Figure 1.
The geometry domain of functionally graded materials plate.
Citation: Dimitra Beroukas, Maurice Selhorst, Stuart M. Pitson, Dusan Matusica, Ian L. Gibbins, Michaela Kress, Rainer V. Haberberger. Sphingosine kinase 1 in murine dorsal root ganglia[J]. AIMS Molecular Science, 2015, 1(1): 22-33. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2015.1.22
| [1] | Yusen Lin . Periodic measures of reaction-diffusion lattice systems driven by superlinear noise. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(1): 35-51. doi: 10.3934/era.2022002 |
| [2] | Xiaoli Wang, Peter Kloeden, Meihua Yang . Asymptotic behaviour of a neural field lattice model with delays. Electronic Research Archive, 2020, 28(2): 1037-1048. doi: 10.3934/era.2020056 |
| [3] | Shuang Wang, FanFan Chen, Chunlian Liu . The existence of periodic solutions for nonconservative superlinear second order ODEs: a rotation number and spiral analysis approach. Electronic Research Archive, 2025, 33(1): 50-67. doi: 10.3934/era.2025003 |
| [4] | Yao Sun, Lijuan He, Bo Chen . Application of neural networks to inverse elastic scattering problems with near-field measurements. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(11): 7000-7020. doi: 10.3934/era.2023355 |
| [5] | Yunhai Wang, Guodong Huang, Rui Zhu, Shu Zhou, Yuan Chai . Response mechanism of heat-sensitive neurons under combined noise stimulation. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(11): 6405-6423. doi: 10.3934/era.2024298 |
| [6] | Meiyu Sui, Yejuan Wang, Peter E. Kloeden . Pullback attractors for stochastic recurrent neural networks with discrete and distributed delays. Electronic Research Archive, 2021, 29(2): 2187-2221. doi: 10.3934/era.2020112 |
| [7] | Qiang Mu . Smash product construction of modular lattice vertex algebras. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(1): 204-220. doi: 10.3934/era.2022011 |
| [8] | Lianbing She, Nan Liu, Xin Li, Renhai Wang . Three types of weak pullback attractors for lattice pseudo-parabolic equations driven by locally Lipschitz noise. Electronic Research Archive, 2021, 29(5): 3097-3119. doi: 10.3934/era.2021028 |
| [9] | Jian Liu, Zhen Yu, Wenyu Guo . The 3D-aware image synthesis of prohibited items in the X-ray security inspection by stylized generative radiance fields. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(3): 1801-1821. doi: 10.3934/era.2024082 |
| [10] | Peng Yu, Shuping Tan, Jin Guo, Yong Song . Data-driven optimal controller design for sub-satellite deployment of tethered satellite system. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(1): 505-522. doi: 10.3934/era.2024025 |
Functionally graded materials (FGM) are an advanced composite material class whose vary gradually and continuously in the composition of microstructure constituents through the dimension of the material [1,2,3]. The behavior composition of FGM reduce the structural weight with increasing its coefficient modulus of stiffness and strength [4,5,6,7,8]. The properties of all constituents can be employed, for example, the toughness of a metal can be mated with the refractoriness of a ceramic, without any compromise in the toughness of the metal side or the refractoriness of the ceramic side [9,10,11,12,13,14]. The simple rule of mixture (Voigt law) is used to obtain the effective micromechanics material properties in the commencement of research papers. But to assess the effect of the micromechanical models on the structural responses of FG plates several micromechanical models of FGMs have been studied in [14,15,16]. Gasik has studied different micromechanical models to obtain the effective material properties of FGMs with power-law, Sigmoid, and exponential function distributions of volume fraction across the thickness of the static, buckling, free and forced vibration analyses for simply-supported FG plates resting on an elastic foundation [17]. Akbarzadeh et al. [18] have investigated about the influences of different forms of micromechanical models on FGM pressurized hollow cylinders. They have used the numerical results via finite element method (FEM) analyses for detailed and homogenized models of functionally graded (FG) carbon nanotube reinforced composite (CNTRC) beams. The effect of the imposed temperature field on the response of the FGM plate composed of Metal and Ceramic with the Mori–Tanaka micromechanical method is discussed [19,20].
Shen et al. [21] have studied the small and large amplitude frequency of vibrations are presented for a functionally graded rectangular plate resting on a two-parameter elastic foundation with two kinds of micromechanics models, namely, Voigt model and Mori–Tanaka model. The comparison studies reveal that the difference between these two models is much less compared to the difference caused by different solution methodologies and plate theories. In literature there is no available work treating the impact of the homogenization models on the sandwich FGM plate. In this paper we have studied the impact of (Reuss, LRVE, Tamura) homogenization or micromechanical models on the axial and shear stress of sandwich functionally graded materials plate subjected to linear and nonlinear thermal loads. The static and elastic behavior of the simply supported is considered. Using an integral higher shear deformation theory (HSDT), the governing partial differential equations are solved in the Cartesian coordinate via Navier solution method. Those Numerous micromechanical models have been examined to attain the effective material properties of the two-phase FGM plate (Metal and ceramic). The numerical results are compared with those given by other model existing in the literature to confirm the accuracy of the (HSDT). The present results are in good agreement with all models studied of homogenization for all values of the material index and all geometry configurations of the FG-sandwich plates.
The geometry domain is assumed as a uniform rectangular plate with thickness "h", length "a", and width "b" as shown in Figure 1. The plate has three layers. The FG-face sheets are made by two materials metal and ceramic.
The mechanical and thermal proprieties of Metal (Titanium) are Young modulus $E\left(z \right)$ is 66.2 GPa, thermal expansion coefficients $\alpha $ is 10.3 (10−6/K). The mechanical and thermal proprieties of Ceramic (Zirconia) are Young modulus $E\left(z \right)$ is 117 GPa, thermal expansion coefficients $\alpha $ is 7.11 (10−6/K). The Poison coefficient is supposed the same in the metal and the ceramic ($\nu $ is 1/3). In the following.
Several types of geometries configurations are exanimated depending the thickness of each layer as shown in Table 1.
| Configurations of the plate | Geometries with Layers thickness |
| (1-0-1) | 
|
| (1-1-1) | |
| (1-2-1) | |
| (2-1-2) | 
|
| (2-2-1) |
DownLoad:
CSV
The volumes fraction of the FG- faces sheet are assumed varies as following functions (Eq 1).
| $ {V^{\left( 1 \right)}} = {\left( {\frac{{z - {h_0}}}{{{h_{1 - }}{h_0}}}} \right)^k}\, \, \, \, \, \, \, z \in \left[ {{h_0}, {h_1}} \right] \\ {V^{\left( 2 \right)}} = 1\, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, z \in \left[ {{h_1}, {h_2}} \right] \\{V^{\left( 3 \right)}} = {\left( {\frac{{z - {h_3}}}{{{h_{2 - }}{h_3}}}} \right)^k}\, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, z \in \left[ {{h_2}, {h_3}} \right] $ | (1) |
Where K is the material index.
A number of micromechanics models have been proposed for the determination of effective properties of FGMs. K is the material index.
(1) Voigt model
The Voigt model is relatively simple; this model is frequently used in most FGM analyses estimates properties of FGMs as:
| $ P\left( {T, z} \right) = {P_c}\left( {T, z} \right)V\left( z \right) + {P_m}\left( {T, z} \right)\left( {1 - V\left( z \right)} \right) $ | (2) |
(2) Reuss model
Reuss assumed the stress uniformity through the material and obtained the effective properties as:
| $ P\left( {T, z} \right) = \frac{{{P_c}\left( {T, z} \right){P_m}\left( {T, z} \right)}}{{{P_c}\left( {T, z} \right)\left( {1 - V\left( z \right)} \right) + {P_m}\left( {T, z} \right)V\left( z \right)}} $ | (3) |
(3) Tamura model
The Tamura model uses actually a linear rule of mixtures, introducing one empirical fitting parameter known as "stress-to-strain transfer". For q = 0 correspond to Reuss rule and with$q = \pm \infty $to the Voigt rule, being invariant to the consideration of with phase is matrix and which is particulate. The effective property is found as:
| $ P\left( {T, z} \right) = \frac{{\left( {1 - V\left( z \right)} \right){P_m}\left( {T, z} \right)\left( {{q_{}} - {P_c}\left( {T, z} \right)} \right) + V\left( z \right){P_c}\left( {T, z} \right)\left( {{q_{}} - {P_m}\left( {T, z} \right)} \right)}}{{\left( {1 - V\left( z \right)} \right)\left( {{q_{}} - {P_c}\left( {T, z} \right)} \right) + V\left( z \right){P_c}\left( {T, z} \right)\left( {q - {P_m}\left( {T, z} \right)} \right)}} \; \text{with} \\ q = \frac{{{\sigma _1} - {\sigma _2}}}{{{\varepsilon _1} - {\varepsilon _2}}} $ | (4) |
(4) Description by a representative volume element (LRVE)
The LRVE is developed based on the assumption that the microstructure of the heterogeneous material is known. The input for the LRVE for the deterministic micromechanical framework is usually volume average or ensemble average of the descriptors of the microstructures.
The effective property is expressed as follows by the LRVE method:
| $ P(T, z) = P_m(T, z)\left(1+\frac{V(z)}{\frac{1}{1-\frac{P_m(T, z)}{P_c(T, z)}}-\sqrt[3]{V(z)}}\right) $ | (5) |
Based on the same assumptions of the conventional HSDT (with fives variables or more). The displacement field of the proposed HSDT is only with four unknowns variables and can be written in a simpler form as:
|
$
\left\{u(x,y,z)=u0(x,y)−z∂w0∂x+k1f(z)∫θ(x,y)dxv(x,y,z)=v0(x,y)−z∂w0∂y+k2f(z)∫θ(x,y)dyw(x,y,z)=w0(x,y) \right.
$
|
(6) |
Where ${u_0}\left({x, y} \right)$, ${v_0}\left({x, y} \right)$, ${w_0}\left({x, y} \right)$, and $\theta \left({x, y} \right)$ are the four-unknown displacement functions of middle surface of the FG-sandwich plate. $f\left(z \right)$ is the warping function and (${k_1}$ and ${k_2}$) are constants.
