Mathematical Foundations

of Continuum Mechanics
Katharina Brazda
DIANA seminar talk on March 30, 2012

Abstract
Continuum mechanics deals with the motion, the deformation, and the interaction
of continuous bodies which possess certain material properties. I will discuss various
approaches towards a correct mathematical formulation of these physical concepts
in the sense of including all that can possibly be imagined by an engineer but
excluding all that can be dreamt up only by an ingenious mathematician.1

0 Introduction
0.1 Continuum mechanics
Description of
1. Geometry and Kinematics (motion)
2. Dynamics (force)
3. Material Properties (constitutive equation)
of continuous bodies in terms of field equations.

Continuum hypothesis: Neglect molecular or atomistic structure of materials.

Some literature:

[1] Antman, Nonlinear problems of elasticity, 2005.

[6] Ciarlet, Mathematical elasticity, 1988.
[16] Marsden & Hughes, Mathematical foundations of elasticity, 1983.
[21] Truesdell & Noll, The non-linear field theories of mechanics, 1965.

1
[19] Noll & Virga 1988.

1
0.2 Example: Field equations of nonlinear hyperelasticity
Second-order quasilinear system of PDEs. Material representation.
Equation of motion:
(X) (X, t) div T (X, t) = f (X, t)

Constitutive equation:
T (X, t) = D W (X, (X, t))

Initial conditions:
(., t0 ), (., t0 )

Boundary conditions:

[t0 ,t1 ]
, T n [t0 ,t1 ]
d

for B = d n (disjoint union) with unit normal .

(X, t) B [t0 , t1 ] R3 R classical spacetime

: B [t0 , t1 ] R3 motion
: B R+ reference (mass) density
T : B [t0 , t1 ] R33 stress tensor
f : B [t0 , t1 ] R3 force density
W : B R33 R internal energy density

0.3 Question
What is the correct class of sets / functions for
1. B, geometry and kinematics
2. f , T dynamics
3. , W material properties
allowing for derivation, formulation, and analysis of the field equations?

mathematically precise, physically natural, conceptually simple ([1] Antman), includ-

ing all that can possibly be imagined by an engineer but excluding all that can be dreamt up
only by an ingenious mathematician ([19] Noll & Virga 1988).

Remark: The mathematical treatment of the axioms of physics is Hilberts Sixth Prob-
lem ([13] Hilbert 1902).

2
0.4 Towards a definition of a continuous body
Physicists define a continuous body as a set that
(i) can occupy regions in space,

(ii) has volume, mass as well as other physical properties, and can sustain forces.
(i) model a continuous body as a topological space that can be mapped homeomor-
phically to regions in R3 ; identify the body with a region B R3 which it occupies
at some reference time t0 R and describe the evolution of the body via the motion
: B [t0 , t1 ] R3 (see 1).

(ii) a continuous body should be measurable in some sense:

Volume:
vol(B) = vol((B, t)) <
(with vol = dX = dx = L (3) denoting the (3-dimensional) Lebesgue measure).

Mass (see 0.5): Z

m(B) = (X) dX <
B
R
(which, by conservation of mass, is equal to m((B, t)) = (B,t)
s (x, t) dx with s
the spatial representation of density).

Similarly there exist measures and corresponding densities describing other physical
properties and forces (see 3, 2).

Denote the set of all bodies/regions B by B (see 1).

0.5 Density via measure theory

It is physically reasonable to assume that

m is a positive outer measure on B, and

m L , i.e. mass is absolutely continuous with respect to Lebesgue measure,

since [this follows from the natural assumptions that] for all A, B, Bk B

m() = 0 [the empty body has zero mass], m(B) 0 [massSis nonnegative],
P AB
m(A) m(B) [parts of bodies have smaller mass], m( k Bk ) = k m(Bk ) for
disjoint Bk [the total mass is obtained by adding masses of disjoint parts], and

L (B) = 0 m(B) = 0 [sets with zero volume have zero mass; in particular there
are no area, line, nor point masses].

3
Consequently (by the RadonNikodym
R theorem) there exists a nonnegative function
L1loc (B) such that m(B) = B (X) dX. The existence of s can be inferred analogously.

Aim to argue similarly with other fundamental quantities of continuum mechanics!

1 Geometry and kinematics

1.1 Desiderata for geometry and kinematics
A suitable class B of regions B Rn and corresponding motions : B [t0 , t1 ] Rn
should satisfy ([19] Noll & Virga 1988):
B is a Boolean algebra (where 0, 1, , , are realized by , Rn , , , (.)c ),
axioms of the material universe ([18] Noll 1973).
All regions in B have a (hyper-)surface-like boundary which allows for the application
of a version of the divergence theorem.
B is invariant under homeomorphisms corresponding to possible motions (., t) for
some fixed times t.
In particular, injectivity of (., t) expresses the requirement of impenetrability of matter.
An additional condition like det() > 0 implies that motions also preserve orientation.

