International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

International Journal of Engineering Science

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

Bending and vibration of functionally graded microbeams using

a new higher order beam theory and the modified couple stress
theory
M. Sß imsßek a,⇑, J.N. Reddy b
a
Yildiz Technical University, Department of Civil Engineering, Davutpasßa Campus, 34210 Esenler-Istanbul, Turkey
b
Mechanical Engineering Department, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-3123, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Static bending and free vibration of functionally graded (FG) microbeams are examined in
Received 1 August 2012 this paper based on the modified couple stress theory (MCST) and various higher order
Received in revised form 14 November 2012 beam theories (HOBTs). This non-classical microbeam model incorporates the material
Accepted 3 December 2012
length scale parameter which can capture the size effect. The material properties of the
Available online 30 January 2013
FG microbeams are assumed to vary in the thickness direction and are estimated through
the Mori–Tanaka homogenization technique. The governing equations and the related
Keywords:
boundary conditions are derived using Hamilton’s principle. The Navier-type solution is
Bending
Vibration
developed for simply-supported boundary conditions. Numerical results are presented to
Microbeam investigate the influences the material length scale parameter, different material composi-
Functionally graded material tions, and shear deformation on the bending and free vibration behavior of FG microbeams.
Modified couple stress theory Some of the present results are compared with the previously published results to establish
Higher order beam theory the validity of the present formulation. It is established that the present FG microbeams
exhibit significant size-dependence when the thickness of the microbeam approaches to
the material length scale parameter.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Functionally graded materials (FGMs) have gained wide application in a variety of industries due to their distinctive
material properties that vary continuously and smoothly through certain dimensions. FGMs are made by combining two
or more materials using powder metallurgy method, typically these materials are made from a mixture of ceramic and metal
in which the ceramic component provides high-temperature resistance due to its low thermal conductivity; on the other
hand, the ductile metal component prevents fracture due to thermal stress. Compared with traditional layered composites,
FGMs avoid the inter-laminar stress gaps that are caused by mismatches in the properties of two different materials, and can
be adjusted appropriately according to practical requirements. In view of these advantages, a large number of investigations,
dealing with static, buckling and dynamic characteristics of functionally graded (FG) structures, were published in the sci-
entific literature (see references Aydogdu & Taskin, 2007; Chakraborty, Gopalakrishnan, & Reddy, 2003; Ke, Yang, Kitipornc-
hai, & Xiang, 2009; Li, 2008; Sina, Navazi, & Haddadpour, 2009; Sß imsßek, 2009, 2010b, 2010c, 2010d; Thai & Vo, 2012; Ying,
Lü, & Chen, 2008; Zhong & Yu, 2007).
With the advance of technology, FGMs are started to be used in micro/nanoelectromechanical systems (MEMS/NEMS),
such in the form of shape memory alloy thin films with a global thickness in micro- or nano-scale (Lü, Lim, & Chen,

⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 2123835146; fax: +90 2123835102.

E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] (M. Sßimsßek), [email protected] (J.N. Reddy).

0020-7225/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijengsci.2012.12.002
38 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53

2009), electrically actuated MEMS devices (Zhang & Fu, 2012), and atomic force microscopes (AFMs) (Kahrobaiyan, Asghari,
Rahaeifard, & Ahmadian, 2010). In this context, the experimental studies show that as the thickness of the structures such as
beams and plates becomes on the order of microns and sub-microns, the size effect of material plays an important role in
mechanical analyses of such structures (Fleck & Hutchinson, 1993; Lam, Yang, Chong, Wang, & Tong, 2003; Mindlin,
1963; Mindlin & Tiersten, 1962; Toupin, 1962). The classical continuum mechanics theory cannot be utilized to interpret
the size-dependent effect as it does not contain any material length scale parameter. Thus, the classical couple-stress theory,
which contains two additional material length scale parameters besides the classical constants for an isotropic elastic mate-
rial, was developed to describe the size-dependent effect (Toupin, 1962; Mindlin & Tiersten, 1962; Mindlin, 1963). More re-
cently, Yang, Chong, Lam, and Tong (2002) have proposed the modified couple stress theory involving only one additional
material length scale parameter. Also, in this theory, the strain energy density function depends only on the strain tensor
and the symmetric part of the curvature tensor. These features make the modified couple stress theory easier to use than
the classical couple stress theory. Henceforth, the research effort on bending, buckling and vibration of micro- or nano-sized
structures such as carbon nanotubes, microbeams, microcantilevers, microactuators, microfilms, and atomic force micro-
scope are major topic of current interest by researchers (Asghari, Ahmadian, Kahrobaiyan, & Rahaeifard, 2010; Kong, Zhou,
Nie, & Wang, 2008; Kong, Zhou, Nie, & Wang, 2009; Ma, Gao, & Reddy, 2008; Ma, Gao, & Reddy, 2010; Park & Gao, 2006;
S
ß imsßek, 2010; Xia, Wang, & Yin, 2010; Wang, Zhao, & Zhou, 2010). More recently, Asghari, Kahrobaiyan, and Ahmadian
(2010) proposed a nonlinear Timoshenko beam model based on the modified couple stress theory for free vibration. The
source of nonlinearity is the mid-plane stretching arisen in beams with two immovable supports during finite deflections.
Kahrobaiyan, Asghari, Rahaeifard, and Ahmadian (2011) studied the nonlinear static and free vibration of microbeams with
the aid of Euler–Bernoulli beam theory and the strain gradient theory. Stability of axially loaded micro-scaled beams was
investigated in this manuscript based on the strain gradient elasticity and the modified couple stress theory in conjunction
with the Bernoulli–Euler beam theory by Akgöz and Civalek (2011). Ansari, Gholami, and Sahmani (2011) investigated free
vibration characteristics of microbeams made of functionally graded materials within the framework of the strain gradient
Timoshenko beam theory. Size dependent dynamic stability of functionally graded Timoshenko microbeams was studied by
Ke and Wang (2011). Reddy (2011) developed nonlocal models for bending, free vibration and buckling of functionally
graded beam according to Euler–Bernoulli and Timoshenko beam theories by using modified couple stress-theory. Ke, Wang,
Yang, and Kitipornchai (2012) investigated nonlinear free vibration of microbeams made of functionally graded materials
(FGMs) based on the modified couple stress theory and von-Kármán geometric nonlinearity. A strain gradient formulation
of functionally graded Euler–Bernoulli beam model was derived by Kahrobaiyan, Rahaeifard, Tajalli, and Ahmadian (2012)
for static and dynamic analysis of microbeams. Akgöz and Civalek (2012) studied the bending analysis of microbeams with
different boundary conditions based on the strain gradient theory. Simsek, Kocatürk, and Akbas (2013) has recently inves-
tigated the bending behavior of FG microbeam based on Timoshenko beam theory. Roque, Fidalgo, Ferreira, and Reddy
(2013) used the modified couple stress theory and a meshless method based on collocation with radial basis functions to
study the static bending of composite laminated simply supported Timoshenko beams.
Several beam theories have been used to estimate the response of FG microbeams. The well-known beam theory is the
Euler–Bernoulli beam theory (EBBT) or classical beam theory, and this theory is based on the assumption that plain sections
of the cross-section remain plain and perpendicular to the beam axis. The Euler–Bernoulli beam theory is widely used for
bending of thin beams. However, when a beam is moderately deep, or made of high-strength composite materials with a
high anisotropy ratio, the theory needs some modifications to include the effect of transverse shear. EBBT underestimates
deflections and overestimates natural frequencies and buckling loads due to the neglecting of transverse shear strains. A
more refined beam theory is Timoshenko beam theory or the first order shear deformation beam theory (FSDBT) in which
straight lines perpendicular to the mid-plane before bending remain straight, but no longer remain perpendicular to the
mid-plane after bending. However, the shear correction factors are required in the analysis based on the first-order shear
deformation theory (FSDBT) due to the constant distribution of the transverse shear stress with respect to the thickness coor-
dinate. On the other hand, the higher-order beam theories (HOBTs) satisfies the zero transverse shear stress condition on the
upper and lower fibers of the cross-section, and they do not need the shear correction factors so that higher-order theories
are quite attractive in the analysis of FG beams and plates. The well-known higher-order beam theories include the parabolic
shear deformation beam theory (PSDBT) (Reddy, 1984, 2004), trigonometric shear deformation beam theory (TSDBT) (Toura-
tier, 1991), hyperbolic shear deformation beam theory (HSDBT) (Soldatos, 1992), exponential shear deformation beam the-
ory (ESDBT) (Karama, Afaq, & Mistou, 2003), and a recently published shear deformation beam theory (ASDBT) of Aydogdu
(2009). However, research efforts on the size-dependent behavior of FG microbeams by using higher order beam theories are
still very limited. Chen, Weiwei, and Sze (2012) proposed a size-dependent beam model for the static analysis of laminated
beams based on the modified couple stress theory and parabolic shear deformation beam theory. The modified couple stress
theory has been applied to the parabolic shear deformation beam theory for the static and dynamic analysis of functionally
graded micro beams by Salamat-talab, Nateghi, and Torabi (2012). Nateghi, Salamat-talab, Rezapour, and Daneshian (2012)
studied the size-dependent buckling analysis of FG microbeams by using on the modified couple stress theory and parabolic
shear deformation beam theory.
In this paper, a unified beam theory that contains various higher order beam theories as well as the Euler–Bernoulli and
Timoshenko beam theory is proposed for the static bending and free vibration FG microbeams. The size effect is taken into
account with the help of the modified couple stress theory. It is assumed that the material properties of the FG microbeams
vary in the thickness direction. The governing equations and the associated boundary conditions are derived from Hamilton’s
 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53 39

principle. Analytical solutions are obtained for FG microbeams with simple support at both ends based on the Navier-type
solution. The effects the material length scale parameter, different material compositions, shear deformation on the bending
and free vibration behavior of FG microbeams are examined in detail. The present results are also compared with previously
published results to establish the validity of the present formulation.

2. Functionally graded materials

A two-phase functionally graded (FG) microbeam of length L, width b, and thickness h is shown in Fig. 1. The x1 = x, x2 = y
and x3 = z coordinates are chosen along the length, width, and the thickness of FG microbeam, respectively.
The microbeam is made of a mixture of ceramic phase and metal phase. The materials at the bottom surface and that at
the top surface of the FG microbeam are ceramic and metal, respectively. The local effective material properties are evalu-
ated using the Mori–Tanaka scheme based homogenization method, which gives the effective bulk modulus (Ke) and shear
modulus (le) of the FG microbeam as Ansari et al., 2011
Ke  Km Vc
¼ ð1Þ
K c  K m 1 þ V m ðK c  K m Þ=ðK m þ 4lm =3Þ

le  lm Vc
¼ ð2Þ
lc  lm 1 þ V m ðlc  lm Þ=½lm þ lm ð9K m þ 8lm Þ=ð6ðK m þ 2lm ÞÞ
where V is the volume fraction of the phase materials, and the subscripts m and c denote metal and ceramic phases, respec-
tively. The relation between the volume fractions of the metal and the ceramic constituents is given by
Vm þ Vc ¼ 1 ð3Þ
For a FGM whose material composition follows a simple power law distribution, Vc and Ve can be written as
 k  k
z 1 z 1
V c ðzÞ ¼ þ ; V m ðzÞ ¼ 1  þ ð4Þ
h 2 h 2
where k is the gradient index. The variation of the volume fraction of the ceramic constituent,Vc, through the thickness of the
microbeam is shown in Fig. 2.
The effective Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio are related to (Ke) and (le) by
9K e le
EðzÞ ¼ ð5Þ
3K e þ le
3K  2le
mðzÞ ¼ e ð6Þ
6K e þ 2le
while the effective mass density is given by the rule of mixture as
 k
z 1
qðzÞ ¼ ðqc  qm Þ þ þ qm ð7Þ
h 2

3. The modified couple stress theory

According to the modified couple stress theory proposed by Yang et al., 2002, the strain energy density is a function of
both strain tensor (conjugated with stress tensor) and curvature tensor (conjugated with couple stress tensor). Then, the
strain energy in a deformed isotropic linear elastic body occupying a volume X can be written as
Z
1
Us ¼ ðr : e þ m : vÞ dV ð8Þ
2 X

L
b Full metal

x
h

y Full ceramic
z
Fig. 1. Geometry of a functionally graded (FG) microbeam.
40 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53

Fig. 2. Variation of the volume fraction of the ceramic constituent through the thickness of the FG microbeam.

where r is the stress tensor, e is the strain tensor, m is the deviatoric part of the couple stress tensor, and v is the symmetric
curvature tensor. These tensors are defined by
r ¼ k trðeÞI þ 2le ð9Þ
2
m ¼ 2l lv ð10Þ
1
e ¼ ½ru þ ðruÞT  ð11Þ
2
1
v ¼ ½rh þ ðrhÞT  ð12Þ
2
where u is the displacement vector, k and l are Láme’s constants, l is the material length scale parameter which reflects the
effect of couple stress, and h is the rotation vector that can be expressed as
1
h¼ curl u ð13Þ
2
Here a unified higher-order theory that contains various other theories is used. In this theory, the axial displacement,ux, and
the transverse displacement, uz, are given as
@wðx; tÞ
ux ðx; z; tÞ ¼ uðx; tÞ  z þ UðzÞcðx; tÞ ð14Þ
@x
uy ðx; z; tÞ ¼ 0 ð15Þ
uz ðx; z; tÞ ¼ wðx; tÞ ð16Þ
where u and w are the axial and the transverse displacement of any point on the neutral axis, c is the transverse shear strain
of any point on the neutral axis
@wðx; tÞ
cðx; tÞ ¼  /ðx; tÞ ð17Þ
@x
/is the total bending rotation of the cross-sections at any point on the neutral axis, t denotes time. In Eq. (14), U is a function
of z that characterizes the transverse shear and stress distribution along the thickness of the beam. The displacement fields of
different beam theories can be obtained by choosing U(z) as follows:

EBBT : UðzÞ ¼ 0 ð18Þ

FSDBT : UðzÞ ¼ z ð19Þ
2
PSDBT : UðzÞ ¼ zð1  4z2 =3h Þ ð20Þ
h pz
TSDBT : UðzÞ ¼ sin ð21Þ
p h  
z 1
HSDBT : UðzÞ ¼ h sinh  z cosh ð22Þ
h 2
2
ESDBT : UðzÞ ¼ ze2ðz=hÞ ð23Þ
2ðz=hÞ2
ASDBT : UðzÞ ¼ za ln a with a ¼ 3 ð24Þ
 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53 41

It should be noted at this stage that EBBT, FSDBT and PSDBT have been considered in isolation by the previous papers (i.e.,
Asghari et al., 2010; Chen et al., 2012; Ke and Wang, 2011; Nateghi et al., 2012; Reddy, 2011; Salamat-talab et al., 2012).
However, a more general unified beam theory that contains HOBTs as well as EBBT and FSDBT is proposed in this paper
unlike the above-mentioned previous papers. By using Eq. (9) and Eqs. (14)–(16), the components of the strain tensor are
obtained as

@u @2w @c
exx ¼  z 2 þ UðzÞ ; eyy ¼ ezz ¼ exy ¼ eyz ¼ 0 ð25Þ
@x @x @x
cxz ¼ 2exz ¼ U;z c ð26Þ

where (),z indicates the derivative with respect to z. Also, Eqs. (11), (14)–(16) give

1 @w
hy ¼ U;z c  ; hx ¼ hz ¼ 0 ð27Þ
2 @x

Substitution of Eq. (27) into (10) yields the following expression for the non-zero components of the symmetric curvature
tensor

1 @c 1 @2w 1
vxy ¼ U;z  ; vyz ¼ U;zz c; vxx ¼ vyy ¼ vzz ¼ vxz ¼ 0 ð28Þ
4 @x 2 @x2 4

4. The governing equations and boundary conditions

In this study, the equations of motion are derived by using Hamilton’s principle (Reddy, 2002). This principle can be ex-
pressed as

Z T
d ½U k  ðU s  WÞdt ¼ 0 ð29Þ
0

where Uk is the kinetic energy, Us is the strain energy and W is the work done by the external applied forces. The first var-
iation of the strain energy on the time interval [0, T] can be written as

Z T Z T Z Z T Z
d U s dt ¼ ðrij deij þ mij dvij ÞdVdt ¼ ðrxx dexx þ 2rxz dexz þ 2mxy dvxy þ 2myz dvyz ÞdVdt
0 0 X 0 X
Z Z L "     #
T
@du @ 2 dw 1 @dc 1
¼ N  ðM c þ Y 1 Þ þ M nc þ Y 2 þ Q þ Y 3 dc dx dt ð30Þ
0 0 @x @x2 2 @x 2

where L is the length of the microbeam and the following stress resultants are defined as

