2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.mechmat.2013.03.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Elastic in-plane properties of 2D linearized models of graphene

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…beam models are clear since bond between 2 neighbor atoms is always strait and never bent. Further limitations of the beam models have been discussed in [12]. It should be noted that fracture of α-P nanotubes cannot be studied by the compass force field, which was used in [9], and by the harmonic force field, which was used in [11], because the bond energy computed from the compass or harmonic force field becomes infinite when bond extension tends to the infinite.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…beam models are clear since bond between 2 neighbor atoms is always strait and never bent. Further limitations of the beam models have been discussed in [12]. It should be noted that fracture of α-P nanotubes cannot be studied by the compass force field, which was used in [9], and by the harmonic force field, which was used in [11], because the bond energy computed from the compass or harmonic force field becomes infinite when bond extension tends to the infinite.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the rod bond model at the reasonable parameters give a much lower value of the flexural rigidity. Thus, the value of 1/2 can only be achieved if the thickness of the rod is close to its length and the material of the rod should have the negative Poisson ratio [39]. So, an important issue is to find a relatively simple mechanical model that allows for such a ratio of stiffness.…”
Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, we assume the same values for the equivalent beam elements as in the approach proposed in To [2006], Li and Chou [2003] and Kalamkarov et al [2006]. It should be noted here that this approach may have some disadvantages and should be used with caution, i.e., for large deformations and carbon structures in tension [Berinskii and Borodich, 2013]. The motions of these atoms are regulated by a force field and is the sum of contributions from bond stretch interaction, bond angle bending, dihedral angle torsion, improper (out of plane) torsion, and a non-bonded van der Waals interaction in the case of multi-walled tubes (see Fig.…”
Section: Materials Parameters and Boundary Conditionsmentioning
confidence: 99%