Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Do˝or of Philosophy
in
Engineering
by
Manoranjan Barik
With love to
My wife Trushna
And little ones Trushita and Monisha
Who endured all the sufferings silently
And looked for this day patiently
* INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
KHARAGPUR 721302, INDIA
Certificate
This is to certify that the thesis entitled ‘FINITE ELEMENT STATIC,
DYNAMIC AND STABILITY ANALYSES OF ARBITRARY STIFFENED
PLATES’ being submitted to the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharag-
pur by Mr. Manoranjan Barik for the award of the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy in Engineering is a record of bonafide research work carried
out by him under my supervision and guidance, and Mr. Barik fulfills the
requirements of the regulations of the degree. The results embodied in
this thesis have not been submitted to any other University or Institute
for the award of any degree or diploma.
Madhujit Mukhopadhyay
Acknowledgements
v
vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I acknowledge the help received in various forms from all the facul-
ties and staff members of the Department whose excellent cooperation
made my stay here a homely, pleasant and enjoyable one.
Krishna and Prusheth, the LATEX lovers did marvelous jobs to han-
dle in my own way, the commas and semicolons of the LATEX. I sincerely
acknowledge their invaluable help.
The works could not have seen such a happy ending without the lov-
ing cooperation of Abhinna, who helped me in taking the final prints. I
feel short of words to thank him.
I express my sincere thanks to my Church Members at Rourkela
and Kharagpur and the IIT Christian Fellowship Members, particularly
James and Patrick who held me up through their fervent prayer support
throughout my research work.
The sweet presence of my co-scholars, Satish, Asokendu, Sushanta,
Murthy, Chaitali, Sangita ... made my stay at the Institute a memo-
rable one, for together we suffered the moments of trauma, together we
triumphed over the success, together we shared the moments of joy and
happiness and the greatest of all was that we understood each other better
than any body else.
Above all, I express my deep sense of gratitude to my Professor and
supervisor Professor Madhujit Mukhopadhyay, Professor, Department
of Ocean Engineering and Naval Architecture, Indian Institute of Tech-
nology, Kharagpur, whose constant encouragement, guidance and the
time I spent along with him was invaluable to me. There were moments
when he pushed me forward, enough to stumble, so that I may rise up
and stand upright on my own on firm ground. And often he dragged me
forward just to enable me to reach my goal. I adore him for his many ex-
cellent qualities and feel myself blessed to work under him, for working
with him was never a burden, rather a pleasure, the moments of which I
will be carrying along with me throughout my life’s journey.
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 The Objective and Scope of Present Investigation . . . . 5
2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 9
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2 Review on Bare Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2.1 Static Analysis of Bare Plates . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.2 Free Vibration Analysis of Bare Plates . . . . . . 17
2.2.3 Stability Analysis of Bare Plates . . . . . . . . . 24
2.3 Various Methods of Analysis of Stiffened Plates . . . . . 30
2.4 Review on Stiffened Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.4.1 Static Analysis of Stiffened Plates . . . . . . . . 33
2.4.2 Free Vibration Analysis of Stiffened Plates . . . 36
2.4.3 Stability Analysis of Stiffened Plates . . . . . . 43
3 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION 47
3.1 The Basic Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
3.2 Proposed Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.2.1 The Basic Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.2.2 The Transformation of the Coordinate . . . . . . 49
3.3 Arbitrary Bare Plate Bending Formulation . . . . . . . . 52
3.3.1 The Displacement Function . . . . . . . . . . . 52
3.3.2 Elastic Stiffness Matrix Formulation . . . . . . . 53
3.3.2.1 Stress-Strain Relationship . . . . . . . 53
vii
viii CONTENTS
6 CONCLUSIONS 209
CONTENTS xiii
xv
xvi PREFACE
matrix for the plate element and the stiffener element have been formu-
lated separately. The boundary conditions have been implemented by
consistently formulating the stiffness matrices of the boundary line and
adding them to the global stiffness matrix.
The Chapter 4 briefly describes the computer programme implemen-
tation of the theoretical formulation presented in Chapter 3. The different
functions and the associated variables which have been used in writing
the codes in C++ language have been presented in brief. A few numbers
of flowchart of the computer codes have been illustrated.
Several numerical examples which include the static, the free vibra-
tion and the stability analyses of bare and the stiffened plates of various
geometries have been presented in the Chapter 5 to validate the formu-
lation of the proposed method. Attempt has been made to include a wide
spectrum of problems of diverse geometrical plate shapes. The results
have been compared wherever possible and the discrepancies in them
have been discussed.
The Chapter 6 sums up and concludes the present investigation. An
account of possible scope of extension to the present study along with a
list of publications has been appended to the concluding remarks.
At the end, some important publications and books referred during
the present investigation have been listed in the Bibliography section.
List of Symbols
Although all the principal symbols used in this thesis are defined in the
text as they occur, a list of them is presented below for easy reference. On
some occasions, a single symbol is used for different meanings depend-
ing on the context and thus its uniqueness is lost. The contextual expla-
nation of the symbol at its appropriate place of use is hoped to eliminate
the confusion.
English
As cross sectional area of the stiffener
[Bp ] strain matrix for plate element of stiffened plate
[Bs ] strain matrix for stiffener element of stiffened plate
[Bu ] strain matrix for bare plate element
dx, dy element length in x and y-direction
dv volume of the element
[Du ] rigidity matrix of bare plate element
[Dp ] rigidity matrix of stiffened plate element
[Ds ] rigidity matrix of stiffener element
E modulus of elasticity
{f¨} acceleration field vector
{FI } nodal inertia force parameter
{fku } reaction component per unit length of bare plate
Fx , Fy , Fxy inplane forces
FS axial force in the stiffener
G modulus of rigidity
Is second moment of area of the stiffener
xix
xx LIST OF SYMBOLS
|J| jacobian
Js torsional constant of the stiffener
|Jst | jacobian of the stiffener
[K] global elastic stiffness matrix
[KG ] global geometric stiffness matrix
[Ku ]e elastic stiffness matrix of the bare plate bending element
[KuG ]e geometric stiffness matrix of the bare plate bending element
[Ku ] global elastic stiffness matrix of the bare plate
[KuG ] global geometric stiffness matrix of the bare plate
[Kp ]e elastic stiffness matrix of the stiffened plate element
[KpG ]e geometric stiffness matrix of the stiffened plate element
[Ks ]e elastic stiffness matrix of the stiffener element
[KsG ]e geometric stiffness matrix of the stiffener element
[Kp ]b stiffness matrix of the boundary of stiffened plate
[Ku ]b stiffness matrix of the boundary line of the bare plate
ku , kv , kw translational restraint coefficient
kα , kβ rotational restraint coefficient
[M ] global consistent mass matrix
[Mu ]e consistent mass matrix of the bare plate bending element
[Mp ]e consistent mass matrix of the stiffened plate element
[Ms ]e consistent mass matrix of the stiffener element
Ms bending moment of the stiffener
Mx , My , Mxy bending moments of the plate
Ni (s, t) cubic serendipity shape functions
Nu , Nv , Nw finite element shape functions
Nθξ , Nθη finite element shape functions
{P } global load vector
{P }e element load vector
q load intensity
s-t axis system of the plate in the mapped domain
s1 length along the boundary
xxi
Greek
α angle between the x´ -y´ and x-y axes system
β angle between the x1 -y1 and x-y axes system
{δ}u nodal displacement vector of bare plate
{δ}p nodal displacement vector of stiffened plate
{δ̈}u nodal acceleration vector of bare plate
ξ-η axis system of the element in the mapped domain
{σ}u stress resultant vector of bare plate
{σ}p stress resultant vector of stiffened plate
{σ}s stress resultant vector of stiffener
σx , σy , τxy stresses at a point
{²}u generalized strain vector of bare plate
{²}uG geometric strain vector of bare plate
{²}p strain vector of stiffened plate element
{²}pE elastic plate strain vector
{²}pG geometric plate strain vector
{²}s strain vector of the stiffener
{²}sE elastic stiffener strain vector
{²}sG geometric stiffener strain vector
xxii LIST OF SYMBOLS
Subscripts
u for bare plate
G for geometric stiffness matrix
b for boundary
p for the plate element of the stiffened plate
s for the stiffener element of the stiffened plate
Operators
(˙ ) first derivative with respect to time
¨( ) second derivative with respect to time
[ ]−1 inverse of the matrix
[ ]−T transpose of the matrix
List of Tables
xxiii
xxiv LIST OF TABLES
r
ωa2 ρ
5.12 Frequency parameters λ = for all edges clamped
2π D
trapezoidal plate . . . . . . . . . r. . . . . . . . . . . . 137
ρ
5.13 Frequency parameters λ = ωa2 for triangular
D
plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
5.14 Values of ω for annular sector plates . . . . . . . . . . 141
5.15 Frequency parameters λ = ωa2 (ρh/D)1/2 for elliptical
and circular plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
5.16 Buckling parameter k = λb2 /π 2 D for uniformly com-
pressed all edges simply supported rectangular plates 145
5.17 Buckling parameter k = λb2 /π 2 D for uniformly com-
pressed all edges clamped rectangular plates . . . . . 146
5.18 Buckling parameter k = λb2 /π 2 D for all edges clamped
rectangular plates with biaxial uniform compression . 147
5.19 Buckling parameter k = λb2 /π 2 D for uniaxially com-
pressed all edges simply supported rectangular plates
with triangular load i.e; α = 1 in the expression Nx =
y
N0 (1 − α ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
b
5.20 Buckling parameter k = λb2 /π 2 D for uniaxially com-
pressed all edges simply supported and clamped skew
plates (Aspect ratio = 1.0, ν = 0.3) . . . . . . . . . . . 149
5.21 Buckling parameter k = (Nr )cr a2 /D for uniformly
compressed simply supported and clamped circular
plates (ν = 0.3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
5.22 Deflection at the centre of simply supported square
stiffened plate (×104 mm.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
5.23 Convergence of deflection (w), plate moment (My ) and
plate stress (σx ) of the eccentrically stiffened square
plate at its centre with different mesh divisions. . . . . 154
5.24 Central deflection of rectangular cross-stiffened plate
(×103 mm.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
LIST OF TABLES xxv
xxvii
xxviii LIST OF FIGURES
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
Plates used as structural elements take different shapes due to their
functional or structural requirements as well as from the aesthetic con-
sideration. These arbitrarily shaped, elastic thin plates are widely used
in civil, marine, aeronautical and mechanical engineering applications.