Z
@u @2w @c
N¼ rxx dA ¼ Axx  Bxx 2 þ Exx ð31Þ
A @x @x @x
Z
@u @2w @c
Mc ¼ zrxx dA ¼ Bxx  Dxx 2 þ F xx ð32Þ
A @x @x @x
Z
@u @2w @c
Mnc ¼ UðzÞrxx dA ¼ Exx  F xx 2 þ Hxx ð33Þ
A @x @x @x
Z
Q¼ U;z ðzÞrxz dA ¼ Bxz c ð34Þ
A
Z Z 2
2 1 @c 2@ w
Y1 ¼ mxy dA ¼ 2lðzÞl vxy dA ¼ Dxz l2  Axz l ð35Þ
A A 2 @x @x2
Z Z 2
2 1 @c 2@ w
Y2 ¼ U;z ðzÞmxy dA ¼ 2U;z ðzÞlðzÞl vxy dA ¼ Bxz l2  Dxz l ð36Þ
A A 2 @x @x2
Z Z
2 1
Y3 ¼ U;zz ðzÞmyz dA ¼ 2U;zz ðzÞlðzÞl vyz dA ¼ Exz l2 c ð37Þ
A A 2
42 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53

where
Z
EðzÞ½1  v ðzÞ
ðAxx ; Bxx ; Dxx Þ ¼ ð1; z; z2 ÞdA ð38Þ
½1 þ v ðzÞ½1  2v ðzÞ
A
Z
EðzÞ½1  v ðzÞ
ðExx ; F xx ; Hxx Þ ¼ UðzÞ½1; z; UðzÞdA ð39Þ
A ½1 þ v ðzÞ½1  2v ðzÞ
Z Z
EðzÞ
Axz ¼ lðzÞdA ¼ dA ð40Þ
A A 2½1 þ v ðzÞ
Z
Bxz ¼ lðzÞ½U;z ðzÞ2 dA ð41Þ
ZA
Dxz ¼ lðzÞU;z ðzÞdA ð42Þ
ZA
Exz ¼ lðzÞ½U;zz ðzÞ2 dA ð43Þ
A

The kinetic energy of the beam is given by

Z " 2  2  2 #
1 @ux @uy @uz
Uk ¼ qðzÞ þ þ dV ð44Þ
2 X @t @t @t

where q(z) is the mass density of FG microbeam. By using Eqs. (14)–(16) and (44), the first variation of the kinetic energy on
the time interval [0, T] is given by
Z Z Z "   !  
T T L
@u @du @w @dw @u @ 2 dw @du @ 2 w @ 2 w @ 2 dw @u @dc @du @ c
dU k dt ¼ IA þ  IB þ þ ID þ IE þ
0 0 0 @t @t @t @t @t @x@t @t @x@t @x@t @x@t @t @t @t @t
! #
@ 2 w @dc @ 2 dw @ c @ c @dc
IF þ þ IH dx dt ð45Þ
@x@t @t @x@t @t @t @t

where
Z
ðIA ; IB ; ID Þ ¼ qðzÞð1; z; z2 ÞdA ð46Þ
A
Z
ðIE ; IF ; IH Þ ¼ qðzÞUðzÞ½1; z; UðzÞdA ð47Þ
A

General form of the first variation of work done by the external applied forces on the time interval [0, T] is given by Ma et al.,
2008
Z T Z T Z Z T Z
d Wdt ¼ ð^f du þ ^cdhÞdVdt þ ð^tdu þ ^sdhÞdSdt ð48Þ
0 0 X 0 S

where ^f ; ^c; ^t; ^s are, respectively, body force per unit volume, body couple per unit volume, traction per unit area and surface
couple per unit area, and S is the surface of X. By neglecting the traction and the surface couple, the first variation of work
done by the external applied forces on the time interval [0, T] is
Z Z Z     Z T L
T T L
@c 1 
dWdt ¼ f du þ q þ dw þ acdc dx dt  ðcdwÞ dt ð49Þ
0 0 0 @x 2 0 0

where f and q are the x and z components of the body forces per unit length, c is the y component of the body couple per unit
R
length, and a ¼ A U;z ðzÞdA. Substituting Eqs. (30), (45) and (49) into Eq. (29), integrating by parts and setting the coefficient
du, dw and dc to zero lead to the following equations of motion:

@N @2u @3w @2c

þ f ¼ IA 2  IB 2
þ IE 2 ð50Þ
@x @t @x@t @t
@ 2 Mc @ 2 Y 1 @c @2w @3u @4w @3c
þ þ þ q ¼ I A þ I B  I D þ I F ð51Þ
@x2 @x2 @x @t2 @x@t2 @x2 @t2 @x@t 2
@M nc 1 @Y 2 1 1 @2u @3w @2c
þ  Y 3  Q þ ac ¼ IE 2  IF 2
þ IH 2 ð52Þ
@x 2 @x 2 2 @t @x@t @t
 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53 43

The corresponding boundary conditions at the beam ends (at x = 0 and x = L) are obtained
either N ¼ 0 or u ¼ 0 at x ¼ 0 and x ¼ L ð53Þ
@M c @Y 1 @2u @3w @2c
either þ þ c  IB 2 þ ID 2
 IF 2 ¼ 0 or w ¼ 0 at x ¼ 0 and x ¼ L ð54Þ
@x @x @t @x@t @t
1
either M nc þ Y 2 ¼ 0 or c ¼ 0 at x ¼ 0 and x ¼ L ð55Þ
2
@w
either M c þ Y 1 ¼ 0 or ¼ 0 at x ¼ 0 and x ¼ L ð56Þ
@x
By using Eqs. (31)–(37) and (50)–(52), the equations of motion of FG microbeam in terms of the displacements are obtained
as
@2u @3w @2c @2u @3w @2c
Axx 2
 Bxx 3 þ Exx 2  IA 2 þ IB 2
 IE 2 þ f ¼ 0 ð57Þ
@x @x @x @t @x@t @t
  3
@3u 4
2 @ w 1 2 @ c @2w @3u @4w @3c @c
Bxx þ ðD xx þ A xz l Þ  F xx þ D xz l þ I A 2
þ I B 2
 I D 2
þ I F  q¼0 ð58Þ
@x3 @x4 2 @x3 @t @x@t @x2 @t @x@t2 @x
  3   2  
@2u 1 2 @ w 1 2 @ c 1 2 @2u @3w @2c 1
Exx  F xx þ D xz l þ H xx þ Bxz l  Bxz þ E xz l c  IE 2 þ IF 2
 IH 2 þ ac ¼ 0 ð59Þ
@x2 2 @x3 4 @x2 4 @t @x@t @t 2
It should be noted that when the scale parameter l and the Poisson’s ratio are taken to be zero in Eqs. (57)–(59), the govern-
ing equations of motion are obtained for the classical higher order beam model.

5. Analytical solution for static bending and free vibration of a simply-supported FG microbeam

In this section, the governing equations are analytically solved for static bending and free vibration of a simply-supported
FG microbeam. The boundary conditions of a simply-supported microbeam at x = 0, L are given as
@u @2w @c
N ¼ Axx  Bxx 2 þ Exx ¼0 ð60Þ
@x @x @x
w¼0 ð61Þ
  2  
1 @u 1 2 @ w 1 2 @c
Mnc þ Y 2 ¼ Exx  F xx þ Dxz l 2
þ Hxx þ Bxz l ¼0 ð62Þ
2 @x 2 @x 4 @x
2  
@u 2 @ w 1 2 @c
Mc þ Y 1 ¼ Bxx  ðDxx þ Axz l Þ 2 þ F xx þ Dxz l ¼0 ð63Þ
@x @x 2 @x
In this study, the Navier solution procedure is employed to obtain the analytical solution. For this purpose, the displacement
functions are expressed as product of undetermined coefficients and known trigonometric functions so as to satisfy the gov-
erning equations and the above-mentioned boundary conditions at x = 0, L. The following expansions of the displacement
field are assumed:
X
N
uðx; tÞ ¼ U n eixn t cos bx ð64Þ
n¼1
X
N
wðx; tÞ ¼ W n eixn t sin bx ð65Þ
n¼1
X
N
cðx; tÞ ¼ Gn eixn t cos bx ð66Þ
n¼1
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
where i ¼ 1; xn is the vibration frequency, (Un, Wn, Gn) are the unknown Fourier coefficients to be determined for each n
value, and b = np/L.

