Skip to main content
Materials logoLink to Materials
. 2018 Jul 16;11(7):1222. doi: 10.3390/ma11071222

A Multi-Parameter Perturbation Solution for Functionally Graded Piezoelectric Cantilever Beams under Combined Loads

Yongsheng Lian 1, Xiaoting He 1,2,*, Sijie Shi 1, Xue Li 1, Zhixin Yang 1, Junyi Sun 1,2
PMCID: PMC6073610  PMID: 30013018

Abstract

In this study, we use a multi-parameter perturbation method to solve the problem of a functionally graded piezoelectric cantilever beam under combined loads, in which three piezoelectric coefficients are selected as the perturbation parameters. First, we derive the two basic equations concerning the Airy stress function and electric potential function. By expanding the unknown Airy stress function and electric potential function with respect to three perturbation parameters, the two basic equations were decoupled, thus obtaining the corresponding multi-parameter perturbation solution under boundary conditions. From the solution obtained, we can see clearly how the piezoelectric effects influence the behavior of the functionally graded piezoelectric cantilever beam. Based on a numerical example, the variations of the elastic stresses and displacements as well as the electric displacements of the cantilever beam under different gradient exponents were shown. The results indicate that if the pure functionally graded cantilever beam without a piezoelectric effect is regarded as an unperturbed system, the functionally graded piezoelectric cantilever beam can be looked upon as a perturbed system, thus opening the possibilities for perturbation solving. Besides, the proposed multi-parameter perturbation method provides a new idea for solving similar nonlinear differential equations.

Keywords: functionally graded piezoelectric materials, cantilever beams, multi-parameter perturbation method, piezoelectric coefficients

1. Introduction

Functionally graded piezoelectric materials (FGPMs) have been increasingly used in piezoelectric sensors and actuators [1,2]. The FGPMs inherit the advantages of functionally graded materials (FGMs) and piezoelectric materials. The FGMs consist of two or more materials in which the composition of the materials varies continuously in certain directions, and there is no obvious interface in FGMs [3]. Therefore, the stress concentration problem caused by the bonding of the two materials can be avoided by using FGMs. The advantage of piezoelectric materials is their good conversion ability between mechanical energy and electric energy. Piezoelectricity is very suitable for physical sensors and biosensors construction [4] and there are many valuable applications in engineering fields (for example, structural health monitoring [5]). Piezoelectric materials characterization is a challenging problem involving physical concepts, electrical and mechanical measurements, and numerical optimization techniques [6,7]. Thus, the analysis of piezoelectric materials and structures becomes more and more important. However, the difficulties in studying FGMs and piezoelectric materials are also inherited by FGPMs, and the nonlinear differential governing equations of the FGPM structures are usually difficult to be analytically solved.

Over the past few decades, researchers have devoted a lot of effort to the problems of FGMs and FGPMs and have harvested some fruits. Eshraghi et al. [8]. studied the bending and free vibrations of FGM annular and circular micro-plates under thermal loading. Kim and Reddy [9] derived the equations of motion for FGM plates with surface-mounted piezoelectric layers by using Hamilton’s principle, in which the gradient elasticity was accounted for through the modified couple stress model and linear piezoelectricity. Kahya and Turan [10] presented a finite element model for free vibration and buckling analyses of FGM sandwich beams on the basis of first-order shear deformation theory. By using Hamilton’s variational principle and the classical plate theory, Arshid and Khorshidvand [11] studied the free vibration analysis of saturated porous FGM circular plates integrated by piezoelectric actuator patches via a differential quadrature method. On the basis of classical plate theory, Żur presented the analysis and numerical results for the free axisymmetric and non-axisymmetric vibrations of FGM circular plates elastically supported on a concentric ring [12] and annular plates elastically supported on the ring support [13] via quasi-Green’s function method. Zhu et al. [14,15] originally introduced the concept of FGMs into piezoelectric materials, and successfully manufactured FGPM actuators. Shi et al. presented the solution of FGPM cantilever beams subjected to different loadings [16], and investigated the electrostatic behavior of piezoelectric cantilevers with a nonlinear piezoelectric parameter [17]. Huang et al. proposed a piezoelasticity solution for FGPM cantilever beams under different loading conditions [18] and a unified solution for an anisotropic FGPM cantilever beam subject to sinusoidal transverse loads [19]. Zhong and Yu obtained a solution for FGPM cantilever beams under different loadings by assuming that the mechanical and electrical properties of the material have the same variations along the thickness direction [20], and proposed a general solution for FGPM cantilever beams with arbitrary graded material properties along the beam thickness direction by expressing the Airy stress function and the electric potential function in finite power series [21]. Yang and Xiang [22] and Komeili et al. [23] investigated the static bending FGPM beams under combined thermo-electro-mechanical loads. Based on the modified strain gradient theory and Timoshenko beam theory, Li et al. [24] developed a size-dependent FGPM beam model by using variational formulation, and solved the static bending and free vibration problems of a simply supported FGPM beam. Lin and Muliana [25] studied the nonlinear electro-mechanical responses of FGPM beams undergoing small deformation gradients. Pandey and Parashar [26] investigated the static bending of the FGPM beam under electromechanical loading, in which the effective material properties of the FGPM beam are graded according to sigmoid law distribution. Duc et al. [27] investigated the nonlinear dynamic response and vibration of an eccentrically stiffened FGPM plate subjected to mechanical and electrical loads in a thermal environment. Su et al. [28] dealt with the electro-mechanical vibration characteristics of FGPM rectangular plates with different boundary conditions based on first-order shear deformation theory. More recently, He et al. [29] presented an electroelastic solution for FGPM beams with different moduli in tension and compression. Given that there are many relative works in this field, we do not review them in detail.

From the above studies, we may see that in the analysis of FGPM beams, the number of basic equations used for the solution of the problem is so large that it is difficult to solve them analytically; at least the process is relatively complex. In addition, the basic equations are generally presented in the form of a high-order partial differential equation, which further aggravates the complexity of the solution. For this purpose, we need to seek an effective mathematical method for similar boundary value problems.

The parametric perturbation method (PPM) proposed by Poincaré [30] is one of the standard analytical methods used for the solution of nonlinear problems in applied mechanics and physics. Many studies have indicated that this method is a general analytical method for obtaining approximate solutions of nonlinear differential equations in initial or boundary value problems. In PPM, the solution of the nonlinear differential equation is constructed by developing an asymptotic series with respect to a certain parameter. The so-called perturbation is generated in the neighborhood of the solution of the unperturbed equation, so that the known properties of the unperturbed linear system can be used to obtain the solution of the perturbed system. More recently, this basic idea of perturbation was demonstrated again by Lian et al. [31], in which the Hencky membrane problem without a small-rotation-angle assumption was solved by perturbation to the corresponding classical small-rotation-angle problem. Originally, there was only a single perturbation parameter in the PPM, which was called the single-parameter perturbation method (S-PPM), and many classical works were based on the PPM. Later, as the method was continuously studied, scholars began to discover if multiple parameters are introduced, the perturbation solution characterized by these parameters may well describe the separate influence of each parameter on the nonlinearity of the problem. The earlier work can be seen from Nowinski and Ismail [32], in which a multi-parameter perturbation method (M-PPM) was proposed to solve the deformation problem of a cylindrical orthotropic circular plate. The pioneer work in nonlinear beam problems was done by Chien [33], in which a biparametric perturbation method (B-PPM) was initially applied to solve the classical Euler-Bernoulli equation of beams with a height difference between the two ends from a practical engineering problem. Later, He et al. successfully used the so-called B-PPM to solve large deflection beam problems which Chien dealt with [34] and large deflection circular plate problems with a bimodular effect [35]. However, the application of the real M-PPM which contains three or more perturbation parameters has not been found yet.

