Operator calculus approach to comparison of elasticity models for modelling of masonry structures

Affiliation
Chair of Applied Mathematics, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, 99423 Weimar, Germany;
Gürlebeck, Klaus;
ORCID
0000-0002-0028-5793
Affiliation
Chair of Mathematics, Universität Erfurt, 99089 Erfurt, Germany;
Legatiuk, Dmitrii;
ORCID
0000-0001-6720-8170
Affiliation
Chair of Advanced Structures, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, 99423 Weimar, Germany
Webber, Kemmar

The solution of any engineering problem starts with a modelling process aimed at formulating a mathematical model, which must describe the problem under consideration with sufficient precision. Because of heterogeneity of modern engineering applications, mathematical modelling scatters nowadays from incredibly precise micro- and even nano-modelling of materials to macro-modelling, which is more appropriate for practical engineering computations. In the field of masonry structures, a macro-model of the material can be constructed based on various elasticity theories, such as classical elasticity, micropolar elasticity and Cosserat elasticity. Evidently, a different macro-behaviour is expected depending on the specific theory used in the background. Although there have been several theoretical studies of different elasticity theories in recent years, there is still a lack of understanding of how modelling assumptions of different elasticity theories influence the modelling results of masonry structures. Therefore, a rigorous approach to comparison of different three-dimensional elasticity models based on quaternionic operator calculus is proposed in this paper. In this way, three elasticity models are described and spatial boundary value problems for these models are discussed. In particular, explicit representation formulae for their solutions are constructed. After that, by using these representation formulae, explicit estimates for the solutions obtained by different elasticity theories are obtained. Finally, several numerical examples are presented, which indicate a practical difference in the solutions.

Cite

Citation style:
Could not load citation form.

Rights

License Holder: © 2022 by the authors.

Use and reproduction:
This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively.