Article

Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids

2014, Vol. 19(6) 672693

One-dimensional problem of a The Author(s) 2013

Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
fractional order two-temperature DOI: 10.1177/1081286513482605
mms.sagepub.com
generalized thermo-piezoelasticity
M Islam
Department of Mathematics, St. Xaviers College, Kolkata, India

M Kanoria
Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Calcutta, India

Received 15 November 2012; accepted 22 February 2013

Abstract
This paper is concerned with the determination of the thermoelastic stress, strain and conductive temperature in a
piezoelastic half-space body in which the boundary is stress free and subjected to thermal loading in the context of
the fractional order two-temperature generalized thermoelasticity theory (2TT). The two-temperature three-phase-lag
(2T3P) model, two-temperature GreenNaghdi model III (2TGNIII) and two-temperature LordShulman (2TLS) model
of thermoelasticity are combined into a unified formulation introducing unified parameters. The basic equations have
been written in the form of a vector-matrix differential equation in the Laplace transform domain that is then solved
by the state-space approach. The numerical inversion of the transform is carried out by a method based on Fourier
series expansion techniques. The numerical estimates of the quantities of physical interest are obtained and depicted
graphically. The effect of the fractional order parameter, two-temperature and electric field on the solutions has been
studied and comparisons among different thermoelastic models are made.

Keywords
Generalized thermopiezoelasticity, fractional order, vector-matrix differential equation, three-phase-lag thermoelastic
model, LordShulman model, GreenNaghdi model III

1. Introduction
Gurtin and Williams [1, 2] have suggested that there are no a priori grounds for assuming that the second law
of thermodynamics for continuous bodies involves only a single temperature, i.e. it is more logical to assume
a second law in which the entropy contribution due to heat conduction is governed by one temperature, that of
the heat supply by another.
Chen and Gurtin [3] and Chen et al. [4, 5] have formulated a theory of heat conduction in deformable
bodies, which depends on two distinct temperatures the conductive temperature and the thermodynamic
temperature . The key element that sets the two-temperature thermoelasticity (2TT) apart from the classical
theory of thermoelasticity (CTE) is the material parameter a( 0), called the temperature discrepancy [4].
Specifically, if a = 0, then = and the field equations of the 2TT reduce to those of CTE.
The linearized version of two-temperature theory (2TT) has been studied by many authors. Warren and
Chen [6] have investigated wave propagation in the two-temperature theory of thermoelasticity. Iesan [7] has

Corresponding author:
M Kanoria, Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Calcutta, 92 A.P.C.Road, Kolkata-700009, India.
Email: k_mri@yahoo.com

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
Islam et al. 673

established uniqueness and reciprocity theorems for the 2TT. Puri and Jordan [8] have studied the propagation
of plane waves under the 2TT. The existence, structural stability and spatial behavior of the solution in 2TT has
been discussed by Quintanilla [9]. Kumar and Mukhopadhyay [10] have studied the effect of thermal relaxation
time on plane wave propagation under two-temperature thermoelasticity.
For classical uncoupled and coupled theories of thermoelasticity, the heat conduction equations are of the
diffusion type, which lead to infinite speed of propagation of heat waves contrary to physical observations.
Hetnarski and Ignaczak [11] examined five generalizations of the coupled theory of thermoelasticity. The first
generalization is due to Lord and Shulman [12] who formulated the generalized thermoelasticity theory involv-
ing one thermal relaxation time. This theory is referred to as LS theory or extended thermoelasticity theory
(ETE), in which the MaxwellCattaneo law replaces the Fourier law of heat conduction by introducing a single
parameter that acts as a relaxation time. The second generalization to the coupled thermoelasticity theory is
due to Green and Lindsay [13], called GL theory or the temperature-rate dependent theory (TRDTE), which
involves two relaxation times. Problems concerning generalized theories such as ETE and TRDTE have been
studied by Chandrasekharaiah [14] and Ignaczak [15].
The third generalization to the coupled thermoelasticity theory is known as low-temperature thermoelasticity
introduced by Hetnarski and Ignaczak [16], called HI theory. This model is characterized by a system of non-
linear field equations.
The fourth generalization to the coupled theory is concerned with the thermoelasticity theory without energy
dissipation (TEWOED) introduced by Green and Naghdi [17, 18], referred to as GN theory of type II in which
the classical Fourier law is replaced by a heat flux ratetemperature gradient relation. The heat transport equation
does not involve a temperature-rate term and, as such, this model admits undamped thermoelastic waves in
thermoelastic material. In the context of the linearized version of this theory [18], a theorem on the uniqueness of
solutions has been established by Chandrasekharaiah [19, 20]. The fourth generalization of the thermoelasticity
theory developed by Green and Naghdi also involves a heat conduction law, which includes a conventional
law and one that involves the thermal displacement gradient among the constitutive variables. This model is
referred to as the GN model III [17, 21], which involves dissipation of energy in general and admits damped
thermoelastic waves. Mallik and Kanoria [22] have studied one-dimensional thermoelastic disturbances in an
infinite isotropic functionally graded medium in the context of generalized thermoelasticity without energy
dissipation. Problems concerning these theories [18, 21] have been studied by many authors [2327].
The fifth generalization of the thermoelasticity theory is known as the dual-phase-lag thermoelasticity devel-
oped by Tzou [28] and Chandrasekharaiah [29]. Tzou [28] introduced two-phase lags to both the heat flux vector
and the temperature gradient and considered a constitutive equation to describe the lagging behavior in the heat
conduction in solids.
Recently, Roychoudhuri [30] has established a generalized mathematical model of a coupled thermoelas-
ticity theory that includes three-phase lags (3Ps) in the heat flux vector, the temperature gradient and in the
thermal displacement gradient. The more general model established reduces to the previous models as special

cases. According to this model, q(P, t + q ) = [K T(P, 
t + T ) + K (P,  ( = T) is the
t + )], where

thermal displacement gradient and K is the additional material constant. To study some practical relevant prob-
lems, particularly in heat transfer problems involving very short time intervals and in the problems of very high
heat fluxes, the hyperbolic equation gives significantly different results than the parabolic equation. According
to this phenomenon, the lagging behavior in the heat conduction in solid should not be ignored, particularly
when the elapsed times during a transient process are very small, say about 107 s or the heat flux is very high.
The 3P model is very useful in problems of nuclear boiling, exothermic catalytic reactions, phonon-electron
interactions, phonon scattering, etc., where the delay time q captures the thermal wave behavior (a small scale
response in time), the phase lag T captures the effect of phonon-electron interactions (a microscopic response
in space), the other delay time is effective since, in the 3P model, the thermal displacement gradient is
considered a constitutive variable, whereas in conventional thermoelasticity theory, the temperature gradient
is considered a constitutive variable. Kar and Kanoria [31] studied thermoelastic stresses, displacements and
temperature distributions in a functionally graded orthotropic hollow sphere due to sudden temperature changes
in the stress free boundaries of the hollow sphere in the context of TEWOED, TEWED and 3P models of gen-
eralized thermoelasticity. Quintanilla and Racke [32] studied the stability of solutions in 3P heat conduction.
Quintanilla [33] studied spatial behavior of solutions for the 3P heat conduction equation on a semi-infinite
cylinder. Kar and Kanoria [34] studied the thermoviscoelastic stresses in an isotropic viscothermoelastic homo-
geneous spherical shell due to step input of temperature in the stress free boundaries of the shell in the context

