This paper tracks the development of lattice models that aim to describe linear elasticity of solids and the field equations of which converge asymptotically toward those of isotropic continua, thus showing the connection between discrete and continuum. In 1759, Lagrange used lattice strings/rod dynamics to show the link between the mixed differential-difference equation of a one-dimensional (1D) lattice and the partial differential equation of the associated continuum. A consistent three-dimensional (3D) generalization of this model was given much later: Poincaré and Voigt reconciled the molecular and the continuum approaches at the end of the nineteenth century, but only in 1912 Born and von Kármán presented the mixed differential-difference equations of discrete isotropic elasticity. Their model is a 3D generalization of Lagrange’s 1D lattice and considers longitudinal, diagonal and shear elastic springs among particles, so the associated continuum is characterized by three elastic constants. Born and von Kármán proved that the lattice equations converge to Navier’s partial differential ones asymptotically, thus being a formulation of continuous elasticity in terms of spatial finite differences, as for Lagrange’s 1D lattice. Neglecting shear springs in Born–Kármán’s lattice equals to Navier’s assumption of pure central forces among molecules: in the limit, the lattice behaves as a one-parameter isotropic solid (“rari-constant” theory: equal Lamé parameters, or, equivalently, Poisson’s ratio 𝜐=1/4 ). Hrennikoff and McHenry revisited the lattice approach with pure central interactions using a plane truss; the equivalent Born–Kármán’s lattice in plane stress in the limit tends to a continuum with Poisson’s ratio 𝜐=1/3 . Contrary to McHenry–Hrennikoff’s truss, Born–Kármán’s lattice leads to a “free” Poisson’s ratio bounded by its “limit’ bound (𝜐=1/4 for plane strain or 3D elasticity; 𝜐=1/3 for plane stress elasticity). Unfortunately, Born–Kármán’s lattice model does not comply with rotational invariance principle, for non-central forces. The consistent generalization of Lagrange’s lattice in 3D was achieved only by Gazis et al. considering an elastic energy that depends on changes in both lengths and angles of the lattice. An alternative consistent three-parameter elastic lattice is the Hrennikoff’s, with additional structure in the cell. We also discuss the capability of nonlocal continuous models to bridge the gap between continuum isotropic elasticity at low frequencies and lattice anisotropic elasticity at high frequencies.

Discrete and continuous models of linear elasticity: history and connections

dell'Isola F.
2023-01-01

Abstract

This paper tracks the development of lattice models that aim to describe linear elasticity of solids and the field equations of which converge asymptotically toward those of isotropic continua, thus showing the connection between discrete and continuum. In 1759, Lagrange used lattice strings/rod dynamics to show the link between the mixed differential-difference equation of a one-dimensional (1D) lattice and the partial differential equation of the associated continuum. A consistent three-dimensional (3D) generalization of this model was given much later: Poincaré and Voigt reconciled the molecular and the continuum approaches at the end of the nineteenth century, but only in 1912 Born and von Kármán presented the mixed differential-difference equations of discrete isotropic elasticity. Their model is a 3D generalization of Lagrange’s 1D lattice and considers longitudinal, diagonal and shear elastic springs among particles, so the associated continuum is characterized by three elastic constants. Born and von Kármán proved that the lattice equations converge to Navier’s partial differential ones asymptotically, thus being a formulation of continuous elasticity in terms of spatial finite differences, as for Lagrange’s 1D lattice. Neglecting shear springs in Born–Kármán’s lattice equals to Navier’s assumption of pure central forces among molecules: in the limit, the lattice behaves as a one-parameter isotropic solid (“rari-constant” theory: equal Lamé parameters, or, equivalently, Poisson’s ratio 𝜐=1/4 ). Hrennikoff and McHenry revisited the lattice approach with pure central interactions using a plane truss; the equivalent Born–Kármán’s lattice in plane stress in the limit tends to a continuum with Poisson’s ratio 𝜐=1/3 . Contrary to McHenry–Hrennikoff’s truss, Born–Kármán’s lattice leads to a “free” Poisson’s ratio bounded by its “limit’ bound (𝜐=1/4 for plane strain or 3D elasticity; 𝜐=1/3 for plane stress elasticity). Unfortunately, Born–Kármán’s lattice model does not comply with rotational invariance principle, for non-central forces. The consistent generalization of Lagrange’s lattice in 3D was achieved only by Gazis et al. considering an elastic energy that depends on changes in both lengths and angles of the lattice. An alternative consistent three-parameter elastic lattice is the Hrennikoff’s, with additional structure in the cell. We also discuss the capability of nonlocal continuous models to bridge the gap between continuum isotropic elasticity at low frequencies and lattice anisotropic elasticity at high frequencies.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11697/199381
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact