Past exam of the mathematical mechanical biology course of the University of Oxford / 2023 / 1 (Rod mechanics)

The material frame of a rod obeys the director kinematics of a rodIn the stress-free reference configuration, the constitutive equation gives $u_1=0$, $u_2=\hat{u}$, and $u_3=0$, since all three stiffnesses are positive. Thus $\mathbf{u}=\hat{u}{\mathbf{d}}_2$. Its cross product with ${\mathbf{d}}_2$ vanishes, soConsequently this director is a fixed vector in space, even though the other two directors rotate along the elastic rod.

The right-handed material frame of a rod has ${\mathbf{d}}_2\times {\mathbf{d}}_1=-{\mathbf{d}}_3$ and ${\mathbf{d}}_2\times {\mathbf{d}}_3={\mathbf{d}}_1$. Hence the director kinematics of a rod reduce toSolving these constant-coefficient ordinary differential equations with the given initial frame givesThe inextensible rod has ${\mathbf{r}}^{\prime }={\mathbf{d}}_3$. An integration using $\mathbf{r}(0)=0$ yields, for $\hat{u}\ne 0$,Indeed,so the centreline is a circular arc of radius $1/|\hat{u}|$ in the plane perpendicular to ${\mathbf{e}}_2$. The continuous $\hat{u}\to 0$ limit is ${\mathbf{d}}_1={\mathbf{e}}_1$, ${\mathbf{d}}_3={\mathbf{e}}_3$, and $\mathbf{r}=S{\mathbf{e}}_3$.

The second moment of area about an axis weights each element of cross-sectional area by its squared perpendicular distance from that axis. The ellipse extends farther along ${\mathbf{d}}_2$ than along ${\mathbf{d}}_1$, so its material lies, on balance, farther from the ${\mathbf{d}}_1$ axis. ThereforeWith zero intrinsic curvature of an elastic filament, the respective bending moments required by the constitutive equation are $E{I}_1\kappa {\mathbf{d}}_1$ and $E{I}_2\kappa {\mathbf{d}}_2$. Thus their magnitudes satisfyfor $\kappa \ne 0$: bending about the minor axis is harder. Here $E$ is Young's modulus, and $E{I}_i$ is the corresponding bending stiffness.

Zero applied end force and the force balance ${\mathbf{n}}^{\prime }=0$ imply $\mathbf{n}(S)=0$ everywhere. The moment balance then reduces to ${\mathbf{m}}^{\prime }=0$.

Choose an untwisted straight configuration: all three directors are constant, ${\mathbf{r}}^{\prime }={\mathbf{d}}_3$, and $\mathbf{u}=0$. The constitutive equation giveswhich is constant in space and therefore satisfies the moment balance. The required end bending moment is consequentlyIts sign opposes the positive intrinsic curvature of an elastic filament. If the initial position and frame from part (ii) are retained, this solution is simply $\mathbf{r}(S)=S{\mathbf{e}}_3$ with ${\mathbf{d}}_i={\mathbf{e}}_i$; the clamp supplies the opposite reaction moment at the other end.

Because the two elastic rods each have thickness $a$, their centrelines are separated by $a$ along the common director ${\mathbf{d}}_1$. The bonded geometry isDifferentiate with respect to reference arc length. The first rod is an inextensible rod, and the printed director kinematics of a rod giveFor the physically admissible orientation-preserving configuration $1-au>0$, the rods have the same unit tangent ${\mathbf{d}}_3^{+}={\mathbf{d}}_3$ and the same planar material frame of a rod. ThereforeIn particular, the second rod is shortened on the inside of a bend with $u>0$.

The bending strain of a rod is defined here by differentiation with respect to reference arc length. Since the reference labels match,The distinction from spatial curvature matters: the second centreline hasThus $u/(1-au)$ is its signed spatial curvature, rather than the $u^{+}$ appearing in the given elastic energy.

The first term is the bending energy of rod 1, whose preferred bending strain of a rod is zero. The second is the bending energy of rod 2 relative to its preferred intrinsic curvature of an elastic filament $\hat{u}$. The third is its stretching energy, with stretching stiffness $k{B}_2$ and stress-free stretch ratio ${\alpha }^{+}=1$. Each term is an energy per unit reference arc length before integration.

Substitute $u^{+}=u$ and ${\alpha }^{+}-1=-au$. The resulting quadratic function of $u$ has densityThere are no derivatives of $u$ or imposed end constraints in this minimum potential energy principle in elasticity. Sincethe unique pointwise minimizer is also the constant global minimizer:For example, completing the square giveswhich also proves uniqueness, up to equality almost everywhere, without merely assuming a uniform curvature.

With $k$, $a$ and $\hat{u}$ fixed, the two limits areIn the first limit, rod 1 dominates the bending energy and suppresses the bend. In the second, rod 1 offers negligible bending resistance, but following rod 2's preferred bending strain of a rod still shortens rod 2 through the bonded geometry. The competition between its bending energy and stretching energy leaves $u_{\ast }<\hat{u}$ when $\hat{u}>0$ and $k{a}^2>0$. Only when that stretching penalty also vanishes does $u_{\ast }\to \hat{u}$.

These formulae describe an admissible bonded elastic rod provided $1-a{u}_{\ast }>0$. If parameters instead force $a{u}_{\ast }\ge 1$, the unconstrained quadratic minimizer is outside the kinematic regime of the model; the given energy does not itself enforce positive stretch ratio.