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
674 Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids 19(6)

of TEWED and 3P models of generalized thermoelasticity. Kanoria and Mallik [35] studied generalized ther-
moviscoelastic interaction in an infinite KelvinVoigt solid due to periodically varying heat source with the 3P
effect. Mukhopadhyay and Kumar [36] studied effects of 3Ps on generalized thermoelasticity for an infinite
medium with a cylindrical cavity. Islam and Kanoria [37] have investigated 3P effects in a two-dimensional
transversely isotropic thick plate.
Due to its special characteristics, piezoelectric material can function effectively as distributed sensors and
actuators for controlling structural response. In sensor applications, mechanically or thermally induced distur-
bances can be determined from measurement of the induced electric potential difference, whereas in actuator
applications, deformation or stress can be controlled through the introduction of an appropriate electric poten-
tial difference. By integrating piezoelectric elements and advanced composite materials, the potential exists for
forming high-strength, high-stiffness, light-weight structures capable of self monitoring and self controlling.
The theory of thermopiezoelectricity was first proposed by Mindlin [38]. Among the early investigations
in this area, Tiersten [39] derived the differential equations and boundary conditions governing the behavior
of an electrically polarizable, finitely deformable, heat conducting medium in interaction with an electric field.
Thereafter, Mindlin [40] derived governing equations of a thermopiezoelectric plate. Nowacki [41] has stud-
ied the physical laws for the thermopiezoelectric materials. Chandrasekharaiah [42] has generalized Mindlins
theory of thermopiezoelectricity to account for the finite speed of propagation of thermal disturbances. Majhi
[43] studied the transient thermal response of a semi-infinite piezoelectric rod subjected to a local heat source
along the length direction by introducing a potential function and applying the LS theory. Aouadi [44] has
solved the generalized thermopiezoelectric problems with temperature-dependent properties. Sharma et al. [45]
studied plane harmonic wave in piezothermoelastic materials. Sharma and Walia [46] studied reflection of
piezothermoelastic waves from a stress free electroded boundary of a a half-space. Sumi and Matsunaga [47]
studied one-dimensional thermal, electrical and mechanical responses of a piezoceramic thin film subjected
to impulsive loading. The problem was solved by applying GL and LS theories. Tianhu et al. [48] discussed
various thermal shock problems of piezoelectric plates by applying the LS and GL theories. The problems of
piezoelasticity have been studied by many authors [49, 50].
Recently, Youssef [51] improved the previous theories of the generalized thermoelasticity (GL and LS)
with a new theory that depends on two distinct temperatures, that is, the conductive temperature and the
thermodynamic temperature. This theory is called the theory of two-temperature generalized thermoelastic-
ity (Y-TTGTE). The uniqueness of the solution of the last theory has been derived also from Youssef [51].
Youssef and Bassiouny [52] solved a boundary value problem of a one-dimensional piezoelectric half-space
by heating its boundary using different types of heating by using two-temperature generalized theory in the
context of the LS model. Youssef and El-bary [53] solved a generalized thermoelastic infinite layer problem
subjected to ramp type thermal and mechanical loading under three theories. Banik and Kanoria [54, 55] stud-
ied two-temperature generalized thermoelastic interactions in an infinite body with a spherical cavity. Kumar
et al. [56, 57] established variational and reciprocal principles and some theorems in two-temperature
generalized thermoelasticity.
Differential equations of fractional order have been the focus of many studies due to their frequent appear-
ance in various applications in fluid mechanics, viscoelasticity, biology, physics and engineering. The most
important advantage of using fractional differential equations in these and other applications is their non-local
property. It is well known that the integer order differential operator is a local operator but the fractional order
differential operator is non-local. This means that the next state of a system depends not only upon its current
state, but also upon all of its historical states. This is more realistic, and this is one reason why fractional calculus
has become more and more popular [5860].
Fractional calculus has been used successfully to modify many existing models of physical processes. One
can state that the whole theory of fractional derivatives and integrals was established in the second half of the
nineteenth century. The first application of fractional derivatives were given by Abel who applied fractional
calculus in the solution of an integral equation that arises in the formulation of the Tautochrone problem. The
generalization of the concept of derivative and integral to a non-integer order has been subjected to several
approaches, and some various alternative definitions of fractional derivatives have appeared [6164]. In the
last few years, fractional calculus was applied successfully in various areas to modify many existing models
of physical processes, e.g. chemistry, biology, modeling and identification, electronics, wave propagation and
viscoelasticity. One can refer to Padlubny [60] for a survey of applications of fractional calculus.

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
Islam et al. 675

Recently, considerable research effort has been expended to study anomalous diffusion, which is character-
ized by the time-fractional diffusion-wave equation by Kimmich [65] as follows

c = I c,ii (1)

where is the mass density, c the concentration, the diffusion conductivity, i the coordinate symbol, which
takes the value 1, 2, 3. The notation I is the RiemannLiouville fractional integral, introduced as a natural gen-
eralization of the well-known n-fold repeated integral I n f (t) written in a convolution-type form as in Mainardi
and Gorenflo [66], which is written as follows
 t
1
I n f (t) = (t )n1 f ( )d , 0 < n 2
(n) 0
= f (t), n=0 (2)

where (n) is the Gamma function.

According to Kimmich [65], equation (1) describes different cases of diffusion where 0 < < 1 corre-
sponds to weak diffusion (subdiffusion), = 1 corresponds to normal diffusion, 1 < < 2 corresponds to
strong diffusion (superdiffusion) and = 2 corresponds to ballistic diffusion.
It should be noted that the term diffusion is often used in a more generalized sense including various trans-
port phenomena. Equation (1) is a mathematical model of a wide range of important physical phenomena, for
example, the subdiffusive transport occurs in widely different systems ranging from dielectrics and semicon-
ductors through to polymers to fractals, glasses, porous and random media. Superdiffusion is comparatively rare
and has been observed in porous glasses, polymer chain, biological systems, transport of organic molecules and
atomic clusters on surface. One might expect anomalous heat conduction in media where anomalous diffusion
is observed.
Fujita [67] considered the heat wave equation for the case of 1 2

c T = kI T,ii (3)

where c is the specific heat, k is the thermal conductivity, and the subscript , means the derivative with respect
to the coordinate xi . Equation (3) can be obtained as a consequence of the non-local constitutive equation for
the heat flux components qi in the form

qi = kI 1 T,i , 1< 2 (4)

Povstenko [68, 69] used the Caputo heat wave equation defined in the form

qi = kI 1 T,i , 0< 2 (5)

Cattaneo introduced a law of heat conduction to replace the classical Fourier law in the form

qi + 0 qi = kT (6)

Sherief et al. [70] introduced a formula of heat conduction as

qi T
qi + 0 = k , 0< 1 (7)
t t
where

f (y, t) f (y, 0), 0
f (y, t) = I 1 f t
(y,t)
, 0< <1 (8)
t f (y,t)
t
, =1
and proved a uniqueness theorem and derived a reciprocity relation and a variational principle.