In the current research work the proposed combined (exponential/hyperbolic) warping function ensures the nullity condition of the free surfaces of the FG-sandwich plate (zero transverse shear stresses at top and the Bottom of the FG-sandwich plate). The present exponential/hyperbolic warping function $f\left(z \right)$ is expressed as:
| $ f\left( z \right) = \left[ {{\text{ln}}\left( {\pi \exp \left( {\frac{1}{{20}}} \right)} \right) - \left( {{{(0.1407)}^{\left( {5/6} \right)}}} \right){\text{cosh}}\left( {\pi z} \right)} \right]z $ | (7) |
The stresses/strains linear relation of the PFG-sandwich plate can be expressed as:
|
$ {\left\{ {σxσyτxyτyzτxz } \right\}^{(n)}} = {\left[ {C11C12000C12C2200000C6600000C4400000C55 } \right]^{(n)}}{\left\{ {εx−αTεy−αTγxyγyzγxz } \right\}^{(n)}} $
|
(8) |
Where
|
$
\left\{C(n)11=C(n)22=E(n)(z)1−(v(n))2C(n)11=v(n)C(n)11C(n)44=C(n)55=C(n)66=E(n)(z)2(1+v(n)), \right.
$
|
(9) |
The variation of the temperature field across the thicness is assumed to be:
| $ T(x, y, z) = T_1(x, y)+\frac{z}{h} T_2(x, y)+\frac{\Psi(z)}{h} T_3(x, y) $ | (10) |
Where
| $ \Psi(z) = \frac{h}{\pi} \sin \left(\frac{\pi z}{h}\right) $ | (11) |
The principle of virtual works of the considered PFG-sandwich plates is expressed as $\delta {\text{ }}U + \delta {\text{ }}V = 0$ where $ \delta U $is the variation of strain energy; and $ \delta V $ is the variation of the virtual work done by external load applied to the plate. The governing equations can be obtained as follows:
|
$
{δu0:∂Nx∂x+∂Nxy∂y=0δv0:∂Nxy∂x+∂Ny∂y=0δw0:∂2Mbx∂x2+2∂2Mbxy∂x∂y+∂2Mby∂y2=0δθ:−k1Msx−k2Msy−(k1A′+k2B′)∂2Msxy∂x∂y+k1A′∂Ssxz∂x+k2B′∂Ssyz∂y=0
$
|
(12) |
Based on the Navier method, the following expansions of displacements are
|
$
\left\{u0v0w0θ \right\} = \left\{Ucos(αx)sin(βy)Vsin(αx)cos(βy)Wsin(αx)sin(βy)Xsin(αx)sin(βy) \right\}
$
|
(13) |
where ($U$, $V$, $W$, $X$) are unknown functions to be determined and $ \alpha = \pi /a $ and $\beta = \pi /b$.
In the present work, the transverse temperature loads T1, T2, and T3 in double sinus series form as:
|
$
\left\{T1T2T3 \right\} = \left\{ˉT1ˉT2ˉT3 \right\} \sin (\alpha x) \sin (\beta y)
$
|
(14) |
The closed-form solution can be written as following matrix form:
|
$
\left[S11S12S13S14S12S22S23S24S13S23S33S34S14S24S34S44 \right]\left\{UVWX \right\} = \left\{P1P2P3P4 \right\}
$
|
(15) |
Where
|
$
\left\{S11=−(A11α2+A66β2)S12=−αβ(A12+A66)S13=α(B11α2+B12β2+2B66β2)S14=α(k1Bs11+k2Bs12−(k1A′+k2B′)Bs66β2)S22=−(A66α2+A22β2)S23=β(B22β2+B12α2+2B66α2)S24=β(k2Bs22+k1Bs12−(k1A′+k2B′)Bs66α2)S33=−(D11α4+2(D12+2D66)α2β2+D22β4)S34=−k1(Ds11α2+Ds12β2)+2(k1A′+k2B′)Ds66α2β2−k2(Ds22β2+Ds12α2)S44=−k1(Hs11k1+Hs12k2)−(k1A′+k2B′)2Hs66α2β2−k2(Hs12k1+Hs22k2)−(k1A′)2As55α2−(k2B′)2As44β2 \right.
$
|
(16) |
And
|
$
\left\{P1=α(ATT1+BTT2+aBTT3)P2=β(ATT1+BTT2+aBTT3)P3=−h(α2+β2)(BTT1+DTT2+aDTT3)P4=−h(α2+β2)(sBTT1+sDTT2+sFTT3) \right.
$
|
(17) |
Where and $ ({L^T}, {}^a{L^T}, {R^T}) $ are coefficients calculated by integral summation formulations, in which $ \bar z = z/h, \bar f(z) = f(z)/h{\text{ and }}\bar \psi (z) = \psi (z)/h $.
In the following three sections, the results have been presented.
A comparison has been done to verify the accuracy of the present theory of different models of homogenization (Reuss, Tamura and LRVE). Results are compared with the mixture model (Voigt) using by Zankour and Algamidi [22].
