
 k6 2  k4
2
2
x x
x x
x x
x x
x
0







w
2 w
2 w
w
w
 k5

k
dx
 k7 2  k6


5
x
x x2
x
x
x

Z L
2 u
2
2 w

m0 2 u m2 2 m0 2 w dx
57
t
t
t
0
In the case of in-plane buckling analyses and assuming prebuckling stressess0xx , non-linear strains appear, and the weak form
can be reformulated as


Z L
2 u 2 u
u u
2 2
2 w

k3 2
k1 2
k2
 k6 2  k4
2
2
x x
x x
x x
x x
x
0







w
2 w
2 w
w
w
 k5
k5
dx
 k7 2  k6

2
x
x x
x
x
x


Z L
u u

w w
J
A
dx
58

s0xx A
x x
x x
x x
0
where s0xx is the in-plane pre-buckling stress.

50
either

1
1
1
1
1
0 or 3T zzx
3T yyx
 2T 1
xxx  P x  N 0
x
5

51

2.4. Equations of motion in terms of displacements

Substituting Eqs. (35)(38) into Eqs. (43)(45), the equations of
motion can be achieved in terms of the displacements (u,w and )
as
k1

4 u
2 u
2 u
k2 2 f u  m0 2
4
x
x
t

52

k3

4
2
3 w
w
2
f  m2 2
 k4 2 k5 k6 3  k5
x
x4
x
x
t

53

4 w
2 w
2 w
k 7 4  k 5 2 f w  m0 2
k5
3
x
x
x
x
t

54

k6

where





4 2
4 2
2
2
l1 2l0 ; k2 2A; k3 J
l1 2l0 ;
k1 A
5
5
 


32 2 1 2
2
l1 l2 2l0 J 2 ; k5 Aks ;
k4 A
15
4




16 2 1 2
1 2
8 2
l1  l2 ; k7 A
l2
l1 :
55
k6 A
15
4
4
15
2.5. Weak form equations of Timoshenko microbeam
A weak form of the static model for Timoshenko microplates
can be briey expressed as


Z L
2 u 2 u
u u
2 2
2 w

k
k1 2

k

k

k
2
3
6
4
x x
x x
x x2
x2 x2
x2
0



 2



2
w
w
w
w
w
 k5
 k7 2  k6


dx
k
5
x
x x2
x
x
x

3. Finite element formulation for the Timoshenko

microbeams
In this section, we consider the discretion of weak form equations
of Timoshenko microbeams, i.e. Eqs. (56)(58). From the above
equations, we can see that the second-order derivative of transverse
deection w, rotation and axial displacement u are contained in the
weak form equations, unlike those based on the classical Timoshenko
beam theory that only contains the rst derivative of those generalized
displacements. Consequently, to guarantee the integrability of weak
form equations, the C1 continuity of the generalized displacement
functions is required. However, the classical Timoshenko beam
element needs C0 continuity requirement only, and lacks material
length scale parameters in the constitutive relation. Therefore, it
is desirable to construct a non-classical Timoshenko beam element that satises the C 1 continuity requirement and involves
additional material length scale parameters to capture the
microstructure size effect.
In this paper, we present a 2-node Timoshenko beam element.
The proposed element has 6-DOF at each node and relax the
continuity condition more loosely, which satisfy the C0 continuity
and C1 weak continuity conditions and contains three material length
scale parameters.
It is clearly observed from Eqs. (52) to (54) that the axial
displacement u is uncoupled with the transverse displacement w
and the rotation can therefore be obtained separately based on
prescribed boundary conditions and suitable initial conditions.
To construct the mathematical form of these displacement functions, we assume that the solutions to the homogeneous differential equations can be expressed as exponential functions
u Uex ;

epx ;

w Wepx

59

As I know this approach has appeared in Refs. [72,73,68]

respectively for the macroscopical straight Timoshenko beam
element, the macroscopical curved Timoshenko beam element
and the strain gradient Bernoulli-Euler beam. Here, it should be

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

pointed that the axial displacement u is uncoupled with the

transverse displacement w and the rotation .
Substitution of Eq. (59) into Eqs. (52)(54) and dividing through by
the exponential function gives three homogeneous algebraic equations
for the three coefcients U, and Win Eqs. (52)(54) and the
parameter and p are undetermined
2 k1 2  k2 U 0

60

k3 p4 k4 p2 k5 pk6 p2  k5 W 0

61

p  k6 p2 k5 p2 k7 p2  k5 W 0

62

In order for a non-trival solution to the exist for U, and W the

matrix of the coefcients must be singular, namely its determinant
must be equal to zero. After some simplication we can get
2 k1 2  k2 0
4

63

2 2

p k3 k7 p k6 p  k3 p k5  k4 p k7 k4 k5 k5 k7  2k6 k5 0

64

Eq. (63) represents the eigenvalue equation of stretching

deformation whereas Eq. (64) represents that of bending deformation. The roots of Eqs. (63) and (64) can be given as follows:
q
q
65
1 2 0; 3 k2 =k1 4  k2 =k1

v
p u
p s
2u
2 d1  d2
td1 d2
p6  p5 
; p8  p7 
2
2
k3 k7
k3 k7

p1 p2 p3 p4 0;

66
where
2

d1 k6 k3 k5 k4 k7
q
2
2
2
4
2
2
2
2
d2 k6  2k6 k3 k5  2k6 k4 k7 k3 k5  2k3 k5 k4 k7 k4 k7  4k3 k7 k5 8k3 k7 k5 k6

67
The rst and most obvious solution for 0 and that means
that a constant value is a solution to the differential equation
related with axial displacement u. But since is squared that
means a multiplicity and requires that the linear polynomial x
must be also a solutions. The second family of solutions is based on
the solution for according to the expression inside the brackets
in Eq. (63). This indicates that the general solution to the axial
displacement function u consists of hyperbolic functions (sinh and
cosh). Similarly, the general expression of displacement functions
and w also can be reasoned based on Eq. (64).
Therefore, the accurate solutions of u, and w must be of the
following form:
u a0 a1 x a3 cosh3 x a4 sinh3 x

68a

b0 b1 x b2 x2 b3 x3 b4 coshp5 x b5 sinhp5 x
b6 coshp7 x b7 sinhp7 x

68b

w c0 c1 x c2 x2 c3 x3 c4 coshp5 x c5 sinhp5 x
c6 coshp7 x c7 sinhp7 x

coefcients to vanish identically we can obtain four constraints which

will leave exactly four independent coefcients. These independent
coefcients will later on have to be expressed in terms of the node
parameters (i.e. node displacement and rotation). Finally, the accurate
shape functions and w given by Kosmatka [72] can be recovered
here. The accurate shape functions for the present strain gradient
Timoshenko beam also can be obtained in the same way, however,
and the detailed formulas are lengthy and rather complicated and will
not be discussed. In this case, the shape functions obtained are
associated with material properties and length scale parameters. This
characteristic also can be found in the strain gradient BernoulliEuler
beam element developed by Kahrobaiyan et al. [68].
On the other hand, the Timoshenko beam nite element with
linear interpolation of both w and is the simplest, i.e.
b0 b1 x;

71a

b0 b1 x b2 x2 b3 x3

71b

w c0 c1 x c2 x2 c3 x3

71c

where ai(i 0, 1, 2 or 3) are the coefcients that can be determined by

four simultaneous equations linking the values of u and its rst
derivative u,x at the nodes when the coordinates take their appropriate
values, bi and ci can be obtained with the similar procedure as ai.
By using the displacement boundary conditions at the beam's
ends, the resulting explicit form of the shape functions are given as


1

 cosh3 L 3 L sinh3 L 1
3 L sinh3 L 2  2 cosh 3 L



 sinh3 L3 x sinh3 Lsinh3 x 1  cosh3 L cosh3 x ;


1

 L3 cosh3 L  sinh3 L
N u
2
3 3 L sinh3 L 2  2 cosh3 L




3 1  cosh3 L x L3 sinh3 L 1  cosh3 L sinh3 x



sinh3 L  L3 cosh3 L cosh3 x ;

1
N u
3 L sinh L 2  2 cosh L 1  cosh 3 L 3 sinh 3 Lx
3
3
3



 sinh3 Lsinh3 x cosh3 L  1 cosh3 x ;
N u
1



1

 sinh3 L  3 L 1 cosh3 L 3 x
3 3 L sinh3 L 2 2 cosh3 L





72
cosh3 L 1 sinh3 x L3  sinh3 L cosh3 x :

N4u

N3 3

x 2
x 3
2
;
L
L

x 2
L

N1w N 1 ;

u a0 a1 x

69a

u N u du ;

b0 b1 x b2 x b3 x

69b

where

w c0 c1 x c2 x2 c3 x3

69c

h
u
N u N1

By substituting Eqs. (69b) and (69c) into the governing equations of

classical Timoshenko beam (see also Ref. [72]) and requiring these

70

u a0 a1 x a3 cosh3 x a4 sinh3 x

where ai(i1, 2, 3 and 4), bi and ci are undetermined coefcients

(i 1, 2, , 8).
When the size effect is suppressed by letting l0 l1 l2 0,
Eqs. (68a)(68c) will reduce to the accurate displacement functions of classical Timoshenko beams, i.e.

