About this Journal Submit a Manuscript Table of Contents
Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Volume 2014 (2014), Article ID 684075, 10 pages

http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/684075
Research Article

Mixed Variational Principles in Nondissipative Coupled Thermoelasticity

Department of Structures for Engineering and Architecture, University of Naples Federico II, Via Claudio, 21-80125 Napoli, Italy

Received 14 March 2014; Accepted 13 May 2014; Published 9 June 2014

Academic Editor: Zhaowei Zhong

Copyright © 2014 Francesco Marotti de Sciarra. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

This paper is concerned with a general framework to consistently derive all the variational formulations with different combinations of the state variables for a thermoelastic structural model based on the nonlinear thermoelasticity of type II proposed by Green and Naghdi. Comparisons with existing formulations are also given.

1. Introduction

Thermal stresses play an important role in structural mechanics and several theories for describing the heat conduction have been presented in the literature. Generally, the heat problem is first solved to get the three-dimensional distribution of the temperature, and then the temperature distribution is used, via an interface, as a thermal load in the structural problem; see, for example, Argyris and Tenek [1], Hetnarski and Ignaczak [2, 3], and Rolfes et al. [4].

It is well-known that the classical linear theory of heat conduction is based on Fourier's law for the thermal flux and predicts that a thermal effect at a point of a body is felt instantly at other points of the body. Therefore in past years several alternative theories of heat conduction have been proposed; see for a survey Hetnarski and Eslami [5], Ignaczak and Ostoja-Starzewski [6].

In this paper the nonclassical theory of thermoelasticity developed by Green and Naghdi [7, 8] is considered. Such a model incorporates the approach based on Fourier's law (referred to as type I), the theory without energy dissipation (type II), and a theory which allows finite wave propagation as well as energy dissipation (type III).

Since the publication of the works of Green and Naghdi (GN), several authors have been interested in studying the implications of these theories. However, it is apparent that further mathematical and physical studies are still needed to clarify their applicability.

Contributions on the GN approach can be found, among others, in [9, 10], an energy method is employed to derive uniqueness theorems in [11], continuous dependence results are established in [12], spatial-decay theorems are proved in [13], questions of existence are investigated in [14], and thermodynamic relations between the entropy flux and the heat flux are addressed in [15, 16].

An analytical treatment of coupled thermoelastic problems is complex so that the development of alternative methods of analysis plays a central role. Accordingly a framework which allows one to derive all the admissible variational formulations of such problems is of great interest from a theoretical point of view and from a computational standpoint since suitable variational formulations are the basis to develop mixed finite elements; see, for example, [17, 18].

Variational formulations of classical thermoelastic problems are discussed, among others, in [1924]. Variational formulations for the GN theory of type II are addressed in [25, 26].

In this paper the nonclassical thermoelastic problem following the GN model of type II is analysed. One of the basic items in this theory is the thermal displacement which, on the macroscopic scale, is regarded as representing a mean thermal displacement magnitude on the molecular scale. Variational formulations for the GN theory of type II have received little attention, and thus our contribution represents a further step in developing a consistent framework for this theory.

It is well known that the GN theory of type II has been developed as a dynamic theory, but an important prerequisite for its use is a thorough understanding of the corresponding problems in which the dynamical effects are disregarded; see, for example, [27]. Hence a class of quasi-static solutions for the dynamical problem is considered so that it is possible to extend to a thermoelastic structural problem following the GN model of type II several procedures which have been previously used in the context of isothermal theories; see, for example, [28] for plasticity, [29] in nonlocal elasticity, and [30] in the case of elasticity with nonlocal strain damage.

The purpose of this paper is to provide for the first time a framework to derive all the variational formulations associated with the GN coupled thermoelastic structural model starting from a new general formulation in all the state variables of the problem. Thus this procedure provides a consistent methodology to obtain variational formulations with different combinations of the state variables. It is worth noting that, up to now, variational principles for the GN coupled thermoelastic structural model have been obtained by ad hoc reasoning for the specific problem.

