nanomaterials
Article
Elastostatics of Bernoulli–Euler Beams Resting on
Displacement-Driven Nonlocal Foundation
Marzia Sara Vaccaro, Francesco Paolo Pinnola , Francesco Marotti de Sciarra and Raffaele Barretta *
Citation: Vaccaro, M.S.; Pinnola, F.P.;
Marotti de Sciarra, F.; Barretta, R.
Elastostatics of Bernoulli–Euler
Beams Resting on
Displacement-Driven Nonlocal
Foundation. Nanomaterials 2021, 11,
573. https://doi.org/10.3390/
10.3390/nano11030573
Academic Editor: Yang-Tse Cheng
Received: 3 February 2021
Accepted: 18 February 2021
Published: 25 February 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Department of Structures for Engineering and Architecture, University of Naples Federico II, Via Claudio 21,
80125 Naples, Italy; marziasara.vaccaro@unina.it(M.S.V.); francescopaolo.pinnola@unina.it(F.P.P.);
marotti@unina.it (F.M.d.S.)
* Correspondence: rabarret@unina.it
Abstract: The simplest elasticity model of the foundation underlying a slender beam under flexure
was conceived by Winkler, requiring local proportionality between soil reactions and beam deflection.
Such an approach leads to well-posed elastostatic and elastodynamic problems, but as highlighted
by Wieghardt, it provides elastic responses that are not technically significant for a wide variety of
engineering applications. Thus, Winkler’s model was replaced by Wieghardt himself by assuming
that the beam deflection is the convolution integral between soil reaction field and an averaging kernel.
Due to conflict between constitutive and kinematic compatibility requirements, the corresponding
elastic problem of an inflected beam resting on a Wieghardt foundation is ill-posed. Modifications
of the original Wieghardt model were proposed by introducing fictitious boundary concentrated
forces of constitutive type, which are physically questionable, being significantly influenced on
prescribed kinematic boundary conditions. Inherent difficulties and issues are overcome in the
present research using a displacement-driven nonlocal integral strategy obtained by swapping
the input and output fields involved in Wieghardt’s original formulation. That is, nonlocal soil
reaction fields are the output of integral convolutions of beam deflection fields with an averaging
kernel. Equipping the displacement-driven nonlocal integral law with the bi-exponential averaging
kernel, an equivalent nonlocal differential problem, supplemented with non-standard constitutive
boundary conditions involving nonlocal soil reactions, is established. As a key implication, the
integrodifferential equations governing the elastostatic problem of an inflected elastic slender beam
resting on a displacement-driven nonlocal integral foundation are replaced with much simpler
differential equations supplemented with kinematic, static, and new constitutive boundary conditions.
The proposed nonlocal approach is illustrated by examining and analytically solving exemplar
problems of structural engineering. Benchmark solutions for numerical analyses are also detected.
Keywords: Wieghardt foundation; Bernoulli–Euler beams; nonlocal effects; integral nonlocal model
1. Introduction
Structural models of beams on an elastic foundation have been widely exploited by
the scientific community to describe engineering problems with numerous applications in
geotechnics, road, railroad, marine engineering, and biomechanics; see e.g., [1].
The problem of a beam subjected to transverse distributed loading proportional to its
deflection was considered by E. Winkler in the framework of the local theory of elasticity [2].
It was then considered to model railway tracks on continuous linear elastic foundations by
H. Zimmermann in his handbook on railway constructions [3]. Winkler and Zimmermann’s
theory quickly had followers due to its simplicity and easy mathematical treatment since
the soil was modeled in terms of one parameter as a continuous bed of independent linear
elastic one-dimensional springs with uniform stiffness.
However, E. Wieghardt [4] remarked that, in spite of its intuitive nature, Winkler’s
model was not physically fully reliable since it predicts sharp discontinuities in the beam-
soil profile at beam ends that are not actually present in real phenomena. However,
Nanomaterials 2021, 11, 573. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano11030573 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/nanomaterials