w c0 c1 x

Eq. (70) is the equivalent of the case which considered the

double zero eigenvalues of Eq. (64) only. Obviously, Eq. (70) does
meet the equilibrium equation for non-zero coefcients b0, b1, c0
and c1. Those coefcients just need to be satised four boundary
conditions at the ends of the beam.
In view of the number of nodal parameters and notice that p is
quadruple zero roots, the simplest form of the displacement
functions for strain gradient Timoshenko beam can be assumed as

N 1 1  3

68c

27

2

x 3
L

N 2

N4

N 2w N 2 ;

x 2 x 3 
x
2
L;

L
L
L

 3
x
L

x 2 
L:
L

N 3w N3 ;

73

N 4w N 4 :

74

The element displacement will, as usual, be given by a listing of

nodal displacements

N N1

N d ;

N 2u
N 2

N3u
N 3

w N w dw

i
N 4u ;
i

N 4 ;

75

h
du u1
h

d 1

u;x 1
;x 1

u2
2

u;x 2

iT

;x 2

iT

28

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

h
w
N w N1

N 2w

N 3w

i
N 4w ;


d w w1

w;x 1

w2 w;x 2

iT

76
Using Eq. (75) into the weak form equations of Timoshenko
microbeam (i.e., (56), (57) and (58)), respectively, the nite
element formulations for the static bending, free vibration and
buckling problems can be obtained.
For static analysis, the formulation of Timoshenko microbeams
can then be obtained as
Kd F;

77

for free vibration analysis, it can be rewritten as

K 2 Md 0

78

and, for buckling analysis, one can write,

K F cr K g d 0;

79

where K is the global stiffness matrix, F is the global force vector,

M is the global mass matrix, Kg is the global geometrical stiffness
matrix. and Fcr = s0xx A are the natural frequency, and the critical
buckling load, respectively. The above global matrices and global
force vector can be obtained by assembling each corresponding
element matrix and load vector, respectively.
The element stiffness matrix Ke, element load vector Fe,
element mass matrix Me and element geometrical stiffness matrix
K eg can be given as
2
3
2
3
K uu K uw K u
M uu M uw M u
6
7
6
7
K e 4 K wu K ww K w 5; M e 4 M wu K ww M w 5;
K u K w K
M u M w M
2 g
3
2
3
0
0
K uu
Fu
6
7
6
7
0 7:
0
K gww
80
F e 4 F w 5; K eg 6
4
5
0
0
K g
F

K gww

T

T

Nu Nu
N u N u
;
k2
x
x
x2
x2
K u K u K uw K wu 0;


 2
T 2
Nw
Nw
N w T N w
;
K ww k7
k
5
x
x
x2
x2
" 
#
T 2
N N w
T N w
K Tw K w  k6

k
N

5
x
x
x2


 2 T 2
N N
N T N
k5 N T N :
k4
K k3
2
2
x
x
x
x
2

K uu k1

#

N u T 1 x L
T
T 0
N u f u dx N u N u
N u jx 0 ;
Fu
x
0
"
#


Z L
N w T 1 x L
Fw
N w T f w dx N w T N0

N
w
w jx 0 ;
x
0
"
#


Z L
N T 1 x L
F
N T f dx N T N0

N
jx 0 :

x
0
Z

"

RL

M uu

m0 N u T N u dx;

L
0

Z
M ww

K guu

RL
0

either



N T N
dx
x
x


A

86



32 2
1 2

2
l1 2l0 l2 JA 2
15
4
x




4 2 2
2
0 or J 2l0 l1
either
0
x
5
x2
either u 0 or A 2

either
82

83
RL



w
8 2 1 2 2 w
0 or A
l1 l2
x
15
4
x2


16 2 1 2
l1  l2
0
 A
15
4
x

87
81

M u M u M uw M wu 0;

K g

84




 3
16 2 1 2 2 w
4 2
2
l1  l2
l
 A

J

2l
 N 0
1
0
0
15
4
5
x2
x3



N u T N u
dx;
A
x
x



N w T N w
dx:
x
x

m0 N w T N w dx:

either 0 or

m2 N u N u dx; M w M w 0;

Since the analytical form of stiffness and mass matrices related

to stretching deformation are tedious and complicated, only those
matrices concerned bending deformation are listed in Appendix A.
From Eq. (81), it is clearly observed that the current Timoshenko
beam element based on the strain gradient elastic theory contains
three independent additional material length scale parameters, unlike
the existing beam element based on the classical Timoshenko beam
theory that requires C0 continuity only. Nevertheless, the presence of
those length scale parameters enables the incorporation of the
material microstructural features in the new element, thereby making
it possible to explain the size effect. This will be further demonstrated
in Section 4. In addition, the Poisson effect [27,50,53] is involved in Eq.
(81), which differs from the existing Timoshenko beam element being
negligible. Only for a slender beam with a large aspect ratio, the
Poisson effect is secondary and may be neglected by replacing 2
with E, as was done in classical beam theories. For other cases, the
Poisson effect will have to be included in order to obtain accurate and
reliable results. This will be further illustrated through numerical
results to be presented below.
For the strain gradient Timoshenko microbeam, it can be seen that
the boundary conditions require the specication of the primary (or
kinematic) variables u, u/x, w, w/x, and /x or else the
0
1
1
1
1
secondary (force) variables N 0
u , N u , N w , N w , N and N equal to
zero. As those higher order tractions in Eq. (42) have not special
physical meaning, all of them are not considered here.
By using Eqs. (35)(38) and (46)(51), the boundary conditions of
Timoshenko microbeams in terms of the displacements are given as


8 2 1 2 3 w
w
l1 l2
either w 0 or  A
ks A
15
4
x
x3

 2
16 2 1 2
l1  l2
 ks A  N w0 0
85
A
15
4
x2

where




u
4 2 3 u
2
 A 2l0 l1
 N0
u 0
x
5
x3


 2
u
4 2
2 u
0 or A
l1 2l0
0
x
5
x2

88

89

90

It is clearly seen from Eqs. (85) to (90) that letting the material
length scale parameters l0, l1 and l2 equal to zero, the higher order
boundary conditions (i.e. Eqs. (86), (88) and (90)) will automagically
disappear and meanwhile the boundary conditions related to those of
the classical beam theory are regained. Boundary conditions have to
be supplied to all the primary kinematic variables, in this case both
the displacements and the displacement derivatives. As in the
classical theory this can be accomplished by either prescribing a
value of a kinematic variable or prescribing the conjugated traction.
For the conjugate pair of displacement and force traction this is
standard procedure and will not be elaborated on further. For the

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

29

Table 1
Boundary conditions used in nite element implementation.
Boundary
conditions

Node parameters related to bending deformation

w

w,x

,x

Movable (u a 0)

S
C
F

0
0

Immovable (u 0)

S
C
F

0
0

displacement derivatives and higher order tractions, this procedure

merits a more thorough investigation. Physically, some of the
available conditions seem unreasonable when applied to the higher
order terms. For instance, a boundary on which displacement
derivative is constrained to a non-zero value would be hard to
motivate and the physical interpretation in terms of actual processes that would lead to such a condition defy the imagination of
the authors. For the sake of convenience, we neglect higher-order
boundary conditions for the later discussion. The validity of the
present approach will be established by comparing the present
results with previously published results.
Table 1 lists the kinematic boundary conditions in our nite
element implementations. The capital letter C, S and F respectively
represents the boundary conditions of the edges as clamped,
simply supported and free. In addition, the dashes denote the
unknown displacements on the corresponding boundary.
4. Numerical results and discussion
In this section, static bending, free vibration and static buckling
problems of a Timoshenko microbeam with various boundary conditions are numerical solved by applying the developed non-classical
beam element. For simplicity, axial deformation is no considered in
the following investigations. To verify the reliability and the accuracy
of the aforementioned method, several comparison studies of the
static and free vibration responses of the present method are carried
out with the results given in the available literature [53,59,68]. Unless
other stated, the microbeam investigated here is made of epoxy with
the following m properties [6,27,53]: E1.44 GPa, 1220kg=m3 ,
0.38 and l17.6 m. The material length scale parameter l for
the epoxy microbeam is based on the work reported by Lam et al. [6].
They fabricated the epoxy microbeams and conducted the bending
tests by using a nano-indenter to determine the material length scale
parameter which is depended on the material microstructures (e.g.,
dislocations, lattice defects and voids). Except where noted, the shear
coefcient ks is taken to be 5=6, which was often used for a
rectangular cross-section beam. The following dimensionless quantities can be dened for the convenience:
Dimensionless transverse deection:
EJ
for point load
PL3
Dimensionless transverse deection:
EJ
w 1000w
or uniform load
f w L4
Dimensionless rotation:
EJ
1000 2 for point load
PL
Dimensionless rotation:
EJ
1000
or uniformload
f w L3
Dimensionless natural frequency:
w 1000w

Fig. 2. Timoshenko microbeam with two different boundary conditions.

r
m0
EJ
Dimensionless critical buckling load:
L2

F cr

F cr L2
EJ

4.1. Convergence study

In order to verify the convergence of the present approach,
the static bending of a Timoshenko microbeam with the loading,
geometry, and cross-sectional shape shown in Fig. 2 is solved
by applying the present non-classical beam element. The dimensionless deection and rotation results listed in Table 2 are correspond to
the CC and SS boundary conditions at the prescribed point x L=4.
It is observed that the present method has good convergency and high
precision. Therefore, one could observe that 20 elements are enough
to get reasonably accurate results. So in all the following computation
20 elements are employed.
For illustration purposes, the following parameters are used in
computing the numerical results: P 100 N, E 1.44 GPa, 0.38
1220kg=m3 , l 17.6 m, hl, L 20 h, and b2 h.
4.2. Shear locking study
As we all know, shear locking appears in the classical Timoshenko
beam element when the thickness-to-length ratio is small. The
reduced integration using a single Gauss point is utilized to compute
shear strain energy while the full integration with two Gauss points is
used for the bending strain energy. Unfortunately, the reduced
integration often causes instability due to rank deciency and results
in zero-energy modes. Theoretically, it is well known that the shear
effect reduces as the length-to-thickness ratio (L=h) increases. Hence,
solutions of the Timoshenko theory will approach those of the
Bernoulli-Euler model. Now, we illustrate the performance of the
present Timoshenko beam element when the thickness becomes very
thin. For the sake of simplicity, the material length scale parameters
are all set to zero here. We consider a cantilever subjected a
concentrate force P and a force couple M at the free end, as shown
in Fig. 3. Due to the lack of material length scale parameters, the
element stiffness sub-matrices related bending deformation are given
as
2
3
6
1
6
1
 5L
5L
10
10
6 1
7
2
1
1 7
6
 10
 30
L7
15 L
6 10
K ww k5 6
;
6
1
6
1 7
6  5L
7
 10
 10
5L
4
5
1
1
1
2
 30
L  10
10
15 L

30

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

Table 2
Dimensionless deection and rotation results at a prescribed point x L/4
Boundary conditions

Sources

Node parameters

Presenta

SS

Present

Presentc
Presenta

CC

Presentb
Presentc

a
b
c

Number of elements
4

12

16

20

7.7370
25.3897
2.3390
7.6732
0.9170
3.0590

7.7374
25.3842
2.3393
7.6819
0.9176
3.0644

7.7375
25.3850
2.3393
7.6824
0.9176
3.0644

7.7375
25.3853
2.3393
7.6824
0.9177
3.0644

7.7375
25.3853
2.3393
7.6824
0.9177
3.0644

1.4769
8.6962
0.5551
2.9112
0.2358
1.2440

1.4773
8.6907
0.5840
2.9553
0.2364
1.2497

1.4774
8.6914
0.5969
2.9869
0.2364
1.2496

1.4774
8.6917
0.6030
3.0037
0.2364
1.2497

1.4774
8.6918
0.6061
3.0119
0.2364
1.2497

Classical theory, i.e. i.e. l0 l1 l2 0.

Modied couple stress theory, i.e.l0 0, l1 0 and l2 l.
Strain gradient elasticity theory, i.e. l0 l1 l2 l.


T
F RA 0 0 0 M A 0 M 0
97
By solving nite element equation, the solutions of the cantilever subjected a point force are given as

wA 0;

6
6
6
K Tw K w k5 6
6
4
2

1
5

1
2
1
L
 10
1
2
1
10 L

6k4
13
7 L Lk5

6 
6 1 k4 11 2 
6
6 10 k5 21 L


K k5 6
6 3 3L 2k4
6 5 14  Lk5
6 

4
1 k4
13L2
10 k5  42

1
10 L

0
1
 10
L
1 2
L
60
1
10

L
15
1
10

k4
k5

2k4
k5

11 2
21 L
2

L7

k4
k5

1
 10
L

1
2
1
10 L
 12
1
 10
L



2


2

k4
L
14 3k5
13L
42

L
 10

2k4
Lk5

wA 0;


2
 kk45 13L
42


6k4
1 13
5 7 L Lk5


2
1 k4
 10
11
21 L
k5
1
10

3L
14

1
10

k4
k5

13L2
42

 3

2
 7
7
k4
L
L
7
 10
14 3k5
7

 7:
1 k4
11 2 7
 10 k5 21 L 7

 7
5
L 2k4
L2
15 k5 7

91
where k4 J(2) and k5 Aks.
Now the present beam element is used to calculate the
deection and rotation at the right end. The element displacement
and force vectors can be written as
h
iT
wA w;x A wB w;x B A ;x A B ;x B
92
h
F RA

RhA

RhB

RB

MA

M hA

MB

M hB

iT

93

where wA, (w,x)A, A, (,x)A, wB, (w,x)B, B, (,x)B are the node
displacement parameters of the present beam element. RA, RB, MA,
MB are the classical node forces; RhA , RhB , M hA , M hB are the higherorder forces work-conjugate to (w,x)A, (,x)A, (w,x)B, (,x)B respectively. Note that the higher-order forces are all set to zeros.
For concentrated force, the above equations are simplied as
h
iT
0 w;x A wB w;x B 0 ;x A B ;x B
94

F RA

MA

P
;
k5

PL
;
k4

wB

PL3k4 L2 k5
;
3k5 k4

1 L2 P
;
2 k4

w;x B

PL2 k5 2k4
;
2k5 k4

;x B 0:

98

With the same way, we can get the node displacement

parameters for a cantilever subjected to a force couple as follows:

7
1 27
 60
L 7
7;
1
7
10 L 5
0
3
5

A 0; ;x A

Fig. 3. A micro-cantilever subjected loads acting on the ends.

w
x

In the case of force couple, it follows that

h
iT
0 w;x A wB w;x B 0 ;x A B ;x B

95

96

w;x A 0;

ML
;
k4

;x B

wB

1 ML2
2 k4

M
;
k4

for force couple:

w;x B

ML
;
k4

A 0;

;x A

M
;
k4

99

Substituting the specic expressions of k4 and k5 into Eqs. (97)

and (98), we obtain
wB
B

"
#
 2
PL3
1 h
1  2
;

1
3EJ
2ks L
1 
PL2 1 1 2
;
2EJ1 

w;x B

"
 2 #
PL2 1 1  2
1
h
;

2EJ
1 
12ks L

for point force;

100
And
ML2 1 1  2
ML 1 1  2
; w;x B
;
1 
EJ
1 
2EJ
ML 1 1  2
; for force couple:
B
EJ
1 
wB

101

From Eqs. (100) and (101), one can clearly seen that the results
obtained by the present Timoshenko beam element can reduce to
the solutions of classical Bernoulli-Euler theory when the Poisson
effect is set to zeros (i.e. 0) and the thickness-to-thickness ratio
is very small. Consequently, it can be concluded that the present
beam element performs well and the shear locking problem will
not exist here.
4.3. Verication study
4.3.1. Timoshenko microbeam with SS boundary conditions
For comparison, the microbeam is taken to be made of epoxy.
The cross-sectional shape is kept to be the same by letting b=h 2.
All material length scale parameters are considered to be equal to
each other as l0 l1 l2 l 17.6 m. If the rst two or all material

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

Table 3
Dimensionless central deections of the Timoshenko microbeam subjected to a
uniform load, fw 10 N/m.

Table 6
Comparison of the dimensionless second-order frequency.
h=l

h=l

Sources

L 10 h
CT

MCST

SGT

CT

MCST

SGT

EBT [59]
Presenta
TBT [59]
Presentb
SBT [59]

6.9556
6.9556
7.3006
7.3006
7.2999

2.0934
2.0934
2.2384
2.2384
2.1277

0.7513
0.7516
1.0760
1.0764
0.7742

6.9556
6.9556
6.9940
6.9940
6.9939

2.0934
2.0934
2.1097
2.1097
2.0973

0.7550
0.7551
0.7937
0.7937
0.7576

EBT [59]
Presenta
TBT [59]
Presentb
SBT [59]

6.9556
6.9556
7.3006
7.3006
7.2999

6.3644
6.3644
6.6804
6.6804
6.6468

5.2285
5.2287
5.5740
5.5744
5.4576

6.9556
6.9556
6.9940
6.9940
6.9939

6.3644
6.3645
6.3995
6.3995
6.3958

5.2358
5.2361
5.2743
5.2743
5.2613

Sources

L 10 h

L 30 h

L 30 h

31

CT

MCST

SGT

CT

MCST

SGT

EBT [59]
Presenta
TBT [59]
Presentb
SBT [59]

53.1473
53.1477
48.6751
48.6751
48.6922

96.8767
96.8767
86.4924
86.4924
94.1134

163.1234
162.9447
106.1615
106.1113
154.5577

53.9161
53.9160
53.3195
53.3195
53.3206

98.2779
98.2777
96.7708
96.7708
97.9163

163.8039
163.7976
149.3488
149.3436
162.6833

EBT [59]
Presenta
TBT [59]
Presentb
SBT [59]

53.1473
53.1477
48.6751
48.6751
48.6922

55.5613
55.5613
50.9056
50.9056
51.3623

61.4494
61.4396
54.8583
54.8511
56.8752

53.9161
53.9159
53.3195
53.3195
53.3206

56.3649
56.3649
55.7406
55.7406
55.8057

62.1605
62.1601
61.2486
61.2483
61.5514

The value of shear correction factor ks is set equal to 107.

The value of shear correction factor ks is set equal to 5=6.

Table 4
Dimensionless maximum static deections of the Timoshenko microbeam subjected to a point load, P 100 N.
h=l

Sources

L 10 h
CT

L 30 h
MCST

SGT

CT

MCST

SGT

EBT [59]
Presenta
TBT [59]
Presentb
SBT [59]

11.1290
11.1290
11.8176
11.8174
11.8060

3.3495
3.3495
3.6239
3.6239
3.4152

1.2007
1.2010
1.7662
1.7666
1.2438

11.1290
11.1289
11.2055
11.2055
11.2051

3.3495
3.3496
3.3813
3.3813
3.3570

1.2079
1.2079
1.2808
1.2808
1.2129

EBT [59]
Presenta
TBT [59]
Presentb
SBT [59]

11.1290
11.1290
11.8176
11.8174
11.8060

10.1830
10.1830
10.8023
10.8023
10.7319

8.3627
8.3628
9.0290
9.0294
8.8020

11.1290
11.1290
11.2055
11.2055
11.2051

10.1830
10.1826
10.2528
10.2528
10.2452

8.3769
8.3781
8.4529
8.4529
8.4272

Fig. 4. Size effect on the dimensionless deection curve of the simply supported
Timoshenko beam by using the present approach.

Table 5
Comparison of the dimensionless fundamental frequency.
h=l

Sources

L 10 h

L 30 h

CT

MCST

SGT

CT

MCST

SGT

EBT [59]
Presenta
TBT [59]
Presentb
SBT [59]

13.4484
13.4484
13.1232
13.1232
13.1239

24.5137
24.5137
23.7053
23.7053
24.3157

40.9238
40.9124
34.1822
34.1755
40.3106

13.4975
13.4975
13.4595
13.4595
13.4595

24.6031
24.6027
24.5061
24.5061
24.5801

40.9674
40.9673
39.9336
39.9333
40.8962

EBT [59]
Presenta
TBT [59]
Presentb
SBT [59]

13.4484
13.4484
13.1232
13.1232
13.1239

14.0593
14.0592
13.7192
13.7192
13.7542

15.5118
15.5112
15.0180
15.0175
15.1796

13.4975
13.4978
13.4595
13.4595
13.4595

14.1105
14.1107
14.0707
14.0707
14.0749

15.5572
15.5568
15.4989
15.4988
15.5184

length scale parameters equal to zero, the strain gradient model

(SGT) will be turned into the modied couple stress model (MCST)
or the classical model (CT), respectively.
The dimensionless central deections under uniform and point
loads with different thickness-to-material length scale parameters
ratio and length-to-thickness are given in Tables 3 and 4, respectively. For comparison purposes, the analytical solutions given by
Akgz and Civalek are also listed in these tables. Excellent
agreement is achieved between the present results and those
analytical ones provided in Ref. [59]. To reect the shear deformation effect, two cases of shear correction factor ks 107 and
ks 5=6 are considered here respectively. It can be seen that shear

Fig. 5. Size effect on the rotation curve of the simply supported Timoshenko beam
by using the present approach.

deformation becomes more important for stubby beams. The

deection results obtained by the present beam element even
are in good agreement with the analytical solutions of the
Bernoulli-Euler microbeam, when the shear correction factor is
set equal to a reasonable and large enough value.
To further verify the vibration results, the dimensionless
natural frequencies of a Timoshenko microbeam are compared
with those of Akgz and Civalek by adopting the same

32

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

Fig. 6. Natural frequency obtained by the present approach varying with dimensionless thickness, 0.

Fig. 7. Natural frequency obtained by the present approach varying with dimensionless thickness, 0.38.

computation parameters. In Tables 5 and 6, the dimensionless

fundamental and second-order frequencies of the Timoshenko
microbeam are respectively tabulated, where different dimensionless thickness (h=l) and dimensionless length (L=h) are considered.
The comparison shows that the present frequencies are in very
consistent with those of the existing literature.
In Figs. 4 and 5, deection and rotation curves of a simply
supported Timoshenko microbeam subjected to the midspan load
are plotted by using the present beam element by considering
different beam theories, respectively. Figs. 6 and 7 depict the effects
of dimensionless thickness (h=l) on variation of the fundamental
natural frequency. According to the compare with the analytical
solutions given by Wang et al. [53], it is clearly shown that the
calculated results agree with the reference results pretty well. Note
that the parameters of material property, geometry shape adopted
here are same as the literature for direct comparison. The results of
Wang et al. [53] are not depicted in Figs. 47 to make the present
results more clearly.

4.3.2. Timoshenko microbeam with CF boundary conditions

In this example, the dimensionless deections of a Timoshenko
microbeam under three different frameworks of continuum theory
are plotted in Fig. 8 as a function of the dimensionless length.

Fig. 8. Variation of the dimensionless transverse deections of the Timoshenko

microbeam subjected to a point force with for different continuum theories.

Fig. 9. Variation of the dimensionless end deections as function of the dimensionless thickness.

The dimensionless deections of Kahrobaiyan et al. [68] are used

for comparison. Compared with the FEM results based on strain
gradient Bernoulli-Euler element (see also Fig. 4 displayed in
Ref. [68]), one can nd that good agreement is obtained and the
present FEM results are found to be reliable and precise enough.
The graphical does not depict the deection results of strain
gradient Bernoulli-Euler element, see Ref. [68] for further details.
To makes direct comparison, the microbeam is divided into 10
strain gradient Timoshenko beam elements, the material length
scale parameters associated with the strain gradient theory,
modied couple stress theory and classical theory are set as
l0 l1 l2 l 11.01 m, l2 l 17.6 m and also l0 l1 0, and
l0 l1 l2 0 respectively. The shear correction factor ks is set equal
to 107 to eliminate the shear deformation effect.
Fig. 9 plots the dimensionless end deection w(L)/wCT(L) of
the strain gradient cantilever versus dimensionless thickness h=l.
Making comparison with Fig. 5 illustrated in Ref. [68], it clearly
shows that the deection results by using the present approach
are in good agreement with those of the existing literature.
The micro-cantilever is assumed to be made of epoxy. In
addition, geometry of the micro-cantilever is supposed to be:
L20 h, b2 h and h2 l.

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

33

Table 7
Dimensionless deections of the Timoshenko microbeam subjected to the uniform
load, fw 10 N/m, b 2 h.
Boundary
conditions

h=l

L 10 h

L 30 h

CT

MCST

SGT

CT

MCST

SGT

CC

1
2
4
8

1.7361
1.7361
1.7361
1.7361

0.8767
1.2765
1.5675
1.6872

0.4677
0.7864
1.2540
1.5734

1.4295
1.4295
1.4295
1.4295

0.5230
0.9444
1.2581
1.3813

0.1888
0.4932
0.9568
1.2709

SC

1
2
4
8

3.1910
3.1910
3.1910
3.1910

1.3111
2.2015
2.8392
3.0915

0.6763
1.3034
2.2355
2.8694

2.8278
2.8278
2.8278
2.8278

0.9510
1.8324
2.4798
2.7307

0.3470
0.9561
1.8833
2.5110

Table 8
Dimensionless deections of the Timoshenko microbeam subjected to the point
load, P 100 N, b 2 h.
Boundary
conditions

h/l

L 10 h

Fig. 11. Rotation proles of the Timoshenko microbeam with SC boundary

conditions and subjected to a point load.

L 30 h

CT

MCST

SGT

CT

MCST

SGT

CC

1
2
4
8

3.4706
3.4706
3.4706
3.4706

1.5550
2.4307
3.0871
3.3577

0.8543
1.5205
2.4790
3.1314

2.8587
2.8587
2.8587
2.8587

0.9974
1.8660
2.5097
2.7610

0.3736
0.9843
1.9125
2.5412

SC

1
2
4
8

5.6529
5.6529
5.6529
5.6529

2.2145
3.8227
4.9958
5.4640

1.1669
2.2958
3.9511
5.0754

4.9562
4.9562
4.9562
4.9562

1.6404
3.1987
4.3425
4.7852

0.6109
1.6787
3.3023
4.4014

Fig. 12. Deection proles of the Timoshenko microbeam with CC boundary

conditions and subjected to a point load.

Fig. 10. Deection proles of the Timoshenko microbeam with SC boundary

conditions and subjected to a point load.

4.4. Results for static bending

In this section, the static bending results of Timoshenko microbeams with different boundary conditions are tabulated in Tables 7 and
8 and depicted in Figs. 1013. Dimensionless maximum deections
under uniform and point loads with different dimensionless thickness (h/l) and dimensionless length (L/h) are given in Tables 6 and 7,
respectively, where different continuum beam theories are applied.
Results are presented for CC and SC microbeams. It is clearly
observed that the dimensionless deections obtained on the basis of
the strain gradient model are not only smaller than those of the
classical model but also smaller than those of the modied couple
stress model. This due to the fact that the stiffness matrix of strain

Fig. 13. Rotation proles of the Timoshenko microbeam with CC boundary

conditions and subjected to a point load.

gradient model contains three material length scale parameters

related to dilatation gradient tensor and the deviatoric stretch
gradient tensor in addition to the symmetric rotation gradient tensor,
so that the increased bending rigidity of strain gradient Timoshenko

34

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

microbeam is most. In other words, the more strain gradients

introduced, the more enhancer of bending rigidity. The above results
obtained by using the present method also indicate that the inclusion
of small scale effects results in an increase in beam stiffness, and
consequently, leads to a reduction of deection. Such a small scale
effect is signicant when the beam thickness is close to the material
length scale parameter (with h=l 1here), but becomes negligible
with increasing beam thickness (with h=l 8 here). It agrees with
the general trends observed in experiments [48] and numerical
solutions [24,27,53,68].
Figs. 10 and 11 depict the deection and rotation proles for a
Timoshenko microbeam with SC boundary conditions and subjected to a point load for three different dimensionless thickness
(h=l), respectively. Afterwards, the deection and rotation proles for
a Timoshenko microbeam with CC boundary conditions are displayed in Figs. 12 and 13 respectively. Since the consideration of point
and uniform loads yields the similar results, for the sake of the
brevity, the static responses are present for the point load only after
this point. It is obviously seen that there have similar trends of size
effect on the Timoshenko microbeam to those illustrated in
Tables 7 and 8. Moreover, it is quite clearly seen that when the
boundary constraint increases, the values of deection and rotation
decrease. Thus, constraints of the edges increase the bending rigidity
of the microbeam, resulting in lower deection and rotation.
The static bending results tabulated in Tables 6 and 7 and plotted
in Figs. 1013, have not been reported in the open literatures so far,
and therefore the solutions obtained may serve as benchmark values
for further studies.

Table 10
The second-order dimensionless fundamental frequency for different boundary
conditions.
Boundary
conditions

h/ L 10 h
l
CT

L 30 h
MCST

SGT

CT

MCST

SGT

SC

1
2
4
8

58.4523 102.6807 123.8825 67.0378 121.1284 181.6292

58.4523 73.3208 88.2979 67.0378 84.1450 114.1974
58.4523 62.6153 69.3559 67.0378 71.7172
82.3106
58.4523 59.5312 61.6954 67.0378 68.2391 71.2997

CF

1
2
4
8

27.5916
27.5916
27.5916
27.5916

43.6792
33.3346
29.2724
28.0364

CC

1
2
4
8

66.8123
66.8123
66.8123
66.8123

97.8845 116.2566 81.7007 134.5897 205.0036

78.1630
91.6824 81.7007 100.2608 135.1622
70.2694 76.3899 81.7007 87.0224 99.1318
67.7478 69.6387 81.7007 83.0962 86.4918

59.2227
42.8269
32.8854
29.0786

29.8272
29.8272
29.8272
29.8272

51.6862
37.0906
31.8564
30.3533

84.5105
42.8269
36.5305
31.6489

4.5. Results for free vibration

The rst two dimensionless natural frequencies for Timoshenko
microbeams with different boundary conditions have been computed and the corresponding results are summarized in Tables 9 and
10, respectively. The inuences of the dimensionless thickness (h=l),
dimensionless length (L=h) and boundary conditions on the free
vibration parameters are examined in detail. It can be seen from the
results of these tables that the dimensionless natural frequency
decreases with increasing dimensionless thickness. Also, it is notable
that the dimensionless natural frequency decreases as the dimensionless thickness (h=l) increases, and the frequencies predicted by
the SGT beam model are not only larger than those of the CT model,
but also than those of MCST model. By increasing the beam
thickness, the results obtained by MCST and SGT models are nearly
equal to the results obtained by CT model. In other words, it can be
said that the results obtained by the CT and MCST are underestimated for small length.

Fig. 14. Effect of dimensionless thickness (h=l) on the variation of the rst-order
dimensionless frequency of the Timoshenko microbeam with different boundary
conditions, 0.

Table 9
The rst-order dimensionless frequency for different boundary conditions.
Boundary
Conditions

h=l L 10 h

L 30 h

CT

MCST

SGT

CT

MCST

SGT

35.2864
24.8684
21.2626
20.2449

46.9542
32.3045
24.2257
21.1473

20.9704
20.9704
20.9704
20.9704

38.0515
26.3338
22.4342
21.3460

60.9498
36.5049
25.8935
22.3351

7.5070 13.2152
5.7835 8.1062
5.0497 5.8048
4.8257 5.0334

4.8032
4.8032
4.8032
4.8032

SC

1
2
4
8

19.8926
19.8926
19.8926
19.8926

CF

1
2
4
8

4.7450
4.7450
4.7450
4.7450

CC

1
2
4
8

27.2165
27.2165
27.2165
27.2165

38.1899
31.7506
28.6498
27.6090

52.1416
40.3360
32.0009
28.5837

30.1690
30.1690
30.1690
30.1690

8.3519 14.4200
5.9838 8.1062
5.1326
5.9042
4.8886 5.1011
49.8664
37.1248
32.1609
30.6911

82.7816
51.3235
36.8685
31.9945

Fig. 15. Effect of dimensionless thickness (h=l) on the variation of the rst-order
dimensionless frequency of the Timoshenko microbeam with different boundary
conditions, 0.38.

Plotted in Figs. 14 and 15 are the variation of dimensionless

natural frequencies of Timoshenko microbeams with the value of
dimensionless thickness (h=l) respectively for two different Poisson's
ratio. It is observed that in the case of CT model, the value of

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

dimensionless thickness has no effect on the vibrational behavior of

the Timoshenko microbeam for all the boundary conditions. It is to
be noted here that the dimensionless frequency increases with the
Poisson's ratio increases. This increase in the dimensionless frequency is attributed to the increase of the stiffness of Timoshenko
microbeam due to the Poisson effect. Another signicant observation
from these gures is that the Poisson effect is more pronounced for
the classical model whereas it has little inuences on the SGT model.
Due to the lack of published solutions for these boundary
conditions, these solutions obtained may serve as benchmark
values for further studies.
4.6. Results for static buckling
Finally, we consider the buckling problem for straight Timoshenko
microbeams subjected to in-axial compressive load in which four
different boundary conditions are taken into account, namely, SS,
SC, CF and CC. The Timoshenko microbeam considered here is
taken to be made of epoxy. Table 11 lists the buckling factor and length
factor of axially loaded classical BernoulliEuler beams with the
aforementioned boundary conditions.
To verify the accuracy and applicability of the present beam
element for analyzing the buckling problem, we should do some

Table 11
Buckling factor and length factor of axially loaded classical BernoulliEuler beams
(both the Poisson effect and the shear deformation effect are not contained).
Boundary conditions

Length factor

F cr 2 =2

SS
SC
CF
CC

1.0
0.7
2.0
0.5

9.8696
20.1420
2.4674
39.4784

Table 12
Comparisons of the dimensionless buckling factor for a microbeam with SS
boundary conditions (both the Poisson effect and the shear deformation effect
are not contained).
Model

Sources

h/l
1

10

CT

Present
Ref. [56]

9.8492
9.8696

9.8492
9.8696

9.8492
9.8696

9.8492
9.8696

9.8492
9.8696

9.8492
9.8696

MCST

Present
Ref. [56]

52.6711
52.7809

14.6086
14.6375

11.5634
11.5861

10.7237
10.7453

10.3786
10.3994

10.2769
10.2987

SGT

Present
Ref. [56]