The dimensionless transverse and normal stress are expressed as:
|
$
\left\{ˉσx=h2α0ˉT2E0a2σx(a2,b2,h2)ˉτxz=10hα0ˉT2E0aτxz(0,b2,0) \right.
$
|
(18) |
with ${E_0} = 1{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} GPa$ and ${\alpha _0} = {10^6}{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} K$.
Table 2 presents the variation of dimensionless axial stress "${\bar \sigma _x}$" of the square FG-sandwich plate subjected to linearly thermal load "${T_3} = 0$" versus volumes fractions (material index "$k$") for different values of layer thickness ratio. It is remarkable that there is a proportional relationship between the index "$k$" the dimensionless normal stress "${\bar \sigma _x}$".
| k | Theory | ${\bar \sigma _x}$ | |||||
| 1-0-1 | 1-1-1 | 1-2-1 | 2-1-2 | 2-2-1 | |||
| 0 | Zankour | Voigt | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 |
| Present | Reuss | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | |
| LRVE | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | ||
| Tamura | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | ||
| 1 | Zenkour | Voigt | −1.993962994 | −2.144483622 | −2.262070783 | −2.071720141 | −2.276270538 |
| Present | Reuss | −2.054001279 | −2.206426851 | −2.319985581 | −2.133961897 | −2.328859434 | |
| LRVE | −2.019721781 | −2.170723580 | −2.286705796 | −2.098127768 | −2.298783479 | ||
| Tamura | −2.054001279 | −2.206426851 | −2.319985581 | −2.133961897 | −2.328859434 | ||
| 3 | Zenkour | Voigt | −1.764722947 | −1.912070024 | −2.065545648 | −1.830280890 | −2.099358095 |
| Present | Reuss | −1.780352582 | −1.937106476 | −2.093543390 | −1.851668884 | −2.122979641 | |
| LRVE | −1.772412913 | −1.923584710 | −2.078438949 | −1.840257943 | −2.110349605 | ||
| Tamura | −1.780352582 | −1.937106476 | −2.093543390 | −1.851668884 | −2.122979641 | ||
| 5 | Zenkour | Voigt | −1.726018586 | −1.851951252 | −2.008943548 | −1.775782946 | −2.052753400 |
| Present | Reuss | −1.731998461 | −1.865654772 | −2.025948107 | −1.786255940 | −2.066835810 | |
| LRVE | −1.729130531 | −1.858346729 | −2.016889735 | −1.780777417 | −2.059428200 | ||
| Tamura | −1.731998461 | −1.865654772 | −2.025948107 | −1.786255940 | −2.066835810 | ||
DownLoad:
CSV
The Table 3 presents the variation of the dimensionless shear stress "${\bar \tau _{xz}}$" of the square FG-sandwich plate subjected to nonlinearly thermal load "${T_3} = - 100$" versus volumes fractions (material index "$k$") for different values of layer thickness ratio.from the Table 3 the shear stress "${\bar \tau _{xz}}$" and the index $k$ have direct relation. We can see from the Tables 2 and 3 that the present results are in good agreement with all models studied of homogenization (Voigt Zenkour et al. [22], Reuss, LRVE and Tamura) for all values of the material index "$k$" and all configurations of the FG-sandwich plate (1-0-1, 1-1-1, 1-2-1, 2-1-2 and 2-2-1).
| k | Theory | ${\bar \tau _{xz}}$ | |||||
| 1-0-1 | 1-1-1 | 1-2-1 | 2-1-2 | 2-2-1 | |||
| 0 | Zenkour | Voigt | 0.4146850492 | 0.4146850448 | 0.4146850391 | 0.4146850437 | 0.4146850439 |
| Present | Reuss | 0.4146850492 | 0.4146850448 | 0.4146850391 | 0.4146850437 | 0.4146850439 | |
| LRVE | 0.4146850492 | 0.4146850448 | 0.4146850391 | 0.4146850437 | 0.4146850439 | ||
| Tamura | 0.4146850492 | 0.4146850448 | 0.4146850391 | 0.4146850437 | 0.4146850439 | ||
| 1 | Zenkour | Voigt | 0.5088666494 | 0.5057769569 | 0.5120235930 | 0.5028076163 | 0.5078946003 |
| Present | Reuss | 0.5136021296 | 0.4984428129 | 0.4996166330 | 0.4989271190 | 0.4972491537 | |
| LRVE | 0.5087063178 | 0.5006052702 | 0.5045310781 | 0.4991788650 | 0.4946850439 | ||
| Tamura | 0.5136021296 | 0.4984428129 | 0.4996166330 | 0.4989271190 | 0.4972491537 | ||
| 3 | Zenkour | Voigt | 0.5103204312 | 0.5033093833 | 0.5165886526 | 0.4976909215 | 0.5100386919 |
| Present | Reuss | 0.5238780098 | 0.5054862362 | 0.5169250930 | 0.5015862328 | 0.5102636411 | |
| LRVE | 0.5156350522 | 0.5037663327 | 0.5159615534 | 0.4988965994 | 0.5012769094 | ||
| Tamura | 0.5238780098 | 0.5054862362 | 0.5169250930 | 0.5015862328 | 0.5102636411 | ||
| 5 | Zenkour | Voigt | 0.5212843911 | 0.4908722755 | 0.5036863726 | 0.4852538506 | 0.5661515630 |
| Present | Reuss | 0.5357072550 | 0.4919895199 | 0.5166537262 | 0.4878864038 | 0.5084226158 | |
| LRVE | 0.5281264494 | 0.4913047274 | 0.5153580228 | 0.4862334163 | 0.5071304901 | ||
| Tamura | 0.5357072550 | 0.4919895199 | 0.5166537262 | 0.4878864038 | 0.5084226158 | ||
DownLoad:
CSV
In this section, the parametric studies are presented in the explicit graphs form. Figure 2 plots the variation of the axial stress "${\bar \sigma _x}$" across the total thickness "$h$" of FG-sandwich plate ($k = 1$) under linear thermal loads "${T_3} = 0$" with different micromechanical models. From the plotted graphs, it is clear that the compressive stresses are obtained at the top of the plate. We can see that the present results are in good agreement with different models Voigt, Reuss, LRVE and Tamura for configurations of the FG-sandwich plate (1-0-1, 1-2-1 and 2-2-1) and the material index $k = 1$ (Figure 2a–c).