The required steps are the following. The GN coupled thermoelastic structural model is cast in terms of a global multivalued structural operator. Then the related nonsmooth potential is evaluated by direct integration along a ray in the operator domain and depends on all the state variables involved in the model. Appraising the generalized gradient of the nonsmooth potential [31] and imposing its stationarity, the operator formulation of the problem is recovered. All the admissible variational formulations in a reduced number of state variables can then be obtained from the general formulation by imposing the field equations. As a consequence a firm variational basis is given to the GN thermoelastic structural problem.

To show the effectiveness of the methodology, several variational formulations with different combinations of the state variables are recovered from the potential in the complete set of state variables in a straightforward manner. Some variational formulations are then specialized to the case of linear thermoelasticity in order to recover variational formulations already published in the literature following ad hoc reasoning.

2. The Thermoelastic Structural Problem

In small strain analysis the theory of thermoelasticity without energy dissipation as described in [8] is considered and the body is regarded as the compositions of a mechanical and a thermal material [32]. A compact notation is adopted throughout the paper with bold-face letters associated with vectors and tensors; a superimposed dot means differentiation with respect to time.

Green and Naghdi's theory is based on the introduction of a scalar thermal displacement defined as where is a point pertaining to the thermoelastic body defined on a regular bounded domain of an Euclidean space, represents the temperature variation from the uniform reference temperature , and is the initial value of at the time . As a consequence the time derivative of the thermal displacement is the temperature variation; that is, .

Assuming that the internal energy [33] depends on strain , entropy , and gradient of the thermal displacement , the constitutive relations are where is the stress tensor and is the entropy flux vector with being the heat flux.

Using the well-known relation between the internal energy and the Helmholtz free energy , the constitutive relations (2) can be equivalently expressed in the following form: It is worth noting that it is not necessary to consider a peculiar expression of the internal energy or to split it in an additive form for the development of the variational theory. Hence a nonlinear elastic anisotropic behaviour and a temperature dependency of the thermoelastic parameters are encompassed in the model.

Further issues such as thermoelastic models which depend on two distinct temperatures, that is, the conductive temperature and the thermodynamic temperature, where the difference between these two temperatures is proportional to the heat supply, see [34], dependence of the stress on the strain rate, or heat and mass transfer within the body to get a chemohygrothermomechanical model, see [35] for concrete, are definitively out the scope of this paper.

Let denote the linear space of strain tensors and let denote the dual space of stress tensors . The scalar product between dual quantities (simple or double index saturation operation between vectors or tensors) is denoted by and the inner product in the dual spaces has the mechanical meaning of the internal virtual work; that is, The linear space of thermal displacement is . To each thermal displacement field , there corresponds a boundary field . The dual space of is given by the boundary heat fluxes and the external heat sources belong to the space of square integrable fields on . The external thermal forces are collected in the set , where is the rate of heat flow into the body by a heat source. Reactive thermal forces of the external thermal constraints belong to the subspace where is the subspace of conforming thermal displacement fields which satisfy the homogeneous boundary conditions. To any , there corresponds a uniquely defined boundary thermal reaction system such that for any .

The kinematic thermal operator Lin is a bounded linear operator and a thermal gradient is said to be thermally compatible if there exists an admissible thermal displacement field such that . The dual operator of is the equilibrium thermal operator Lin which turns out to be defined by the equalities [36] where Lin is the formal adjoint of the kinematic thermal operator such that . The boundary flux associated with the entropy flux vector is , where denotes the outward normal to the boundary .

External thermal forces and the rate of entropy in equilibrium with a entropy flux vector belong to the image of the equilibrium thermal operator Let be a prescribed thermal displacement field on . A pair is thermally compatible if there exists a thermal displacement such that and , where and is a thermal displacement field which fulfils nonhomogeneous boundary thermal conditions.

Constraint conditions can be fit in field equations by noting that the external relation between reactive thermal forces and thermal displacements is provided by the relations with , being conjugate convex functionals and the relation (7) represents Fenchel’s equality. The symbol denotes the sub(super)differential of convex (concave) functions [37].