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
676 Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids 19(6)

In the limit, as tends to one, equation (7) reduces to the well-known Cattaneo law used by Lord and
Shulman [12] to derive the equation of the generalized theory of thermoelasticity with one relaxation time.
Youssef [71] introduced another formula of heat conduction and taking into consideration (4)(6)

qi
qi + 0 = kI 1 T, 0 < 2 (9)
t
and a uniqueness theorem has been proved.
Ezzat established a new model of a fractional heat conduction equation by using the new Taylor series
expansion of time-fractional order, developed by Jumarie [72] as

0 qi
qi + = kT, 0 < 1 (10)
! t

El-Karamany and Ezzat [73] introduced two general models of fractional heat conduction law for a non-
homogeneous anisotropic elastic solid. Uniqueness and reciprocal theorems are proved, and the convolutional
variational principle is established and used to prove a uniqueness theorem with no restriction on the elasticity
or thermal conductivity tensors except symmetry conditions. The two-temperature dynamic coupled, LS and
fractional coupled thermoelasticity theories result as limit cases. For fractional thermoelasticity not involving
two temperatures, El-Karamany and Ezzat [74] established the uniqueness, reciprocal theorems and convolution
variational principle. The dynamic coupled and GreenNaghdi thermoelasticity theories result as limit cases.
The reciprocity relation in the case of a quiescent initial state is found to be independent of the order of differ-
integration [73, 74]. Fractional order theory of a perfect conducting thermoelastic medium not involving two
temperatures was investigated by El-Karamany and Ezzat [75]. Ezzat et al. [76] have also investigated the frac-
tional order theory with the 3P effect. Fractional order two-temperature generalized thermoelasticity with finite
wave speed was investigated by Sur and Kanoria [77].
The objective of this paper is to study the distribution of thermoelastic stress, strain and conductive tem-
perature in the piezoelastic half-space body under thermal shock in the context of the fractional order two
temperature generalized thermoelasticity theory (2TT) for 2T3P, 2TGNIII and 2TLS models. The governing
equations of 2TT are obtained in the Laplace transform domain, which are then solved by the state-space
approach. The inversion of the transformed solutions is carried out numerically applying a method based on
Fourier series expansion technique [78]. The numerical estimates of the stress, strain and conductive temper-
ature are obtained and are shown graphically. Comparison of the results for different thermoelastic theories
(2T3P, 2TGNIII and 2TLS models) are made, and the effects of the fractional order parameter, two types of
temperatures and electric field for 3P, GNIII and LS models are also discussed.

2. Basic equations
The equations governing linear piezoelectric thermoelastic interactions in homogeneous anisotropic medium
are [48]
(a) The straindisplacement equation:
1
eij = (ui,j + uj,i ) (11)
2
(b) The constitutive equation:
ij = cijkl ekl hijk Dk ij (12)
(c) The stress equation of motion in the absence of body forces:

ui = ij,j (13)

(d) Gausss equation and electric field relations:

Di,i = e , Ei = hijk ejk + ik Dk pi (14)

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
Islam et al. 677

(e) The unified equation for LS, GNIII and 3P theories, in the context of two-temperature generalized
thermoelasticity based on the theory of the fractional integral is given by:
 
q2 2 
1 + t1 q + t2 cE
+ ij 0 divu pk 0 k Q

t 2 t2

= I 1 Kij ,ii + I 1 T Kij ,ii + I 1 ,ii (15)

where ti s (i = 1, 2) are unified parameters, Ei = i is the electric field and Di is the electric dis-
placement, is the mass density, ui the mechanical displacement, eij the strain tensor, ij the stress
tensor, cijkl the isothermal elastic parameters, hijk the piezoelectric moduli, ij the dielectric moduli, pi
the pyroelectric moduli, the temperature change, e the free charge, i the electric potential change,
ij the thermal elastic coupling tensor, 0 the reference temperature, Kij the coefficient of thermal con-
ductivity, Kij the additional material constant, cE the specific heat at constant strain and T and q the
phase lag of the temperature gradient and the phase lag of the heat flux, respectively.
Also, = Kij + Kij , where is the phase lag of the thermal displacement gradient and is the conductive
temperature and satisfies the relation
= a,ii (16)
where a( 0) is the two-temperature parameter [53].
For t1 = 1, t2 = 1, equation (15) will be reduced to the 3P model, for t1 = 1, t2 = 0, Kij = 0, T = 0, = 0,
the equation will be reduced to the LS model, and for t1 = 0, t2 = 0, T = 0, = 0, the equation will be
reduced to the GNIII model [79].
According to Kimmich [65], equation (15) describes different cases of diffusion where 0 < < 1 corre-
sponds to weak diffusion (subdiffusion), = 1 corresponds to normal diffusion, 1 < < 2 corresponds to
strong diffusion (superdiffusion) and = 2 corresponds to ballistic diffusion.

3. Formulation of the problem

We now consider a thin semi-infinite piezoelectric body with stress free boundary occupying the space x 0.
At the near end of the body, a thermal effect is given which raises the temperature of this end to a prescribed
temperature with known function, the direction of the piezoelectric being parallel to the x-axis.
We shall consider a one-dimensional disturbance of the medium, so that the displacement vector u can be
expressed in the following form
ux = u(x, t), uy = 0, uz = 0 (17)
Then, the strain components in our case become
u
e= (18)
x
In the context of linear theory of generalized thermoelasticity in the absence of body forces and heat sources,
the constitutive equation, the equation of motion, Gausss law and the electric field relation and the heat equation
in a unified form can be written as
u
= c11 hD (19)
x
2u 2u
c11 2 = 2 (20)
x x t
Since there is no free charge inside the piezoelectric body from Gausss law, we have
D
= 0; hence, D = constant (21)
x

E= (22)
x

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
678 Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids 19(6)



1 2 3u 1
3
4 1
2
1 + t1 q + t2 q2 2 cE + 0 = I + I 1
K T + I K (23)
t 2 t xt2 x2 t x2 t2 x2
The conductive temperature is given by
2
=a (24)
x2
where is the thermodynamic temperature, a the temperature discrepancy, D the electric displacement com-
ponent, 0 the reference temperature, the density, cE the specific heat, the stress temperature coefficient,
K an additional material constant, K the thermal conductivity, = T, the thermal displacement and
= K + K . Delay time is called the phase lag of the thermal displacement gradient. The other
delay time T is called the phase lag of the temperature gradient and q is called the phase lag of the heat
flux. Here, dot denotes derivative with respect to time. For t1 = 1, t2 = 1, equation (23) reduces to the
3P model, for t1 = 1, t2 = 0, K = 0, T = 0, = 0, the equation reduces to the LS model, and for
t1 = 0, t2 = 0, T = 0, = 0, the equation reduces to the GNIII model.
Also,
0< <1 for weak conductivity
=1 for normal conductivity
1< 2 for strong conductivity
We now introduce the following dimensionless variables

u = c0 u, x = c0 x, t = c20 t,  = ,
c11

 = , T = c20 T , q = c20 q ,  = c20 ,
0
 h K
 = ,D = D, t0 = c20 t0 , K  =
0 c11 cE c20
where
c11 cE
c20 = and =
K
Substituting (18) into (19), (20) and using the dimensionless variables, equations (19), (20), (23) and (24)
can be written in non-dimensional form after omitting the primes as follows

= e D (25)