Figure 3 illustrates the variation of the "${\bar \tau _{xz}}$" through the total thickness of the 1-0-1, 1-2-1 and 2-2-1 FG-sandwich plate under linear thermal loads "${T_3} = 0$". It is noted that the shear stress "${\bar \tau _{xz}}$" is parabolically varied through the total thickness of the FG-sandwich plate. We can see that the present results are in good agreement with different models Voigt, Reuss, LRVE and Tamura for configurations of the FG-sandwich plate (1-0-1, 1-2-1 and 2-2-1) and the material index $k = 1$(Figure 3a–c).
In the present section three types of the temperature distribution across the thickness are considered. The first one, the temperature is linearly distributed through the thickness $T = z{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {T_2}$, in the second type the temperatures vary nonlinearly across $h$ ($T = z{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {T_2} + \psi (z){\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {T_3}$) and the third type is reserved for a combination of linear and nonlinear distributions $ T(z) = {T_1} + (z/h){T_2} + (\Psi (z)/h){T_3} $.
Figure 4a shows the distributions of the axial stress "${\bar \sigma _x}$" through the total thickness of the simply supported 2-2-1 FG-sandwich plate for various values of the thermal load ($ {T_1} = 100 $), $ {T_2} = 100 $ and $ {T_3} = 100 $ with ($k = 1$). From the plotted curves, it can be observed that the axial stress "${\bar \sigma _x}$" is c influenced by the values of the thermal load.
Figure 4b plot the variation of the shear stress "${\bar \tau _{xz}}$" through the thickness $h$ of the 2-2-1 square FG-sandwich plate ($k = 1$). For different values of the thermal load ($ {T_1} = 100 $), $ {T_2} = 100 $ and $ {T_3} = 100 $. It can be noted from the graphs that the shear stress "${\bar \tau _{xz}}$" has a parabolic variation through the thickness. The maximal values of the shear stress "${\bar \tau _{xz}}$" are obtained at the mid-plane axis "$\overline z = 0$". And it is clearly influenced by the values of the thermal load.
In this investigation, the impact of (Reuss, LRVE, Tamura) homogenization or micromechanical models on the axial and shear stress of sandwich functionally graded materials plate subjected to linear and nonlinear thermal loads have studied. The static and elastic behavior of the simply supported is considered. Using an integral higher shear deformation theory (HSDT), the governing partial differential equations are solved in the Cartesian coordinate via Navier solution method. Those Numerous micromechanical models have been examined to attain the effective material properties of the two-phase FGM plate (Metal and ceramic). The numerical results are compared with those given by other model existing in the literature to confirm the accuracy of the (HSDT). The present results are in good agreement with all models studied of homogenization for all values of the material index and all geometry configurations of the FG-sandwich plates.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support provided by University of Sidi Bel Abbes, Algeria while the preparation of the doctorate thesis.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
| [1] |
Maceyka M, Harikumar KB, Milstien S, et al. (2012) Sphingosine-1-phosphate signaling and its role in disease. Trends Cell Biol 22: 50-60. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2011.09.003
|
| [2] |
Pitson SM (2011) Regulation of sphingosine kinase and sphingolipid signaling. Trends Biochem Sci 36: 97-107. doi: 10.1016/j.tibs.2010.08.001
|
| [3] |
Mizugishi K, Yamashita T, Olivera A, et al. (2005) Essential role for sphingosine kinases in neural and vascular development. Mol Cell Biol 25: 11113-11121. doi: 10.1128/MCB.25.24.11113-11121.2005
|
| [4] |
Chan H, Pitson SM (2013) Post-translational regulation of sphingosine kinases. Biochim Biophys Acta 1831: 147-156. doi: 10.1016/j.bbalip.2012.07.005
|
| [5] |