Various engineering structures consisting of these thin plates of differ-
ent shapes are often stiffened with stiffening ribs for achieving greater
strength with relatively less material and thus making the structure cost
effective. While the stiffening elements add negligible weight to the over-
all structure, their influence on strength and stability is enormous. In this
process the strength/weight ratio is improved dramatically which is vital
in some specific structures like ship, aircrafts and similar other types.
These plates of arbitrary geometries are subjected to the static lat-
eral load, the dynamic load and the inplane load for which three types
of analysis such as static, free vibration and stability are to be carried
out. In these analyses, the geometry of the plate as well as its boundary
conditions play a major role in the choice of the methods of the solution.
Exact solutions for plates are available only for certain shapes, bound-
aries and loading conditions. An attempt to have an analytical solution
1
2 INTRODUCTION
with one of the sides being modified to include a curved edge [35]. But
these elements being developed to accommodate a particular plate geom-
etry, none of them can be generalized to represent an arbitrary edge such
as straight, skew or curved.
Another successful approach in this pursuit is the application of the
isoparametric element because of its generality to model a curved bound-
ary successfully. Unfortunately, this element which is having the shear
strain term based on the Mindlin’s theory becomes very stiff when used
to model thin structures, resulting inexact solutions. This effect is termed
as shear-locking which makes this otherwise successful element unsuit-
able. Much effort has been put to identify and eliminate the source of
this shear-locking effect. The most successful technique for alleviating
the problem associated with this shear-locking is through evaluating cer-
tain transverse shear coefficients of the element stiffness matrix using
a lower order numerical integration rule than that which is required to
evaluate the coefficients exactly as discussed by Zienkiewicz and Tay-
lor [199]. This technique which is known as reduced or selective inte-
gration has been used on elements which shear-lock when exact integra-
tion is performed. However, an inexact integration scheme results in a
rank deficient element stiffness matrix, which in turn, generates addi-
tional zero strain deformation modes in a solution known as zero-energy
modes, other than the rigid body movements and which must be sup-
pressed through stabilization techniques. It has been found that all the
displacement-based shear deformable plate elements of this kind fail on
many occasions either by shear-locking or singular behaviour.
Thus it is felt that in spite of vast number of elements present in the
literature [67] since the inception of the finite element method in the early
1960s, still there is a need of development of suitable elements which can
model the thin plates of arbitrary geometry successfully.
1.2 The Objective and Scope of Present Investigation 5
is modelled in such a way as to lie anywhere within the plate element and
need not follow the nodal lines. Further, in the formulation, their orien-
tation is kept arbitrary which makes the analysis more flexible and the
mesh division independent of their location and orientation. The same
displacement interpolation functions as used for the plate elements are
adopted in the formulation of the stiffener element. This facilitates to
express the stiffness and the mass matrices of the stiffener in terms of the
nodal parameters of the plate element thus ensuring the compatibility of
the stiffener with the plate.
Similar to the bare plate; static, dynamic and stability analyses of
various stiffened plate configurations such as square, rectangular, skew,
trapezoidal, triangular, circular, elliptical, annular sector etc. with various
stiffener positions have been carried out.
The implementation of the methodology to different types of analysis
described in the investigation is made through the development of com-
puter programmes in C++. To make the analysis more cost effective, the
global elastic stiffness, mass and geometric stiffness matrices are stored
using the skyline storage technique. No standard or general software
package is used for these analyses and as such the computer programmes
developed here are general and complete in themselves. The computer
programmes have been run in the HP - UX 9000/819 work station avail-
able at the Computer Centre of the Institute and the ORIGIN 200 of the
Departmental Computer Laboratory.
The present investigation comprises the following topics:
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Introduction
Many exact solutions for thin elastic bare plates for bending and buck-
ling along with a few stiffened plate buckling analysis are well docu-
mented in Timoshenko’s monographs [184] and [185]. Leissa [86] has
presented free vibration analytical results for a number of cases of bare
plates. In the stiffened plate domain the analytical solutions have been
presented by Troitsky [186] for static, dynamic and stability analysis.
However, the analytic solutions in the open literature are incomplete be-
cause they become extremely tedious for complex problem definitions.
The advent of digital computer along with its capability of exponentially
increasing computing speed has made the analytically difficult problems
amenable through the various numerical methods and thus making the
literature rich in this area.
9
10 REVIEW OF LITERATURE
ized coordinates have been determined by the Galerkin method using the
basic functions as the weight functions. They have presented the deflec-
tion and the bending moment results of trapezoidal, parallelogram and
sector plates. Though it has been claimed, the triangular plate results are
not present in the paper. This method is suitable for straight-edged plates
of simply supported boundary conditions. This method requires more
analytical and computational effort for the plates of curved geometry.
Mizusawa et al. [116] have dealt with the free vibration of skew plates
for various boundary conditions using the Rayleigh-Ritz method with
B-spline functions as its coordinate functions. They have applied the
method of artificial springs to deal with the arbitrary boundary condi-
tions of the plates corresponding to deflection and the two slopes at each
of the edges. By assigning zero or infinite values to these spring con-
stants they have obtained free or fixed boundary conditions for the corre-
sponding restraint. They have also studied the convergence of the results
with respect to changes in the degree of the B-spline functions and in the
number of knots, for different skew angles. They have obtained the total
potential energy by adding the energy due to the springs corresponding
to boundary conditions, to that of the skew plate.
Leissa and Narita [94] have presented the free vibration natural fre-
quencies of simply supported circular plates for different values of Pois-
son’s ratio and number of internal nodal circles using the ordinary and
modified Bessel functions. They have considered the deflected shape of
the vibrating plate in polar coordinates and have derived the relationship
to obtain additional values of frequency parameters for large number of
internal nodal circles.
Maruyama and Ichinomiya [105] have described an experimental study
of the low frequency transverse vibration modes of wedge-shaped and
ring-shaped sector plates with all edges clamped which are carried out
by using the real time method of holographic interferometry. They have
studied the effects of the sector angle and the radii ratio on the natural fre-
quencies and the corresponding mode shapes of the sector plates with all
edges clamped and have compared their experimental results with those
of analytically obtained ones by the other investigators.
Bhat [23] has investigated the vibration problem of rectangular plates
by using a set of characteristic orthogonal polynomials in the Rayleigh-
2.2 Review on Bare Plates 19
plates. A set of new starting functions has been proposed which satisfies
the geometrical boundary conditions of circular and elliptical plates with
clamped, simply supported or free circumferential peripheries. Further,
the Gram-Schmidt process has been used to generate the higher terms in
the set of plate functions. The use of these functions for the determination
of natural frequencies and mode shapes has been presented. They have
analyzed circular and elliptical plates for free, simply supported or fully
clamped boundary conditions.