2e 2 2e
= (26)
x2 x2 t2

2 
2 2

1
I K +I 1
(1 + ) + I T 2 = 1 + t1 q + t2 q 2 +  e
1 2
(27)
t t t t
2
= (28)
x2
0
where = , = and = ac20 2 .
c11 cE
The problem is to solve equations (25)(28) subject to the boundary conditions
(i) stress free boundary
(0, t) = 0 (29)
and (ii) varying thermal load
(0, t) = F(t) (30)

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
Islam et al. 679

where F(t) is a known function of time t. The initial and regularity conditions can be written as

e = 0 = = at t = 0 (31)

e
= = = 0 at t = 0 (32)
t t t
and
e(x, t) 0, (x, t) 0, (x, t) 0 as x , t > 0 (33)
Applying a Laplace transform to equations (25)(30) we obtain,

D
= e (34)
s

d 2 e d 2
= s2 e (35)
dx2 dx2
  d 2   
K + (1 + ) s + T s2 2
= s +1
1 + t
1 q s + t
2 q
2 2
s +  e (36)
dx
d 2
= 2 (37)
dx
s) = F(s)
(0, (38)
and
(0, s) = 0 (s) = 0 (39)
Eliminating between (36) and (37), we get

d 2
= l + l e (40)
dx2

a3 s +1 (1 + t1 q s + t2 q2 s2 )
where l = and a3 =  
1 + a3 K + (1 + )s + T s2
Using equation (40) in equation (37), we get

= (1 l) l e (41)

Now, from equation (35), we get

d 2 e
= M + N e (42)
dx2
(1 l)l s2 + (1 l)l
where M = and N =
1 + l 1 + l

4. State-space approach
Equations (40) and (42) can be written in a vector-matrix differential equation as

d 2 V (x, s)
= A(s)V (x, s) (43)
dx2



l l
where V (x, s) = and A(s) =
e M N

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
680 Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids 19(6)

Hence, the solution of equation (43) is

V (x, s) = V (0, s)e A(s)x (44)


0
where V (0, s) = and
e 0
0 = F(s)

(45)
e 0 = e (0, s)
The characteristic equation corresponding to matrix A is

2 (l + N) + (lN lM) = 0 (46)

The roots 1 , 2 are given by

1 + 2 = l + N
(47)
1 2 = lN lM
Now spectral decomposition of A(s) is

A(s) = 1 E1 + 2 E2 (48)

where E1 and E2 are called the projectors of A(s) and they satisfy the following conditions

E1 + E2 = I; I is the identity matrix,

E1 E2 = zero matrix,
Ei2 = Ei , for i = 1, 2.
Then, we have   
A(s) = 1 E1 + 2 E2 (49)
where

1 l 2 l
E1 = (1 l)(2 l)
1 2 l
1 l
and

1 1 l l
E2 = (1 l)(2 l)
1 2 l
l 2
Therefore, we get


1 l+ 1 2 l

B(s) = A(s) = (50)
1 + 2 M N + 1 2

Now the solution of (43) can be written as

V (x, s) = V (0, s)e[B(s)x] (51)

To find the form of the matrix exp[B(s)x)], we now apply the CayleyHamilton theorem. The characteristic
equation of the matrix B(s) can be written as follows
   
P2 P( 1 + 2 ) + 1 2 = 0 (52)

The roots of this equation, taken as P1 , P2 , are as follows

 
P1 = 1 and P2 = 2 (53)

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
Islam et al. 681

The Taylor series expansion for the matrix exponential exp[B(s)x] is given by Bahar and Hetnarski [80]

 [B(s)x]n
exp[B(s)x] = (54)
n=0
n

We can express B2 and higher powers of the matrix B in terms of I and B where I is the unit matrix of second
order [80]. Then, the infinite series in equation (54) can be reduced to the following form
exp[B(s)x] = b0 (x, s)I + b1 (x, s)B(s) (55)
where b0 , b1 are coefficients depending on s and x.
The characteristic roots P1 , P2 of the matrix B must satisfy equation (54). Then, we have
exp[P1 x] = b0 + b1 P1 (56)
exp[P2 x] = b0 + b1 P2 (57)
Solving equations (56) and (57), we get b0 , b1 as follows

P1 eP2 x P2 eP1 x
b0 = (58)
P1 P2
eP1 x eP2 x
b1 = (59)
P1 P2
Hence, equation (55) can be written as
exp[B(s)x] = H(x, s) = [hij (x, s)], i, j = 1, 2 (60)
where
(P12 l)eP2 x (P22 l)eP1 x
h11 = (61)
P12 P22
l(eP1 x eP2 x )
h12 = (62)
P12 P22
M(eP1 x eP2 x )
h21 = (63)
P12 P22
(P12 N)eP2 x (P22 N)eP1 x
h22 = (64)
P12 P22
Using equation (60) in equation (51), we get
 
V (x, s) = hij (x, s) V (0, s)

which can be written as




h11 h12 0
= (65)
e h21 h22 e 0
Therefore, the solutions for and e are obtained from equation (65) as follows

= 1 eP2 x 2 eP1 x (66)

P2 x P1 x
e = e1 e e2 e (67)
where
[(P12 l) 0 le0 ] [(P22 l) 0 le0 ]
1 = , 2 =
P1 P2
2 2
P12 P22

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
682 Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids 19(6)

[(P12 N)e0 M 0 ] [(P22 N)e0 M 0 ]

e1 = , e2 =
P12 P22 P12 P22

Using equations (66) and (67) in equation (41), we get

= 1 eP2 x 2 eP1 x (68)
where
1 = (1 l)1 le1 , 2 = (1 l)2 le2
Now, the solution for stress is obtained from equation (34) by using equations (67) and (68) as follows
D
= 1 eP2 x 2 eP1 x (69)
s
where
1 = e1 1 , 2 = e2 2
which completes the solution in the Laplace transform domain

4.1. Thermal shock

We take the thermal load in the following form
F(t) = F0 H(t)
where F0 is constant and H(t) is the Heaviside unit step function. Taking the Laplace transform, we have
F0
0 = F(s)
= (70)
s
and 
1 (1 l)F0 D
e 0 = + (71)
1 + l s s
Thus, we get the complete solution of the thermal shock problem on the Laplace transform domain by using
equations (70) and (71) in equations (66)(69).

5. Inversion of the Laplace transform

It is difficult to find the analytical inverse Laplace transform of the complicated solutions for the displacement,
temperature, strain and stress in the Laplace transform domain. So we have to resort to numerical computations.
We now outline the numerical procedure to solve the problem. Let f (x, p) be the Laplace transform of a function
f (x, t).
Then, the inversion formula for the Laplace transform can be written as
 d+i
1
f (x, t) = ept f (x, p)dp (72)
2i di

where d is an arbitrary real number greater than the real part of all the singularities of f (x, p).
Taking p = d + iw, the preceding integral takes the form

edt itw
f (x, t) = e f (x, d + iw)dw (73)
2

Expanding the function h(x, t) = edt f (x, t) in a Fourier series in the interval [0, 2T], we obtain the approximate
formula [78]
f (x, t) = f (x, t) + ED (74)

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
Islam et al. 683

where

1
f (x, t) = c0 + ck for 0 t 2T (75)
2 k=1

and
edt  ik t ikt 
ck =
e T f (x, d + ) (76)
T T
The discretization error ED can be made arbitrarily small by choosing d large enough [78]. Since the infinite
series in equation (75) can be summed up to a finite number N of terms, the approximate value of f (x, t) becomes

1  N
fN (x, t) = c0 + ck for 0 t 2T (77)
2 k=1

Using the preceding formula to evaluate f (x, t) we introduce a truncation error ET that must be added to the
discretization error to produce the total approximation error.
Two methods are used to reduce the total error. First the Korrecktur method is used to reduce the
discretization error. Next, the -algorithm is used to accelerate convergence [78].
The Korrecktur method uses the following formula to evaluate the function f (x, t):

f (x, t) = f (x, t) e2dT f (x, 2T + t) + ED (78)

where the discretization error | ED || ED |. Thus, the approximate value of f (x, t) becomes

fNK (x, t) = fN (x, t) e2dT fN  (x, 2T + t) (79)

where N  is an integer such that N  < N.

We shall now describe the -algorithm that is used to accelerate the convergence of the series in equation

m
(77). Let N = 2q + 1, where q is a natural number and let sm = ck be the sequence of the partial sum of the
k=1
series in (77).
We define the -sequence by
0,m = 0, 1,m = sm
and
1
r+1,m = r1,m+1 + , r = 1, 2, 3, ...
r,m+1 r,m
It can be shown that [78] the sequence
1,1 , 3,1 , 5,1 , ..., N,1
converges to f (x, t) + ED faster than the sequence of partial sums sm , m = 1, 2, 3, ...
c0
2
The actual procedure used to invert the Laplace transform consists of using equation (79) together with the
-algorithm. The values of d and T are chosen according to the criterion outlined in Honig and Hirdes [78].

6. Numerical results and discussion

To obtain the solutions for the stress component , strain component e and conductive temperature in
the spacetime domain, we have to apply the Laplace inversion formula to equations (66), (67) and (69),
respectively, which has been done numerically using a method based on Fourier series expansion technique.
For computational purposes, the values of the material constants have been taken as follows [52]
F0 = 1,  = 0.003887, = 0.036991, = 0.1, K = 7
Here in this paper, we have considered 3P model. Now for this model, the solution of the heat conduction law
is stable if
2KT
> > K q (80)
q

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
684 Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids 19(6)

0.05 =0.5
=0.75
=1
0 =1.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 =2

-0.05

-0.1

-0.15

-0.2

-0.25 x

Figure 1. Variation of stress distribution against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.1 (2T3P model).

0.05 =0.5
=0.75
=1
0 =1.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 =2

-0.05

-0.1

-0.15

-0.2

-0.25
x

Figure 2. Variation of stress distribution against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.1 (2TGNIII model).

where = K + K [32]. We have assumed the values of these phase-lag parameters in our paper in a way
that has satisfied the above condition. Hence, for numerical calculation, we have taken q = 0.01, T = 0.2 and
= 1.01.
The numerical values of the stress, strain and conductive temperature have been calculated for fixed time
t = 0.25 and for x ranging widely from x = 0.0 up to x = 2.0.
Figures 19 represent the variation of thermophysical quantities versus the space variable x for different
values of fractional order parameter , viz. = 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2 using the two-temperature three-phase-lag
(2T3P) model, the two-temperature GNIII (2TGNIII) model and the two-temperature LS (2TLS) model. Figures
1012 are drawn to give a comparison of the results obtained for stress, strain and conductive temperature
for the three models (2T3P, 2TGNIII, 2TLS). Figures 1315 show the differences between the theory of one-
temperature ( = 0) generalized thermopiezoelasticity and the theory of two-temperature ( = 0.1) generalized
thermopiezoelasticity using different models (3P, GNIII and LS models). Figures 1621 depict the variations
of stress and strain against x for 2T3P, 2TGNIII and 2TLS models, respectively, for different values of D, viz.
D = 107 , 0.05, 0.15.
Figures 13 depict the variations of stress wave against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15, = 0.1 and for different
values of fractional order parameter using the 2T3P, 2TGNIII and 2TLS models. In each case, vanishes at
x = 0.0, satisfying the theoretical boundary condition. From Figures 13, it can be observed that the magnitude
of the stress wave decreases with the increase of the fractional order parameter . The steep jump of occurs
at a particular value of x.
Figures 46 represents the distribution of strain e against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15, = 0.1 and for different
values of fractional order parameter using the 2T3P, 2TGNIII and 2TLS models. In each case, e is found to
be maximum at x = 0.0, which complies with the reality of the problem. It is seen that the magnitude of e
decreases with the increase of the fractional order parameter in the range 0 x < 0.3 for the 2T3P and 2TLS

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
Islam et al. 685

0.05 =0.5
=0.75
=1
0 =1.5
=2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

-0.05

-0.1

-0.15

-0.2 x

Figure 3. Variation of stress distribution against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.1 (2TLS model).

0.25
=0.5
0.2 =0.75
=1
=1.5
0.15
=2

e 0.1

0.05

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

-0.05
x

Figure 4. Variation of strain distribution e against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.1 (2T3P model).

0.25
=0.5
=0.75
0.2 =1
=1.5
=2
0.15

e 0.1

0.05

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
-0.05
x

Figure 5. Variation of strain distribution e against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.1 (2TGNIII model).

models. It is also observed that in each case, e has a steep jump at a particular value of x, in the neighborhood of
which the strain wave shows its variation from its progressive nature to compressive, and ultimately, this wave
dies out for any for all three models.
The graphs in Figures 79 represent the variations of conductive temperature against x for t = 0.25, D =
0.15, = 0.1 and for different values of fractional order parameter predicted respectively by three different
theories of thermoelasticity (2T3P, 2TGNIII and 2TLS models). As seen from Figures 79, is maximum
at x = 0.0, which satisfies the theoretical boundary condition. Also, its magnitude, in each case, gradually
decreases with the increase of x, which is physically plausible. It has been observed from these figures that

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
686 Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids 19(6)

0.25
=0.5
=0.75
0.2
=1
=1.5
0.15 =2

e 0.1

0.05

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
-0.05
x

Figure 6. Variation of strain distribution e against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.1 (2TLS model).

1.2
=0.5
=0.75
1 =1
=1.5
0.8 =2

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

Figure 7. Variation of conductive temperature against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.1 (2T3P model).

1.2
=0.5
=0.75
1 =1
=1.5
0.8 =2

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

Figure 8. Variation of conductive temperature against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.1 (2TGNIII model).

possesses greater magnitude throughout the variation of the space variable x for weak conductivity ( = 0.5)
and the magnitude decreases with the increase of the parameter for all three models (2T3P, 2TGNIII and
2TLS). This is due to the fact that for a weak conductivity = 0.5, the particles transports the heat to the
other particle with difficulty, which makes the particles keep the temperature within it for a longer time interval,
which makes this curve lie above the other four curves. For strong conductivity (superconductivity) 1 < 2,
the particles transport the heat to the other particles easily and this makes the decreasing rate of the temperature
greater than the other ones. As may be seen from the figures, propagates with x with uniformly decaying
speed, but the presence of (= 2) decelerates to vanish as compared to when = 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5.

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
Islam et al. 687

1.2
=0.5
=0.75
1
=1
=1.5
0.8
=2

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

Figure 9. Variation of conductive temperature against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.1 (2TLS model).

0.05 2T3P (=0.75)

2T3P (=1.5)
2TGNIII(=0.75)
0
2TGNIII(=1.5)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2TLS (=0.75)
-0.05 2TLS (=1.5)

-0.1

-0.15

-0.2

-0.25
x

Figure 10. Variation of stress distribution against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.1.

0.25 2T3P (=0.75)

2T3P (=1.5)
2TGNIII(=0.75)
0.2
2TGNIII(=1.5)
2TLS (=0.75)
2TLS (=1.5)
0.15

e
0.1

0.05

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

-0.05
x

Figure 11. Variation of strain distribution e against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.1.

Figure 10 represents the graph of the stress distribution against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15, = 0.1 and
= 0.75, 1.5 for the three models (2T3P, 2TGNIII and 2TLS models). Figure 10 shows the compressive nature
of for all three models. It is observed that has a steep jump at a particular value of x and as x increases,
gets its stationary values for all the models. Numerical results shows that the magnitude of the stress wave is
greater for = 0.75 than that for = 1.5 in the range 0.2 < x < 2 for all three models, and the magnitude is
greater for the GNIII model in comparison with the other two models.
Figure 11 depicts the graphs of strain distribution e against x for the same parameters as in Figure 10. Figure
11 shows the progressive nature of the strain wave e for all three models (2T3P, 2TGNIII and 2TLS models)
with larger magnitude corresponding to = 0.75 to a certain value of x, at which it shows its variation from
progressive to compressive. Beyond this value, e vanishes in all cases, and no other distinction is obtained.

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
688 Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids 19(6)

1.2
2T3P (=0.75)
2T3P (=1.5)
1 2TGNIII(=0.75)
2TGNIII(=1.5)
0.8 2TLS (=0.75)
2TLS (=1.5)

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

Figure 12. Variation of conductive temperature against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.1.

0.05 1T3P (=0)

1TGNIII (=0)
1TLS (=0)
0 2T3P (=0.1)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2TGNIII (=0.1)
2TLS (=0.1)
-0.05

-0.1

-0.15

-0.2

-0.25 x

Figure 13. Variation of stress distribution against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.75.

Figure 12 is plotted to show the variation of the conductive temperature against x for t = 0.25,
D = 0.15, = 0.1 and = 0.75, 1.5, respectively, for the 2T3P, 2TGNIII and 2TLS models. It is clear
from the figure that the numerical results for the temperature distribution (for the three models) are found to sat-
isfy the theoretical boundary condition. The magnitude of conductive temperature for the 2TGNIII model is
greater than that of the 2T3P model, which is again greater than that of the 2TLS model in the ranges 0 < x < 1
corresponding to = 0.75, whereas in the range 1 < x 2, the 2T3P model is greater than that of the 2TGNIII
model, which is again greater than that of the 2TLS model.
Figure 13 displays a comparison of stress against x with t = 0.25, D = 0.15, = 0.75 for one-temperature
( = 0) and two-temperature ( = 0.1) theories for different models (3P, GNIII and LS models). The difference
between two temperatures and one temperature is more prominent in the range 0 x 0.2 for all the models
and after that, has a steep jump at a particular value of x.
Figure 14 depicts the graph of the strain e verses the space variable x for two types of temperatures and for
the same parameters as in Figure 13. It is observed that the magnitude of e is larger for the two temperatures
( = 0.1) in the interval 0 x < 0.29 for all three models.
The variation of the conductive temperature with t = 0.25, D = 0.15, = 0.75 is shown in Figure 15
for one-temperature ( = 0.0) and two-temperature ( = 0.1) theories for different models (3P, GNIII and LS
models). It is observed that corresponding to one temperature ( = 0.0) satisfies the theoretical boundary
conditions. This is true for two temperature ( = 0.1) also. As may be seen from the figures, the conductive
temperature () propagates with x with a uniformly decaying speed, but the presence of (= 0.1) decelerates
to vanish as compared to when = 0.0. It is also observed that the magnitude of for the 3P and GNIII
models is larger than that of the LS model.
Figures 1621 show the effect of electric displacement D on the stress and strain e for the three models
(2T3P, 2TGNIII and 2TLS). In all the figures, the value of the parameters are taken as t = 0.25, = 0.1,

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
Islam et al. 689

0.25
1T3P (=0)
1TGNIII (=0)
0.2 1TLS (=0)
2T3P (=0.1)
2TGNIII (=0.1)
0.15 2TLS (=0.1)
e
0.1

0.05

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
-0.05 x

Figure 14. Variation of strain distribution e against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.75.

1.2
1T3P (=0)
1TGNIII(=0)
1 1TLS (=0)
2T3P (=0.1)
2TGNIII(=0.1)
0.8
2TLS (=0.1)

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
x

Figure 15. Variation of conductive temperature against x for t = 0.25, D = 0.15 and = 0.75.

0.05 2T3P(=0.75, D=1.E-7)

2T3P(=1.5, D=1.E-7)
2T3P(=0.75, D=0.05)
2T3P (=1.5, D=0.05)
0 2T3P(=0.75, D=0.15)
2T3P (=1.5, D=0.15)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2

-0.05

-0.1

-0.15

x
-0.2

Figure 16. Variation of stress distribution against x for t = 0.25 and = 0.1 (2T3P model).

D = 107 , 0.05, 0.15, = 0.75, 1.5. It is observed from Figures 1618 that the magnitude of increases with
D for all three models and it is larger for = 0.75. Here also, a steep jump of occurs at a particular value of
x, after which its magnitude decreases as x increases and vanishes for large x for D = 107 (with = 0.75, 1.5),
whereas becomes almost stationary for each of D = 0.05 and D = 0.15 (for = 0.75, 1.5). It is seen from
Figures 1921 that the magnitude of e increases with an increase of D and it is larger for = 0.75. It is also
observed that in each case, e has a steep jump at a particular value of x, in the neighborhood of which the strain
wave shows its variation from its progressive nature to compressive and ultimately this wave dies out for any D
(with = 0.75, 1.5) for all three models (2T3P, 2TGNIII and 2TLS).
Figures 19 correspond to = 1 (for all three models) and agree with those of Banik and Kanoria [50].

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
690 Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids 19(6)

0.05 2tGNIII (=0.75, D=1.E-7)

2TGNIII (=1.5, D=1.E-7)
2TGNIII (=0.75, D=0.05)
2TGNIII (=1.5, D=0.05)
0 2TGNIII (=0.75, D=0.15)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2TGNIII (=1.5, D=0.15)

-0.05

-0.1

-0.15

x
-0.2

Figure 17. Variation of stress distribution against x for t = 0.25 and = 0.1 (2TGNIII model).

0.05 2TLS (=0.75, D=1.E-7)

2TLS (=1.5, D=1.E-7)
2TLS (=0.75, D=0.05)
2TLS (=1.5, D=0.05)
0
2TLS (=0.75, D=0.15)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2TLS (=1.5, D=0.15)

-0.05

-0.1

-0.15

-0.2
x

Figure 18. Variation of stress distribution against x for t = 0.25 and = 0.1 (2TLS model).

0.2
=0.75, D=1.E-7
=1.5, D=1.E-7
=0.75, D=0.05
=1.5, D=0.05
0.15
=0.75, D=0.15
=1.5, D=0.15

0.1

e
0.05

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2

-0.05
x

Figure 19. Variation of strain distribution e against x for t = 0.25 and = 0.1 (2T3P model).

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
Islam et al. 691

0.2 =0.75, D=1.E-7

=1.5, D=1.E-7
=0.75, D=0.05
=1.5, D=0.05
0.15 =0.75, D=0.15
=1.5, D=0.15

0.1

e
0.05

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2

-0.05
x

Figure 20. Variation of strain distribution e against x for t = 0.25 and = 0.1 (2TGNIII model).

0.2
=0.75, D=1.E-7
=1.5, D=1.E-7
=0.75, D=0.05
0.15 =1.5, D=0.05
=0.75, D=0.15
=1.5, D=0.15

0.1
e

0.05

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2

-0.05 x

Figure 21. Variation of strain distribution e against x for t = 0.25 and = 0.1 (2TLS model).

Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Prof. S. C. Bose of the Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Calcutta for his valuable suggestions and
guidance in preparation of the paper.

Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References
[1] Gurtin, ME, and Williams, WO. On the Clausius-Duhem inequality. Z Angew Math Phys 1966; 7: 626633.
[2] Gurtin, ME, and Williams, WO. An axiomatic foundation for continuum thermodynamics. Arch Ration Mech Anal 1967; 26:
83117.
[3] Chen, PJ, and Gurtin, ME. On a theory of heat conduction involving two temperatures. Z Angew Math Phys 1968; 19: 614627.
[4] Chen, PJ, Gurtin, ME, and Williams, WO. A note on non simple heat conduction. Z Angew Math Phys 1968; 19: 969-970.
[5] Chen, PJ, Gurtin, ME, and Williams, WO. On the thermodynamics of non-simple elastic materials with two temperatures.
Z Angew Math Phys 1969; 20: 107112.
[6] Warren, WE, and Chen, PJ. Wave propagation in two temperatures theory of thermoelasticity. Acta Mech 1973; 16: 83117.
[7] Iesan, D. On the linear coupled thermoelasticity with two temperatures. J Appl Math Phys 1970; 21: 583591.
[8] Puri, P, and Jordan, PM. On the propagation of harmonic plane waves under the two-temperature theory. Int J Engrg Sci 2006;
44: 11131126.
[9] Quintanilla, R. On existence, structural stability, convergence and spatial behavior in thermoelasticity with two temperatures.
Acta Mech 2004; 168: 6173.
[10] Kumar, R, and Mukhopadhyay, S. Effects of thermal relaxation time on plane wave propagation under two temperature
thermoelasticity. Int J Engrg Sci 2010; 48: 128139.

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
692 Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids 19(6)

[11] Hetnarski, RB, and Ignaczak, J. Generalized thermoelasticity. J Therm Stresses 1999; 22: 451476.
[12] Lord, HW, and Shulman, YH. A generalized dynamical theory of thermoelasticity. J Mech Phys Solids 1967; 15: 299309.
[13] Green, AE, and Lindsay, KA. Thermoelasticity. J Elasticity 1972; 2: 17.
[14] Chandrasekharaiah, DS. Thermoelasticity with second sound. Appl Mech Rev 1986; 39(3): 355375.
[15] Ignaczak, J. Generalized thermoelasticity and its applications. In: Hetnarski RB (ed.) Mechanical and mathematical methods.
North Holland, Thermal Stresses III, 1989.
[16] Hetnarski, RB, and Ignaczak, J. Soliton-like waves in a low-temperature non-linear thermoelastic solid. Int J Engrg Sci 1996; 34:
17671787.
[17] Green, AE, and Naghdi, PM. A re-examination of the basic results of thermomechanics. Proc R Soc Lond A 1991; 432: 171194.
[18] Green, AE, and Naghdi, PM. Thermoelasticity without energy dissipation. J Elasticity 1993; 31: 189208.
[19] Chandrasekhariah, DS. A uniqueness theorem in the theory of thermoelasticity without energy dissipation. J Therm Stresses
1996; 19: 267272.
[20] Chandrasekharaiah, DS. A note on the uniqueness of solution in the linear theory of thermoelasticity without energy dissipation.
J Elasticity 1996; 43: 279283.
[21] Green, AE, and Naghdi, PM. On undamped heat waves in an elastic solid. J Therm Stresses 1992; 15: 253264.
[22] Mallik, SH, and Kanoria, M. Generalized thermoelastic functionally graded solid with a periodically varying heat source. Int J
Solids Struct 2007; 44(2223): 76337645.
[23] Mallik, SH, and Kanoria, M. A two dimensional problem for a transversely isotropic generalized thermoelastic thick plate with
spatially varying heat source. Eur J Mech A/Solids 2008; 27: 607621.
[24] Mallik, SH, and Kanoria, M. A unified generalized thermoelasticity formulation: application to penny shaped crack analysis.
J Therm Stresses 2009; 32(9): 943965.
[25] Kar, A, and Kanoria, M. Thermoelastic interaction with energy dissipation in a transversely isotropic thin circular disc. Eur J
Mech A/Solids 2007; 26: 969981.
[26] Kar, A, and Kanoria, M. Thermo-elastic interaction with energy dissipation in an unbounded body with a spherical hole. Int J
Solids Struct 2007; 44: 29612971.
[27] Islam, M, Mallik, SH, and Kanoria, M. Dynamic response in two-dimensional transversely isotropic thick plate with spatially
varying heat sources and body forces. J Appl Math Mech Engl Ed 2011; 32(10): 13151332.
[28] Tzou, DY. A unified field approach for heat conduction from macro to micro scales. ASME J Heat Transfer 1995; 117: 816.
[29] Chandrasekharaiah, DS. Hyperbolic thermoelasticity: a review of recent literature. Appl Mech Rev 1998; 51: 705729.
[30] Roychoudhuri, SK. On a thermoelastic three-phase-lag model. J Therm Stresses 2007; 30: 231238.
[31] Kar, A and Kanoria, M. Generalized thermoelastic functionally graded orthotropic hollow sphere under thermal shock with
three-phase-lag effect. Eur J Mech A/Solids 2009; 28: 757767.
[32] Quintanilla, R, and Racke, R. A note on stability in three-phase-lag heat conduction. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 2008; 51: 2429.
[33] Quintanilla, R. Spatial behaviour of solutions of the three-phase-lag heat equation. Appl Math Comput 2009; 213: 153162.
[34] Kar, A, and Kanoria, M. Generalized thermo-visco-elastic problem of a spherical shell with three-phase-lag effect. Appl Math
Model 2009; 33: 32873298.
[35] Kanoria, M, and Mallik, SH. Generalized thermoviscoelastic interaction due to periodically varying heat source with three-phase-
lag effect. Eur J Mech A/Solids 2010; 29: 695703.
[36] Mukhopadhyay, S, and Kumar, R. Thermoelastic interactions on two-temperature generalized thermoelasticity in an infinite
medium with a cylindrical cavity. J Therm Stresses 2009; 32: 341360.
[37] Islam, M, and Kanoria, M. Study of dynamical response in a transversely isotropic thick plate due to heat source. J Thermal
Stresses 2011; 34: 702723.
[38] Mindlin, RD. On the equations of motion of piezoelectric crystals. In: Muskilishivili, NI (ed.) Problems of continuum mechanics,
70th birthday volume. Philadelphia: SIAM, 1961, pp. 282290.
[39] Tiersten, HF. On the nonlinear equations of thermoelectroelasticity. Int J Engrg Sci 1971; 9: 587604.
[40] Mindlin, RD. Equations of high frequency vibrations of thermo-piezoelectric plate. Int J Solids Struct 1974; 10: 625637.
[41] Nowacki, W. Foundations of linear piezoelectricity. In: Parkus H (ed.) Electromagnetic interactions in elastic solids. Wien:
Springer, 1979, ch. 1.
[42] Chandrasekharaiah, DS. A generalized thermoelastic wave propagation in a semi-infinite piezoelectric rod. Acta Mech 1988; 71:
3949.
[43] Majhi, MC. Discontinuities in generalized thermoelastic wave propagation in a semi-infinite piezoelectric rod. J Tech Phys 1995;
36: 269278.
[44] Aouadi, M. Generalized thermo-piezoelectric problems with temperature-dependent properties. Int J Solids Struct 2006; 43:
63476358.
[45] Sharma, JN, Kumar, M, and Kumar, R. Plane harmonic waves in piezo-thermoelastic materials. Indian Eng Mater Sci 2000; 7:
434442.
[46] Sharma, JN, and Walia, V. Reflection of piezothermoelastic waves from stress free electroded boundary of a half space. In:
Proceedings of the 8th international congress on thermal stresses, 14 June, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
pp. 515518, 2009.