5.1. Static bending

For the static bending problem, all time derivatives are set to zero and the external force f and couple c are also set to zero.
The applied transverse load q is expanded in Fourier series as
X
N
qðxÞ ¼ Q n sin bx ð67Þ
n¼1
Z L
2
Qn ¼ qðxÞ sin bx dx ð68Þ
L 0
44 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53

where Qn are the Fourier coefficients, which are given for uniform and point loads as follows (Nateghi et al., 2012):
4q0
Uniform load; qðxÞ ¼ q0 : Q n ¼ ; n ¼ 1; 3; 5; . . . ð69Þ
np
2P
Point load; qðxÞ ¼ Pdðx  xP Þ : Q n ¼ sin bxP ; n ¼ 1; 2; 3; . . . ð70Þ
L
where q0 is the intensity of the uniformly distributed load, d() is the Dirac delta function, P is the magnitude of the point
load, xP is the application position of the point load. When the point load is acted on the midspan of the beam, namely,
q(x) = Pd(x  L/2), the Fourier coefficients take the following form
2P np
Qn ¼ sin ; n ¼ 1; 2; 3; . . . ð71Þ
L 2
Substituting Eqs. (64)–(67) into Eqs. (57)–(59) lead to the following system of algebraic equations:
2 38 9 8 9
K 11 K 12 K 13 >< Un > < 0 >
= > =
6 7
4 K 21 K 22 K 23 5 W n ¼ Q n ð72Þ
>
: > >
; : >
;
K 31 K 32 K 33 Gn 0

where
2
K 11 ¼ b2 Axx ; K 12 ¼ K 21 ¼ b3 Bxx ; K 13 ¼ K 31 ¼ b2 Exx ; K 22 ¼ b4 ðDxx þ Axz l Þ
     
1 2 1 2 1 2
ð73Þ
K 23 ¼ K 32 ¼ b3 F xx þ Dxz l ; K 33 ¼ b2 Hxx þ Bxz l þ Bxz þ Exz l
2 4 4
Eq. (73) can be solved to obtain the Fourier coefficients

For PSDBT, TSDBT, HSDBT, ESDBT, ASDBT

2 2
½ðb2 l þ 4ÞBxx Bxz þ 4b2 ðBxx Hxx  Exx F xx Þ þ l ðBxx Exz  2b2 Exx Dxz ÞQ n
Un ¼ 3
ð74Þ
b R
2 2
½ðb2 l þ 4ÞAxx Bxz þ 4b2 ðAxx Hxx  E2xx Þ þ l Axx Exz Q n
Wn ¼ ð75Þ
b4 R
2
½4b2 ðAxx F xx  Bxx Exx Þ þ 2b2 l Axx Dxz Q n
Gn ¼ 3
ð76Þ
b R
where
     
2 2 2 2
R ¼ ðb2 l þ 4Þ Axx Dxx Bxz þ l Axx Axz Bxz  B2xx Bxz þ 4b2 Axx Hxx  E2xx ðDxx þ l Axz Þ þ l Exz Axx Dxx  B2xx
 
2 4 2
 4b2 Axx F xx ðF xx þ l Dxz Þ þ l Axx Axz Exz  b2 D2xz þ 4b2 Bxx ðl Exx Dxz þ 2Exx F xx  Bxx Hxx Þ ð77Þ

For FSDBT
2
ðb2 l  4ks ÞBxx Q n
Un ¼ 2 2 2
ð78Þ
b ½ðb l þ 4ks ÞðB2xx  Axx Dxx Þ  4ks l Axx Axz 
3

2
½4b2 ðB2xx  Axx Dxx Þ  ðb2 l þ 4ks ÞAxx Axz Q n
Wn ¼ 2 2 2
ð79Þ
4
b Axz ½ðb l þ 4ks ÞðB2xx  Axx Dxx Þ  4ks l Axx Axz 
2
½4b2 ðB2xx  Axx Dxx Þ  2b2 l Axx Axz Q n
Gn ¼   ð80Þ
2 2
b Axz ½ðb2 l þ 4ks Þ B2xx  Axx Dxx  4ks l Axx Axz 
3

where ks is the shear correction factor.

For EBBT
Bxx Q n
Un ¼ 2
ð81Þ
b3 ½ðAxx Dxx  B2xx Þ þ l Axx Axz 
Axx Q n
Wn ¼ 4 2
ð82Þ
b ½ðAxx Dxx  B2xx Þ þ l Axx Axz 
It should be noted that Gn is identically zero for EBBT. Also, note that although Eqs. (78)–(82) have been derived in the
author’s previous work (Simsek et al., 2013), these equations are given again here for the completeness of the paper. The
complete solutions for the displacements are known from Eqs. (64)–(66).
 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53 45

5.2. Free vibration

For free vibration, when all external forces are taken as zero, substituting Eqs. (64)–(66) into Eqs. (57)–(59) lead to the
following eigenvalue problem:
02 3 2 318 9 8 9
K 11 K 12 K 13 M11 M 12 M 13 >
> Un >
> >0>
> >
B6 7 6 >
7C< >
= >
< > =
B6 7 6 7C
B6 K 21 K 22 K 23 7  x2 6 M21 M 22 M 23 7C W n ¼ 0 ð83Þ
@4 5 4 5A>
> >
> >
> > >
>
: >
; >
: > ;
K 31 K 32 K 33 M31 M 32 M 33 Gn 0

M11 ¼ IA ; M 12 ¼ M 21 ¼ bIB ; M13 ¼ M31 ¼ IE ; M 22 ¼ IA þ b2 ID ;

ð84Þ
M23 ¼ M32 ¼ bIF ; M33 ¼ IH

Eq. (83) defines an eigenvalue problem with xn. The eigenvalues (characteristic values) xn are found by setting the deter-
minant of the coefficient matrix in Eq. (83) to zero. The smallest eigenvalue (x1) is the fundamental frequency.

6. Numerical results

In this section, several numerical examples of bending and free vibration behavior of FG microbeams are presented. The
constituents of the FG microbeams used in this study include aluminum (Al:Em = 70 GPa, qm = 2702 kg/m3, mm = 0.3) and
ceramic (SiC:Ec = 427 GPa, qc = 3100 kg/m3, mc = 0.17) (Ansari et al., 2011). It is known that the material length scale param-
eter is obtained as l = 17.6 lm for homogeneous epoxy beam (Ansari et al., 2011). Since there is no available data for the
material length scale parameter for FG microbeams, the material length scale parameter of FG microbeam is taken as
l = 15 lm throughout the paper (Ansari et al., 2011; Ke and Wang, 2011). The width and the thickness of the FG microbeam
are taken to be equal to each other (b = h). The shear correction factor is taken as ks = 5/6 for FSDBT. The following dimen-
sionless quantities can be defined for the convenience:

Dimensionless transverse deflection:

Em I
 ¼ 100w
w for point load
PL3
Dimensionless transverse deflection:
Em I
 ¼ 100w
w for uniform load
q0 L 4
Dimensionless stresses:
 
rxx A rxz A
ðr
 xx ; r
 xz Þ ¼ ; for point load
P P
Dimensionless stresses:
 
rxx A rxz A
ðr
 xx ; r
 xz Þ ¼ ; for uniform load
q0 L q0 L
Dimensionless frequency:
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
xL2 qm
k¼
h Em

6.1. Verification of the present results

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 of the previously published paper.

6.1.1. Example 1: Bending of a homogeneous microbeam

Fig. 3 presents the comparison the variation of the static deflection and the rotation versus the normalized beam length
between the present results and those of Ma et al., 2008. For the comparison purposes, the following parameters are used in
computing the numerical results: P = 100 lN, E = 1.44 GPa, v = 0.38, q = 1220 kg/m3, L = 20h, b = 2h, h = l = 17.6 lm (where b
and h are the width and the thickness of the beam, respectively). In Fig. 3, it is observed that the results obtained on the basis
of the present method have good agreement with the available data.
46 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53

Fig. 3. Comparison of the normalized static deflections and rotations of the simply supported microbeam subjected to a point load at the middle for
P = 100 lN, L = 20h, b = 2h, v = 0.38.

6.1.2. Example 2: Free vibration of a homogeneous microbeam

In this example, the natural frequency (x1) of the homogeneous Timoshenko microbeam, which is considered in the pre-
vious example, is plotted as a function of the dimensionless material length scale parameter (h/l). The frequencies of Ma
et al., 2008 are also provided for the comparison purpose. Good agreement is obtained between the present results and
the results given by Ma et al., 2008 as shown in Fig. 4.