In this study, we extended the traditional S-PPM and B-PPM to M-PPM which contains three perturbation parameters and solved the governing equations of the FGPM cantilever beam under combined loads. The piezoelectric coefficients are selected as perturbation parameters. Thus, from the point of view of the perturbation idea, if the pure FGM cantilever beam is regarded as an unperturbed system, the FGPM cantilever beam can be looked upon as a perturbed system. In the next section, the mechanical model of a FGPM cantilever beam under the combined action of a uniformly distributed load, concentrated force, and bending moment is presented. In Section 3, the perturbation solution of the FGPM cantilever beam is obtained. In Section 4, based on a numerical example, the variations of the elastic stresses and displacements, as well as the electric displacements, are shown and some important issues are discussed. Section 5 is the concluding remarks.

2. Mechanical Model and Basic Equations

In this study, the mechanical model of the FGPM cantilever beam is established by using two-dimensional elastic beam theory and neglecting shear deformation, since what we consider here is a relatively shallow beam. Generally speaking, the mechanical and electrical parameters of FGPMs change along one direction only. In this study, we assume that the mechanical and electrical parameters of the FGPM cantilever beam vary along the thickness of the FGPM cantilever beam. As shown in Figure 1, an FGPM cantilever beam is fixed at its right end and subjected to uniformly distributed loads q on its upper surface, a concentrated force P, and a bending moment M at its left end, in which l, b, and h (h << l) denote the length, width, and height of the beam, respectively. A rectangular coordinate system is introduced with the upper and lower surfaces of the beam lying in z=h/2 and z=h/2. The mechanical and electrical parameters of the FGPM cantilever beam vary along the z coordinate, such that

sij=sij0eαz/h,dij=dij0eαz/h,λij=λij0eαz/h, (1)

where α is a gradient exponent; sij, dij, and λij are the elastic coefficient, piezoelectric coefficient, and dielectric coefficient, respectively; and sij0, dij0, and λij0 are values of the corresponding material parameters at z=0, respectively.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Scheme of a functionally graded piezoelectric cantilever beam.

By neglecting body forces and free charges, the mechanical equation of equilibrium and the electrical equation of equilibrium are

{σxx+τzxz=0τzxx+σzz=0 (2)

and

Dxx+Dzz=0, (3)

where σx, σz, and τzx are the stress components; and Dx and Dz are the electric displacement components. The constitutive equations of the materials are

{εx=s11σx+s13σz+d31Ezεz=s13σx+s33σz+d33Ezγzx=s44τzx+d15ExDx=d15τzx+λ11ExDz=d31σx+d33σz+λ33Ez, (4)

where εx, εz, and γzx are the strain components; and Ex and Ez are the electric field components. The geometric equations give

εx=ux,εz=wz,γzx=uz+wx, (5)

where u and w are the displacement components. The strain compatibility equation is

2εxz2+2εzx22γzxzx=0. (6)

The relationships between the electric field components and the electric potential are

Ex=Φx, Ez=Φz, (7)

where Φ is the electric potential function. By introducing Airy stress function U(x, z), we may express the stress components as

σx=2Uz2, σz=2Ux2, τzx=2Uzx. (8)

Substituting Equations (4), (7), and (8) into Equations (3) and (6), the governing equations for the Airy stress function U(x, z) and the electric potential function Φ(x, z) are

z(d312Uz2)+z(d332Ux2)d153Ux2z=z(λ33Φz)+λ112Φx2 (9)

and

2z2(s112Uz2+s132Ux2)+z(s443Ux2z)+s134Ux2z2+s334Ux4=2z2(d31Φz)+d333Φx2zz(d152Φx2), (10)

where d310, d330, and d150 in the piezoelectric coefficients d31, d33, and d15 may be selected as the perturbation parameters. When d310=d330=d150=0, Equation (10) may be regressed into the governing equation of the pure functionally graded cantilever beam (Equation (11) in [36]), i.e.,

2z2(s112Uz2+s132Ux2)+z(s443Ux2z)+s134Ux2z2+s334Ux4=0. (11)

The mechanical and electrical boundary conditions are given as follows:

h/2h/2τzxdz=Pb, h/2h/2σxdz=0 and h/2h/2zσxdz=Mb, at x=0, (12)
{σz=τzx=0,  at z=h/2σz=q, τzx=0, at z=h/2, (13)
{h/2h/2Dxdz=0, at x=0 and x=lDz=0,     at z=h/2 and z=h/2 (14)

and

u=w=wx=0, at z=0 and x=l (15)

3. Perturbation Solution

Substituting Equation (1) into Equations (9) and (10), we have

{d310αh2Uz2+d330αh2Ux2+d3103Uz3+(d330d150)3Ux2z=λ330αhΦz+λ3302Φz2+λ1102Φx2s110α2h22Uz2+s130α2h22Ux2+2s110αh3Uz3+(2s130+s440)αh3Ux2z+s1104Uz4+s3304Ux4+(s440+2s130)4Ux2z2=d310α2h2Φz+2d310αh2Φz2+d3103Φz3+(d330d150)3Φx2zd150αh2Φx2. (16)

From the piezoelectric parameters of the five kinds of piezoelectric materials listed by Ruan et al. [37], it can be seen that the piezoelectric coefficients are usually very small. So, they can be selected as perturbation parameters to meet the requirement of convergence in perturbation expansions. Thus, from the point of view of the perturbation idea, if the pure FGM cantilever beam is regarded as an unperturbed system, the FGPM cantilever beam can be looked upon as a perturbed system. By selecting d310, d330, and d150 as perturbation parameters, we may expand Φ and U with respect to d310, d330, and d150, as follows:

Φ=Φ00+Φ1Id310+Φ2Id330+Φ3Id150+Φ1II(d310)2+Φ2II(d330)2   +Φ3II(d150)2+Φ4IId310d330+Φ5IId310d150+Φ6IId330d150 (17)

and

U=U00+U1Id310+U2Id330+U3Id150+U1II(d310)2+U2II(d330)2   +U3II(d150)2+U4IId310d330+U5IId310d150+U6IId330d150, (18)

where Φ00 and U00, ΦiI and UiI (i=1,2,3), and ΦiII and UiII(i=1,2,3,...,6) are unknown functions of x and z.

Substituting Equations (17) and (18) into Equation (16), as well as into the boundary conditions, Equations (12)–(14), we may obtain a series of decomposed differential equations and the corresponding boundary conditions by comparing the coefficients of the same power of d310, d330, and d150.