1.2 Examples and counterexamples

At first glance the class of sets with piecewise smooth boundary seems to be a
reasonable candidate for B. However, intersections might be quite nasty (e.g. the
2
function x 7 e1/x sin(1/x) is smooth on R but has infinitely many oscillations).
When bodies are modeled as open or closed sets, then two bodies (or different parts
of one body) cannot be in contact without interpenetration. Moreover, one cannot
deal with the separation of a body in parts. This suggests to disregard individual
points of bodies and thus to identify bodies whenever they coincide up to a set of
measure zero. However, the boundary of Borel sets is generally not surface-like.
Based on concepts of geometric measure theory a class fulfilling all desiderata above
was proposed in [12] Gurtin, Williams & Ziemer 1986: They defined B as the mea-
sure theoretically open sets of finite perimeter2 and used adapted definitions
2
A (Borel) set B Rn is measure theoretically open if it coincides with its measure theoretic interior
n
(Lebesgue density points) B := {x R : limr0+ LL (BB r (x))
n (B (x))
r
= 1} where Br (x) denotes a ball with
radius r and centered at x. The measure theoretic boundary is defined as B := (B (B c ) )c and B
is of finite perimeter if the (n 1)-dimensional Hausdorff measure of B is finite (H n1 ( B) < )
or equivalently, if its characteristic function is of bounded variation (B BV (Rn )). On sets of finite
perimeter the divergence theorem holds in classical form for C 1 -functions (if the measure theoretic boundary
and the measure theoretic unit outer normal are employed, see [10] Evans & Gariepy).

4
 for unions and complements. Suitable motions are C 1 -diffeomorphisms, the so-
called classical deformations.

Later approaches tried to reduce the amount of measure theory involved: [19] Noll
& Virga 1988, introduced the so-called fit regions defined by B Rn which are
bounded, regularly open (i.e. B = (B) ), of finite perimeter, and have negligible
boundary (i.e. vol(B) = 0). A new class of fit regions was proposed by [9] Del Piero
2003, consisting of bounded sets B with B = (B) , B = (B ), and H n1 (B) <
(the second resp. third condition excludes bodies with missing resp. isolated points,
lines, or hypersurfaces).

One way to describe fracture of bodies is to consider suitable limits of finite unions
of fit regions and corresponding piecewise C 1 -motions ([8] Del Piero & Owen 1993).
These so-called structured deformations can be generalized to the SBV -setting
(special functions of bounded variation, [5] Choksi & Fonseca 1997).

2 Dynamics
The most fundamental desiderata concerning force are as follows.

2.1 Balance of forces

By Newtons Second Law the inertial force is balanced by the applied forces for each part
A of a continuous body B:
Z Z Z
dV = f dV + t dS.
A A A

The applied forces divide into body forces (with volume force density f ) and contact
forces (with surface force density or traction t).

2.2 Cauchys stress theorem

Contact forces depend only linearly on the normal of the surface on which they act

t = T

which defines the stress tensor T . Consequently, applying the divergence theorem to the
balance of forces formally yields the integral form of the equation of motion (cf. 0.2).

Alternatively, if the applied forces are conservative, the weak form of the equation of motion
(naturally including the boundary conditions) can be derived from Hamiltons principle of
stationary action. The equivalence of weak and integral form is discussed in [2] Antman &
Osborn 1979.

5
2.3 Describing force as general interaction between bodies
One of the first approaches towards an axiomatic definition of body and contact forces
is found in [17] Noll 1959 and the regularity requirements were gradually reduced (e.g.
[11] Gurtin & Martins 1976 and [20] Silhavy 1991). In current research, stress tensors are
modeled by divergence measure fields, which allows for concentrated forces (e.g. [4] Chen,
Torres, & Ziemer 2009).

3 Material Properties
3.1 Classification of materials
The mechanical response of a material to an applied force depends on the specific physical
properties of the material. The mathematical relation between stress and strain (or possibly
other variables) is called the constitutive equation of the material. Generally, it takes
the form
T = Te(... ...)
with constitutive (response) function Te for stress dependent in general on the motion as
a function on spacetime, see [21] Truesdell & Noll.
Elastic:
T (X, t) = Te(X, (X, t)).
Viscoelastic:
T (X, t) = Te(X, (X, t), (X, t)).
Hyperelastic:
T (X, t) = D W (X, (X, t)).

G(r) := {S UM (n) : r(F ) = r(F S), F Rnn , det F > 0} isotropy group of the
response function r : Rnn R, UM (n) := {S Rnn : | det S| = 1} group of unimodular
n n-matrices, O(n) group of orthogonal n n-matrices.
Elastic solid:
G(Te) O(n).
The specific subgroup determines the crystallographic class of the material.
Elastic fluid:
G(Te) = UM (n).
In particular, this implies that elastic fluids are isotropic. Moreover, by conservation
of mass3 , the pressure (to which stress reduces) depends on just through s .

3
R R R
Since m(A) = A (X) dX and m((A, t)) = (A,t) s (x, t) dx = A s ((X, t), t) det (X, t) dX by
change of variables, conservation of mass m(A) = m((A, t)) implies (X) = s ((X, t), t) det (X, t).

6
3.2 Desiderata for constitutive functions
Requirements on Te or W for nonlinear elastodynamics (cf. [1] Antman):

An increase of strain should correspond to an increase of stress.

ellipticity (monotonicity, convexity).

Extreme strain requires infinite stress.

coercivity (growth conditions).

These conditions also allow for analysis of the field equations. In particular one wants to
guarantee the following:
Existence of wave-like solutions of the dynamical field equations with appropriate
regularity.
hyperbolicity.

Possible nonuniqueness of solutions of the equilibrium field equations.

bifurcation.
For more details see the results by [3] Ball 1976, [14] Hughes, Kato, & Marsden 1977, [15]
Hughes & Marsden 1978, and [7] Dafermos & Hrusa 1985, etc.

References
[1] S.S. Antman. Nonlinear problems of elasticity. Springer-Verlag, New York, second edition,
2005.

[2] S.S. Antman and J. Osborn. The principle of virtual work and integral laws of motion.
Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 69(3):231262, 1979.

[3] J. Ball. Convexity conditions and existence theorems in nonlinear elasticity. Archive for
Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 63(4):337403, 1976.

[4] G.Q. Chen, W.P. Ziemer, and M. Torres. GaussGreen theorem for weakly differen-
tiable vector fields, sets of finite perimeter, and balance laws. Communications on Pure and
Applied Mathematics, 62(2):242304, 2009.

[5] R. Choksi and I. Fonseca. Bulk and interfacial energy densities for structured deforma-
tions of continua. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 138(1):37103, 1997.

[6] P.G. Ciarlet. Mathematical elasticity. Vol. I: Three-dimensional elasticity. North-Holland

Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1988.

[7] C. Dafermos and W. Hrusa. Energy methods for quasilinear hyperbolic initial-boundary
value problems. Applications to elastodynamics. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Anal-
ysis, 87(3):267292, 1985.

7
 [8] G. Del Piero and D.R. Owen. Structured deformations of continua. Archive for Rational
Mechanics and Analysis, 124(2):99155, 1993

[9] G. Del Piero. A class of fit regions and a universe of shapes for continuum mechanics.
Journal of Elasticity, 70(1):175195, 2003.

[10] L.C. Evans and R.F. Gariepy. Measure theory and fine properties of functions. CRC
Press, 1992.

[11] M. Gurtin and L. Martins. Cauchys theorem in classical physics. Archive for Rational
Mechanics and Analysis, 60(4):305324, 1976.

[12] M. Gurtin, W. Williams, and W. Ziemer. Geometric measure theory and the axioms
of continuum thermodynamics. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 92(1):122,
1986.

[13] D. Hilbert. Mathematical problems. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 8(10):437479, 1902.

[14] T. Hughes, T. Kato, and J. Marsden. Well-posed quasi-linear second-order hyperbolic

systems with applications to nonlinear elastodynamics and general relativity. Archive for
Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 63(3):273294, 1977.

[15] T. Hughes and J. Marsden. Classical elastodynamics as a linear symmetric hyperbolic

system. Journal of Elasticity, 8(1):97110, 1978.

[16] J.E. Marsden and T.J.R. Hughes. Mathematical foundations of elasticity. Dover Pub-
lications Inc., New York, 1994. Corrected reprint of the 1983 original.

[17] W. Noll. The foundations of classical mechanics in the light of recent advances in contin-
uum mechanics. 266281 in The Axiomatic Method with Special Reference to Geometry and
Physics, edited by L. Henkin, P. Suppes, A. Tarski, North-Holland Publishing Company,
Amsterdam, 1959.

[18] W. Noll. Lectures on the foundations of continuum mechanics and thermodynamics.

Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 52(1):6292, 1973.

[19] W. Noll and E.G. Virga. Fit regions and functions of bounded variation. Archive for
Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 102(1):121, 1988.

[20] M. Silhavy. Cauchys stress theorem and tensor fields with divergences in Lp . Archive for
Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 116:223255, 1991.

[21] C. Truesdell and W. Noll. The non-linear field theories of mechanics. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, third edition, 2004. Edited and with a preface by S.S. Antman.