6.1.3. Example 3: Free vibration of an FG microbeam

In order to further verify the present results, the dimensionless natural frequencies of FG microbeam are compared with
those of Ansari et al., 2011 by inserting the material properties used in this reference. Computations in this section are made
according to Timoshenko beam theory in conjunction with the modified couple stress theory. For comparison purposes, the
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
dimensionless frequencies k ¼ xL IA0 =Axx0 are used, where IA0 and Axx0 are the values IA and Axx of homogeneous metal
microbeam. In Table 1, the dimensionless fundamental frequency of FG microbeam with k = 2 is presented for different val-
ues of the beam thickness. Table 2 contains dimensionless fifth vibration frequencies of FG microbeam for various values of
the gradient index (k) and for h/l = 2, L/h = 10. The comparisons presented in these tables show that the present frequencies
are in good agreement with those of the existing literature.

6.2. Results for static responses

Tables 3 and 4 contain dimensionless transverse deflections of the FG microbeam based on the different beam theories for
various values of the gradient index (k = 0, 0.3, 1, 10), dimensionless material length scale parameter (h/l = 1, 2, 4, 8), two dif-
ferent values of the aspect ratio (L/h = 10, 100). Results are given for the point load and uniform load. It is seen that the effect
of the shear deformation is significant for the thick microbeams (i.e., L/h = 10). On the other hand, all beam theories used in
this study produce the similar results with some small differences for L/h = 100. This means that the shear deformation loses
its effect on the transverse deflections for the slender microbeams (i.e., L/h = 100). It should be noted that the transverse

Fig. 4. Comparison of the natural frequency of the simply supported microbeam for L = 20h, b = 2h, v = 0.38.
 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53 47

Table 1
Comparison of the dimensionless fundamental frequencies of the FG microbeam with k = 2, L = 10h (the first mode, n = 1).

h (lm) 15 30 45 60 75 90 120
Present 0.7982 0.5099 0.4341 0.4040 0.3893 0.3811 0.3727
Ansari et al., 2011 0.7983 0.5100 0.4341 0.4041 0.3894 0.3811 0.3728

Table 2
Comparison of the dimensionless fifth frequencies of the FG microbeam with h/l = 2, L = 10h (the fifth mode, n = 5).

Source Ceramic k = 0.1 k = 0.6 k = 1.2 k=2 k = 10 Metal

Present 16.4670 14.7275 11.6880 10.3915 9.5585 7.8448 6.9885
Ansari et al., 2011 16.4672 14.7194 11.6879 10.3919 9.5590 7.8479 7.0831

Table 3
Dimensionless transverse deflections of the FG microbeam for point load.

h/l Beam theory L/h = 10 L/h = 100

k = 0.3 k=1 k=3 k = 10 k = 0.3 k=1 k=3 k = 10
1 EBBT 0.0904 0.1375 0.2020 0.2718 0.0904 0.1375 0.2020 0.2718
FSDBT 0.0956 0.1456 0.2150 0.2906 0.0905 0.1376 0.2021 0.2720
PSDBT 0.0916 0.1391 0.2041 0.2749 0.0904 0.1376 0.2020 0.2718
TSDBT 0.0916 0.1391 0.2041 0.2751 0.0904 0.1376 0.2020 0.2718
HSDBT 0.0916 0.1390 0.2040 0.2749 0.0904 0.1376 0.2020 0.2718
ESDBT 0.0915 0.1390 0.2042 0.2752 0.0904 0.1376 0.2020 0.2718
ASDBT 0.0915 0.1390 0.2042 0.2752 0.0904 0.1376 0.2020 0.2718
2 EBBT 0.2394 0.3564 0.4909 0.6302 0.2394 0.3564 0.4909 0.6302
FSDBT 0.2473 0.3690 0.5116 0.6604 0.2394 0.3565 0.4912 0.6305
PSDBT 0.2437 0.3628 0.5011 0.6452 0.2394 0.3565 0.4910 0.6304
TSDBT 0.2436 0.3629 0.5014 0.6457 0.2394 0.3565 0.4911 0.6304
HSDBT 0.2437 0.3628 0.5010 0.6451 0.2394 0.3565 0.4911 0.6304
ESDBT 0.2435 0.3628 0.5015 0.6459 0.2394 0.3565 0.4911 0.6304
ASDBT 0.2435 0.3628 0.5015 0.6459 0.2394 0.3565 0.4911 0.6304
4 EBBT 0.4067 0.5917 0.7642 0.9402 0.4067 0.5917 0.7642 0.9402
FSDBT 0.4187 0.6104 0.7940 0.9826 0.4069 0.5919 0.7645 0.9406
PSDBT 0.4166 0.6077 0.7908 0.9771 0.4068 0.5919 0.7645 0.9406
TSDBT 0.4166 0.6077 0.7912 0.9776 0.4068 0.5919 0.7645 0.9406
HSDBT 0.4166 0.6076 0.7907 0.9770 0.4068 0.5919 0.7645 0.9406
ESDBT 0.4165 0.6077 0.7914 0.9777 0.4068 0.5919 0.7645 0.9406
ASDBT 0.4165 0.6077 0.7914 0.9777 0.4068 0.5919 0.7645 0.9406
8 EBBT 0.4929 0.7087 0.8877 1.0720 0.4929 0.7087 0.8877 1.0720
FSDBT 0.5073 0.7310 0.9223 1.1206 0.4931 0.7089 0.8881 1.0725
PSDBT 0.5066 0.7314 0.9259 1.1233 0.4931 0.7089 0.8881 1.0725
TSDBT 0.5066 0.7314 0.9262 1.1234 0.4931 0.7089 0.8881 1.0725
HSDBT 0.5066 0.7313 0.9259 1.1232 0.4931 0.7089 0.8881 1.0725
ESDBT 0.5065 0.7314 0.9263 1.1232 0.4931 0.7089 0.8881 1.0725
ASDBT 0.5065 0.7314 0.9263 1.1232 0.4931 0.7089 0.8881 1.0725
Classical theory EBBT 0.5304 0.7586 0.9383 1.1246 0.5304 0.7586 0.9383 1.1246
FSDBT 0.5461 0.7828 0.9753 1.1761 0.5305 0.7589 0.9386 1.1251
PSDBT 0.5460 0.7848 0.9823 1.1828 0.5305 0.7589 0.9387 1.1252
TSDBT 0.5460 0.7848 0.9825 1.1826 0.5305 0.7589 0.9387 1.1252
HSDBT 0.5460 0.7847 0.9823 1.1828 0.5305 0.7589 0.9387 1.1252
ESDBT 0.5459 0.7847 0.9825 1.1823 0.5305 0.7589 0.9387 1.1252
ASDBT 0.5459 0.7847 0.9825 1.1823 0.5305 0.7589 0.9387 1.1252

deflections of all higher order beam theories (HOBTs) are almost the same, and also the results of ESDBT and ASDBT are iden-
tical. It is noteworthy that when the thickness of the beam is equal to the material length scale parameter (i.e., h/l = 1), very
small transverse deflections are obtained due to strong size effect. As the thickness of the beam (or dimensionless material
length scale parameter, h/l) increases, the deflections of the FG microbeam also increase. 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.
In Fig. 5, the dimensionless transverse deflections are plotted as a function of dimensionless material length scale param-
eter (h/l) for L/h = 10, k = 1. It is clear from Fig. 5 that the transverse deflections predicted by the classical beam models are
always larger than those predicted by the non-classical beam models with couple stress in all theories considered. This
48 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53

Table 4
Dimensionless transverse deflections of the FG microbeam for uniform load.