1. By comparing the coefficients of (d310)0, (d330)0, and (d150)0 in Equation (16), we may obtain the differential equations for Φ00 and U00,

{λ330αhΦ00z+λ3302Φ00z2+λ1102Φ00x2=0s110α2h22U00z2+s130α2h22U00x2+2s110αh3U00z3+(2s130+s440)αh3U00x2z+s1104U00z4+s3304U00x4+(s440+2s130)4U00x2z2=0, (19)

which may be solved under the boundary conditions

h/2h/2(2U00zx)dz=Pb,h/2h/22U00z2dz=0 and h/2h/2z2U00z2dz=Mb, at x=0 (20)
{2U00x2=2U00zx=0,  at z=h/22U00x2=q, 2U00zx=0, at z=h/2 (21)

and

{h/2h/2(d152U00zxλ11Φ00x)dz=0,  at x=0 and x=ld312U00z2+d332U00x2λ33Φ00z=0,  at z=h/2 and z=h/2. (22)

Suppose

{Φ00=x2g10(z)+xg20(z)+g30(z)U00=x22f10(z)+xf20(z)+f30(z), (23)

where gi0(z) and fi0(z) (i=1,2,3) are unknown functions of z. After Substituting Equation (23) into Equation (19), it is found that

{g10(z)=B10+B20eαhzg20(z)=B30+B40eαhzg30(z)=B50+B60eαhz2hαλ110λ330B10z+2hαλ110λ330B20zeαhz (24)

and

{f10(z)=C10+C20z+(C30+C40z)eαhzf20(z)=C50+C60z+(C70+C80z)eαhzf30(z)=C90+C100z+(C110+C120z)eαhzz26s110(3s130C10+3s440hαC20+s130C20z)    z26s110(3s130C303s440hαC40+s130C40z)eαhz, (25)

where Bi0 (i=1,2,3,...,6) and Ci0 (i=1,2,3,...,12) are undetermined constants which can be determined by Equations (20)–(22), please see Appendix A.

2. Similarly, by comparing the coefficients of (d310)1, (d330)1, and (d150)1 in Equation (16), we may obtain the differential equations for ΦiI and UiI (i=1,2,3), respectively, for term (d310)1:

{λ330αhΦ1Iz+λ3302Φ1Iz2+λ1102Φ1Ix2=αh2U00z2+3U00z3s110α2h22U1Iz2+s130α2h22U1Ix2+2s110αh3U1Iz3+(2s130+s440)αh3U1Ix2z+s1104U1Iz4+s3304U1Ix4+(s440+2s130)4U1Ix2z2=α2h2Φ00z+2αh2Φ00z2+3Φ00z3, (26)

for term (d330)1:

{λ330αhΦ2Iz+λ3302Φ2Iz2+λ1102Φ2Ix2=αh2U00x2+3U00x2zs110α2h22U2Iz2+s130α2h22U2Ix2+2s110αh3U2Iz3+(2s130+s440)αh3U2Ix2z+s1104U2Iz4+s3304U2Ix4+(s440+2s130)4U2Ix2z2=3Φ00x2z, (27)

and for term (d150)1:

{λ330αhΦ3Iz+λ3302Φ3Iz2+λ1102Φ3Ix2=3U00x2zs110α2h22U3Iz2+s130α2h22U3Ix2+2s110αh3U3Iz3+(2s130+s440)αh3U3Ix2z+s1104U3Iz4+s3304U3Ix4+(s440+2s130)4U3Ix2z2=3Φ00x2zαh2Φ00x2, (28)

which may be solved under the boundary conditions

h/2h/2(2UiIzx)dz=0, h/2h/22UiIz2dz=0 and h/2h/2z2UiIz2dz=0 (i=1,2,3), at x=0, (29)
{2UiIx2=2UiIzx=0, at z=h/22UiIx2=2UiIzx=0, at z=h/2(i=1,2,3) (30)

and

{h/2h/2(d152UiIzxλ11ΦiIx)dz=0,at x=0 and x=ld312UiIz2+d332UiIx2λ33ΦiIz=0,    at z=h/2 and z=h/2(i=1,2,3). (31)

Suppose

{ΦiI=x2g3i2I(z)+xg3i1I(z)+g3iI(z)UiI=x22f3i2I(z)+xf3i1I(z)+f3iI(z) (i=1,2,3), (32)

where giI(z) and fiI(z) (i=1,2,3,...,9) are unknown functions of z. After Substituting Equation (32) into Equations (26)–(28), it is found that

{g1I(z)=B1I+B2Ieαhzα2hλ330C40zeαhzg2I(z)=B3I+B4Ieαhzαhλ330C80zeαhzg3I(z)=B5I+B6Ieαhzz[1λ330hα(s130s110αhC10+s440s110C20+2λ110B1I)+s1302λ330s110C20z]+z[hα1λ330(s130s110αhC30+s440s110C40λ110λ330C40α2h2C120+2λ110B2I)+12λ330(s130s110αhC30s130+s440s110C40λ110λ330C40)z+s1306s110λ330αhC40z2]eαhz, (33)
{g4I(z)=B7I+B8Ieαhzg5I(z)=B9I+B10Ieαhzg6I(z)=B11I+B12Ieαhz+1λ330hα[(αhC102λ110B7I)z+12αhC20z2+(2λ110B8IC40)zeαhz], (34)
{g7I(z)=B13I+B14Ieαhzg8I(z)=B15I+B16Ieαhzg9I(z)=B17I+B18Ieαhz1λ330hα(C20+2λ110B13I)z+12λ330(4hαλ110B14I2C30C40z)zeαhz, (35)
{f3i2I(z)=C12i11I+C12i10Iz+(C12i9I+C12i8Iz)eαhzf3i1I(z)=C12i7I+C12i6Iz+(C12i5I+C12i4Iz)eαhz(i=1,2,3) (36)

and

{f3I(z)=C9I+C10Iz+(C11I+C12Iz)eαhzz26s110(3s130C1I+3s440hαC2I+6hαλ110λ330B10+s130C2Iz)   z26s110(3s130C3I3s440hαC4I+s130C4Iz)eαhzf6I(z)=C21I+C22Iz+(C23I+C24Iz)eαhzz26s110(3s130C13I+3s440hαC14I+s130C14Iz)    z26s110(3s130C15I3s440hαC16I+6hαB20+s130C16Iz)eαhzf9I(z)=C33I+C34Iz+(C35I+C36Iz)eαhzz26s110(3s130C25I+3s440hαC25I+6hαB10+s130C26Iz)   z26s110(3s130C27I3s440hαC28I+s130C28Iz)eαhz, (37)

where BiI(i=1,2,3,...,18) and CiI(i=1,2,3,...,36) are undetermined constants which can be determined by Equation (29)–(31), please see Appendix A.

3. Similarly, by comparing the coefficients of (d310)2, (d330)2, (d150)2, d310d330, d310d150, and d330d150 in Equation (16), we may obtain the differential equations for ΦiII and UiII (i=1,2,3,...,6), respectively, for term (d310)2:

{λ330αhΦ1IIz+λ3302Φ1IIz2+λ1102Φ1IIx2=αh2U1Iz2+3U1Iz3s110α2h22U1IIz2+s130α2h22U1IIx2+2s110αh3U1IIz3+(2s130+s440)αh3U1IIx2z+s1104U1IIz4+s3304U1IIx4+(s440+2s130)4U1IIx2z2=α2h2Φ1Iz2αh2Φ1Iz2+3Φ1Iz3, (38)

for term (d330)2:

{λ330αhΦ2IIz+λ3302Φ2IIz2+λ1102Φ2IIx2=αh2U2Ix2+3U2Ix2zs110α2h22U2IIz2+s130α2h22U2IIx2+2s110αh3U2IIz3+(2s130+s440)αh3U2IIx2z+s1104U2IIz4+s3304U2IIx4+(s440+2s130)4U2IIx2z2=3Φ2Ix2z, (39)

for term (d150)2:

{λ330αhΦ3IIz+λ3302Φ3IIz2+λ1102Φ3IIx2=3U3Ix2zs110α2h22U3IIz2+s130α2h22U3IIx2+2s110αh3U3IIz3+(2s130+s440)αh3U3IIx2z+s1104U3IIz4+s3304U3IIx4+(s440+2s130)4U3IIx2z2=3Φ3Ix2zαh2Φ3Ix2, (40)

for term d310d330:

{λ330αhΦ4IIz+λ3302Φ4IIz2+λ1102Φ4IIx2=αh2U2Iz2+3U2Iz3+αh2U1Ix2+3U1Ix2zs110α2h22U4IIz2+s130α2h22U4IIx2+2s110αh3U4IIz3+(2s130+s440)αh3U4IIx2z+s1104U4IIz4+s3304U4IIx4+(s440+2s130)4U4IIx2z2=α2h2Φ2Iz+2αh2Φ2Iz2+3Φ2Iz3+3Φ1Ix2z, (41)

for term d310d150:

{λ330αhΦ5IIz+λ3302Φ5IIz2+λ1102Φ5IIx2=αh2U3Iz2+3U3Iz33U1Ix2zs110α2h22U5IIz2+s130α2h22U5IIx2+2s110αh3U5IIz3+(2s130+s440)αh3U5IIx2z+s1104U5IIz4+s3304U5IIx4+(s440+2s130)4U5IIx2z2=α2h2Φ3Iz+2αh2Φ3Iz2+3Φ3Iz33Φ1Ix2zαh2Φ1Ix2, (42)

and for term d330d150:

{λ330αhΦ6IIz+λ3302Φ6IIz2+λ1102Φ6IIx2=αh2U3Ix2+3U3Ix2z3U2Ix2zs110α2h22U6IIz2+s130α2h22U6IIx2+2s110αh3U6IIz3+(2s130+s440)αh3U6IIx2z+s1104U6IIz4+s3304U6IIx4+(s440+2s130)4U6IIx2z2=3Φ3Ix2z3Φ2Ix2zαh2Φ2Ix2, (43)

which may be solved under the boundary conditions

h/2h/2(2UiIIzxdz)=0,h/2h/22UiIIz2dz=0 and h/2h/2z2UiIIz2dz=0 (i=1,2,3,...,6), at x=0, (44)
{2UiIIx2=2UiIIzx=0, at z=h/22UiIIx2=2UiIIzx=0, at z=h/2 (i=1,2,3,...,6) (45)

and

{h/2h/2(d152UiIIzxλ11ΦiIIx)dz=0,atx=0 and x=ld312UiIIz2+d332UiIIx2λ33ΦiIIz=0,    atz=h/2 and z=h/2 (i=1,2,3,...,6). (46)

Suppose

{ΦiII=x2g3i2II(z)+xg3i1II(z)+g3iII(z)UiII=x22f3i2II(z)+xf3i1II(z)+f3iII(z)(i=1,2,3,...,6) (47)

where giII(z) and fiII(z) (i=1,2,3,...,18) are unknown functions of z. After Substituting Equation (47) into Equations (38)–(43), it is found that

{g3i2II(z)=B6i5II+B6i4IIeαhzg3i1II(z)=B6i3II+B6i2IIeαhzg3iII(z)=B6i1II+B6iIIeαhz2hαλ110λ330B6i5IIz+2hαλ110λ330B6i4IIzeαhz (i=1,2,3,...,6), (48)
{f1II=C1II+21s110B1Iz+C2IIzhα[21s110B2I+C3IIC40s110λ330(αhz+1)+C4IIhα(αhz+1)]eαhzf2II=C5II+1s110B3Iz+C6IIzhα[1s110B4I+C7IIC80s110λ110(αhz+1)+C8IIhα(αhz+1)]eαhzf3II=C9II+C10IIz+1s110B5Iz12(2hα1s110s440s110B1I+s130s110C1II+hαs440s110C2II)z2  12s1101λ330s110hα(s130αhC10+s440C20+2λ110s110B1I)z2s1303s110(1s110B1I+12C2II)z3  16s110s130λ330s110C20z3(hαF1+h2α2G1+2h3α3H1+6h4α4I1+hαG1z+2h2α2H1z  +6h3α3I1z+hαH1z2+3h2α2I1z2+hαI1z3)eαhz, (49)
{f3i2II=C12i11II+C12i10IIz+(C12i9II+C12i8IIz)eαhzf3i1II=C12i7II+C12i6IIz+(C12i5II+C12i4IIz)eαhz  (i=2,3,...,6) (50)

and

{f6II=C21II+C22IIz+(C23II+C24IIz)eαhzz26s110(3s130C13II+3s440hαC14II+s130C14IIz)  z26s110(3s130C15II3s440hαC16II+s130C16IIz)eαhzf9II=C33II+C34IIz+(C35II+C36IIz)eαhzz26s110(3s130C25II+3s440hαC26II+6αhB13I+s130C26IIz)  z26s110(3s130C27II3s440hαC28II+s130C28IIz)eαhzf12II=C45II+C46IIz+1s110B11Iz12(s130s110C37II+hαs440s110C38II1λ3301s110C10)z2+16(1λ3301s110C20s130s110C38II)z3(hαF2  +h2α2G2+2h3α3H2+6h4α4I2+hαG2z+2h2α2H2z+6h3α3I2z+hαH2z2+3h2α2I2z2+hαI2z3)eαhzf15II=1s110[C57II+s110C58IIz+B17IzhαB1Iz212λ330hα(C20+2λ110B13I)z2  (hαF3+h2α2G3+2h3α3H3+hαG3z+2h2α2H3z+hαH3z2)eαhz]f18II=C69II+C70IIz+(C71II+C72IIz)eαhzz26s110(3s130C61II+3s440hαC62II+s130C62IIz)  z26s110(3s130C63II3s440hαC64II+s130C64IIz)eαhz, (51)

where Fi (i=1,2,3), Gi (i=1,2,3), Hi (i=1,2,3), and Ii (i=1,2) can be found in Appendix A, and BiII (i=1,2,3,...,36) and CiII (i=1,2,3,...,72) are undetermined constants which can be determined by Equations (44)–(46) , please see Appendix A.

Thus, the expression of the electric potential function Φ(x, z) and Airy stress function U(x, z) may be obtained by means of Equations (17) and (18), Equations (23)–(25), Equations (32)–(37), and Equations (47)–(51). Substituting Equations (17) and (18) into Equations (7) and (8), the electric field components and the stress components may be expressed as

{Ex=(2xg1I+g2I)d310(2xg7I+g8I)d150Ez=(x2g1I+xg2I+g3I)d310g6Id330g9Id150 (52)

and

{σx=x22f10+xf20+f30+f3II(d310)2+f9II(d150)2+f12IId310d330+f15IId310d150σz=f10τzx=xf10f20. (53)

And substituting Equations (52) and (53) into Equation (4), the electric displacement components and the strain components may be written as

{Dx=[λ110(2xg1I+g2I)d310+λ110(2xg7I+g8I)d150+(xf10+f20)d150]eαz/hDz=(x22f10+xf20+f30)d310eαz/h+f10d330eαz/h[(x2g1I+xg2I+g3I)d310+g6Id330+g9Id150]λ330eαz/h (54)

and

{εx=[(s110x22f10+s110xf20+s110f30+s130f1I)+(s110f3IIx2g1Ixg2Ig3I)(d310)2+s110f9II(d150)2+(s110f12IIg6I)d310d330+(s110f15IIg9I)d310d150]eαz/hεz=[(s130x22f10+s130xf20+s130f30+s330f10)+s130f3II(d310)2g6I(d330)2+s130f9II(d150)2+(s130f12IIx2g1Ixg2Ig3I)d310d330+s130f15IId310d150g9Id330d150]eαz/hγzx=[(xf10+f20)s440+(2xg7I+g8I)(d150)2+(2xg1I+g2I)d310d150]eαz/h. (55)

Substituting Equation (55) into the first two items of Equation (5), and integrating with respect to x and z, respectively, the displacement components may be obtained as

u=[(x36s110f10+x22s110f20+xs110f30+xs130f1I)(x33g1I+x22g2I+xg3Ixs110f3II)(d310)2+xs110f9II(d150)2x(g6Is110f12II)d310d330x(g9Is110f15II)d310d150]eαz/h+g1(z) (56)

and

w=s130[x22(2αhC40+α2h2C30)+x(2αhC80+α2h2C70)+s330s130C302αhC120+α2h2C110s130s110C30+s440s110hαC40]z   +s130[x24α2h2C40+12α2h2C80x+12s330s130C40+12α2h2C120s130s110αhC30s440s110C4012s130s110C40]z2s130αh(s1306s110αhC30   2s130+s4406s110C40)z3s130s13024s110α2h2C40z4+s130hα[s330s130C10s130s110C10hαs330s130C20+(1s440s130)hαs130s110C20+(s330s130   s130s110)C20z]eαz/h+[s130(G1αhF1)z+s130(H1α2hG1)z2+(αhI1α23h2H1)z314αhs130I1z4+h2α2s130λ330s110   ×(s130s110C20s130s110αhC10+s440s110C20+2λ110B1Iαhs130s110C20z)eαz/h](d310)2+hα1λ330[(α2h2λ330B12I+C40)z12αhC40z2   (C10hαC20+C20z)eαz/h](d330)2+s130[αh(αhC35II2C36II)z+α22h2C36IIz22h2α21s110B13Ieαz/h](d150)2   +{[αh(B2I+C402λ330)x2+αh(B4I+C80λ330)x+αhB6I1λ330(s130s110C30+hαs440s110C40hαλ110λ330C40αhC120+2hαλ110B2I)   +s130G2αhs130F2]z+[s130(H1α2hG2)1λ330(s130s110αhC30s130+2s4402s110C40+α22h2C120λ110B2I)α24h2λ330(2C80x   +C40x2)]z2+[s130(I2α3hH2)+αh16λ330(s130s110αhC302s130+s440s110C40λ110λ330C40)]z3+α4h(s1306s110λ330αhC40   s130I2)z4+2h2α2s130λ330s110(αhC10C20+s4402s130C20+λ110s110s130B7+αhC20z)eαz/h}d310d330+s130s110[(G3αhF3)z   +(H3α2hG3)z2α3hH3z3(2h2α2B1I+1λ330h2α2C20+21λ330h2α2λ110B13I)eαz/h]d310d150   +1λ330[(αhλ330B18I+C30)z+12(C40αhC30)z2α6hC40z3+h2α2(C20+2λ110B13I)eαz/h]d330d150+g2(x), (57)

where g1(z) and g2(z) are unknown functions of x and z, respectively. Substituting Equations (56) and (57) into the third item of Equation (5) yields,

k1z2+k2z+k3eαz/h+k4dg1(z)dz=k5x3+k6x2+k7x+dg2(x)dx, (58)

where

{k1=α22h2s130C80+α22h2λ330C80d330d310k2=2s130αhC80s130α2h2C70+s440αhC80+αhλ330C80d310d150(B4Iαh+αhλ330C80)d330d310k3=B3Id310d150B15Id150d150s440C60k4=B4Id310d150s440C80+s440αhC70k5=16α2h2s110C4013α22h2λ330C40d310d310k6=12α2h2s110C8012α2h2λ330C80d310d310k7=s110α2h2C120+2s130αhC30s440C40s440αhC30+(1λ330C40αhs110C60II2λ110λ330B14I   +2B2I)d310d150B2Iαh(d310)2+α2h2s110C36II(d150)2+(2B2IC48IIαhs110)d310d330, (59)

By letting

k1z2+k2z+k3eαz/h+k4dg1(z)dz=k5x3+k6x2+k7x+dg2(x)dx=v, (60)

where v is an undetermined constant, we have

{dg1(z)dz=k1z2+k2z+k3eαz/h+k4vdg2(x)dx=k5x3k6x2k7x+v. (61)

Integrating Equation (61), one has

{g1(z)=13k1z3+12k2z2+hαk3eαz/h+k4zvz+u0g2(x)=14k5x413k6x312k7x2+vx+w0, (62)

where u0 and w0 are undetermined constants. The undetermined constants v, u0, and w0 may be determined by Equation (15) (please see Appendix A for details). Substituting Equation (62) into Equations (56) and (57), the final expression of the displacement components may be obtained.

4. Results and Discussions

In the governing equation, Equation (16), U and Φ are coupled with each other. By using M-PPM, Equation (16) is decoupled and simplified, as shown in the decomposed differential equations, i.e., Equation (19), Equations (26)–(28), and Equations (38)–(43). Thus, the perturbation solution of the governing equations can be easily obtained under boundary conditions. From Equations (52) and (54), it can be seen that there are only the first-order perturbation items in the electric field components (Ex and Ez) and electric displacement components (Dx and Dz), which are deduced from the first-order perturbation solutions of the electric potential function, ΦiI (i=1,2,3). While in the stress components (σx, σz and τzx), strain components (εx, εz and γzx), and displacement components (u and w), there are the zero-order and second-order perturbation items, which are deduced from the zero-order and second-order perturbation solutions of the Airy stress function, U00 and UiII (i=1,2,3,...,6). This phenomenon can be explained by Figure 2. Figure 2 shows the relationship between the applied mechanical and electrical loads and the each order perturbation expressions of the Airy stress function and electric potential function.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Relationship between the applied loads and the each order perturbation expressions.

From Figure 2, it may be seen that the mechanical loads (q, P, M) give rise to U00, U00 gives rise to ΦiI (i=1,2,3), and then ΦiI (i=1,2,3) gives rise to UiII (i=1,2,3,...,6), while Φ00, UiI (i=1,2,3), and ΦiII (i=1,2,3,...,6) have no effect on the stress, strain, displacement, and electric displacement components because the applied electrical loads are 0. Therefore, for the sake of simplification, Equations (17) and (18) may also be written as

Φ=Φ1Id310+Φ2Id330+Φ3Id150 (63)

and

U=U00+U1II(d310)2+U2II(d330)2+U3II(d150)2+U4IId310d330+U5IId310d150+U6IId330d150. (64)

Next, based on the presented perturbation solution, let us consider a functionally graded piezoelectric cantilever beam with l=1 m and h=0.2 m subjected to transverse uniformly distributed loads q=1 N/m2 to discuss some related issues. The elastic, piezoelectric, and dielectric constants at z=0 are shown in Table 1 [37].

Table 1.

Elastic, piezoelectric, and dielectric constants of the cantilever beam at z=0.