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016
Islam et al. 693

[47] Sumi, N, and Matsunaga, Y. Thermal, electrical and mechanical response of a piezoceramic thin film with damping. In: Proceed-
ings of the 8th international congress on thermal stresses, 14 June, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, pp. 179182,
2009.
[48] Tianhu, H, Xiaogeneg, T, and Yapeng, S. State space approach to one-dimensional thermal shock problem for a semi-infinite
piezoelectric rod. Int J Engrg Sci 2002; 40: 10811097.
[49] Singh, B. Wave propagation in an anisotropic generalized thermoelastic solid. Indian J Pure Appl Math 2003; 34: 14791485.
[50] Banik, S, and Kanoria, M. Study of two temperature generalized thermo-piezoelastic problem. J Thermal Stresses 2013; 36:
7193. (in press).
[51] Youssef, HM. Theory of two-temperature generalized thermoelasticity. IMA J Appl Math 2006; 71: 18.
[52] Youssef, HM, and Bassiouny, E. Two temperature generalized thermopiezoelasticity for one dimensional problems- State space
approach. Computat Methods Sci Tech 2008; 14(1): 5564.
[53] Youssef, HM, and El-bary, AA. Generalized thermoelastic infinite layer subjected to ramp type thermal and mechanical loading
under three theories state space approach. J Therm Stresses 2009; 32: 12931309.
[54] Banik, S, and Kanoria, M. Two temperature generalized thermoelastic interactions in an infinite body with a spherical cavity. Int
J Thermo Physics 2011; 32: 12471270.
[55] Banik, S, and Kanoria, M. Effects of three-phase-lag on two temperature generalized thermoelasticity for infinite medium with
spherical cavity. J Appl Math Mech Engl Ed 2012; 33(4): 483498.
[56] Kumar, R, Prasad, R and Mukhopadhaya, S. Variational and reciprocal principles in two temperature generalized thermoelasticity.
J Thermal Stresses 2010; 33: 161171.
[57] Kumar, R, Prasad, R, and Mukhopadhaya, S. Some theorems on two temperature generalized thermoelasticity. Arch Appl Mech
2011; 81: 10311040.
[58] Caputo, M. Linear models of dissipation whose Q is almost frequently independent II. Geophys J R Astron Soc 1967; 13: 529539.
[59] Mainardi, F. Fractional calculus: some basic problems in continuum and statistical mechanics. In: Carpinteri, A and Mainardi, F
(eds) Fractals and fractional calculus in continuum mechanics. New York: Springer, 1997, pp. 291348.
[60] Podlubny, I. Fractional differential equations. New York: Academic Press, 1999.
[61] Gorenflo, R, and Mainardi, F. Fractional calculus: integral and differential equations of fractional orders, fractals and fractional
calculus in continuum mechanics. Wien: Springer, 1997.
[62] Hilfer, R. Application of fraction calculus in physics. Singapore: World Scientific, 2000.
[63] Ignaczak, J, and Ostoja-Starzewski, M. Thermoelasticity with finite wave speeds. Oxford Science Publications, 2010.
[64] Debnath, L, and Bhatta, D. Integral transforms and their applications. London, New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC, Taylor &
Francis Group, 2007.
[65] Kimmich, R. Strange kinetics, porous media, and NMR. J Chem Phys 2002; 284: 243285.
[66] Mainardi, F, and Gorenflo, R. On Mittag-Lettler-type function in fractional evolution processes. J Comput Appl Math 2000; 118:
283299.
[67] Fujita, Y. Integrodifferential equation which interpolates the heat equation and wave equation (II). Osaka J Math 1990; 27:
797804.
[68] Povstenko, YZ. Fractional heat conductive and associated thermal stress. J Therm Stresses 2004; 28: 83102.
[69] Povstenko, YZ. Fractional Catteneo-type equations and generalized thermoelasticity. J Therm Stresses 2011; 34: 94114.
[70] Sherief, HH, El-Said, A, and Abd El-Latif, A. Fractional order theory of thermoelasticity. Int J Solids Struct 2010; 47: 269275.
[71] Youssef, HM. Theory of fractional order generalized thermoelasticity. J Heat Transfer (ASME) 2010; 132(6): 17.
[72] Jumarie, G. Derivation and solutions of some fractional Black-Scholes equations in coarse-grained space and time. Application
to Mertons optimal portfolio. Comput Math Appl 2010; 59: 11421164.
[73] El-Karamany, AS, and Ezzat, MA. Convolution variational principles reciprocal and uniqueness theorems in linear fractional
two-temperature thermoelasticity. J Therm Stresses 2011; 34(3): 264284.
[74] El-Karamany, AS, and Ezzat, MA. On fractional thermoelasticity. Math Mech Solid 2011; 16(3): 334346.
[75] El-Karamany, AS, and Ezzat, MA. Fractional order theory of a perfect conducting thermoelastic medium. Can J Phys 2011;
89(3): 311318.
[76] Ezzat, MA, El-Karamany, AS, and Fayik, MA. Fractional order theory in thermoelastic solid with three-phase-lag heat transfer.
Arch Appl Mech 2012; 82: 557572.
[77] Sur, A, and Kanoria, M. Fractional order two-temperature thermoelasticity with finite wave speed. Acta Mech 2012; 223:
26852701.
[78] Honig, G and Hirdes, U. A method for the numerical inversion of Laplace transform. J Comp Appl Math 1984; 10: 113132.
[79] Hetnarski, RB, and Eslami, MR. Thermal stress-advanced theory and applications. Springer, 2008.
[80] Bahar, LY, and Hetnarski, RB. State space approach to thermoelasticity. J Thermal Stresses 1978; 1: 135145.

Downloaded from mms.sagepub.com at Arab Academy for Science Techn on October 17, 2016