h/l Beam theory L/h = 10 L/h = 100

k = 0.3 k=1 k=3 k = 10 k = 0.3 k=1 k=3 k = 10
1 EBBT 0.0565 0.0859 0.1262 0.1698 0.0565 0.0859 0.1262 0.1698
FSDBT 0.0592 0.0902 0.1330 0.1797 0.0565 0.0860 0.1263 0.1699
PSDBT 0.0571 0.0867 0.1273 0.1715 0.0565 0.0860 0.1262 0.1699
TSDBT 0.0571 0.0867 0.1273 0.1716 0.0565 0.0860 0.1262 0.1699
HSDBT 0.0571 0.0867 0.1273 0.1715 0.0565 0.0860 0.1262 0.1699
ESDBT 0.0571 0.0867 0.1274 0.1716 0.0565 0.0860 0.1262 0.1699
ASDBT 0.0571 0.0867 0.1274 0.1716 0.0565 0.0860 0.1262 0.1699
2 EBBT 0.1496 0.2227 0.3068 0.3939 0.1496 0.2227 0.3068 0.3939
FSDBT 0.1537 0.2292 0.3175 0.4095 0.1496 0.2228 0.3069 0.3940
PSDBT 0.1518 0.2261 0.3121 0.4017 0.1496 0.2228 0.3069 0.3940
TSDBT 0.1518 0.2261 0.3123 0.4019 0.1496 0.2228 0.3069 0.3940
HSDBT 0.1518 0.2261 0.3121 0.4016 0.1496 0.2228 0.3069 0.3940
ESDBT 0.1518 0.2261 0.3123 0.4021 0.1496 0.2228 0.3069 0.3940
ASDBT 0.1518 0.2261 0.3123 0.4021 0.1496 0.2228 0.3069 0.3940
4 EBBT 0.2542 0.3698 0.4776 0.5876 0.2542 0.3698 0.4776 0.5876
FSDBT 0.2603 0.3794 0.4928 0.6093 0.2543 0.3699 0.4778 0.5878
PSDBT 0.2593 0.3780 0.4913 0.6067 0.2542 0.3699 0.4777 0.5878
TSDBT 0.2593 0.3781 0.4916 0.6069 0.2542 0.3699 0.4777 0.5878
HSDBT 0.2593 0.3780 0.4913 0.6066 0.2542 0.3699 0.4777 0.5878
ESDBT 0.2592 0.3781 0.4917 0.6070 0.2542 0.3699 0.4777 0.5878
ASDBT 0.2592 0.3781 0.4917 0.6070 0.2542 0.3699 0.4777 0.5878
8 EBBT 0.3081 0.4429 0.5548 0.6700 0.3081 0.4429 0.5548 0.6700
FSDBT 0.3154 0.4542 0.5723 0.6946 0.3081 0.4430 0.5550 0.6702
PSDBT 0.3150 0.4545 0.5743 0.6962 0.3081 0.4430 0.5550 0.6703
TSDBT 0.3150 0.4545 0.5745 0.6963 0.3081 0.4430 0.5550 0.6703
HSDBT 0.3150 0.4545 0.5743 0.6962 0.3081 0.4430 0.5550 0.6703
ESDBT 0.3150 0.4545 0.5746 0.6962 0.3081 0.4430 0.5550 0.6703
ASDBT 0.3150 0.4545 0.5746 0.6962 0.3081 0.4430 0.5550 0.6703
Classical theory EBBT 0.3315 0.4741 0.5864 0.7028 0.3315 0.4741 0.5864 0.7028
FSDBT 0.3393 0.4862 0.6049 0.7286 0.3315 0.4743 0.5866 0.7031
PSDBT 0.3394 0.4874 0.6087 0.7324 0.3315 0.4743 0.5866 0.7031
TSDBT 0.3394 0.4874 0.6089 0.7323 0.3315 0.4743 0.5866 0.7031
HSDBT 0.3394 0.4874 0.6087 0.7324 0.3315 0.4743 0.5866 0.7031
ESDBT 0.3393 0.4874 0.6089 0.7322 0.3315 0.4743 0.5866 0.7031
ASDBT 0.3393 0.4874 0.6089 0.7322 0.3315 0.4743 0.5866 0.7031

Fig. 5. Variation of the dimensionless transverse deflections of the FG microbeam subjected to a point load with the material parameter for, L/h = 10, k = 1.

indicates that inclusion of couple stress stiffens the microbeam. The difference between the deflections of the classical and
non-classical models is significant for thin microbeams with h/l 6 5  10. It is also seen that the results of the classical beam
models are independent of the material length scale parameter.
Fig. 6 displays the variation of the dimensionless transverse deflection with the gradient index for two different values of
the dimensionless material parameter and for L/h = 10. The solid and the dashed lines correspond to the deflections with and
 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53 49

Fig. 6. Variation of the dimensionless transverse deflections of the FG microbeam subjected to a point load with the gradient index for, L/h = 10, (a) h/l = 1,
(b) h/l = 8.

without the Poisson effect, respectively. According to these figures, it is recognized that the consideration of the Poisson ef-
fect causes a decrement in the dimensionless static deflections. This is due to the fact that as seen from Eqs. (38) and (39), the
inclusion of the Poisson effect changes the value of the elasticity modulus from E to E(1  v)/((1 + v)(1  2v)), and then this
change produces an increase in the rigidity values of the FG microbeam. It can be said that the neglecting the Poisson effect
leads to the significant errors. This was concluded by Ma et al., 2008 studying the microstructure effect of a simply-
supported Timoshenko beam model based on the modified couple stress theory. It is observed that the Poisson effect on
the dimensionless transverse deflection increases as the gradient index increases. This is explained as follows: when the
gradient index increases, the volume fraction of the metal constituent in the FG microbeam is also increased, and then this
leads to an increase in the value of the effective Poisson’s ratio of the FG microbeam (because, the Poisson’s ratio of the metal
constituent is greater than that of the ceramic constituent).
In Fig. 7, the variation of the dimensionless axial normal stress ðr xx ðL=2; zÞÞ of the FG microbeam with L/h = 10 through the
thickness is presented for different values of the gradient index and for h/l = 1, 8. The axial normal stresses are compressive
and tensile at the upper and the lower side of the microbeam, respectively. It should be noted at this stage that all higher
order beam theories (HOBTs) considered here yield the same variation for the axial normal stress. The most important result
deduced from Fig. 7 is that the variation of the dimensionless axial normal stress of the FG microbeam is very different from
that of a homogeneous one. For instance, it is explicit that the axial stresses are not zero on the mid-plane of the FG micro-
beams which implies that the neutral plane of the FG microbeams moves towards the lower side of the FG microbeams. Con-
trary to the homogeneous microbeams (i.e., full ceramic and full metal microbeams), the magnitudes of the compressive and
the tensile stresses are not equal to each other for FG microbeams with k = 0.3, 1, 3. Furthermore, the magnitude of the tensile
stresses is increased when the gradient index is increased. As seen from Fig. 7(b), as the dimensionless material length scale
parameter increases, the magnitudes of the axial normal stresses increases, considerably. Also, warping effect of the cross-
section, which is more pronounced for the microbeam with h/l = 8, can be seen from these figures (please see black and red
lines).
Fig. 8 shows the variation of the dimensionless transverse shear stress ðr  xz ð0; zÞÞ of the FG microbeam with L/h = 10, h/
l = 1 through the thickness for the different higher order beam theories (HOBTs). Although all HOBTs give the same variation

Fig. 7. Variation of the dimensionless axial stress of the FG microbeam subjected to a point load through the thickness for L/h = 10, (a) h/l = 1, (b) h/l = 8.
50 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53

Fig. 8. Variation of the dimensionless shear stress of the FG microbeam subjected to a point load through the thickness for L/h = 10, h/l = 1, (a) k = 0 (full
ceramic microbeam), (b) k = 1.

Table 5
Dimensionless fundamental frequency of the FG microbeam.