Prasad et al. [149] have presented approximate formulae for the free
vibration of simply supported and clamped elliptical plates. They have
used the Rayleigh-Ritz method with a three-term deflection function. In
this method a deflection has to be chosen satisfying each boundary con-
dition which makes the analysis difficult.
Young and Dickinson [194] have used the Rayleigh-Ritz method for
the free vibrations study of the plates having one or more edges defined
by general polynomials, the admissible functions employed being prod-
ucts of simple polynomials. They have presented the free vibration re-
sults for the isotropic as well as rectangularly orthotropic plates and con-
sidered various plate geometries such as circular, elliptical, annular and
hypocycloidal. However, the incorporation of the boundary conditions is
somewhat complex and imposes the restrictions on the choice of deflec-
tion function.
Ding [46] has proposed the use of a fast converging series consisting
of static beam functions under point load as admissible functions in the
Rayleigh-Ritz method to study the problem of the flexural vibration of
rectangular plates. The admissible sets of displacement functions have
been obtained by varying the location of the point load applied to the
beam. Numerical examples of rectangular plates with various aspect ra-
tios and boundary conditions have been presented. In this method, the
2.2 Review on Bare Plates 21
which are the products of piecewise polynomials and B-3 spline func-
tions. The formulated eigenvalue matrix equation for the buckling anal-
ysis has been solved following the procedure of standard finite element
method. They have presented the first and second buckling load factors
for the rectangular, parallelogrammic, triangular, circular and elliptical
plate configurations.
Singh and Venkateswara Rao [178] have presented design formulae
for the fundamental frequencies and critical buckling loads estimation of
elliptical plates for simply supported and clamped edges. Cortinez and
Laura [40] have proposed simple approximate formulae for a quick and
sufficiently accurate estimate of the fundamental frequencies and critical
loads of clamped plates by simplifying the conformal mapping method.
They have determined the fundamental frequencies and critical buckling
loads of regular polygonal plates, circular plate with two flat sides and a
square plate having rounded corners. This method can be applied to the
plate having clamped edges only.
Wang et al. [188] have used the pb-2 Rayleigh-Ritz method proposed
by Liew and Lam [98] and have analyzed the buckling of skew plates.
In this method, the Ritz functions consist of the product of a basic func-
tion and orthogonal polynomials, the degree of which may be increased
until the desired accuracy is reached. The basic function is formed by
taking the product of the equations expressing the boundary shape, with
each equation having the power of either 0, 1, or 2 corresponding to free,
simply supported, or clamped supporting edges respectively. As such,
the kinematic boundary conditions are automatically satisfied at the out-
set without using Lagrangian multipliers. This form of Ritz function has
an advantage over the trigonometric series, as the analyst need not search
for the appropriate trigonometric series because the boundary expressions
are already given. Using this method they have presented buckling results
2.2 Review on Bare Plates 29
∂θx ∂θy
ement. They have imposed a relaxed continuity condition of =
∂y ∂x
in the element, but satisfying in the strict sense the C1 continuity re-
quirement on the element boundary. They have proposed formulation of
the mass matrix and the geometric stiffness matrix by linear combina-
tion of the interpolations of the element displacement functions. They
have presented a clamped circular plate example for the bending analysis
and simply supported as well as clamped square plates for vibration and
buckling analyses.
Yuan and Jin [195] have employed the multi-term trial functions in
place of earlier used single-term trial function to the extended Kantorovich
method for the eigenvalue solution of elastic stability of rectangular thin
plates subjected to different inplane forces and boundary conditions. They
have derived the ordinary differential equations and the boundary condi-
tions through the associated variational principle reducing the problem
to a linear eigenvalue problem in ordinary differential equations in each
iteration step, which in turn has been solved using general-purpose or-
dinary differential equation solvers. They have presented a number of
numerical examples of rectangular plates.
Among all the existing numerical methods, the finite element method
is undoubtedly the most versatile and accurate one specially for structures
having irregular geometry, material anisotropy, nonhomogeniety and any
type of loading and boundary conditions.
modified to account for an added beam element and additional terms im-
posing the constant between the two. They have presented results for the
deflection of the centre of the stiffened plate and have compared with the
series solution of Timoshenko and Krieger [185].
Al-Shawi and Mardirosian [4] have proposed an improved dynamic
relaxation method for the analysis of cantilever plates stiffened with edge
beams. The plate skin is modelled using an improved rectangular plate
bending element and the edge stiffener is modelled using the grillage
beam element. Different weighting parameters are multiplied with the
mass and damping factor of the structure, the optimum values of which
are obtained for different cantilever plates with edge stiffeners of different
sizes. The method is applicable to the rectangular plates only and the
stiffeners should lie on the nodal lines. The inplane displacements due to
the eccentricity of the stiffeners are not considered in the analysis.
Harik and Haddad [61] and Harik and Salamoun [62] have applied the
analytical strip method to the analysis of stiffened plates having annular
sector and rectangular planforms respectively, modelling the plate and
the stiffener separately. The bending, torsional and warping rigidities of
the stiffener have been considered in the formulation, but the inplane dis-
placements produced by the eccentricity of the stiffeners have not been
considered. The behaviour of the system is derived by imposing the edge
and continuity conditions on the closed form solutions of the individual
plate strips and beam elements. In this approach the stiffener and the line
loads along the strip must follow the nodal lines which imposes restric-
tions on the mesh division.
Petrolito and Golley [147] have proposed a variable degree of free-
dom macro plate bending element where the displacement function within
an element satisfies the governing thin plate equations, substantially re-
ducing the number of equations to be solved. In this method, large ele-
2.4 Review on Stiffened Plates 35
tion of the plate and the stiffeners is included in the modified differential
equation through Dirac delta function and the Heaviside lambda function.
Being an analytical method, the computational involvement is less.
Chan et al. [31] have proposed an exact solution procedure using the
U-transformation method for the static analysis of stiffened plates. In
this approach, only the rectangular plates with stiffeners concentrically
and periodically placed can be analyzed. Based on the energy principle,
Kukreti and Cheraghi [81] have proposed a method for the analysis of
a stiffened plate system consisting of a plate supported on a network of
steel girders. The deflection function is considered as a product of a
polynomial and a trigonometric series. The method is applied to stiffened
plates of rectangular configurations for various loading conditions and
results are compared with those obtained by the finite element method.
A semianalytical method has been proposed by Mukhopadhyay [133]
for bending analysis of stiffened plates. In this method a displacement
function satisfying the boundary conditions along two opposite edges is
assumed. This displacement function is then substituted in the differ-
ential equation of the plate which in turn is reduced to an ordinary dif-
ferential equation having constant coefficients by some transformations.
He has presented results for rectangular stiffened plates having a vary-
ing number of location of stiffeners and possessing different boundary
conditions and loadings.
the grillage approximation approach has not become very popular for dy-
namic analysis of stiffened plates.
Srinivasan and Thiruvenkatachari [180] have applied the concept of
spreading the properties of the stiffeners over the area of the plate and
have solved the problem of curved eccentrically stiffened plates with tor-
sionally soft stiffener using the integral equation technique. This method
has been applied to the all edges clamped annular sector plates with ec-
centric stiffeners for static and vibration analysis.
Plates reinforced with regular orthogonal array of uniform beams
have been analyzed by Mead et al. [107] using a method developed for
the study of wave propagation in two dimensional periodic structures. A
motion of plane wave type characterized by different propagation phase
constants in both the directions is considered. The governing equations of
free wave motion are set up using the hierarchical finite element method
and they are solved as an eigenvalue problem for the frequencies at which
particular waves will propagate. Though a large structure can be analyzed
by this method with minimal effort, but the application is limited to the
periodic structures only.
Mukhopadhyay [131] has applied the semi-analytic finite difference
method to the vibration and stability analysis of rectangular stiffened
plates based on the plate beam idealization. The displacement func-
tions satisfying the boundary conditions along the two opposite edges
are substituted in the governing equations and they are reduced to or-
dinary differential equations by suitable transformations. Though the
method has attractive features from the economic point of view, it has
all the drawbacks inherent in the semi-analytic finite difference method.
In this method, a separate formulation is needed for each different struc-
tural configuration. It is difficult to handle complex boundary conditions,
concentrated load application and similar other situations.
40 REVIEW OF LITERATURE
nique to the finite element method for analyzing the free vibration of
stiffened plates using a super element which consists of a macro element
having analytical as well as the usual finite element shape functions. The
lateral and inplane effects as well as the beam torsion and its horizontal
bending have been incorporated in the formulation. The method limits
its application to the rectangular plate configurations and the stiffeners
placement demands that they should be placed on the nodal lines.