For completeness, the mechanical model is briefly reported hereafter [38, 39] and the time derivative of the displacement field is neglected. Let denote the linear space of displacements . The linear space of forces is denoted by and is placed in separating duality with by a nondegenerate bilinear form which has the physical meaning of external virtual work. For avoiding proliferation of symbols, the internal and external virtual works are denoted by the same symbol. Conforming displacement fields satisfy homogeneous boundary conditions and belong to a closed linear subspace .

The kinematic operator is a bounded linear operator from to the space of square integrable strain fields . The subspace of external forces is dual of . The continuous operator from to is dual of and represents the equilibrium operator. Let be the load functional where and denote the tractions and the body forces.

The equilibrium equation and the compatibility condition are The external relation between reactions and displacements is assumed to be given by the equivalent relations with being a concave functional. The concave functional represents the conjugate of and the relation (9) represents Fenchel’s equality.

Accordingly the relations governing the thermoelastic structural problem without energy dissipation for given mechanical and thermal loads and in the time interval of interest are The initial thermal conditions are considered in the form where and are, respectively, the prescribed initial thermal displacement and the temperature in .

A solution of the thermoelastic structural problem is usually achieved by a finite element approach [40, 41] which can be obtained by starting from a suitable mixed variational formulation. Hence the definition of a general and consistent framework to derive variational principles with different combinations of the state variables, without ad hoc procedures, plays a central role.

The time integral of the thermal balance equation (10) in the interval is given by where . It is worth noting that can be obtained from the constitutive relation (3) considering , , and .

Moreover the time integral of the constitutive relation (10) in the interval is given by where .

Accordingly the thermoelastic structural problem is reported in Table 1 and the initial conditions (11) are incorporated into the field equations.

tab1
Table 1: The thermoelastic structural problem without dissipation.

3. Mixed Variational Formulations

Introducing the product space and its dual space , the thermoelastic structural problem without dissipation reported in Table 1 can be collected in terms of the global multivalued structural operators governing the whole problem The expressions of the vectors , , and are The expression of the structural operator is where the suboperator is given by and, finally, the expression of is

The operators and turn out to be integrable by virtue of the duality existing between the operators , , , , , and and , , , , , and ; the conservativity of ; and the conservativity of the super(sub)differentials and .

The related potential can be evaluated by a direct integration [42] along a straight line in the space starting from its origin to get Hence the new potential in the complete set of state variables is given by which turns out to be linear in , jointly convex with respect to the state variables , and jointly concave with respect to . The following statement then holds.

Proposition 1. The set of state variables is a solution of the saddle problem if and only if it is a solution of the thermoelastic structural problem without dissipation reported in Table 1.

The stationary condition of , enforced at the point , yields back the thermoelastic structural problem. In fact the stationarity of is which can be rewritten in the following form: Hence, performing the super(sub)differentials appearing in (23), the thermoelastic structural problem in Table 1 is recovered.

By enforcing the fulfilment of the thermoelastic relations reported in Table 1, the state variables appearing in the variational formulation stated in Proposition 1 can be alternatively eliminated and new equivalent mixed variational formulations are obtained. All the functionals, obtained following the proposed procedure, attain the same value at the solution point of the GN thermoelastic problem.

An example of the methodology to recover new variational formulations with different state variables for the GN thermoelastic structural problem is reported in the next section. Note that not all the possible combinations of the state variables are admissible in the variational formulations.

4. Comparison with Existing Variational Formulations

Quite a few variational formulations have been proposed for the GN thermoelastic structural problem; see, for example, [25, 26].

In the sequel it is shown how variational principles with a reduced number of state variables can be obtained following a general procedure. The peculiar feature of the proposed procedure is to provide a general methodology to obtain all the admissible variational formulations associated with the GN thermoelastic structural problem without ad hoc reasoning.

In order to show the effectiveness of the procedure, four variational principles, among all the admissible variational formulations, are provided and, then, they are specialized in recovering existing variational principles in the literature. Furthermore three original potentials are contributed in the appendix to be used as auxiliary functionals for the proposed procedure.