h/l Theory L/h = 10 L/h = 100

k = 0.3 k=1 k=3 k = 10 k = 0.3 k=1 k=3 k = 10
1 EBBT 12.9004 10.6483 8.9420 7.8011 12.9565 10.6987 8.9845 7.8348
FSDBT 12.6058 10.3982 8.7110 7.5835 12.9533 10.6960 8.9820 7.8325
PSDBT 12.8337 10.6009 8.9048 7.7640 12.9558 10.6982 8.9841 7.8345
TSDBT 12.8344 10.6004 8.9034 7.7620 12.9558 10.6982 8.9841 7.8344
HSDBT 12.8337 10.6010 8.9050 7.7642 12.9558 10.6982 8.9841 7.8345
ESDBT 12.8364 10.6009 8.9027 7.7611 12.9558 10.6982 8.9840 7.8344
ASDBT 12.8364 10.6009 8.9027 7.7611 12.9558 10.6982 8.9840 7.8344
2 EBBT 7.9307 6.6159 5.7362 5.1231 7.9651 6.6471 5.7633 5.1453
FSDBT 7.8233 6.5211 5.6383 5.0237 7.9640 6.6461 5.7623 5.1442
PSDBT 7.8722 6.5670 5.6876 5.0731 7.9645 6.6466 5.7628 5.1448
TSDBT 7.8725 6.5666 5.6861 5.0713 7.9645 6.6466 5.7628 5.1447
HSDBT 7.8722 6.5671 5.6878 5.0733 7.9645 6.6466 5.7628 5.1448
ESDBT 7.8735 6.5668 5.6853 5.0705 7.9645 6.6466 5.7628 5.1447
ASDBT 7.8735 6.5668 5.6853 5.0705 7.9645 6.6466 5.7628 5.1447
4 EBBT 6.0840 5.1348 4.5978 4.1945 6.1104 5.1590 4.6195 4.2126
FSDBT 6.0115 5.0692 4.5256 4.1184 6.1096 5.1583 4.6187 4.2118
PSDBT 6.0236 5.0783 4.5327 4.1276 6.1097 5.1584 4.6188 4.2119
TSDBT 6.0237 5.0780 4.5316 4.1267 6.1097 5.1584 4.6188 4.2119
HSDBT 6.0236 5.0784 4.5328 4.1277 6.1097 5.1584 4.6188 4.2119
ESDBT 6.0242 5.0781 4.5310 4.1264 6.1097 5.1584 4.6188 4.2119
ASDBT 6.0242 5.0781 4.5310 4.1264 6.1097 5.1584 4.6188 4.2119
8 EBBT 5.5267 4.6920 4.2659 3.9282 5.5507 4.7141 4.2861 3.9452
FSDBT 5.4617 4.6327 4.1995 3.8573 5.5500 4.7135 4.2854 3.9444
PSDBT 5.4646 4.6313 4.1922 3.8528 5.5500 4.7134 4.2853 3.9444
TSDBT 5.4645 4.6311 4.1915 3.8526 5.5500 4.7134 4.2853 3.9444
HSDBT 5.4645 4.6314 4.1923 3.8529 5.5500 4.7134 4.2853 3.9444
ESDBT 5.4649 4.6312 4.1912 3.8528 5.5500 4.7134 4.2853 3.9444
ASDBT 5.4649 4.6312 4.1912 3.8528 5.5500 4.7134 4.2853 3.9444
Classical theory EBBT 5.3280 4.5348 4.1494 3.8353 5.3511 4.5561 4.1691 3.8519
FSDBT 5.2654 4.4775 4.0848 3.7661 5.3505 4.5555 4.1684 3.8512
PSDBT 5.2649 4.4723 4.0719 3.7564 5.3504 4.5555 4.1682 3.8511
TSDBT 5.2650 4.4722 4.0715 3.7565 5.3504 4.5555 4.1682 3.8511
HSDBT 5.2649 4.4724 4.0720 3.7564 5.3504 4.5555 4.1682 3.8511
ESDBT 5.2652 4.4722 4.0713 3.7568 5.3504 4.5555 4.1682 3.8511
ASDBT 5.2652 4.4722 4.0713 3.7568 5.3504 4.5555 4.1682 3.8511

for the axial normal stress, however, they give different results for the transverse shear stress, as seen from Fig. 8. The reason
of this behavior is due to the fact that each higher order beam theory uses different shape function (U), which characterizes
the transverse shear and stress distribution along the thickness of the beam (please see Eqs. (20)–(24)). Also note that, as
seen from Fig. 8, the dimensionless transverse shear stress variations of ESDBT and ASDBT are identical.
 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53 51

Fig. 9. Variation of the dimensionless frequencies of the FG microbeam with the dimensionless material length scale parameter for L/h = 10, k = 1, (a) the
first frequency, (b) the third frequency.

Fig. 10. Variation of the first dimensionless frequency of the FG microbeam with the gradient index for L/h = 10, (a) h/l = 1, (b) h/l = 8.

6.3. Results for free vibration responses

Table 5 contains the dimensionless fundamental frequency of the FG microbeam based on the different beam theories for
various values of the gradient index (k = 0, 0.3, 1, 10), dimensionless material length scale parameter (h/l = 1, 2, 4, 8), two dif-
ferent values of the aspect ratio (L/h = 10, 100). It is notable that the dimensionless fundamental frequency increases as the
dimensionless material length scale parameter (h/l) decreases, and the frequencies predicted by the non-classical beam mod-
els with couple stress are larger than those predicted by the classical beam models. Similarly, the dimensionless fundamental
frequency decreases while the gradient index increases which causes the reduction in the value of the elasticity modulus.
Similar to the static responses, all higher order beam theories (HOBTs) yield the similar results with some small differences.
Although the static responses of EBBT are independent of the aspect ratio, the dimensionless fundamental frequency in-
creases by a small amount with the aspect ratio due to the rotary inertia of the microbeam.
Fig. 9 displays the variation of the first dimensionless frequency (fundamental frequency, n = 1) and the third frequency
(n = 3) with the dimensionless material length scale parameter for L/h = 10, k = 1. It is seen that the classical beam models
underestimate the frequencies, and the frequencies are non-linearly dependent on the material length scale parameter.
Inspection of Fig. 9b reveals that the difference between the frequencies of Euler–Bernoulli beam theory (EBBT) and those
of the shear deformable beam theories (FSDBT, HOBTs) is more pronounced for the third mode. This means that the shear
deformation effect gains importance as the mode number increases.
Fig. 10 presents the Poisson effect on the first dimensionless frequency of the FG beam for two different values of the
dimensionless material parameter and for L/h = 10. It is to be noted here that the dimensionless frequency increases when
the Poisson effect is taken into account. This increase in the dimensionless frequency is attributed to the increase of the stiff-
ness of FG microbeam due to the Poisson effect. Another significant observation from these figures that a prominent decrease
in the dimensionless frequency occurs when the power-law exponent changes between 0 and 5, but after passing k = 5 all of
the curves become flatter.
52 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53

7. Conclusions

A new size-dependent unified beam theory is presented for the static bending and free vibration of the FG microbeam
based on the modified couple stress theory. The unified theory contains various existing beam theories as special cases. This
microbeam model incorporates the material length scale parameter which can capture the size effect. Mori–Tanaka homog-
enization technique is used to determine the material properties of the FG microbeam. The governing equations and the re-
lated boundary conditions are derived by using Hamilton’s principle. Analytical solutions based on the Navier-type solution
are presented for simply-supported boundary conditions. Numerical results are presented to investigate the influences the
material length scale parameter, different material compositions, and shear deformation on the bending and free vibration
behavior of FG microbeams. Present results are also compared with published results to establish the validity of the present
formulation. The novelty of the present paper arises from the several points. Firstly, as mentioned before, a more general
unified beam theory that contains various existing beam theories (classical and shear deformable beam theories) as special
cases is proposed for FG microbeams. Also, in the present formulation, the governing equations are derived in terms of the
transverse shear strain (not rotation) together with axial and transverse displacements. This reduces the number of terms in
the governing equations, and makes the problem easier to solve. Secondly, in most of the studies related to FG beams, plates
and FG microbeams, the effective material properties of FG material are estimated by the classical rule of mixture. It is
known that the modified rule of mixtures, i.e., Mori–Tanaka method as applied in the present paper, gives better results than
the classical rule of mixture for especially stress distribution. Finally, it is known that the stress analysis is very important in
design of structures. However, many studies, especially those on microbeams, give only deflections, and ignore the stress
analysis. In the present paper, the stress distribution of FG microbeam incorporating the size effect is analyzed unlike other
published paper. From the results analyzed above, the following important observations can be made:

 A unified higher order beam theory which contains various beam theories is presented based on the modified couple
stress theory for static bending and free vibration of FG microbeams.
 The non-classical beam models exhibit significant size-dependence when the thickness of the microbeam approaches to
the material length scale parameter.
 The classical beam models overestimate (underestimate) the static responses (free vibration responses).
 The static and free vibration results of the classical beam models are independent of the material length scale parameter.
 The inclusion of the Poisson effect reduces static deflections and increases vibration frequencies.
 All higher order beam theories considered in this paper give the same results with some small differences (i.e., static
deflections, free vibration frequencies, axial normal stress) except for the transverse shear stress.
 ESDBT and ASDBT yield the same results for static deflections, axial normal and shear stresses as well as free vibration
frequencies.
 The difference between the frequencies of Euler–Bernoulli beam theory and those of the shear deformable beam theories
increases as the mode number increases.
 Good agreement is observed between the present results and the previously published results. Further, the present results
given in tabular form can be useful for other researchers to compare their results in the future.

Acknowledgment

The second author wishes to acknowledge that this collaborative research conducted while he was supported by the NSF
project CMMI-1030836.