161.3893
161.7367

26.6846
26.7437

15.9100
15.9443

12.9413
12.9689

11.7205
11.7445

11.3648
11.3883

35

comparison studies. However, there are only limited results of the

buckling problem in the published literature based on the strain
gradient elasticity theory so far. According to what I have learnt,
we only found that Akgz and Civalek [56,58] investigated the
stability for axially loaded microscale BernoulliEuler beams
respectively made of homogeneous and functional gradient materials based on strain gradient elasticity and Ansari et al. [63]
researched thermal postbuckling characteristics of FG Timoshenko
microbeam based on strain gradient elasticity theory.
To make comparison with [56], Table 12 lists the dimensionless
critical buckling load of homogeneous Timoshenko microbeams
corresponding to the different continuum models. The analytical
solutions given by Akgz and Civalek [56] for BernoulliEuler
microbeams are also provided for direct comparison. Considering
the fact that the buckling model investigated by Akgz and Civalek
[56] did not take into account the shear deformation effect, so the
value of shear correction factor ks needs to set large enough in our
nite element implementations to alleviate this effect. Here, we
take ks identical to 107. Besides, the Poisson effect did not contain
in the buckling model of BernoulliEuler microbeam, therefore the
coefcient 2 appeared in Eq. (55) should be replaced by the
Young's modulus E in computing the numerical results for the
comparison purposes. From Table 12, it is clearly seen that good
agreement is achieved between the present results and those
analytical ones [56]. Note that the critical buckling load is normalized as F cr F cr L2 =EJ here.
Although there is still exists minor difference between the
present results and analytical ones. Theoretically speaking, the
present method can obtain analytical solutions when the shear
correction factor is suppressed by letting ks 1. However, the
shear correction factor only can give a nite value by considering
the numerical implementation.
Table 13 lists the dimensionless critical buckling load obtained
by using the present approach for other three different boundary
conditions and various beam thickness. It should be emphasized
that both the Poisson and shear deformation effects are not
contained here. This can be viewed as the results for Bernoulli
Euler model.
From Tables 12 and 13, it is notable that the inuences of
additional material parameters in strain gradient elasticity theory
are signicant, when the thickness of microbeams becomes small.
When the strain gradient theory is applied, it is seen that the
buckling value is signicantly increases. One can see that the
dimensionless critical buckling load obtained by the SGT model is
about three times from the value obtained by the MCST model and
16 times from the CT model for very small length (h=l 1). It is
also possible to say that, the results obtained by the classical and
modied couple stress models are not suitable for microbeams in
more general case, which not only the rotation gradient but also
stretch gradient or other gradients, should be introduced. Namely,

Table 13
Dimensionless buckling factor for a microbeam with S-C, CF and CC boundary conditions (both the Poisson effect and the shear deformation effect are not contained).
Model

Boundary conditions

h=l
1

10

CT

SC
CF
CC

20.1077
2.4642
39.1565

20.1077
2.4642
39.1565

20.1077
2.4642
39.1565

20.1077
2.4642
39.1565

20.1077
2.4642
39.1565

20.1077
2.4642
39.1565

MCST

SC
CF
CC

107.5237
13.1872
209.4000

29.8204
3.6568
58.0729

23.6033
2.8950
45.9667

21.8906
2.6792
42.6304

21.1858
2.5997
41.2583

20.9800
2.5740
40.8581

SGT

SC
CF
CC

330.0842
40.3622
644.6088

54.5458
6.6742
106.4268

32.5046
3.9831
63.3742

26.4330
3.2327
51.5117

23.9330
2.9354
46.6307

23.2055
2.8454
45.2103

36

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

Table 14
Dimensionless buckling factor for a microbeam with SC, CF and CC boundary conditions (the Poisson effect is considered whereas the shear deformation effect is ignored
by letting ks 107).
Model

Boundary conditions

h=l
1

10

CT

SS
SC
CF
CC

18.4380
37.6377
4.6209
73.3002

18.4380
37.6377
4.6209
73.3002

18.4380
37.6377
4.6209
73.3002

18.4380
37.6377
4.6209
73.3002

18.4380
37.6377
4.6209
73.3002

18.4380
37.6377
4.6209
73.3002

MCST

SS
SC
CF
CC

61.2605
125.0574
15.3351
243.5450

23.1967
47.3518
5.8103
92.2172

20.1504
41.1351
5.0456
80.1096

19.3102
39.4212
4.8367
76.7740

18.9683
38.7185
4.7532
75.4036

18.8664
38.5132
4.7219
75.0029

SGT

SS
SC
CF
CC

169.9808
347.6196
42.5154
678.7539

35.2746
72.0809
8.8266
140.5717

24.4996
50.0384
6.1336
97.5187

21.5318
43.9659
5.3894
85.6568

20.3099
41.4662
5.0858
80.7754

19.9531
40.7385
4.9954
79.3547

Table 15
Dimensionless buckling factor for a microbeam with SC, CF and CC boundary conditions (the Poisson effect and the shear deformation effect are both considered).
Model

Boundary conditions

h/l
1

10

CT

SS
SC
CF
CC

18.2171
36.6445
4.6026
69.9506

18.2171
36.6445
4.6026
69.9506

18.2171
36.6445
4.6026
69.9506

18.2171
36.6445
4.6026
69.9506

18.2171
36.6445
4.6026
69.9506

18.2171
36.6445
4.6026
69.9506

MCST

SS
SC
CF
CC

60.2395
112.4070
14.2802
198.9667

22.9150
45.8716
5.7664
87.2277

19.9092
40.0008
5.0254
76.3003

19.0805
38.3635
4.8191
73.2153

18.7395
37.6866
4.7338
71.9337

18.6402
37.4892
4.7089
71.5592

SGT

SS
SC
CF
CC

152.9807
279.1530
41.3471
477.5641

34.4721
68.5100
8.7763
128.7529

24.1102
48.2923
6.1078
91.6711

21.2297
42.6126
5.3709
81.1132

20.0410
40.2612
5.0675
76.7237

19.6948
39.5756
4.9792
75.4416

the size effect on buckling solution of Timoshenko microbeams via

strain gradient elasticity theory is more efcient.
It should be pointed that Ref. [56] can give buckling parameters
for BernoulliEuler beam only, which neglects the Poisson and
shear deformation effects. However, due to the lack of published
solutions for the buckling of Timoshenko beams, Table 14 presents
the numerical results for the Timoshenko microbeam with only
taking into account Poisson's effect, and Table 15 presents the
numerical results for Timoshenko microbeam taking into account
both the two (i.e., ks 5=6). The solutions obtained may serve as
benchmark values for further studies.
From Tables 13 and 14, the Poisson effect on the buckling
parameters can be observed. Clearly, incorporating the Poisson
effect (with 0.38 here) results in higher values of the buckling
parameters than those without considering it ( 0), which is
especially true when the classical beam model is used. This trend
agrees with what has shown by Ma et al. [27], imek and Reddy
[50] and Wang et al. [53] for free vibration analysis for a simply
supported microbeam, where larger natural frequency values are
obtained for the cases with 0.38 than those for the cases with
0. This indicates that the assumption of the Poisson effect being
negligible, which is commonly used in the existing beam element,
is inadequate and should be individually veried or simply
abandoned in order to obtain more accurate and reliable results.
Comparing the results listed in Table 14 with Table 15, it can be

observed that the shear deformation effect results in slight lower

values of the buckling parameters than those without considering
it for the current microbeam with L=h 20and b=h 2.

5. Conclusions
A non-classical Timoshenko beam element has been developed
based on the strain gradient elasticity theory for predicting the static,
free vibration, and bucking behaviors of the microbeams. The present
beam element is a two-node element which has 6-DOF (degrees of
freedom) at each node by considering both bending and stretching
deformations, and 4-DOF with only considering bending deformation. Unlike the classical Timoshenko beam element, the current
strain gradient beam element satises the C0 continuity and C1 weak
continuity and contains three material length scale parameters. The
weak form equations of the Timoshenko microbeam for static, free
vibration, and buckling are respectively given in the present work.
One of the advantages of the present approach can effectively
alleviate the shear locking problem even when the thickness of the
beams is small and consequently the full integration can still be used.
The other advantage of the present beam element lies in that it can
deal with complexity boundary conditions. Static bending, free
vibration and buckling of Timoshenko microbeams with various
boundary conditions are investigated by utilizing the new element.

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

The numerical results based on the current element are in agreement

well with analytical results and numerical results in the existing
literature.
It is inferred that the new strain gradient beam element is a
comprehensive beam element that is not only able to predict the
results of SGT model, but also able to predict the results of MCST and
CT models. This element enables the FEM to deal with the sizedependency observed in micro-/nano-scale structures where the
attempts of the classical FEM will be in failure. Hence, in order to
model the micro-/nano-scale structures numerically, employing the
non-classical elements seems to be essential. It is also noted that the
beams modeled by the new element show stiffer behavior than those
modeled by the classical elements.

Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the NSFC (No. 11072084 and
No.11272131) and the Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral
Program of Higher Education of China (No. 20110142110039).