Baker DA, Barth J, Chang R, et al. (2010) Genetic sphingosine kinase 1 deficiency significantly decreases synovial inflammation and joint erosions in murine TNF-alpha-induced arthritis. J Immunol 185: 2570-2579. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1000644
|
| [6] |
Toman RE, Payne SG, Watterson KR, et al. (2004) Differential transactivation of sphingosine-1-phosphate receptors modulates NGF-induced neurite extension. J Cell Biol 166: 381-392. doi: 10.1083/jcb.200402016
|
| [7] |
Zhang YH, Vasko MR, Nicol GD (2006) Intracellular sphingosine 1-phosphate mediates the increased excitability produced by nerve growth factor in rat sensory neurons. J Physiol 575: 101-113. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2006.111575
|
| [8] |
Zhang YH, Fehrenbacher JC, Vasko MR, et al. (2006) Sphingosine-1-phosphate via activation of a G-protein-coupled receptor(s) enhances the excitability of rat sensory neurons. J Neurophysiol 96: 1042-1052. doi: 10.1152/jn.00120.2006
|
| [9] | He XH, Zang Y, Chen X, et al. (2010) TNF-alpha contributes to up-regulation of Nav1.3 and Nav1.8 in DRG neurons following motor fiber injury. Pain 151: 266-279. |
| [10] |
Hokfelt T, Brumovsky P, Shi T, et al. (2007) NPY and pain as seen from the histochemical side. Peptides 28: 365-372. doi: 10.1016/j.peptides.2006.07.024
|
| [11] |
Mair N, Benetti C, Andratsch M, et al. (2011) Genetic evidence for involvement of neuronally expressed S1P(1) receptor in nociceptor sensitization and inflammatory pain. PLoS One 6: e17268. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017268
|
| [12] |
Camprubi-Robles M, Mair N, Andratsch M, et al. (2013) Sphingosine-1-phosphate-induced nociceptor excitation and ongoing pain behavior in mice and humans is largely mediated by S1P3 receptor. J Neurosci 33: 2582-2592. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4479-12.2013
|
| [13] |
Salvemini D, Doyle T, Kress M, et al. (2013) Therapeutic targeting of the ceramide-to-sphingosine 1-phosphate pathway in pain. Trends Pharmacol Sci 34: 110-118. doi: 10.1016/j.tips.2012.12.001
|
| [14] |
Allende ML, Sasaki T, Kawai H, et al. (2004) Mice deficient in sphingosine kinase 1 are rendered lymphopenic by FTY720. J Biol Chem 279: 52487-52492. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M406512200
|
| [15] |
Pitman MR, Pham DH, Pitson SM (2012) Isoform-selective assays for sphingosine kinase activity. Methods Mol Biol 874: 21-31. doi: 10.1007/978-1-61779-800-9_2
|
| [16] |
Hargreaves K, Dubner R, Brown F, et al. (1988) A new and sensitive method for measuring thermal nociception in cutaneous hyperalgesia. Pain 32: 77-88. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(88)90026-7
|
| [17] |
Xie W, Strong JA, Kays J, et al. (2012) Knockdown of the sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor S1PR1 reduces pain behaviors induced by local inflammation of the rat sensory ganglion. Neurosci Lett 515: 61-65. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2012.03.019
|
| [18] |
Coste O, Pierre S, Marian C, et al. (2008) Antinociceptive activity of the S1P-receptor agonist FTY720. J Cell Mol Med 12: 995-1004. doi: 10.1111/j.1582-4934.2008.00160.x
|
| [19] |
Meng H, Yuan Y, Lee VM (2011) Loss of sphingosine kinase 1/S1P signaling impairs cell growth and survival of neurons and progenitor cells in the developing sensory ganglia. PLoS One 6: e27150. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027150
|
| [20] |
Pollock J, McFarlane SM, Connell MC, et al. (2002) TNF-alpha receptors simultaneously activate Ca2+ mobilisation and stress kinases in cultured sensory neurones. Neuropharmacology 42: 93-106. doi: 10.1016/S0028-3908(01)00163-0
|
| [21] | Nicol GD (2008) Nerve growth factor, sphingomyelins, and sensitization in sensory neurons. Sheng Li Xue Bao 60: 603-604. |
| [22] |
Blondeau N, Lai Y, Tyndall S, et al. (2007) Distribution of sphingosine kinase activity and mRNA in rodent brain. J Neurochem 103: 509-517. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-4159.2007.04755.x
|
| [23] |