References

Akgöz, B., & Civalek, O. (2011). Strain gradient elasticity and modified couple stress models for buckling analysis of axially loaded micro-scaled beams.
International Journal of Engineering Science, 49, 1268–1280.
Akgöz, B., & Civalek, Ö. (2012). Analysis of micro-sized beams for various boundary conditions based on the strain gradient elasticity theory. Archive of
Applied Mechanics, 82, 423–443.
Ansari, R., Gholami, R., & Sahmani, S. (2011). Free vibration analysis of size-dependent functionally graded microbeams based on the strain gradient
Timoshenko beam theory. Composite Structures, 94, 221–228.
Asghari, M., Ahmadian, M. T., Kahrobaiyan, M. H., & Rahaeifard, M. (2010). On the size-dependent behavior of functionally graded micro-beams. Materials
and Design, 31, 2324–2329.
Asghari, M., Kahrobaiyan, M. H., & Ahmadian, M. T. (2010). A nonlinear Timoshenko beam formulation based on the modified couple stress theory.
International Journal of Engineering Science, 48, 1749–1761.
Aydogdu, M. (2009). A new shear deformation theory for laminated composite plates. Composite Structures, 89, 94–101.
Aydogdu, M., & Taskin, V. (2007). Free vibration analysis of functionally graded beams with simply supported edges. Materials and Design, 28, 1651–1656.
Chakraborty, A., Gopalakrishnan, S., & Reddy, J. N. (2003). A new beam finite element for the analysis of functionally graded materials. International Journal of
Mechanical Sciences, 45, 519–539.
Chen, W., Weiwei, C., & Sze, K. Y. (2012). A model of composite laminated Reddy beam based on a modified couple-stress theory. Composite Structures, 94,
2599–2609.
Fleck, H. A., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1993). A phenomenological theory for strain gradient effects in plasticity. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 41,
1825–1857.
 M. Sßimsßek, J.N. Reddy / International Journal of Engineering Science 64 (2013) 37–53 53

Kahrobaiyan, M. H., Asghari, M., Rahaeifard, M., & Ahmadian, M. T. (2010). Investigation of the size-dependent dynamic characteristics of atomic force
microscope microcantilevers based on the modified couple stress theory. International Journal of Engineering Science, 48, 1985–1994.
Kahrobaiyan, M. H., Asghari, M., Rahaeifard, M., & Ahmadian, M. T. (2011). A nonlinear strain gradient beam formulation. International Journal of Engineering
Science, 49, 1256–1267.
Kahrobaiyan, M. H., Rahaeifard, M., Tajalli, S. A., & Ahmadian, M. T. (2012). A strain gradient functionally graded Euler–Bernoulli beam formulation.
International Journal of Engineering Science, 52, 65–76.
Karama, M., Afaq, K. S., & Mistou, S. (2003). Mechanical behaviour of laminated composite beam by the new multi-layered laminated composite structures
model with transverse shear stress continuity. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 40, 1525–1546.
Ke, L. L., & Wang, Y. S. (2011). Size effect on dynamic stability of functionally graded microbeams based on a modified couple stress theory. Composite
Structures, 93, 342–350.
Ke, L. L., Wang, Y. S., Yang, J., & Kitipornchai, S. (2012). Nonlinear free vibration of size-dependent functionally graded microbeams. International Journal of
Engineering Science, 50, 256–267.
Ke, L. L., Yang, J., Kitipornchai, S., & Xiang, Y. (2009). Flexural vibration and elastic buckling of a cracked Timoshenko beam made of functionally graded
materials. Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures, 16, 488–502.
Kong, S., Zhou, S., Nie, Z., & Wang, K. (2008). The size-dependent natural frequency of Bernoulli–Euler micro-beams. International Journal of Engineering
Science, 46, 427–437.
Kong, S., Zhou, S., Nie, Z., & Wang, K. (2009). Static and dynamic analysis of micro beams based on strain gradient elasticity theory. International Journal of
Engineering Science, 47, 487–498.
Lam, D. C. C., Yang, F., Chong, A. C. M., Wang, J., & Tong, P. (2003). Experiments and theory in strain gradient elasticity. Journal of Mechanics and Physics of
Solids, 51, 1477–1508.
Li, X. F. (2008). A unified approach for analyzing static and dynamic behaviors of functionally graded Timoshenko and Euler–Bernoulli beams. Journal of
Sound and Vibration, 318, 1210–1229.
Lü, C. F., Lim, C. W., & Chen, W. Q. (2009). Size-dependent elastic behavior of FGM ultra-thin films based on generalized refined theory. International Journal
of Solids and Structures, 46, 1176–1185.
Ma, H. M., Gao, X. L., & Reddy, J. N. (2008). A microstructure-dependent Timoshenko beam model based on a modified couple stress theory. Journal of the
Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 56, 3379–3391.
Ma, H. M., Gao, X. L., & Reddy, J. N. (2010). A nonclassical Reddy–Levinson beam model based on a modified couple stress theory. International Journal for
Multiscale Computational Engineering, 8, 167–180.
Mindlin, R. D. (1963). Influence of couple-stresses on stress concentrations. Experimental Mechanics, 3, 1–7.
Mindlin, R. D., & Tiersten, H. F. (1962). Effects of couple-stresses in linear elasticity. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 11, 415–448.
Nateghi, A., Salamat-talab, M., Rezapour, J., & Daneshian, B. (2012). Size dependent buckling analysis of functionally graded micro beams based on modified
couple stress theory. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 36, 4971–4987.
Park, S. K., & Gao, X. L. (2006). Bernoulli–Euler beam model based on a modified couple stress theory. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 16,
2355–2359.
Reddy, J. N. (1984). A simple higher-order theory for laminated composite plates. ASME Journal of Applied Mechanics, 51, 745–752.
Reddy, J. N. (2002). Energy principles and variational methods in applied mechanics (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Reddy, J. N. (2004). Mechanics of laminated plates and shells, theory and analysis (2nd ed.). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Reddy, J. N. (2011). Microstructure-dependent couple stress theories of functionally graded beams. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 59,
2382–2399.
Roque, C. M. C., Fidalgo, D. S., Ferreira, A. J. M., & Reddy, J. N. (2013). A study of a microstructure-dependent composite laminated Timoshenko beam using a
modified couple stress theory and a meshless method. Composite Structures, 96, 532–537.
Salamat-talab, M., Nateghi, A., & Torabi, J. (2012). Static and dynamic analysis of third-order shear deformation FG micro beam based on modified couple
stress theory. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, 57, 63–73.
Sßimsßek, M. (2009). Static analysis of a functionally graded beam under a uniformly distributed load by Ritz method. International Journal of Engineering and
Applied Sciences, 1, 1–11.
Sßimsßek, M. (2010). Dynamic analysis of an embedded microbeam carrying a moving microparticle based on the modified couple stress theory. International
Journal of Engineering Science, 48, 1721–1732.
Sßimsßek, M. (2010b). Fundamental frequency analysis of functionally graded beams by using different higher-order beam theories. Nuclear Engineering and
Design, 240, 697–705.
Sßimsßek, M. (2010c). Vibration analysis of a functionally graded beam under a moving mass by using different beam theories. Composite Structures, 92(4),
904–917.
Sßimsßek, M. (2010d). Non-linear vibration analysis of a functionally graded Timoshenko beam under action of a moving harmonic load. Composite Structures,
92, 2532–2546.
Simsek, M., Kocatürk, T., & Akbas, S. D. (2013). Static bending of a functionally graded microscale Timoshenko beam based on the modified couple stress
theory. Composite Structures, 95, 740–747.
Sina, S. A., Navazi, H. M., & Haddadpour, H. (2009). An analytical method for free vibration analysis of functionally graded beams. Materials and Design, 30,
741–747.
Soldatos, K. P. (1992). A transverse shear deformation theory for homogeneous monoclinic plates. Acta Mechanica, 94, 195–220.
Thai, H. T., & Vo, T. P. (2012). Bending and free vibration of functionally graded beams using various higher-order shear deformation beam theories.
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, 62, 57–66.
Toupin, R. A. (1962). Elastic materials with couple stresses. Archives of Rational for Mechanical and Analysis, 11, 385–414.
Touratier, M. (1991). An efficient standard plate theory. International Journal of Engineering Science, 29, 901–916.
Wang, B., Zhao, J., & Zhou, S. (2010). A micro scale Timoshenko beam model based on strain gradient elasticity theory. European Journal of Mechanics A/Solids,
29, 591–599.
Xia, W., Wang, L., & Yin, L. (2010). Nonlinear non-classical microscale beams: Static bending, postbuckling and free vibration. International Journal of
Engineering Science, 48, 2044–2053.
Yang, F., Chong, A. C. M., Lam, D. C. C., & Tong, P. (2002). Couple stress based strain gradient theory for elasticity. International Journal of Solids and Structures,
39, 2731–2743.
Ying, J., Lü, C. F., & Chen, W. Q. (2008). Two-dimensional elasticity solutions for functionally graded beams resting on elastic foundations. Composite
Structures, 84, 209–219.
Zhang, J., & Fu, Y. (2012). Pull-in analysis of electrically actuated viscoelastic microbeams based on a modified couple stress theory. Meccanica, 47,
1649–1658.
Zhong, Z., & Yu, T. (2007). Analytical solution of a cantilever functionally graded beam. Composite Science and Technology, 67, 481–488.