Elastic Constant (10−12 m2/N) Piezoelectric Constant (10−12 C/N) Dielectric Constant (10−8 F/m)
s110     s130      s330      s440 d310      d330      d150 λ110      λ330
12.4 −5.52 16.1 39.1 −135 300 525 1.301 1.151

Figure 3 shows the variation of the stress components (σx, σz and τzx), the horizontal displacement (u), and the electric displacement components (Dx and Dz) of the cantilever beam at x=l/2 with z/h, and the variation of the vertical deflection w at z=0 with x/l, when α takes −2, −1, 1, and 2, respectively.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Variation of stresses, displacements, and electric displacements: (a) Variation of σx with z/h at x=l/2; (b) Variation of σz with z/h at x=l/2; (c) Variation of τzx with z/h at x=l/2; (d) Variation of u with z/h at x=l/2; (e) Variation of w with x/l at z=0; (f) Variation of Dx with z/h at x=l/2; (g) Variation of Dz with z/h at x=l/2.

From Figure 3a,c,d it may be seen that, σx=0, u=0, and the maximum shear stress (i.e., τzxmax) take place at the same z/h when α takes the same value, and this z/h moves toward z/h=0.5 with the increase of α. For σx, when α>0 (or α<0), the maximum compressive stress (or the maximum tensile stress) takes place at z/h=0.5 (or z/h=0.5), but the maximum tensile stress (or the maximum compressive stress) does not always take place at z/h=0.5 (or z/h=0.5), especially when the absolute value of α (i.e., |α|) is relatively large. In addition, the maximum absolute value of σx (i.e., |σxmax|) and τzxmax always take place at the side of αz/h<0 (which means α and z are always contrary positive or negative signs since h>0) and increase with the increase of |α|. It is easily seen from Figure 3b that σz decreases with the increase of α. From Figure 3e, it may be seen that, when α<0, w decreases with the increase of α, while α>0, the regulation is contrary. Besides, the w when α>0 is larger than the one when α<0. From Figure 3f,g, it may be seen that the absolute value of the maximum electric displacements (i.e., |Dxmax| and |Dzmax|) always takes place at the side of αz/h>0 (which means α and z are always identically positive or negative signs since h>0), because the piezoelectric coefficient dij=dij0eαz/h at the side of αz/h>0 is larger than the dij at the side of αz/h<0. In addition, |Dxmax| and |Dzmax| also increase with the increase of |α|.

5. Concluding Remarks

In this study, by extending the traditional single-parameter and biparametric perturbation method to the multi-parameter perturbation method, we solved the problem of a functionally graded piezoelectric cantilever beam under the combined action of uniformly distributed loads, concentrated load, and bending moment. The following main conclusions can be drawn.

(i) By selecting the piezoelectric coefficients as perturbation parameters, the multi-parameter perturbation method can be used to decouple and simplify the governing equations of the functionally graded piezoelectric cantilever beam.

(ii) The expansion expression of the Airy stress function and electric potential function with respect to the perturbation parameters, i.e., Equations (17) and (18), can be simplified to Equations (63) and (64), when only mechanical loads are applied on the functionally graded piezoelectric cantilever beam.

(iii) The |σxmax| and τzxmax always take place at the side of αz/h<0, and the |Dxmax| and |Dzmax| always take place at the side of αz/h>0, but they all increase with the increase of |α|.

It should be pointed out that the analytical results found in the sample example should be validated by comparison with other numerical methods (e.g., Finite Element results) and/or experimental tests. Besides, the multi-parameter perturbation method may also be applicable to the problem of other functionally graded piezoelectric structures under electrical loads or electro-mechanical loads. In these cases, different boundary conditions concerning mechanical or electrical properties will inevitably introduce some new influences on the final results. Due to the fact that the analytical expressions obtained are expressed in terms of the piezoelectric coefficients, we can see clearly how the piezoelectric effects influence the behavior of the functionally graded piezoelectric structural element, which is exactly the benefit of parameter-based perturbation solutions. Therefore, as far as the practical application of the work is concerned, the results obtained in this study may serve as a theoretical guide for the design of smart structures with functionally graded piezoelectric structural elements.

Finally, it should be noted here that in our multi-parameter perturbation method, the parameters are not dependent on each other, thus leading to a large number of independent perturbation equations. However, in the literature, there exists an alternative and much more efficient method [38,39,40,41,42], in which all the parameters (irrespective of their number) are perturbed together along straight lines in the parameter space, thus formally re-conducting the multi-parameter case to that of a single parameter. At the end of the procedure, however, the parameters can be varied independently, since the exploring straight line can be freely chosen. It can be expected that this procedure can be used to solve this kind of problem effectively, and possibly be contrasted to the results obtained in our work. We will study these interesting issues in the future.

Appendix A

{C10=q(2eαα22α2)2(eα+eαα22),C20=qα2h(eα+eαα22)C30=q(2eα+αeα+α2)2eα/2(eα+eαα22),C40=qα(eα1)heα/2(eα+eαα22), (A1)
{C60=Pα2bh(eα+eαα22),C70=P(2eα+αeα+α2)beα/2(eα+eαα22)C80=Pα(eα1)bheα/2(eα+eαα22), (A2)
{C110={1s110[12(s130C10+hαs440C20)N1+13s130C20N2](N3αhN4)12(s130s110C30s440s110hαC40)N5(N3αhN4)+(12αhs130s110C3012s440s110C4013s130s110C40)N6(N3αhN4)+16αhs130s110C40(N3αhN4)N7Mb(N3αhN4)[12s110αh(2s130C10h+2s440hαC20h+s130C20N1)N5+αh(s130s110C30s440s110hαC40)N5N412αh(αhs130s110C30s130s110C40s440s110C40)N5N5α2h2s1306s110C40N5N6]}/[(N3+αhN4)(N3αhN4)+α2h2N5N3]C120=1(N3αhN4)[αhC110N3+12s110(2s130C10h+2s440hαC20h+s130C20N1)+(s130s110C30s440s110hαC40)N412(αhs130s110C30s130s110C40s440s110C40)N5αhs1306s110C40N6], (A3)

where

{N1=0,N2=h34,N3=eα2eα2,N4=h2(eα2+eα2)N5=h24(eα2eα2),N6=h38(eα2+eα2),N7=h416(eα2eα2). (A4)
B10=B20=B30=B40=B60=0. (A5)
{C1I=C2I=C3I=C4I=C6I=C7I=C8I=C11I=C12I=0C13I=C14I=C15I=C16I=C18I=C19I=C20I=C23I=C24I=0C25I=C26I=C27I=C28I=C30I=C31I=C32I=C35I=C36I=0. (A6)
{B1I=1λ330α(C40αhC30)/N3B2I=(C40αhC30)/2λ330B3I=α24h2λ330[h2C802αB4I]/N3B4I=(C80αhC70)/λ330B6I=[2h2α2λ110B1Ieα2+(λ110λ330h2α2C40+C120+2h2α2λ110B2IC110αh)    hαλ110B2Ih+18λ110λ330C40h2]/λ330, (A7)
{B7I=B8I=B9I=B10I=0B12I=hα1λ330(C30+hαC40), (A8)
{B13I=12λ110[α(C40αhC30)C20N3]/N3B14I=B16I=0B15I=1λ110[α(C80αhC70)C60N3]/N3B18I=1λ330N3(C30N4+12C40N5C30hαN3C40hαN4). (A9)
{C1II=0,C2II=21s110B1I,C3II=2B2Is110,C4II=αhC40s110λ330C6II=1s110B3I,C7II=B4Is110,C8II=αhC80s110λ330C11II=(2J1hG1N4H1N5I1N6)/N31s110B6IC12II=[N3(K1N2+H1N6+I1N7)(hαN3+N4)(2J1h+H1N5+I1N6)]/[(hαN3+N4)N4(h2α2N3+hαN4+N5)N3]hα1λ3301s110(s130s110αhC30+s440s110C40λ110λ330C40α2h2C120+2λ110B2I), (A10)