4.1. Seven-Field Mixed Variational Formulation

A mixed seven-field variational principle in can be obtained by imposing on the expression of the potential (the appendix) the thermal external constraint (Table 1 ) in terms of Fenchel’s equality (7) . The variational formulation is reported in the next statement.

Proposition 2. The set of state variables is a solution of the saddle problem where if and only if it is a solution of the thermoelastic structural problem without dissipation reported in Table 1.

To specialize the potential , the expression of the internal energy for the Cauchy model having a GN linear coupled thermoelastic behaviour is The parameter is the temperature-dependent specific heat at constant strain, is the isothermal elastic moduli fourth-order tensor, and is the symmetric tensor of conductivity moduli, both symmetric and positive definite. The second-order thermal expansion tensor is self-adjoint, that is, , and describes the thermoelastic coupling arising from thermal dilatations depending on the linear coefficient of thermal dilatation .

Accordingly the potential can be particularized in the form where is the three-field Hu-Washizu mixed functional in classical elasticity [43] in which the elastic stiffness is replaced by the isentropic elastic stiffness , the functionals are the mixed thermal parts of the potential, and the functionals take into account the thermoelastic coupling.

The variational formulation reported in Proposition 2, replacing with the functional , yields the variational principle provided in [26] for the Cauchy model with a linear GN coupled thermoelastic behaviour if, therein, the velocity field vanishes.

4.2. Four-Field Mixed Variational Formulation

A mixed four-field variational principle in can be obtained by imposing the following relations on the expression of the potential (see the appendix): (a) the constitutive relations (Table 1 ) in terms of Fenchel’s equality ; (b) the thermal external constraints (Table 1 ) in terms of Fenchel’s equality (7) . Hence the related variational formulation is reported in the next proposition.

Proposition 3. The set of state variables is a solution of the saddle problem where if and only if it is a solution of the thermoelastic structural problem without dissipation reported in Table 1.

In order to express the potential in terms of the Cauchy model for the GN linear coupled thermoelastic problem, the conjugate of the internal energy (26) has the following expression: with being the specific heat at constant stress at the reference state temperature . Hence the potential can be rewritten for the linear GN coupled thermoelastic model in the following form: where is the classical Hellinger-Reissner functional, the potential represents the mixed thermal contribution, and the functionals take into account the thermoelastic coupling where is the one appearing in the expression of the functional .

The variational formulation reported in Proposition 3, replacing with the functional , yields the four-field variational principle in terms of displacement, temperature, stress, and heat flux proved in [17] in the framework of the classical Fourier linear thermoelasticity.

4.3. Three-Field Mixed Variational Formulation

A three-field variational principle in terms of displacement, thermal displacement, and entropy flux can be obtained by imposing the following relations on the expression of the potential (the appendix): (a) the constitutive relations which provide the thermal displacement and the entropy flux vector (Table 1 ) in terms of Fenchel's equality ; (b) the thermal external constraints (Table 1 ) in terms of Fenchel’s equality (7) . Hence the following mixed three-field variational formulation is recovered.

Proposition 4. The set of state variables is a solution of the saddle problem where if and only if it is a solution of the thermoelastic structural problem without dissipation reported in Table 1.

For the Cauchy model with linear GN coupled thermoelastic behaviour, the partial conjugate of the elastic energy with respect to the state variables is the functional which, after some computations, has the following expression: Accordingly the potential can be rewritten for the Cauchy linear GN coupled thermoelastic model in the following form: where is the total potential energy in which the elastic stiffness is replaced by the isentropic one, the functional is the mixed thermal functional differing from , see (36), by the presence of the specific heat at constant strain , and the functionals take into account the thermoelastic coupling where is the same functional appearing in the expressions of and .

The variational formulation reported in Proposition 4, replacing with the functional , coincides with the three-field variational principle in terms of displacement, temperature, and heat flux proposed by Lebon and Lambermont [44], Lebon [20] for the classical Fourier model.

4.4. Two-Field Mixed Variational Formulation

A two-field variational principle can be obtained by imposing the following relations on the expression of the potential (the appendix): (a)the thermal external constraints (Table 1 ) in terms of Fenchel’s equality (7) ; (b) the mechanical compatibility condition (Table 1 ); the thermal compatibility condition (Table 1 ). Hence the following proposition holds.