Palani et al [143] have studied the performance of an eight-noded and
an nine-noded isoparametric finite element models for static and vibra-
tion analysis of eccentrically stiffened plates/shells. They have derived
the models by combining serendipity or Lagrangian plate/shell elements
with the three-noded isoparametric beam element employing suitable
transformations for the eccentricity of the stiffeners. Numerical studies
have been made for the concentrically and eccentrically stiffened plates
using four mass lumping schemes. Though they have used the isopara-
metric elements which is capable to model the arbitrary shape of a plate,
they have not addressed any such plate configurations other than the rect-
angular ones. Moreover, their formulation demands the placement of the
stiffeners along the element boundaries of the plates/shells. However, in
another publication [144] they have extended their formulation to accom-
modate the arbitrary placement of the stiffeners and the application areas
to the skew and annular stiffened plates. They have considered the nine-
noded element to be superior to the eight-noded one which locks in shear
for thin plates.
Harik and Guo [60] have developed a compound finite element model
to investigate the eccentrically stiffened plates in free vibration where
they have treated the beam and the plate elements as integral parts of
a compound section, and not as independent bending components. In
their formulation, the neutral surface may not coincide in the orthogo-
42 REVIEW OF LITERATURE
portion of the plate area and with the stiffener area. Klitchieff [79] has
presented an expression for the minimum dimensions of the stiffeners to
withstand a predetermined critical load.
Sherbourne et al. [174] have used the orthotropic plate approach for
the behaviour of the simply supported stiffened and corrugated plates
under uniform axial compression. This method has all the drawbacks of
the orthotropic plate modelling.
Dean and Abdel-Malek [44] have presented a discrete field approach
to compute the elastic buckling of stiffened plates subjected to uniform
longitudinal compression. As they have used the orthotropic stiffened
plate modelling, the formulation is restricted to the equally spaced and
equally sized stiffeners. Also it is confined to the simply supported plates
of rectangular geometries.
Allman [6] has carried out the analysis for buckling loads of square
and rectangular plates using triangular element. He has presented the re-
sults both by including and neglecting the torsional stiffness of the stiff-
eners and has considered three cross-sections of the stiffeners such as
square, rectangular and circular.
Shastry et al. [171] have solved the problem of buckling analysis of
stiffened plates with arbitrarily oriented stiffeners using finite element
method. In their modelling, they have used triangular plate bending ele-
ment and compatible beam element and applied the method to the buck-
ling analysis of square and rectangular stiffened plates.
Hovichitr et al. [66] have presented an analytical approach to analyze
orthogonally, equally spaced, simply supported stiffened plates for bend-
ing and stability. They have treated the stiffener sections, which were
assumed to be identical, and a portion of the plate as single unit. Using a
variational method, they have generated governing differential equations
of order of ten which in turn were reduced to eight and then to four using
2.4 Review on Stiffened Plates 45
in which the stiffener can be positioned anywhere within the plate ele-
ment and need not necessarily be placed on the nodal lines. They have
presented buckling results for square and skew stiffened plates and have
studied the effect of stiffener rigidity, torsional stiffness and eccentricity
of the stiffener on the buckling load. Though the element can readily ac-
commodate curved boundaries they have considered only the rectangular
and skew plates in their analysis.
Recently, an extensive review on the stability of stiffened plates has
been carried out by Bedair [19]. He has also presented a numerical
method for the prediction of the buckling load of multi-stiffened plates
under uniform compression following the philosophy of plate beam ide-
alization. He has employed the sequential quadratic programming to the
strain energy components of the plate and the stiffener elements which
are in terms of the out-of-plane and in-plane displacement functions. A
number of examples pertaining to the straight-edged orthogonally stiff-
ened plates buckling are presented. However, this method lacks in ana-
lyzing the curved boundary stiffened plates buckling.
Chapter - 3
MATHEMATICAL
FORMULATION
3. Stability Analysis
47
48 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
where [K], [M ] and [KG ] are the global elastic stiffness, consistent mass
and geometric stiffness matrices respectively, {δ} and {δ̈} are the dis-
placement and acceleration vectors in the global coordinate system and
{P } is the load vector acting at the nodes. The global matrices used
in the Eqs.(3.1.1)-(3.1.3) are obtained by assembling the corresponding
element matrices which are derived in the forthcoming sections of this
Chapter.
1. The normal to the middle plane of the plate before bending remains
straight and normal to the middle plane of the plate after bending.
2. The common normal to the plate and the stiffener system before
bending remains straight and normal to the deflected middle plane
of the plate after bending.
5. The material of the plate and the stiffener is same and follows
Hooke’s law.
where (xi , yi ) are the coordinates of the i-th node on the boundary of the
plate in the x-y plane and Ni (s, t) are the corresponding cubic serendipity
50 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
t
y
12 11
1 12 11 10
1 (-1,1) (1,1)
10
2 2 9 (1,1/3)
9
s
3 8
3 8 (1,-1/3)
6 7 (-1,-1) (1,-1)
4 5 4 5 6 7
(-1/3,1) (1/3,-1)
x
(a) Original plate (b) Master plate
shape functions presented in the Table 3.1. The mapping of the original
plate to the Master plate is as shown in the Fig. 3.1. In a mapping based
on the serendipity shape function the interior opening at a corner node
should not be greater than 180◦ (Zienkiewicz and Taylor [198]). This
3.2 Proposed Analysis 51
t
η
(−1,1) 12 11 (1,1)
1 10
2 9
s ξ
3 8
4 7
(−1,−1) 5 6 (1,−1)
(a) Element in a 4x4 mesh (b) Master element
in s-t plane in ξ−η plane
in a similar way as the original plate is mapped into the Master Plate in
the s-t plane using the same cubic serendipity shape functions given in
Eq.(3.2.1), but now the variables being changed from (s, t) to (ξ, η).
where
[Nw ] = [Nw1 Nθ1ξ Nθ1η Nw2 Nθ2ξ Nθ2η
(3.3.2)
Nw3 Nθ3ξ Nθ3η Nw4 Nθ4ξ Nθ4η ]
· µ ¶ µ ¶ µ ¶ µ ¶ ¸T
∂w ∂w ∂w ∂w
{δu } = w1 . . . . . . w4
∂ξ 1 ∂η 1 ∂ξ 4 ∂η 4
(3.3.3)
The shape functions for the displacement field for the jth node are given
as (Zienkiewicz and Taylor [198]):
1
[Nwj , Nθjξ , Nθjη ] = [(ξ0 + 1)(η0 + 1)(2 + ξ0 + η0 − ξ 2 − η 2 ),
8
ξj (ξ0 + 1)2 (ξ0 − 1)(η0 + 1), ηj (ξ0 + 1)(η0 + 1)2 (η0 − 1)](3.3.4)
Et3
DX = DY =
12(1 − ν 2 )
D1 = νDX (3.3.9)
1−ν
DXY = DX
2
· ¸T
∂2w ∂ 2w ∂ 2w
{²u } = − 2 − 2 2 (3.3.10)
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y
∂w ∂w
∂x ∂ξ
−1
= [J] (3.3.11)
∂w
∂w
∂y ∂η
3.3 Arbitrary Bare Plate Bending Formulation 55
2
∂2w
∂ w
−
∂w
∂x2
∂ξ 2
2 ∂ξ
∂2w −1 ∂ w −1 −1
− 2 = [J2] − [J2] [J1][J]
∂y ∂η 2
∂w
∂η
∂ 2w
∂ 2w
2
∂x∂y ∂ξ∂η
(3.3.12)
where
∂x ∂y
∂ξ ∂ξ
[J] =
∂x
(3.3.13)
∂y
∂η ∂η
∂ 2x ∂ 2y
∂ξ 2 ∂ξ 2
2
∂ x ∂ y
2
[J1] =
∂η 2
(3.3.14)
∂η 2
∂ 2x ∂ y
2
∂ξ∂η ∂ξ∂η
µ ¶2 µ ¶2
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y
− −
∂ξ ∂ξ ∂ξ ∂ξ
µ ¶2 µ ¶2
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y
[J2] =
− −
∂η ∂η ∂η ∂η
µ ¶ µ ¶ µ ¶
∂x ∂x ∂y ∂y 1 ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y
− − +
∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ ∂η 2 ∂ξ ∂η ∂η ∂ξ
(3.3.15)
From the above equations the strain vector of Eq.(3.3.10) can be ex-
56 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
pressed as
∂w
∂ξ
∂ 2w
∂w
− 2
∂x
∂η
h i ∂2w
∂ 2w
− 2 = [TF 1 ] [TF 2 ] ∂ξ 2 (3.3.16)
∂y
2
∂2w
∂ w
2
∂x∂y
∂η 2
∂2w
∂ξ ∂η
or
{²(x, y)u } = [Tu ] {²(ξ, η)u } (3.3.17)
where
and {²(x, y)u } and {²(ξ, η)u } denote the strain vectors in the respective
coordinate systems, the expression for {²(ξ, η)u } being given by;
· ¸T
∂w ∂w ∂ 2w ∂ 2w ∂2w
{²(ξ, η)u } = (3.3.19)
∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ 2 ∂η 2 ∂ξ∂η
where
· ¸T
£ ¤ ∂Nw ∂Nw ∂ 2 Nw ∂ 2 Nw ∂ 2 Nw
B̄u = (3.3.21)
∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ 2 ∂η 2 ∂ξ ∂η
3.3 Arbitrary Bare Plate Bending Formulation 57
where
[Bu ] = [Tu ][B̄u ] (3.3.23)
The stress-strain relationship from Eq.(3.3.6) can be expressed with
the help of the Eq.(3.3.22) as
where |J| is the determinant of the Jacobian matrix [J] given by Eq.(3.3.13).