The mass submatrices Mww, Mw Mw and M are dened as

the following forms:
2 11
3
m13
m14
mww m12
ww
ww
ww
6 21
22
23
24 7
6 mww mww mww mww 7
7
M ww 6
6 m31 m32 m33 m34 7;
ww
ww
ww 5
4 ww
m41
m42
m43
m44
ww
ww
ww
ww
2 11
3
mw m12
m13
m14
w
w
w
6 21
7
6 mw m22
7
m23
m24
w
w
w 7
6
M Tw M w 6 31
7;
32
33
34
6 mw mw mw mw 7
4
5
m41
m42
m43
m44
w
w
w
w
2 11
3
m m12
m13
m14

6 21
7
6 m m22
7
m23
m24

7
6
A:3
M 6 31
7:
32
33
34
6 m m m m 7
4
5
m41
m42
m43
m44

where
11
m33
ww mww

Appendix A

11

kww

6 21
6k
6 ww
K ww 6 31
6 kww
4
41
kww

kww

22

kww

kww

32

kww

42
kww

43
kww

11

12

13

22
k

23
k

24
k

32

42

33

kww

24 7
kww 7
7
34 7;
kww 7
5
44
kww

14

33
43

41

14

31

13

kww kww  kww  kww

21

kw

12

kw

13

kw

22

kw

kw

32

kw

42
kw

kw

23
33
43

12

6
5L

14

kw

7
24
kw 7
7
7;
34
kw 7
7
5
44
kw

7
7
7
7
34 7:
k 7
5
44
k

where
11

11

kw
6 21
6k
6
w
K Tw K w 6
6 k31
6 w
4
41
kw

kww
23

14

12

13

kww

6 21
6k
6
K 6
6 k31
6
4
41
k

33

A:1

10k7
L2

32


k5 ;
23

43

34

kww kww kww kww  kww  kww  kww  kww

6
L2

k7

1
k5 ;
10

1
2
Lk5 k7 ;
30
L
1
1
13
11
31
33
22
44
kw kw  kw  kw k5 ; kw  kw k6 ;
2
2
k6
1
34
41
23
12
14
21
32
43
Lk5 ;

kw kw kw kw  kw  kw  kw  kw
10
L
44

22

kww kww

42

24

4
2
k7
Lk5 ;
L
15

kw  kw
21

12

31

13

41

14

42

34

43

24

kww kww 

1 2
1
L k5 k6 ;
60
2

k k  k  k
k k

33

11

k k

13
6 k4
k3
Lk5
12 3 ;
35
5 L
L

1
11 2
k3
k4
L k5 6 2 ;
10
210
L

12
34
43
m21
ww mww  mww  mww

11 2
210 L m0 ;

1 3
9
13
L m0 ; m31
m0 L;
ww mww
105
70
13 2
23
14
41
L m0 ;
m32
ww mww  mww  mww
420
1 3
13
24
11
L m0 ; m33
m2 L;
m42
ww mww 
m
140
35
11 2
1 3
12
34
43
22
L m2 ; m44
L m2 ;
m21
m  m  m
m
210
105

23

32

A:4

The rest elements of Eq. (A.3) are all zeros.

The geometrical nonlinear submatrices K gww ,K gw K gw and K g
are dened as the following forms:
2 g11
3
g12
g13
g14
kww kww kww kww
6 g21
g22
g23
g24 7
6k
7
6 ww kww kww kww 7
g
K ww 6 g31
7;
g32
g33
g34
6 kww kww kww kww 7
4
5
g41
g42
g43
g44
kww kww kww kww
2 g11
3
g12
g13
g14
kw kw kw kw
6 g21
7
g22
g23
g24 7
6k
6 w kw kw kw 7
g
g
T
7
K w K w 6
6 kg31 kg32 kg33 kg34 7;
6 w
w
w
w 7
4
5
g41
g42
g43
g44
kw kw kw kw
2 g11
3
g12
g13
g14
k k k k
6 g21
7
g22
g23
g24 7
6k
6 k k k 7
g
6
7
A:5
K 6 g31
g32
g33
g34 7:
6 k k k k 7
4
5
g41
g42
g43
g44
k k k k

g33

13 2
k3
1
L k5 6 2
k4 ;
420
10
L

2
1
k3
k4 L
k5 L 3 4 ;
15
105
L
1
1
k3
42
24
3
k5 L 
k4 L 2 :
k k 
140
30
L

9
13 2
23
14
41
m2 L; m32
L m2 ;
m m m
70
420
1 3
24
L m2 :
m42
m 
140

13
m31
m

where

9
6 k4
k3
Lk5 
 12 3 ;
70
5 L
L

k k  k  k 
44

13
m0 L;
35

22
m44
ww mww

The stiffness submatrices Kww, Kw Kw and K are dened as

the following forms:
2

37

22

k k

A:2

g11

g31

g13

g44

g22

g42

6
2
kww kww  kww  kww 5L
1 : kww kww 15
1 L kww
1
g24
g41
g41
g21
g12
g23
g34
1 L; kww kww kww kww  kww kww
kww 
30
1
g32
g32
1 ;
 kww  kww
10
6
2
g33
g11
g31
g13
g44
g22
2 ; k k
2 L;
k k  k  k
5L
15
1
g42
g24
g41
g41
g21
g12
g23
2 L; k k k k  k
k k 
30

38

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

g34

g32

g32

 k  k  k

1
2 :
10

A:6

where 1 = A, 2 = J. The rest elements of Eq. (A.5) are all zeros.

References
[1] H.G. Craighead, Nanoelectromechanical systems, Science 290 (2000)
15321535.
[2] M. Li, H.X. Tang, M.L. Roukes, Ultra-sensitive NEMS-based cantilevers for
sensing, scanned probe and very high-frequency applications, Nat. Nanotechnol. 2 (2007) 114120.
[3] M. Rahaeifard, M.H. Kahrobaiyan, M.T. Ahmadian, Sensitivity analysis of
atomic force microscope cantilever made of functionally graded materials,
ASME, 2009.
[4] N.A. Fleck, G.M. Muller, M.F. Ashby, J.W. Hutchinson, Strain gradient plasticity:
theory and experiment, Acta. Metall. Mater. 42 (2) (1994) 475487.
[5] J.S. Stlken, A.G. Evans, A microbend test method for measuring the plasticity
length scale, Acta Mater. 46 (14) (1998) 51095115.
[6] D.C.C. Lam, F. Yang, A.C.M. Chong, J. Wang, P. Tong, Experiments and theory in
strain gradient elasticity, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 51 (2003) 14771508.
[7] D. Liu, Y. He, D.J. Dunstan, B. Zhang, Z. Gan, P. Hu, H. Ding, Toward a further
understanding of size effects in the torsion of thin metal wires: an experimental and theoretical assessment, Int. J. Plasticity 41 (2013) 3052.
[8] D. Liu, Y. He, X. Tang, H. Ding, P. Hu, P. Cao, Size effects in the torsion of microscale
copper wires: experiment and analysis, Scr. Mater., 66, 2012; 406409.
[9] D. Liu, Y. He, D. Dunstan, B. Zhang, Z. Gan, P. Hu, H. Ding, Anomalous plasticity
in the cyclic torsion of micron scale metallic wires, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013)
244301.
[10] R. Toupin, Elastic materials with couple-stresses, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 11
(1962) 385414.
[11] R. Mindlin, H. Tiersten, Effects of couple-stresses in linear elasticity, Arch.
Ration. Mech. Anal. 11 (1962) 415448.
[12] W. Koiter, Couple stresses in the theory of elasticity, I and II, in: Nederl. Akad.
Wetensch. Proc. Ser. B, 1964, pp. 1729.
[13] M. Gurtin, J. Weissmller, F. Larche, A general theory of curved deformable
interfaces in solids at equilibrium, Philos. Mag. A 78 (1998) 10931109.
[14] A.C. Eringen, Nonlocal polar elastic continua, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 10 (1972) 116.
[15] A.C. Eringen, Theory of micropolar plates, Z. Angew. Math. Phys. 18 (1967) 1230.
[16] N.A. Fleck, J.W. Hutchinson, Strain gradient plasticity, Adv. Appl. Mech. 33
(1997) 295361.
[17] N.A. Fleck, J.W. Hutchinson, A reformulation of strain gradient plasticity, J.
Mech. Phys. Solids 49 (2001) 22452271.
[18] J.N. Reddy, Nonlocal theories for bending, buckling and vibration of beams, Int.
J. Eng. Sci. 45 (2007) 288307.
[19] Q. Wang, K. Liew, Application of nonlocal continuum mechanics to static
analysis of micro-and nano-structures, Phys. Lett. A 363 (2007) 236242.
[20] J.N. Reddy, S.D. Pang, Nonlocal continuum theories of beams for the analysis of
carbon nanotubes, J. Appl. Phys. 103 (2) (2008) 023511023511-16.
[21] . Civalek, . Demir, Bending analysis of microtubules using nonlocal EulerBernoulli beam theory, Appl. Math. Model. 35 (5) (2011) 20532067.
[22] C.M. Roque, A.J. Ferreira, J.N. Reddy, Analysis of Timoshenko nanobeams with a
nonlocal formulation and meshless method, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 49 (9) (2011) 976984.
[23] D.C.C. Lam, F. Yang, A.C.M. Chong, J. Wang, P. Tong, Experiments and theory in
strain gradient elasticity, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 51 (8) (2003) 14771508.
[24] S.K. Park, X.L. Gao, Bernoulli-Euler beam model based on a modied couple
stress theory, J. Micromech. Microeng. 16 (11) (2006) 23552359.
[25] S. Kong, S. Zhou, Z. Nie, K. Wang, The size-dependent natural frequency of
Bernoulli-Euler microbeams, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 46 (2008) 427437.
[26] W. Xia, L. Wang, L. Yin, Nonlinear non-classical microscale beams: static
bending, postbuckling and free vibration, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 48 (2010) 20442053.
[27] H.M. Ma, X.L. Gao, J.N. Reddy, A microstructure-dependent Timoshenko beam
model based on a modied couple stress theory, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 56
(2008) 33793391.
[28] M. Asghari, M.H. Kahrobaiyan, M.T. Ahmadian, A nonlinear Timoshenko beam
formulation based on the modied couple stress theory, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 48
(2010) 17491761.
[29] C.M.C. Roque, D.S. Fidalgo, A.J.M. Ferreira, J.N. Reddy, A study of a
microstructure-dependent composite laminated Timoshenko beam using a
modied couple stress theory and a meshless method, Compos. Struct. 96
(2013) 532537.
[30] M.H. Ghayesh, H. Farokhi, M. Amabili, Nonlinear dynamics of a microscale
beam based on the modied couple stress theory, Compos. Part B-Eng. 50
(2013) 318324.
[31] H.M. Ma, X.L. Gao, J.N. Reddy, A nonclassical Reddy-Levinson beam model based
on a modied couple stress theory, Int. J. Multiscale Com. 8 (2) (2010) 167180.
[32] G.C. Tsiatas, A new Kirchhoff plate model based on a modied couple stress
theory, Int. J. Solids Struct. 46 (13) (2009) 27572764.
[33] L. Yin, Q. Qian, L. Wang, W. Xia, Vibration analysis of microscale plates based
on modied couple stress theory, Acta. Mech. Solida 23 (5) (2010) 386393.
[34] E. Jomehzadeh, H.R. Noori, A.R. Saidi, The size-dependent vibration analysis of
micro-plates based on a modied couple stress theory, Phys. E 43 (4) (2011)
877883.