Proposition 5. The set of state variables is a solution of the saddle problem where if and only if it is a solution of the thermoelastic structural problem without dissipation reported in Table 1.

For the Cauchy model with linear GN coupled thermoelastic behaviour, the partial conjugate of the internal energy with respect to the entropy is the functional which, after some computations, has the following expression: Accordingly the potential can be rewritten for the Cauchy linear GN coupled thermoelastic model in the following form: where is the classical total potential energy. Note that the three-field potential depends on the total potential energy in terms of the isentropic elastic energy. The functional is the thermal part of the potential and the thermoelastic coupling functionals coincide with the ones appearing in the expression of .

The variational formulation reported in Proposition 5, replacing with the functional , yields the two-field variational principle in terms of displacement and temperature proposed by Ieşan [45], Nickell and Sackman [46] for the classical Fourier model.

5. Closure

A consistent framework to develop variational formulations for the GN thermoelasticity without energy dissipation is presented.

Mechanical and thermal boundary conditions are incorporated into the field equations so that a thermoelastic structural operator is built up in order to perform a direct derivation of the new general variational formulation in the complete set of state variables. The novelty of the proposed analysis consists in casting the GN thermoelastic model without energy dissipation in a general framework which can be used to derive variational formulations with different combinations of state variables which, as is well-known, turn out to be useful from both the theoretical and computational point of view.

Original variational formulations with a reduced number of state variables are provided using the proposed methodology and existing variational principles are obtained starting from the general formulations.

Future developments will concern the consistent derivation of a suitable mixed variational formulation to develop a FE analysis of thermoelastic problems so that numerical examples for isotropic and anisotropic structures will be provided in a forthcoming paper.

Appendix

Performing the partial or total conjugates of the internal energy with respect to the state variables , seven functions are obtained. In particular, in this paper, it is necessary to assess the conjugate of the internal energy with respect to all the state variables, the conjugate of the internal energy with respect to the pair , and the conjugate of the internal energy with respect to .

Hence the constitutive relations (Table 1 ) are expressed in terms of Fenchel’s equality in the form The constitutive relations which provide the thermal displacement and the entropy flux vector (Table 1 , ) are expressed in terms of Fenchel’s equality in the form The constitutive relation which provides the thermal displacement (Table 1—( )) is expressed in terms of Fenchel’s equality in the form In order to obtain the variational formulations reported in Section 4, the following auxiliary functionals are provided. It is worth noting that this original procedure can be used to obtain many other functionals with different combination of the state variables depending on the problem at hand.

(i) Enforcing the constitutive relation (Table 1 ) in terms of Fenchel’s equality (A.3) in the expression of the functional , the result is

(ii) Enforcing the external constraint (Table 1 ) in terms of Fenchel’s equality (9) in the expression of the functional , it follows that

(iii) Enforcing the external constraint (Table 1 ) in terms of Fenchel’s equality (9) in the expression of the functional , the result is

(iv) To specialize the general variational formulations reported in Section 4, it is necessary to consider external frictionless bilateral constraints with nonhomogeneous boundary conditions. The admissible set of displacements is the subspace and the subspace of the external constraint reactions is . Then the functional turns out to be the indicator of defined in the form and a direct evaluation shows that its conjugate is given by Similarly, nonhomogeneous constraints on thermal displacement fields are formulated by considering a prescribed thermal displacement field , and thermal displacement fields belonging to the affine set are said to be admissible. Reactive thermal forces belong to the orthogonal complement of . Then the functional is the indicator of : and its conjugate is given by

Conflict of Interests

The author declares that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

The research work is funded by Project FARO IV Tornata, 2012, University of Naples Federico II, Polo delle Scienze e delle Tecnologie, and Compagnia di San Paolo.

References

  1. J. Argyris and L. Tenek, “Recent advances in computational thermostructural analysis of composite plates and shells with strong nonlinearities,” Applied Mechanics Reviews, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 285–306, 1997. View at Scopus
  2. R. B. Hetnarski and J. Ignaczak, “Generalized thermoelasticity,” Journal of Thermal Stresses, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 451–476, 1999. View at Scopus
  3. R. B. Hetnarski and J. Ignaczak, “Nonclassical dynamical thermoelasticity,” International Journal of Solids and Structures, vol. 37, no. 1-2, pp. 215–224, 2000. View at Scopus
  4. R. Rolfes, J. Teßmer, and K. Rohwer, “Models and tools for heat transfer, thermal stresses, and stability of composite aerospace structures,” Journal of Thermal Stresses, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 641–670, 2003. View at Scopus
  5. R. B. Hetnarski and M. R. Eslami, Thermal Stresses—Advanced Theory and Applications, Springer, New York, NY, USA, 2009.
  6. J. Ignaczak and M. Ostoja-Starzewski, Thermoelasticty with Finite Wave Speeds, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA, 2010.
  7. A. E. Green and P. M. Naghdi, “On thermodynamics and the nature of the second law,” Proceedings of the Royal Society A, vol. 357, no. 1690, pp. 253–270, 1977. View at Scopus
  8. A. E. Green and P. M. Naghdi, “Thermoelasticity without energy dissipation,” Journal of Elasticity, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 189–208, 1993. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. S. Bargmann and P. Steinmann, “Finite element approaches to non-classical heat conduction in solids,” Computer Modeling in Engineering and Sciences, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 133–150, 2005. View at Scopus
  10. S. Bargmann and P. Steinmann, “Theoretical and computational aspects of non-classical thermoelasticity,” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 196, no. 1–3, pp. 516–527, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. D. S. Chandrasekharaiah, “A uniqueness theorem in the theory of thermoelasticity without energy dissipation,” Journal of Thermal Stresses, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 267–272, 1996. View at Scopus
  12. D. Ieşan, “On the theory of thermoelasticity without energy dissipation,” Journal of Thermal Stresses, vol. 21, no. 3-4, pp. 295–307, 1998. View at Scopus
  13. R. Quintanilla, “On the spatial behavior in thermoelasticity without energy dissipation,” Journal of Thermal Stresses, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 213–224, 1999. View at Scopus
  14. R. Quintanilla, “Existence in thermoelasticity without energy dissipation,” Journal of Thermal Stresses, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 195–202, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. S. Bargmann and P. Steinmann, “Classical results for a non-classical theory: remarks on thermodynamic relations in Green-Naghdi thermo-hyperelasticity,” Continuum Mechanics and Thermodynamics, vol. 19, no. 1-2, pp. 59–66, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. F. Marotti de Sciarra and M. Salerno, “On thermodynamic functions in thermoelasticity without energy dissipation,” European Journal of Mechanics A: Solids, vol. 46, pp. 84–95, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  17. A. A. Cannarozzi and F. Ubertini, “Mixed variational method for linear coupled thermoelastic analysis,” International Journal of Solids and Structures, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 717–739, 2001. View at Scopus
  18. F. Marotti de Sciarra and R. Barretta, “A gradient model for Timoshenko nanobeams,” Physica E: Low-Dimensional Systems and Nanostructures, vol. 62, pp. 1–9, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  19. D. E. Carlson, “Linear thermoelasticity,” in Handbuch der Physik, C. Truesdell, Ed., vol. 6a/2, pp. 297–346, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1972.
  20. G. Lebon, “Variational principles in thermomechanics,” in Recent Developments in Thermomechanics of Solids, G. Lebon and P. Perzina, Eds., CISM Courses and Lectures no. 262, pp. 221–396, Springer, Vienna, Austria, 1980.
  21. G. Batra, “On a principle of virtual work for thermo-elastic bodies,” Journal of Elasticity, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 131–146, 1989. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. J. C. Simo, “Nonlinear stability of the time-discrete variational problem of evolution in nonlinear heat conduction, plasticity and viscoplasticity,” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 88, no. 1, pp. 111–131, 1991. View at Scopus
  23. J. C. Simo and C. Miehe, “Associative coupled thermoplasticity at finite strains: formulation, numerical analysis and implementation,” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 98, no. 1, pp. 41–104, 1992. View at Scopus
  24. Q. Yang, L. Stainier, and M. Ortiz, “A variational formulation of the coupled thermo-mechanical boundary-value problem for general dissipative solids,” Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 401–424, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. D. S. Chandrasekharaiah, “Variational and reciprocal principles in thermoelasticity without energy dissipation,” Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences: Mathematical Sciences, vol. 108, no. 2, pp. 209–215, 1998. View at Scopus
  26. S. Chiriţǎ and M. Ciarletta, “Reciprocal and variational principles in linear thermoelasticity without energy dissipation,” Mechanics Research Communications, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 271–275, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. R. Quintanilla and J. Sivaloganathan, “Aspects of the nonlinear theory of type II thermoelastostatics,” European Journal of Mechanics A: Solids, vol. 32, pp. 109–117, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. F. Marotti de Sciarra, “Variational formulations and a consistent finite-element procedure for a class of nonlocal elastic continua,” International Journal of Solids and Structures, vol. 45, no. 14-15, pp. 4184–4202, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. F. Marotti de Sciarra, “On non-local and non-homogeneous elastic continua,” International Journal of Solids and Structures, vol. 46, no. 3-4, pp. 651–676, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. F. Marotti de Sciarra, “A nonlocal model with strain-based damage,” International Journal of Solids and Structures, vol. 46, no. 22-23, pp. 4107–4122, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. F. Marotti de Sciarra, “Novel variational formulations for nonlocal plasticity,” International Journal of Plasticity, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 302–331, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. P. Podio-Guidugli, “A virtual power format for thermomechanics,” Continuum Mechanics and Thermodynamics, vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 479–487, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. H. B. Callen, Thermodynamics and an Introduction to Thermostatistics, John Wiley & Sons, Toronto, Canada, 1985.
  34. H. M. Youssef, “Theory of two-temperature-generalized thermoelasticity,” IMA Journal of Applied Mathematics, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 383–390, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. D. Gawin, F. Pesavento, and B. A. Schrefler, “Modelling of hygro-thermal behaviour of concrete at high temperature with thermo-chemical and mechanical material degradation,” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 192, no. 13-14, pp. 1731–1771, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. G. Romano, M. Diaco, and R. Barretta, “Variational formulation of the first principle of continuum thermodynamics,” Continuum Mechanics and Thermodynamics, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 177–187, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. R. T. Rockafellar, Convex Analysis, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA, 1970.
  38. R. E. Showalter, Monotone Operators in Banach Space and Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, USA, 1997.
  39. F. Marotti de Sciarra, “Hardening plasticity with nonlocal strain damage,” International Journal of Plasticity, vol. 34, pp. 114–138, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. F. Marotti de Sciarra, “Finite element modelling of nonlocal beams,” Physica E: Low-Dimensional Systems and Nanostructures, vol. 59, pp. 144–149, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  41. F. Marotti de Sciarra, “A nonlocal finite element approach to nanobeams,” Advances in Mechanical Engineering, vol. 2013, Article ID 720406, 8 pages, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  42. G. Romano, L. Rosati, F. Marotti de Sciarra, and P. Bisegna, “A potential theory for monotone multi-valued operators,” Quarterly of Applied Mathematics, vol. 4, pp. 613–631, 1993.
  43. K. Washizu, Variational Methods in Elasticity and Plasticity, Pergamon, New York, NY, USA, 3rd edition, 1982.
  44. G. Lebon and J. Lambermont, “Some variational principles pertaining to non-stationary heat conduction and coupled thermoelasticity,” Acta Mechanica, vol. 15, no. 1-2, pp. 121–139, 1972. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. D. Ieşan, On Some Reciprocity Theorems and Variational Theorems in Linear Dynamic Theories of Continuum Mechanics, Memorie dell'Accademia delle scienze di Torino 4, no. 17, 1974.
  46. R. Nickell and J. Sackman, “Variational principles for linear coupled thermoelasticity,” Quarterly of Applied Mathematics, vol. 26, pp. 11–25, 1968.