The integration of the Eq.(3.3.28) is carried out numerically by adopting
2 × 2 Gaussian quadrature formula.
58 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
{f¨} = {w}
¨ = [Nw ] {δ¨u } (3.3.29)
The above equation with the help of the Eq.(3.3.30) can be rewritten as
Z
© Tª © Tª
dδ {FI } = dδ [Nw ]T ρ dV [Nw ] {δ¨u } (3.3.32)
v
from which
Z
{FI } = ρ [Nw ]T [Nw ] dV {δ¨u } = [Mu ]e {δ¨u } (3.3.33)
v
where [Mu ]e is the mass matrix of the bare plate element and for constant
thickness t it is given by
Z ZZ
T
[Mu ]e = ρ [Nw ] [Nw ] dV = ρt [Nw ]T [Nw ] |J| dξ dη (3.3.34)
v
3.3 Arbitrary Bare Plate Bending Formulation 59
and
σx τxy
[σu ] = (3.3.40)
τxy σy
The Eq.(3.3.39) can be expressed in terms of ξ and η and can be rewritten
as ∂w ∂w
∂x
∂ξ
{θu } = = [TuG ] (3.3.41)
∂w
∂w
∂y ∂η
where
[TuG ] = [J]−1 (3.3.42)
and ∂w
∂ξ
£ ¤
= B̄uG {δu } (3.3.43)
∂w
∂η
where ·· ¸ · ¸¸T
£ ¤ ∂Nw ∂Nw
B̄uG = (3.3.44)
∂ξ ∂η
Hence combining Eq.(3.3.41) and Eq.(3.3.43) {θu } can be expressed
as
£ ¤
{θu } = [TuG ] B̄uG {δu } = [BuG ] {δu } (3.3.45)
where
£ ¤
[BuG ] = [TuG ] B̄uG (3.3.46)
1
W = {δu }T [KuG ] {δu } (3.3.48)
2
From Eqs.(3.3.47) and (3.3.48) the geometric stiffness matrix of the bare
plate element can be written as
ZZ ZZ
T
[KuG ]e = t [BuG ] [σu ] [BuG ] dx dy = t [BuG ]T [σu ] [BuG ] |J| dξ dη
(3.3.49)
where the subscript e denotes that the matrix is for the plate element.
Let the angle made by the local axis x1 -y1 with the global axis x-y be β.
Hence a relationship between the two axes can be established as given
below.
x cosβ −sinβ x1
= (3.3.50)
y sinβ cosβ y1
62 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
y
y1
x1
P
β
x
w
w
∂w
{fbu } = =
θn (3.3.51)
∂x1
∂w
θt
∂y1
where θn and θt represent the slopes which are normal and transverse to
the boundaries respectively. Substituting from Eqs.(3.3.50), the Eq.(3.3.51)
can be written as
3.3 Arbitrary Bare Plate Bending Formulation 63
w
1 0 0
∂w
{fbu } = 0 cosβ sinβ (3.3.52)
∂x
∂w
0 −sinβ cosβ
∂y
Expressing Eq.(3.3.52) in terms of the shape functions;
where
[Nw ]
1 0 0
∂[N ]
w
∂x
[Nbu ] = 0 cosβ sinβ (3.3.54)
∂[N ]
w
0 −sinβ cosβ ∂y
The reaction components per unit length along the boundary line due
to the elastic springs corresponding to the possible boundary displace-
ments given in the Eq.(3.3.51) can be expressed as
kw w
fkw
{fku } = = k θ
α n (3.3.55)
fkα
k θ
fkβ
β t
64 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
where
k 0 0 [Nw ]
w
∂[N ]
w
[Nku ] = 0
kα cosβ kα sinβ ∂x (3.3.57)
∂[N w
]
0 −kβ sinβ kβ cosβ
∂y
Using Equations (3.3.52) and (3.3.55) the stiffness matrix can be ob-
tained by the virtual work principle and it can be expressed as
Z
[Kbu ] = [Nbu ]T [Nku ] |Jb | dλ1 (3.3.58)
where λ1 is the direction of the boundary line in the ξ-η plane and the
ds1
Jacobian |Jb | = .
dλ1
The value of the Jacobian along a boundary line is considered as a
constant quantity and is evaluated by the ratio of the actual length to the
length on the mapped domain considering any segment of the boundary
line.
A classical boundary condition can be attained by substituting a high
value of the restraint coefficients corresponding to the restraint direction.
3.4 Arbitrary Stiffened Plate Element Formulation 65
For the proposed stiffened plate bending element, the bending deforma-
tion has been represented combining the four-noded rectangular non-
conforming ACM plate bending element with 12 degrees of freedom
(Adini and Clough [1]), already used in the formulation of the bare plate,
and the four-noded rectangular plane stress element with 8 degrees of
freedom for the in-plane deformations. As before, the element is in the
ξ-η plane, and the shape functions as well as the nodal parameters for the
displacements and slopes are expressed in terms of the coordinates ξ and
η instead of x and y coordinates of the parent ACM element. Thus the
displacement field can be written as:
u
[Nu ]
{f } = v = [Nv ] {δp } (3.4.1)
w [Nw ]
where [Nu ], [Nv ] and [Nw ] are the vectors of the respective shape func-
tions out of which [Nu ] and [Nv ] are given as:
[Nu ] = [Nu1 0 0 0 0 Nu2 0 0 0 0
Nu3 0 0 0 0 Nu4 0 0 0 0]
(3.4.2)
[Nv ] = [0 Nv1 0 0 0 0 Nv2 0 0 0
0 Nv3 0 0 0 0 Nv 0 0 0]
4
3.4 Arbitrary Stiffened Plate Element Formulation 67
and [Nw ] is given by the Eq.(3.3.2) and the displacement vector {δp } for
the stiffened plate is expressed as:
µ ¶ µ ¶
∂w ∂w
{δp } = [u1 v1 w1 ... ...
∂ξ ∂η
1 1 µ ¶ µ ¶ ¸T
∂w ∂w
u4 v4 w4
∂ξ 4 ∂η 4
(3.4.3)
The shape functions for the displacement field corresponding to a
particular node, say the jth node can be expressed as:
1
Nuj = Nvj = (1 + ξ0 )(1 + η0 ) (3.4.4)
4
DXA D1A
D1A DY A 0
DXY A
[Dp ] =
(3.4.6)
DXF D1F
0 D1F DY F
DXY F
where the elements of the matrix for isotropic material are given by:
Et Et3
DXA = DY A = DXF = DY F =
1−ν 2 12(1 − ν )
2
D1A = νDXA D1F = νDXF (3.4.7)
1−ν 1−ν
DXY A = DXA DXY F = DXF
2 2
∂u
∂x
∂v
∂y
∂u ∂v
∂y + ∂x
{²p } = (3.4.8)
∂ 2w
−
∂x2
∂ 2w
−
∂y 2
∂ 2w
2
∂x∂y
3.4 Arbitrary Stiffened Plate Element Formulation 69
or,
{²(x, y)p } = [Tp ] {²(ξ, η)p } (3.4.11)
where
[TA ] 0 0
[Tp ] = (3.4.12)
0 [TF 1 ] [TF 2 ]
· ¸T
∂u ∂u ∂v ∂v ∂w ∂w ∂ 2w
∂ 2w ∂ 2w
{²(ξ, η)p } =
∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ 2
∂ξ ∂η ∂η 2
(3.4.13)
Following the same procedure as in the case of the bare plate, the
strain-displacement relationship can be written as:
where
£ ¤
[Bp ] = [Tp ] B̄p (3.4.15)
and
·
£ ¤ ∂Nu ∂Nu ∂Nv ∂Nv ∂Nw ∂Nw
B̄p =
∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ ∂η
¸T
∂ 2 Nw ∂ 2 Nw ∂ 2 Nw
(3.4.16)
∂ξ 2 ∂η 2 ∂ξ ∂η
A consistent mass matrix for the plate element is formulated on the basis
of lateral as well as in-plane displacements.