Li Y, Ji A, Weihe E, et al. (2004) Cell-specific expression and lipopolysaccharide-induced regulation of tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha) and TNF receptors in rat dorsal root ganglion. J Neurosci 24: 9623-9631. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2392-04.2004
|
| [24] | Ji RR, Zhang X, Wiesenfeld-Hallin Z, et al. (1994) Expression of neuropeptide Y and neuropeptide Y (Y1) receptor mRNA in rat spinal cord and dorsal root ganglia following peripheral tissue inflammation. J Neurosci 14: 6423-6434. |
| [25] |
Kubicek L, Kopacik R, Klusakova I, et al. (2010) Alterations in the vascular architecture of the dorsal root ganglia in a rat neuropathic pain model. Ann Anat 192: 101-106. doi: 10.1016/j.aanat.2010.01.005
|
| [26] |
Nayak D, Huo Y, Kwang WX, et al. (2010) Sphingosine kinase 1 regulates the expression of proinflammatory cytokines and nitric oxide in activated microglia. Neuroscience 166: 132-144. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2009.12.020
|
| [27] |
Grin'kina NM, Karnabi EE, Damania D, et al. (2012) Sphingosine kinase 1 deficiency exacerbates LPS-induced neuroinflammation. PLoS One 7: e36475. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0036475
|
| [28] |
Michaud J, Kohno M, Proia RL, et al. (2006) Normal acute and chronic inflammatory responses in sphingosine kinase 1 knockout mice. FEBS Lett 580: 4607-4612. doi: 10.1016/j.febslet.2006.07.035
|
Dimitra Beroukas, Maurice Selhorst, Stuart M. Pitson, Dusan Matusica, Ian L. Gibbins, Michaela Kress, Rainer V. Haberberger. Sphingosine kinase 1 in murine dorsal root ganglia[J]. AIMS Molecular Science, 2015, 1(1): 22-33. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2015.1.22
| Configurations of the plate | Geometries with Layers thickness |
| (1-0-1) |
|
| (1-1-1) | |
| (1-2-1) | |
| (2-1-2) |
|
| (2-2-1) |
DownLoad:
CSV
| k | Theory | ${\bar \sigma _x}$ | |||||
| 1-0-1 | 1-1-1 | 1-2-1 | 2-1-2 | 2-2-1 | |||
| 0 | Zankour | Voigt | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 |
| Present | Reuss | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | |
| LRVE | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | ||
| Tamura | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | ||
| 1 | Zenkour | Voigt | −1.993962994 | −2.144483622 | −2.262070783 | −2.071720141 | −2.276270538 |
| Present | Reuss | −2.054001279 | −2.206426851 | −2.319985581 | −2.133961897 | −2.328859434 | |
| LRVE | −2.019721781 | −2.170723580 | −2.286705796 | −2.098127768 | −2.298783479 | ||
| Tamura | −2.054001279 | −2.206426851 | −2.319985581 | −2.133961897 | −2.328859434 | ||
| 3 | Zenkour | Voigt | −1.764722947 | −1.912070024 | −2.065545648 | −1.830280890 | −2.099358095 |
| Present | Reuss | −1.780352582 | −1.937106476 | −2.093543390 | −1.851668884 | −2.122979641 | |
| LRVE | −1.772412913 | −1.923584710 | −2.078438949 | −1.840257943 | −2.110349605 | ||
| Tamura | −1.780352582 | −1.937106476 | −2.093543390 | −1.851668884 | −2.122979641 | ||
| 5 | Zenkour | Voigt | −1.726018586 | −1.851951252 | −2.008943548 | −1.775782946 | −2.052753400 |
| Present | Reuss | −1.731998461 | −1.865654772 | −2.025948107 | −1.786255940 | −2.066835810 | |
| LRVE | −1.729130531 | −1.858346729 | −2.016889735 | −1.780777417 | −2.059428200 | ||
| Tamura | −1.731998461 | −1.865654772 | −2.025948107 | −1.786255940 | −2.066835810 | ||
DownLoad:
CSV
| k | Theory | ${\bar \tau _{xz}}$ | |||||
| 1-0-1 | 1-1-1 | 1-2-1 | 2-1-2 | 2-2-1 | |||
| 0 | Zenkour | Voigt | 0.4146850492 | 0.4146850448 | 0.4146850391 | 0.4146850437 | 0.4146850439 |
| Present | Reuss | 0.4146850492 | 0.4146850448 | 0.4146850391 | 0.4146850437 | 0.4146850439 | |
| LRVE | 0.4146850492 | 0.4146850448 | 0.4146850391 | 0.4146850437 | 0.4146850439 | ||
| Tamura | 0.4146850492 | 0.4146850448 | 0.4146850391 | 0.4146850437 | 0.4146850439 | ||
| 1 | Zenkour | Voigt | 0.5088666494 | 0.5057769569 | 0.5120235930 | 0.5028076163 | 0.5078946003 |
| Present | Reuss | 0.5136021296 | 0.4984428129 | 0.4996166330 | 0.4989271190 | 0.4972491537 | |
| LRVE | 0.5087063178 | 0.5006052702 | 0.5045310781 | 0.4991788650 | 0.4946850439 | ||