[35] M. Asghari, Geometrically nonlinear micro-plate formulation based on the

modied couple stress theory, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 51 (2012) 292309.
[36] H.M. Ma, X.L. Gao, J.N. Reddy, A non-classical Mindlin plate model based on a
modied couple stress theory, Acta Mech. 220 (1-4) (2011) 217235.
[37] L.-L. Ke, Y.-S. Wang, J. Yang, S. Kitipornchai, Free vibration of size-dependent
Mindlin microplates based on the modied couple stress theory, J. Sound Vib.
33 (1) (2012) 94106.
[38] X.L. Gao, J.X. Huang, J.N. Reddy, A non-classical third-order shear deformation
plate model based on a modied couple stress theory, Acta Mech. (2013) 120.
[39] W. Chen, M. Xu, L. Li, A model of composite laminated Reddy plate based on
new modied couple stress theory, Compos. Struct. 94 (7) (2012) 21432156.
[40] X. Zhou, L. Wang, P. Qin, Free vibration of micro-and nano-shells based on
modied couple stress theory, J. Comput. Theor. Nanos 9 (6) (2012) 814818.
[41] M. Asghari, M.T. Ahmadian, M.H. Kahrobaiyan, M. Rahaeifard, On the sizedependent behavior of functionally graded micro-beams, Mater. Des. 31 (5)
(2010) 23242329.
[42] M. Asghari, M. Rahaeifard, M.H. Kahrobaiyan, M. Ahmadian, The modied
couple stress functionally graded Timoshenko beam formulation, Mater. Des.
32 (3) (2011) 14351443.
[43] L.L. Ke, Y.S. Wang, Size effect on dynamic stability of functionally graded
microbeams based on a modied couple stress theory, Compos. Struct. 93 (2)
(2011) 342350.
[44] J.N. Reddy, Microstructure-dependent couple stress theories of functionally
graded beams, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 59 (11) (2011) 23822399.
[45] L.L. Ke, Y.S. Wang, J. Yang, S. Kitipornchai, Nonlinear free vibration of sizedependent functionally graded microbeams, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 50 (1) (2012) 256267.
[46] M. imek, T. Kocatrk, .D. Akba, Static bending of a functionally graded
microscale Timoshenko beam based on the modied couple stress theory,
Compos. Struct. 95 (2013) 740747.
[47] B. Akgz, . Civalek, Free vibration analysis of axially functionally graded
tapered Bernoulli-Euler microbeams based on the modied couple stress
theory, Compos. Struct. 98 (2013) 314322.
[48] M. Salamat-Talab, A. Nateghi, J. Torabi, Static and dynamic analysis of thirdorder shear deformation FG micro beam based on modied couple stress
theory, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 57 (1) (2012) 6373.
[49] A. Nateghi, M. Salamat-talab, J. Rezapour, B. Daneshian, Size dependent
buckling analysis of functionally graded micro beams based on modied
couple stress theory, Appl. Math. Model. 36 (10) (2012) 49714987.
[50] M. imek, J. Reddy, Bending and vibration of functionally graded microbeams
using a new higher order beam theory and the modied couple stress theory,
Int. J. Eng. Sci. 64 (2013) 3753.
[51] M. imek, J.N. Reddy, A unied higher order beam theory for buckling of a
functionally graded microbeam embedded in elastic medium using modied
couple stress theory, Compos. Struct. 101 (2013) 4758.
[52] S. Kong, S. Zhou, Z. Nie, K. Wang, Static and dynamic analysis of micro beams
based on strain gradient elasticity theory, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 47 (4) (2009) 487498.
[53] B. Wang, J. Zhao, S. Zhou, A micro scale Timoshenko beam model based on
strain gradient elasticity theory, Eur. J. Mech. A-Solid 29 (4) (2010) 591599.
[54] M.H. Kahrobaiyana, M. Asgharia, M. Rahaeifarda, M.T. Ahmadian, A nonlinear
strain gradient beam formulation, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 49 (11) (2011) 12561267.
[55] S. Ramezani, A micro scale geometrically non-linear Timoshenko beam model
based on strain gradient elasticity theory, Int. J. Nonlinear Mech. 47 (8) (2012)
863873.
[56] B. Akgz, . Civalek, Strain gradient elasticity and modied couple stress
models for buckling analysis of axially loaded micro-scaled beams, Int. J. Eng.
Sci. 49 (11) (2011) 12681280.
[57] B. Akgz, . Civalek, Analysis of micro-sized beams for various boundary
conditions based on the strain gradient elasticity theory, Arch. Appl. Mech. 82
(3) (2012) 423443.
[58] B. Akgz, . Civalek, Buckling analysis of functionally graded microbeams
based on the strain gradient theory, Acta Mech. (2013) 117.
[59] B. Akgz, . Civalek, A size-dependent shear deformation beam model based
on the strain gradient elasticity theory, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 70 (2013) 114.
[60] M. Kahrobaiyan, M. Rahaeifard, S. Tajalli, M. Ahmadian, A strain gradient
functionally graded Euler-Bernoulli beam formulation, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 52
(2012) 6576.
[61] R. Ansari, R. Gholami, S. Sahmani, Free vibration analysis of size-dependent
functionally graded microbeams based on the strain gradient Timoshenko
beam theory, Compos. Struct. 94 (1) (2011) 221228.
[62] R. Ansari, R. Gholami, S. Sahmani, Study of small scale effects on the nonlinear
vibration response of functionally graded Timoshenko microbeams based on
the strain gradient theory, J. Comput. Nonlinear Dyn. 7 (2012) 031010.
[63] R. Ansari, M. Faghih Shojaei, R. Gholami, V. Mohammadi, M. Darabi, Thermal
postbuckling behavior of size-dependent functionally graded Timoshenko
microbeams, Int. J. Nonlinear Mech. 50 (2013) 127135.
[64] S. Sahmani, R. Ansari, On the free vibration response of functionally graded
higher-order shear deformable microplates based on the strain gradient
elasticity theory, Compos. Struct. 95 (2013) 430442.
[65] B. Zhang, Y. He, D. Liu, Z. Gan, L. Shen, A novel size-dependent functionally
graded curved mircobeam model based on the strain gradient elasticity
theory, Compos. Struct. 106 (2013) 374392.
[66] J.K. Phadikar, S.C. Pradhan, Variational formulation and nite element analysis
for nonlocal elastic nanobeams and nanoplates, Comp. Mater. Sci. 49 (3)
(2010) 492499.
[67] S.C. Pradhan, Nonlocal nite element analysis and small scale effects of CNTs
with Timoshenko beam theory, Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 50 (2012) 820.

B. Zhang et al. / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 79 (2014) 2239

[68] M.H. Kahrobaiyana, M. Asgharia, M.T. Ahmadian, Strain gradient beam

element, Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 68 (2013) 6375.
[69] M.H. Kahrobaiyan, M. Khajehpour, M.T. Ahmadian, A size-dependent
beam element based on the modied couple stress Theory, ASME 8 (2011)
591597.
[70] S.C. Pradhan, U. Mandal, Finite element analysis of CNTs based on nonlocal
elasticity and Timoshenko beam theory including thermal effect, Phys. E 53
(2013) 223232.

39

[71] B. Zhang, Y. He, D. Liu, Z. Gan, L. Shen, A non-classical Mindlin plate nite
element based on a modied couple stress theory, Eur. J. Mech. ASolid 42
(2013) 6380.
[72] J. Kosmatka, An improved two-node nite element for stability and natural
frequencies of axial-loaded Timoshenko beams, Comput. Struct. 57 (1) (1995)
141149.
[73] Z. Friedman, J. Kosmatka, An accurate twonode nite element for shear
deformable curved beams, Int. J. Numer. Meth. Eng. 41 (3) (1998) 473498.