The displacement components of a point at a depth z from the middle
plane of the plate can be expressed in terms of those at the plate mid-
plane as
∂w
ū
u−z
∂x
{f } = ∂w
v̄ = v − z (3.4.18)
∂y
w̄ w
where
1 0 0 −z 0
[G] =
0 1 0 0 −z
(3.4.20)
0 0 1 0 0
72 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
1 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0
[L] = 0 0 1 0 0 (3.4.21)
0 0 0 ∂ξ ∂η
∂x ∂x
∂ξ ∂η
0 0 0
∂y ∂y
· ¸T
∂[Nw ] ∂[Nw ]
[N ] = [Nu ] [Nv ] [Nw ] (3.4.22)
∂ξ ∂η
The mass matrix of the plate element for constant thickness t and
constant mass density ρ as derived earlier for the bare plate is given by:
Z
[Mp ] = ρ [Np ]T [Np ] dv (3.4.23)
v
where
1 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0
0
[P ] = 0 0 1 0 (3.4.25)
2
0 0 0 t 0
12
t2
1 0 0 0
12
3.4 Arbitrary Stiffened Plate Element Formulation 73
∂u
- dx ¾
dx ∂x
6
∂w
dx
dx0 ∂x
?
sµ ¶2 µ
¶2
0 ∂u ∂w
dx = dx + dx
+ dx
∂x ∂x
"µ 1
¶2 µ ¶2 #
∂u ∂w 2 (3.4.26)
= dx 1 + +
∂x ∂x
" µ ¶2 µ ¶2 #
∂u 1 ∂u 1 ∂w
= dx 1 + + + + ...
∂x 2 ∂x 2 ∂x
74 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
Neglecting the higher order terms, the expression for the axial strain
of the mid-plane of the plate in the x-direction is:
µ ¶2 µ ¶2
∂u 1 ∂u 1 ∂w
²x = + + ... (3.4.27)
∂x 2 ∂x 2 ∂x
where ²pE and ²pG are the elastic and the geometric plate strain respec-
tively, and are given by:
∂u
∂x
∂v
∂y
∂u ∂v
{²pE } = + (3.4.29)
∂y ∂x
∂w
∂x
∂w
∂y
3.4 Arbitrary Stiffened Plate Element Formulation 75
and
µ ¶2 µ ¶2 µ ¶2
1 ∂w 1 ∂u 1 ∂v
+ +
2 ∂x 2 ∂x 2 ∂x
µ ¶2 µ ¶2 µ ¶2
1 ∂w 1 ∂u 1 ∂v
+ +
2 ∂y 2 ∂y 2 ∂y
µ ¶µ ¶ µ ¶µ ¶ µ ¶µ ¶
{²pG } = ∂w ∂w ∂u ∂u ∂v ∂v
+ +
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y
0
0
(3.4.30)
∂w
−z
u
∂x
{f } = ∂w
v = −z (3.4.31)
∂y
w
w
µ ¶2 µ ¶2 µ ¶2
1 ∂w z2 ∂ 2w z2 ∂ 2w
+ +
2 ∂x 2 ∂x2 2 ∂x ∂y
µ ¶ µ ¶ 2 µ 2 ¶2
1 ∂w
2
z 2
∂ 2
w z 2
∂ w
+ +
2 ∂y 2 ∂x ∂y 2 ∂y 2
µ ¶ µ ¶ µ ¶ µ ¶ µ 2 ¶µ 2 ¶
∂w ∂w ∂ 2
w ∂ 2
w ∂ w ∂ w
{²pG } = + z2 2
+ z2 2
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y
0
0
1
= [A]{θp }
2
(3.4.32)
where
∂w ∂2w ∂ 2w
∂x 0 −z 2 0 −z
∂x ∂x ∂y
∂w 2
∂ w 2
∂ w
[A] =
0 0 −z 2 −z
∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y
µ 2 ¶
∂w ∂w 2
∂ w 2
∂ w ∂ w ∂ w 2
−z −z −z +
∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x2 ∂y 2
(3.4.33)
and
· ¸T
∂w ∂w ∂ 2w ∂ 2w ∂ 2w
{θp } = −z 2 −z 2 −z (3.4.34)
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y
Taking the variation of Eq.(3.4.32)
1 1
δ {²pG } = δ [A]{θp } + [A] δ {θp } (3.4.35)
2 2
3.4 Arbitrary Stiffened Plate Element Formulation 77
Hence
δ {²pG } = [A] δ {θp } (3.4.37)
or
{²pG } = [A] {θp } (3.4.38)
= [HpG ] {²̄pG }
The vector {²̄pG } can be expressed in terms of the ξ-η coordinates as:
where {²̄pG (x, y)} denotes the strain vector in the x-y coordinate system
and
[TF 3 ] 0
[TpG ] = (3.4.41)
[TF 1 ] [TF 2 ]
78 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
· ¸T
∂w ∂w ∂ 2w ∂ 2w ∂ 2w
{²̄pG (ξ, η)} = (3.4.42)
∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ 2 ∂η 2 ∂ξ ∂η
where
·µ ¶ µ ¶ µ ¶ µ ¶ µ ¶¸T
£ ¤ ∂Nw ∂Nw ∂ 2 Nw ∂ 2 Nw ∂ 2 Nw
B̄pG =
∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ 2 ∂η 2 ∂ξ ∂η
(3.4.45)
Hence combining Eq.(3.4.40) and Eq.(3.4.44) yields,
£ ¤
{²̄pG (x, y)} = [TpG ] B̄pG {δp } = [BpG ] {δp } (3.4.46)
Hence
{θp } = [HpG ] {²̄pG } = [HpG ] [BpG ] {δp } (3.4.47)
The internal work done by the distributed internal stresses can be ex-
pressed as: ZZZ
δW = {²pG }T {σ} dx dy dz (3.4.48)
where
{σ} = [σx σy τxy ]T (3.4.49)
ZZZ
δW = δ {δp }T [BpG ]T [HpG ]T [A]T {σ} dx dy dz (3.4.50)
∂w ∂w
0
∂x ∂y
∂w ∂w
0
∂y ∂x σx
∂ 2
w ∂ 2
w
T
[A] {σ} = −z 2 0 −z
∂x ∂x ∂y σy
∂ 2
w ∂ 2
w
0 −z −z τ
∂y 2 ∂x ∂y xy
µ ¶
2
∂ w 2
∂ w ∂ w ∂ w
2 2
−z −z −z +
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x2 ∂y 2
∂w
σ x τ xy 0 0 0
∂x
∂w
τ
xy σ y 0 0 0 ∂y
∂ 2
w
=0 0 σx 0
τxy −z
∂x2
∂ 2
w
0
0 0 σy τxy −z
∂y 2
2
∂ w
0 0 τxy τxy (σx + σy ) −z
∂x ∂y
= [σp ]{θp }
(3.4.51)
80 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
As the reference plane is the mid-plane of the plate, only the inner-
most integral contains the terms z. Hence this integration can be per-
formed separately. Hence
ZZ
[KpG ]e = [BpG ]T [σ̄] [BpG ] dx dy
ZZ (3.4.56)
T
= [BpG ] [σ̄] [BpG ] |J| dξ dη
where Z t/2
[σ̄] = [HpG ]T [σp ] [HpG ] dz (3.4.57)
−t/2
3.4 Arbitrary Stiffened Plate Element Formulation 81
y
y’
P x’
α
x
Figure 3.5: Coordinate axes at any point of a curved stiff-
ener
z
P
∂u0 ∂ 2 w0
= EAs − ES s (3.4.64)
∂x0 ∂x0 2
where As is the cross sectional area and Ss is the first moment of area of
the stiffener with respect to the middle plane of the plate. The value of
Ss depends on the disposition of the stiffener.
The bending moment is
Z
Ms = σ̄sl z dAs (3.4.65)
As
where Is is the second moment of area (reference plane being the mid-
plane of the plate) of the stiffener.