where

{F1=C11II+1s110B6IG1=hα1λ3301s110(3s130s110αhC30+3s440s110C40λ110λ330C40α2h2C120+2λ110B2I)+C12IIH1=12λ3301s110(s130s110αhC30s130s440s110C40λ110λ330C40)1s110(s130s110B2I+s1302C3II+12λ330s440s110C40hαs4402C4II)I1=s1306s110λ3301s110αhC40+s1306s110(αh1s1101λ330C40C4II)J1=12s1101λ330s110hα(s130αhC10+s440C20+2λ110s110B1I)K1=1s110s1303λ330s110C20. (A11)
C13II=C14II=C15II=C16II=C18II=C19II=C20II=C23II=C24II=0, (A12)
{C25II=C26II=C27II=C28II=C30II=C31II=C32II=0C35II=hα(2hα1s110B13IhαhC36IIN4+C36IIN3)/N3C36II=2hα1s110B13Ih(N3+αhN4)/(N32α2h2N42+α2h2N5N3), (A13)
{C37II=C38II=C39II=C40II=C42II=C43II=C44II=0C47II=(1λ3301s110C10h+G2N4+H2N5+I2N6)/N3+1λ3301s110hα(C30+hαC40)C48II=[(131λ3301s110C20N2+H2N6+I2N7)N3(N4+hαN3)(1λ3301s110C10h+H2N5+I2N6)]/[(N4+hαN3)N4(h2α2N3+hαN4+N5)N3]+1λ3301s110hαC40, (A14)

where

{F2=C47II1λ3301s110hα(C30+hαC40),G2=C48II1λ3301s110hαC40H2=1s110B2I+α2hs130s110C39II+s130+s1402s110C40II,I2=α6h(1λ3301s110C40s130s110C40II). (A15)
{C49II=C50II=C51II=C52II=C54II=C55II=C56II=0C59II=[(2hαB1Ih+1λ330hα(C20+2λ110B13I)hG3N4H3N5)/N3B18I]/s110C60II=1s110(G3+1λ330C302hαλ110λ330B14I), (A16)

where

F3=B18I+s110C59II,G3=s110C60II+2hαλ110λ330B14I1λ330C30,H3=1λ330C40. (A17)
C61II=C62II=C63II=C64II=C66II=C67II=C68II=C71II=C72II=0. (A18)
{B1II=B2II=B3II=B4II=B6II=0B7II=B8II=B9II=B10II=B12II=0B13II=B14II=B15II=B16II=B18II=0B19II=B20II=B21II=B22II=B24II=0B25II=B26II=B27II=B28II=B30II=0B31II=B32II=B33II=B34II=B36II=0. (A19)

The solving process of undetermined constants v, u0, and w0: substituting Equations (49) and (50) into Equation (15), we have

u|z=0x=l=l33αhs110C40+l36α2h2s110C30+l22α2h2s110C70l2αhs110C802αhs110C120l+α2h2s110C110l+hαs440C40lhαs440C20l+(s110G2αhs110F2+1λ330hαC40+αhB12I)ld310d330+(G3αhF3+1λ330C30+αhB18I2hαB1I)ld310d150+(α2h2s110C35II2αhs110C36II2hαB13I)l(d150)2+[l33(αhB2Iα2hλ330C40)l22(αhB4Iαhλ330C80)+αhB6Ilhα1λ330(αhs130s110C30+s440s110C40λ110λ330C40α2h2C120+2λ110B2I)l+(s110G1αhs110F1)l](d310)2+hαk3+u0=0, (A20)
w|z=0x=l=hα(s330C10s130s130s110C10s440s130s110hαC20)(s330C20s130s130s110C20)h2α2+[1λ330s110h2α2(s130αhC10+s440C20+2λ110s110B7)2s130λ330s110h2α2C20+hα1λ330s130s110C10]d310d330+1λ330h2α2(C20+2λ110B13I)d330d150(2s130s110h2α2B1I+1λ330s130s110h2α2C20+21λ330s130s110h2α2λ110B13I)d310d150+(1λ330h2α2C201λ330hαC10)(d330)22h2α21s110B13Is130(d150)2+[s130s110s130λ330s110h2α2C20s130s1101λ330h2α2(s130s110αhC10+s440s110C20+2λ110B1I)](d310)214k5l413k6l312k7l2+vl+w0=0 (A21)

and

wx|z=0x=l=k5l3k6l2k7l+v=0. (A22)

From Equations (A20)–(A22), it can be obtained that

v=k5l3+k6l2+k7l, (A23)
u0=l33αhs110C40l36α2h2s110C30l22α2h2s110C70+l2αhs110C80+2αhs110C120lα2h2s110C110lhαs440C40l+hαs440C20l(s110G2αhs110F2+1λ330hαC40+αhB12I)ld310d330(G3αhF3+1λ330C30+αhB18I2hαB1I)ld310d150(α2h2s110C35II2αhs110C36II2hαB13I)l(d150)2[l33(αhB2Iα2hλ330C40)l22(αhB4Iαhλ330C80)+αhB6Ilhα1λ330(αhs130s110C30+s440s110C40λ110λ330C40α2h2C120+2λ110B2I)l+(s110G1αhs110F1)l](d310)2hαk3 (A24)

and

w0=hα(s330C10s130s130s110C10s440s130s110hαC20)+(s330C20s130s130s110C20)h2α2[1λ330s110h2α2(s130αhC10+s440C20+2λ110s110B7)2s130λ330s110h2α2C20+hα1λ330s130s110C10]d310d3301λ330h2α2(C20+2λ110B13I)d330d150+(2s130s110h2α2B1I+1λ330s130s110h2α2C20+21λ330s130s110h2α2λ110B13I)d310d150[s130s110s130λ330s110h2α2C20s130s1101λ330h2α2(s130s110αhC10+s440s110C20+2λ110B1I)](d310)2(1λ330h2α2C201λ330hαC10)(d330)2+2h2α21s110B13Is130(d150)234k5l423k6l312k7l2. (A25)

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.L., X.H., and J.S.; Funding acquisition, X.H.; Methodology, Y.L., Z.Y., and S.S.; Visualization, X.L. and S.S.; Writing—original draft, Y.L., S.S., and X.H.