| Tamura | 0.5136021296 | 0.4984428129 | 0.4996166330 | 0.4989271190 | 0.4972491537 | ||
| 3 | Zenkour | Voigt | 0.5103204312 | 0.5033093833 | 0.5165886526 | 0.4976909215 | 0.5100386919 |
| Present | Reuss | 0.5238780098 | 0.5054862362 | 0.5169250930 | 0.5015862328 | 0.5102636411 | |
| LRVE | 0.5156350522 | 0.5037663327 | 0.5159615534 | 0.4988965994 | 0.5012769094 | ||
| Tamura | 0.5238780098 | 0.5054862362 | 0.5169250930 | 0.5015862328 | 0.5102636411 | ||
| 5 | Zenkour | Voigt | 0.5212843911 | 0.4908722755 | 0.5036863726 | 0.4852538506 | 0.5661515630 |
| Present | Reuss | 0.5357072550 | 0.4919895199 | 0.5166537262 | 0.4878864038 | 0.5084226158 | |
| LRVE | 0.5281264494 | 0.4913047274 | 0.5153580228 | 0.4862334163 | 0.5071304901 | ||
| Tamura | 0.5357072550 | 0.4919895199 | 0.5166537262 | 0.4878864038 | 0.5084226158 | ||
DownLoad:
CSV
| Configurations of the plate | Geometries with Layers thickness |
| (1-0-1) |
|
| (1-1-1) | |
| (1-2-1) | |
| (2-1-2) |
|
| (2-2-1) |
| k | Theory | ${\bar \sigma _x}$ | |||||
| 1-0-1 | 1-1-1 | 1-2-1 | 2-1-2 | 2-2-1 | |||
| 0 | Zankour | Voigt | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 |
| Present | Reuss | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | |
| LRVE | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | ||
| Tamura | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | −2.079675000 | ||
| 1 | Zenkour | Voigt | −1.993962994 | −2.144483622 | −2.262070783 | −2.071720141 | −2.276270538 |
| Present | Reuss | −2.054001279 | −2.206426851 | −2.319985581 | −2.133961897 | −2.328859434 | |
| LRVE | −2.019721781 | −2.170723580 | −2.286705796 | −2.098127768 | −2.298783479 | ||
| Tamura | −2.054001279 | −2.206426851 | −2.319985581 | −2.133961897 | −2.328859434 | ||
| 3 | Zenkour | Voigt | −1.764722947 | −1.912070024 | −2.065545648 | −1.830280890 | −2.099358095 |
| Present | Reuss | −1.780352582 | −1.937106476 | −2.093543390 | −1.851668884 | −2.122979641 | |
| LRVE | −1.772412913 | −1.923584710 | −2.078438949 | −1.840257943 | −2.110349605 | ||
| Tamura | −1.780352582 | −1.937106476 | −2.093543390 | −1.851668884 | −2.122979641 | ||
| 5 | Zenkour | Voigt | −1.726018586 | −1.851951252 | −2.008943548 | −1.775782946 | −2.052753400 |
| Present | Reuss | −1.731998461 | −1.865654772 | −2.025948107 | −1.786255940 | −2.066835810 | |
| LRVE | −1.729130531 | −1.858346729 | −2.016889735 | −1.780777417 | −2.059428200 | ||
| Tamura | −1.731998461 | −1.865654772 | −2.025948107 | −1.786255940 | −2.066835810 | ||
| k | Theory | ${\bar \tau _{xz}}$ | |||||
| 1-0-1 | 1-1-1 | 1-2-1 | 2-1-2 | 2-2-1 | |||
| 0 | Zenkour | Voigt | 0.4146850492 | 0.4146850448 | 0.4146850391 | 0.4146850437 | 0.4146850439 |
| Present | Reuss | 0.4146850492 | 0.4146850448 | 0.4146850391 | 0.4146850437 | 0.4146850439 | |
| LRVE | 0.4146850492 | 0.4146850448 | 0.4146850391 | 0.4146850437 | 0.4146850439 | ||
| Tamura | 0.4146850492 | 0.4146850448 | 0.4146850391 | 0.4146850437 | 0.4146850439 | ||
| 1 | Zenkour | Voigt | 0.5088666494 | 0.5057769569 | 0.5120235930 | 0.5028076163 | 0.5078946003 |
| Present | Reuss | 0.5136021296 | 0.4984428129 | 0.4996166330 | 0.4989271190 | 0.4972491537 | |
| LRVE | 0.5087063178 | 0.5006052702 | 0.5045310781 | 0.4991788650 | 0.4946850439 | ||
| Tamura | 0.5136021296 | 0.4984428129 | 0.4996166330 | 0.4989271190 | 0.4972491537 | ||
| 3 | Zenkour | Voigt | 0.5103204312 | 0.5033093833 | 0.5165886526 | 0.4976909215 | 0.5100386919 |
| Present | Reuss | 0.5238780098 | 0.5054862362 | 0.5169250930 | 0.5015862328 | 0.5102636411 | |
| LRVE | 0.5156350522 | 0.5037663327 | 0.5159615534 | 0.4988965994 | 0.5012769094 | ||
| Tamura | 0.5238780098 | 0.5054862362 | 0.5169250930 | 0.5015862328 | 0.5102636411 | ||
| 5 | Zenkour | Voigt | 0.5212843911 | 0.4908722755 | 0.5036863726 | 0.4852538506 | 0.5661515630 |
| Present | Reuss | 0.5357072550 | 0.4919895199 | 0.5166537262 | 0.4878864038 | 0.5084226158 | |
| LRVE | 0.5281264494 | 0.4913047274 | 0.5153580228 | 0.4862334163 | 0.5071304901 | ||
| Tamura | 0.5357072550 | 0.4919895199 | 0.5166537262 | 0.4878864038 | 0.5084226158 | ||