It is observed from Eqs.(3.4.64) and (3.4.66) that the eccentricity of
the stiffener produces coupling between the axial and the flexural effects.
The torsional moment is given by
∂ 2 w0
Ts = −G Js (3.4.67)
∂x0 ∂y 0
where G is the modulus of rigidity and Js is the torsional constant of the
stiffener.
Combining Eqs.(3.4.64), (3.4.66), and (3.4.67) the generalized stress-
strain relationship of the stiffener in the local axis system at the point P
is expressed as
{σs } = [Ds ] {²s } (3.4.68)
where
{σs } = [Fs Ms Ts ]T (3.4.69)
· 0 ¸T
∂u ∂ 2 w0 ∂ 2 w0
{²s } = − 02 − 0 0 (3.4.70)
∂x0 ∂x ∂x ∂y
and
E A s E Ss 0
[Ds ] = E Ss E Is 0 (3.4.71)
0 0 G Js
where
2 2 1
cos α sin α 2 sin2α 0 0 0
2 2 1
[Ts ] = 0 0 0 cos α sin α − sin2α
2
1 1 1
0 0 0 − sin2α sin2α − cos2α
2 2 2
(3.4.73)
and
· µ ¶ ¸T
∂u ∂v ∂u ∂v ∂ 2w ∂ 2w ∂ 2w
{²̄s } = + − − 2
∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂x2 ∂y 2 ∂x ∂y
(3.4.74)
Once the strain vector of the stiffener is expressed in terms of the dis-
placement components at the mid-plane of the plate, the same displace-
ment shape function of the plate element is used which yields the stiff-
ness matrix of the stiffener in terms of the nodal parameters of the plate
element and by this process, the compatibility between the plate and the
stiffener element is retained.
It may be observed from Eqs.(3.4.74) and (3.4.10) that
where
[Bs ] = [Ts ][Bp ] (3.4.78)
86 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
η
(-1,+1) (+1,+1)
(-1,-1) (+1,-1)
Here l is taken along the stiffener axis in x-y plane. This can be rewritten
as Z
[Ks ]e = [Bs ]T [Ds ][Bs ] |Jst | dλ (3.4.80)
where λ is in the direction of the stiffener axis in the ξ-η plane as shown
in the Fig. 3.7 and the Jacobian |Jst | is given by
dl
|Jst | = (3.4.81)
dλ
The Jacobian is calculated by the ratio of the actual length to the length
on the mapped domain considering any segment of the stiffener and is
3.4 Arbitrary Stiffened Plate Element Formulation 87
constant when a straight line or a circular arc in the x-y plane is mapped
dl
into a straight line. But in case of a complex mapping, the ratio
dλ
may change from point to point. The integration is carried out along the
stiffener axis which is λ in the ξ-η plane by taking Gauss points on the
mapped stiffener axis.
The consistent mass matrix for the arbitrarily oriented stiffener element
is formulated following the steps similar to that of the plate element and
it can be written as:
Z
[Ms ] = ρ [N ]T [L]T [Ts ]T [Ps ][Ts ][L][N ] |Jst | dλ (3.4.82)
where
2
As cos α As sinαcosα 0 −Ss cosα 0
As sinα cosα As sin2 α 0 −Ss sinα 0
[Ps ] =
0 0 As 0 0 (3.4.83)
Ss cosα −Ss sinα 0 Is 0
0 0 0 0 Js
88 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
1 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0
[Ts ] =
0 0 1 0 0 (3.4.84)
0 0 0 cosα sinα
0 0 0 −sinα cosα
and the matrices [L] and [N ] are given by the Eqs.(3.4.21) and (3.4.22)
respectively.
= {²sE } + {²sG }
The field variables are expressed as:
U
∂w
−z
∂x
{f } = V = ∂w (3.4.86)
−z
∂y
W
w
3.4 Arbitrary Stiffened Plate Element Formulation 89
where
1 0
[HsG ] = (3.4.91)
0 −z
and ½ ¾
T ∂w ∂ 2w
{²̄sG } = (3.4.92)
∂x ∂x2
{²̄sG } can be expressed as:
∂w
∂x
{²̄sG } = = [BsG ] {δp } (3.4.93)
∂ 2w
∂x2
90 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
Hence
{θs } = [HsG ] [BsG ] {δp } (3.4.94)
The internal work done by the distributed internal stresses can be ex-
pressed as:
ZZZ
δW = {²sG }T σx dx dy dz
ZZZ
=δ {δp }T [BsG ]T [HsG ]T σx [HsG ] [BsG ] {δp } dx dy dz
(3.4.95)
In the case of the stiffener along the x-direction, the integration with
respect to y and z can be performed with the innermost integral only,
putting y-coordinates in the [BsG ] matrix.
1 0 1 0
[HsG ]T σx [HsG ] = σx
0 −z 0 −z
(3.4.96)
= σx 1 0
0 z2
Hence,
ZZ
σx As 0
[HsG ]T σx [HsG ] dy dz =
0 σx Is (3.4.97)
= [σs ]
∂w
∂x
∂w
∂w
∂y
∂x0
∂ w
2
= [TsG 1 ] − 2 (3.4.98)
∂ 2
w
∂x
∂x 0 2
∂ w
2
− 2
∂y
∂ w
2
2
∂x ∂y
where
cos α sin α 0 0 0
[TsG 1 ] = (3.4.99)
2 2
0 0 − cos α − sin α sin α cos α
where
−1
[J] [0]
[TsG 2 ] = (3.4.101)
[TF 1 ] [TF 2 ]
and [J] is the Jacobian and [TF 1 ], [TF 2 ] being given by the Eq.(3.3.18).
Hence from the Eq.(3.4.93)
∂Nw
∂ξ
∂Nw
∂η
∂2N
w
{²̄sG } = [TsG 1 ] [TsG 2 ] 2
{δp }
∂ξ
∂ 2 Nw
(3.4.102)
∂η 2
∂ 2 Nw
∂ξ ∂η
£ ¤
= [TsG1 ] [TsG2 ] B̄sG {δp }
= [BsG ] {δp }
Z
£ ¤T £ ¤
= B̄sG [TsG 2 ]T [TsG 1 ]T [σs ] [TsG 1 ] [TsG 2 ] B̄sG |Jst | dλ
(3.4.103)
3.4 Arbitrary Stiffened Plate Element Formulation 93
u cosβ sinβ u
1
= (3.4.104)
v −sinβ cosβ v
1
where θn and θt represent the slopes which are normal and transverse to
the boundaries respectively as in the case of bare plate.
Substituting from Eqs.(3.3.50) and (3.4.104), the Eq.(3.4.105) can be
94 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
written as
u
cosβ sinβ 0 0 0
−sinβ cosβ 0 0 0 v
w
{fbp } = 0 0 1 0 0 (3.4.106)
∂w
0 0 0 cosβ sinβ
∂x
∂w
0 0 0 −sinβ cosβ
∂y
Expressing Eq.(3.4.106) in terms of the shape functions;
{fbp } = [Nbp ] {δp } (3.4.107)
where
[Nu ]
cosβ sinβ 0 0 0
[Nv ]
−sinβ cosβ 0 0 0
[Nw ]
[Nbp ] = 0 0 1 0 0
∂[Nw ]
∂x
0 0 0 cosβ sinβ
∂[Nw ]
0 0 0 −sinβ cosβ
∂y
(3.4.108)
3.4 Arbitrary Stiffened Plate Element Formulation 95
The reaction components per unit length along the boundary line due
to the elastic springs corresponding to the possible boundary displace-
ments given in Eq.(3.4.105) can be expressed as
ku u1
fku
k v
fkv
v 1
{fkp } = = k w w (3.4.109)
fkw
k θ
fkα
α n
f
k β θ t
kβ
where
[Nu ]
k cosβ ku sinβ 0 0 0
u
[Nv ]
−kv sinβ kv cosβ 0 0 0
[Nw ]
[Nkp ] = 0 0 kw 0 0
∂[Nw ]
0 0 0 kα cosβ kα sinβ
∂x
∂[Nw ]
0 0 0 −kβ sinβ kβ cosβ
∂y
(3.4.111)
Following the procedure similar to the case of bare plate the stiffness
of the boundary for the stiffened plate can be expressed as
Z
[Kbp ] = [Nbp ]T [Nkp ] |Jb | dλ1 (3.4.112)
Fs Fs e Ms
σz = − z+ z (3.4.113)
As Is Is
3.5 Consistent Load Vector 97
where [Nj ] is the displacement function for the j-th node and |J| is the
determinant of the Jacobian. The global load {P } can be obtained by
assembling the nodal load vector {P }e of each of the elements. When
concentrated load is present at any of the nodal points, the load value is
added to the corresponding degree of freedom of that particular node.