Funding

This work was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 11572061 and 11772072).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  • 1.Xiang H., Shi Z.F. Static analysis for functionally graded piezoelectric actuators or sensors under a combined electro-thermal load. Eur. J. Mech. A-Solid. 2009;28:338–346. doi: 10.1016/j.euromechsol.2008.06.007. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Komijani M., Reddy J.N., Eslami M.R. Nonlinear analysis of microstructure-dependent functionally graded piezoelectric material actuators. J. Mech. Phys. Solids. 2014;63:214–227. doi: 10.1016/j.jmps.2013.09.008. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Koizumi M. FGM activities in Japan. Compos. B-Eng. 1997;28:1–4. doi: 10.1016/S1359-8368(96)00016-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Pohanka M. Overview of piezoelectric biosensors, immunosensors and DNA sensors and their applications. Materials. 2018;11:448. doi: 10.3390/ma11030448. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Pérez N., Buiochi F., Brizzotti Andrade M.A., Adamowski J.C. Numerical characterization of piezoceramics using resonance curves. Materials. 2016;9:71. doi: 10.3390/ma9020071. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.González A.M., García Á., Benavente-Peces C., Pardo L. Revisiting the characterization of the losses in piezoelectric materials from impedance spectroscopy at resonance. Materials. 2016;9:72. doi: 10.3390/ma9020072. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Duan W.H., Wang Q., Quek S.T. Applications of piezoelectric materials in structural health monitoring and repair: Selected research examples. Materials. 2010;3:5169–5194. doi: 10.3390/ma3125169. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Eshraghi I., Dag S., Soltani N. Bending and free vibrations of functionally graded annular and circular micro-plates under thermal loading. Compos. Struct. 2016;137:196–207. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2015.11.024. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Kim J., Reddy J.N. Modeling of functionally graded smart plates with gradient elasticity effects. Mech. Adv. Mater. Struct. 2017;24:437–447. doi: 10.1080/0145935X.2016.1199188. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Kahya V., Turan M. Vibration and stability analysis of functionally graded sandwich beams by a multi-layer finite element. Compos. B-Eng. 2018;146:198–212. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.04.011. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Arshid E., Khorshidvand A.R. Free vibration analysis of saturated porous FG circular plates integrated with piezoelectric actuators via differential quadrature method. Thin Wall. Struct. 2018;125:220–233. doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2018.01.007. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Zur K.K. Quasi-Green’s function approach to free vibration analysis of elastically supported functionally graded circular plates. Compos. Struct. 2018;183:600–610. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.07.012. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Zur K.K. Free vibration analysis of elastically supported functionally graded annular plates via quasi-Green′s function method. Compos. B-Eng. 2018;144:37–55. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.02.019. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Zhu X.H., Wang Q., Meng Z.Y. A functionally gradient piezoelectric actuator prepared by powder metallurgical process in PNN-PZ-PT system. J. Mater. Sci. Lett. 1995;14:516–518. doi: 10.1007/BF00665920. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Zhu X., Meng Z. Operational principle, fabrication and displacement characteristics of a functionally gradient piezoelectric ceramic actuator. Sens. Actuators A. 1995;48:169–176. doi: 10.1016/0924-4247(95)00996-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Shi Z.F., Chen Y. Functionally graded piezoelectric cantilever beam under load. Arch. Appl. Mech. 2004;74:237–247. doi: 10.1007/s00419-004-0346-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Xiang H.J., Shi Z.F. Electrostatic analysis of functionally graded piezoelectric cantilevers. J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 2007;18:719–726. doi: 10.1177/1045389X06069446. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Huang D.J., Ding H.J., Chen W.Q. Piezoelasticity solutions for functionally graded piezoelectric beams. Smart Mater. Struct. 2007;16:687–695. doi: 10.1088/0964-1726/16/3/015. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Huang D.J., Ding H.J., Chen W.Q. A unified solution for an anisotropic functionally graded piezoelectric beam subject to sinusoidal transverse loads. J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 2009;20:1401–1414. doi: 10.1177/1045389X09337083. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Yu T., Zhong Z. Bending analysis of a functionally graded piezoelectric cantilever beam. Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 2007;50:97–108. doi: 10.1007/s11433-007-2006-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Zhong Z., Yu T. Electroelastic analysis of functionally graded piezoelectric material beam. J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 2008;19:707–713. doi: 10.1177/1045389X07079453. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Yang J., Xiang H.J. Thermo-electro-mechanical characteristics of functionally graded piezoelectric actuators. Smart Mater. Struct. 2007;16:784–797. doi: 10.1088/0964-1726/16/3/028. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Komeili A., Akbarzadeh A.H., Doroushi A., Eslami M.R. Static analysis of functionally graded piezoelectric beams under thermo-electro-mechanical loads. Adv. Mech. Eng. 2011;3:153731. doi: 10.1155/2011/153731. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Li Y.S., Feng W.J., Cai Z.Y. Bending and free vibration of functionally graded piezoelectric beam based on modified strain gradient theory. Compos. Struct. 2014;115:41–50. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2014.04.005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Lin C.H., Muliana A. Nonlinear electro-mechanical responses of functionally graded piezoelectric beams. Compos. B-Eng. 2015;72:53–64. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.11.030. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Pandey V.B., Parashar S.K. Static bending and dynamic analysis of functionally graded piezoelectric beam subjected to electromechanical loads. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. C-J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 2015;230:3457–3469. doi: 10.1177/0954406215596359. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Duc N.D., Cong P.H., Quang V.D. Nonlinear dynamic and vibration analysis of piezoelectric eccentrically stiffened FGM plates in thermal environment. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2016;115–116:711–722. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2016.07.010. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Su Z., Jin G.Y., Ye T.G. Electro-mechanical vibration characteristics of functionally graded piezoelectric plates with general boundary conditions. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2018;138–139:42–53. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2018.01.040. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.He X.T., Wang Y.Z., Shi S.J., Sun J.Y. An electroelastic solution for functionally graded piezoelectric material beams with different moduli in tension and compression. J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 2018;29:1649–1669. doi: 10.1177/1045389X17742734. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Poincaré H. Les Méthodes Nouvelles de la Mécanique Celeste. Dover Publications; New York, NY, USA: 1957. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Lian Y.S., He X.T., Liu G.H., Sun J.Y., Zheng Z.L. Application of perturbation idea to well-known Hencky problem: A perturbation solution without small-rotation-angle assumption. Mech. Res. Commun. 2017;83:32–46. doi: 10.1016/j.mechrescom.2017.05.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Nowinski J.L., Ismail I.A. Application of a multi-parameter perturbation method to elastostatics. Dev. Theor. Appl. Mech. 1965;2:35–45. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Chien W.Z. Second order approximation solution of nonlinear large deflection problem of Yongjiang Railway Bridge in Ningbo. Appl. Math. Mech. (Engl. Ed.) 2002;23:493–506. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.He X.T., Cao L., Li Z.Y., Hu X.J., Sun J.Y. Nonlinear large deflection problems of beams with gradient: A biparametric perturbation method. Appl. Math. Comput. 2013;219:7493–7513. doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2013.01.037. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.He X.T., Cao L., Sun J.Y., Zheng Z.L. Application of a biparametric perturbation method to large-deflection circular plate problems with a bimodular effect under combined loads. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2014;420:48–65. doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2014.05.016. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Zhong Z., Yu T. Analytical solution of a cantilever functionally graded beam. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2007;67:481–488. doi: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2006.08.023. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Ruan X.P., Danforth S.C., Safari A., Chou T.W. Saint-Venant end effects in piezoceramic materials. Int. J. Solids Struct. 2000;37:2625–2637. doi: 10.1016/S0020-7683(99)00034-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Seyranian A.P., Mailybaev A.A. Multiparameter Stability Theory with Mechanical Applications. World Scientific Publishing; Singapore: 2003. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Luongo A. A unified perturbation approach to static/dynamic coupled instabilities of nonlinear structures. Thin Wall. Struct. 2010;48:744–751. doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2010.01.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Luongo A., Casciati S., Zulli D. Perturbation method for the dynamic analysis of a bistable oscillator under slow harmonic excitation. Smart Struct. Syst. 2016;18:183–196. doi: 10.12989/sss.2016.18.1.183. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Luongo A. On the use of the multiple scale method in solving ‘difficult’ bifurcation problems. Math. Mech. Solids. 2017;22:988–1004. doi: 10.1177/1081286515616053. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Luongo A., Zulli D. Statics of shallow inclined elastic cables under general vertical loads: A perturbation approach. Mathematics. 2018;6:24. doi: 10.3390/math6020024. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Materials are provided here courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)

RESOURCES