COMPUTER
IMPLEMENTATION
4.1 Introduction
The finite element method has been established as a powerful numeri-
cal tool because of its broad spectrum of generality and its ease of appli-
cability to rather more complex and difficult problems showing greater
efficacy in its solution than that of any other existing similar techniques.
This advantage of the method over others has led various research orga-
nizations and modern industries to endeavour the development of general
purpose software packages and other in-house codes for solving practical
problems of more complex nature. In an effort to make the method more
powerful and to address more complicated problems, the finite element
analysis programmes themselves become extremely complex and com-
putationally involved. These programmes are available as black box
modules which are to be used with the help of CAD programmes. These
conventional programmes cannot easily be modified to perform a desired
task necessitating redesign and rebuild of finite element libraries to suit
one’s need. Hence there is a requirement for finite element analysis pro-
grammes to be easily modifiable to introduce new analysis procedures
101
102 COMPUTER IMPLEMENTATION
• Preprocessor
• Processor
• Postprocessor
The different functions of these steps have been elaborated in the Fig. 4.1.
4.3.1 Preprocessor
This module of the programme reads the necessary information about the
geometry and boundary conditions of the plate, material properties, load-
ing configuration and its magnitude, stiffener orientation and its prop-
erties etc. Also in this module, all the nodal coordinates and the nodal
connectivity are generated. The different functions which are used in
this module are described briefly in the subsequent sections. A flowchart
of the preprocessor unit has been shown in the Fig. 4.2.
START
PREPROCESSOR
Read the Input Data
Generate the mesh
Generate Nodal Connectivity
Read the Stiffener Position and Orientation
PROCESSOR
Generate Element Matrices for the Plate
Generate Element Matrices for the Stiffener if required
Generate Boundary Stiffness Matrices for the Boundaries
Assemble the Matrices to Global Matrix
Sole the
Solve theEquations
Equationsfor
forDifferent
differentAnalyses
Analyses
1. Static Analysis of Bare Plates
2. Free Vibration Analysis of Bare Plates
3. Stability Analysis of Bare Plates
4. Static Analysis of Stiffened Plates
5. Free Vibration Analysis of Stiffened Plates
6. Stability Analysis of Stiffened Plates
POSTPROCESSOR
Echo the Input Data
print the Output
END
input()
bpoin, bcord, nnode, ndofn, ngaus, nxi,
neta, nelem, npoin, nodes, tdof, young,
poiss, thick, ntype, stif, soln
stcod() rgdplt()
coord, xi-divn, dmatx1, young,
eta-divn, xi-small, poiss, thick
eta-small
connect() stifin()
lnods w, d, e
band() rgdstf()
hband, sky As, Ss, Is, G
Js, dmatx2
The function band() computes the half bandwidth of the matrix and the
skyline value for the skyline storage scheme. It has the following vari-
ables:
hband : Half bandwidth of the matrix
sky : Skyline value for the skyline storage
The function xycod() generates all the nodal x-y coordinates of the ele-
ments. The variables used are:
xynod : Cartesian coordinates of the node
xi : s-coordinate of the node in mapped domain
eta : t-coordinate of the node in mapped domain
The function sfr1() calculates the cubic serendipity shape functions, their
derivatives and elements of the Jacobian matrix. The different variables
in this function are:
shape1 : Cubic serendipity shape functions
deriv1 : Shape function derivatives
110 COMPUTER IMPLEMENTATION
The function rgdplt() has been used for computing the rigidity matrix of
the plate element. It comprises the following variables:
dmatx1 : Elements of the plate rigidity matrix
young : Young’s modulous of elasticity
poiss : Poisson’s ratio
thick : Plate thickness
The function rgdstf() calculates the different elements of the rigidity ma-
trix of the stiffener. The following variables are used in the function:
As : Cross-sectional area of the stiffener
Ss : First moment of area of the stiffener
Is : Second moment of area of the stiffener
G : Modulus of rigidity of the stiffener
Js : Torsional constant of the stiffener
dmatx2 : Elements of the stiffener rigidity matrix
4.3 Description of the Programme 111
4.3.2 Processor
This module of the programmes performs the following tasks:
global-stif-mass-geom() global-stf-mass-geom()
bnd-stif()
global() global-stif()
soln
1 2 3
Static Free Vibration Buckling
Analysis Analysis Analysis
stop end
This function generates the elastic and geometric stiffness matrices and
the mass matrices of the stiffener elements.
The assembly of all the element matrices of the plate elements into the
global ones are carried out through this function.
The assembly of all the element matrices of the stiffener elements into
the global mtrices are performed through this function.
This function calculates the consistent element load vector and takes into
account any application of concentrated load on the plate.
The generated element load vectors are assembled into global load vector
using this function.
114 COMPUTER IMPLEMENTATION
and buckling analyses. The input data to this function are the global elas-
tic stiffness matrix gstif, the global geometric stiffness matrix gbl-geom,
the global mass matrix gbl-mass and the corresponding pointer vectors.
Through this function the eigenvalues and the corresponding eigenvec-
tors are extracted. The required number of modes of vibration or buckling
is to be specified by the user. The function requires three arrays u, v and
w, of size (n,m) where n is the total degrees of freedom and m is a value
higher than the number of modes. The numerical value of m has been
considered as 1.5 times the number of modes in the present programme.
The tolerance value has been set to 10−6 and the maximum number of
iterations to 40. The initial trial vectors are generated from a random
number generator. The r8usiv() module consists of a number of func-
tions which are presented below with brief descriptions of their function-
alities and sequence in which they are called inside the function r8usiv().
function r8ured() : decomposes a symmetric matrix into lower
triangular matrix
function r8uran() : generates random trial vectors
function r8uort() : orthonormilises the vectors by the Schmidt
process
function r8ubac() : solves the equation [l]T {v} = {u} by
backward substitution
function r8upre() : performs premultiplication in the form
{v} = {l}{u}
function r8ufor() : solves equation {l}{v} = {u} by forward
substitution
116 COMPUTER IMPLEMENTATION
function r8udec() : sorts the vectors {u} and {v} according to the
descending order of eigenvalue prediction
function r8uran() : generates trial vectors in {w}
function r8uort() : orthonormalizes {w}
function r8uerr() : estimates the vector errors in successive trials
4.3.3 Postprocessor
In this part of the programme , all the input data are echoed to check for
their accuracy. The function print-disp() is used to print the output data
in terms of displacements, moments, stresses, eigenvalues etc. depend-
ing on the type of analysis carried out. The results are stored in a series
of separate output files for each category of problems analyzed and those
values are used to prepare tables and graphs etc.
4.3 Description of the Programme 117
r8ured()
r
enter 8 r8uran()
u
s r8uort()
i
v r8ubac()
r8upre()
r8ufor()
Computation of
Natural frequencies
r8udec()
and buckling load
r8uerr()
return
end
NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
5.1 Introduction
The stiffened as well as bare plates with arbitrary geometries have got
an important role to play as one of the structural elements in the modern
day structures. These plates having various boundary conditions are sub-
jected to varieties of loading for which the stress analysis is to be carried
out. The present day trend for the stress analysis is to use some software
packages for this type of analysis. But these commercial softwares have
got the limitation in the sense that they are inefficient to handle the arbi-
trary orientation of the stiffener as they demand the mesh division to be
along the stiffener. Moreover, they are unable to implement the bound-
ary conditions successfully for a plate of arbitrary configuration having
a curved edge. The element developed here is very much efficient to ad-
dress the problems pertaining to the arbitrarily oriented stiffeners as well
as the curved-boundary arbitrary plates. In this chapter a large number
of numerical examples for the stiffened and bare plates of arbitrary con-
figurations having various boundary conditions and subjected to various
loading conditions are presented as a rigorous test to study the perfor-
mance of the proposed element.
The following types of problems are considered in this chapter:
119
120 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
y
1 12 11 10
b/3
2 9
b/3
3 8
b/3
x
4 5 6 7
a/3 a/3 a/3
Chaudhary [53], Morley [119], Argyris [8], Rossow [156], Jirousek [71]
and Butalia et al. [29] in the Table 5.4. The results for the skew angles
45◦ and less have compared well with those of others. The results for
skew angle 60◦ has deviated from others, but it is closer to that of Butalia
et al. [29]. Even the the 75◦ angle result is close to the result of Butalia
et al. [29]. The location of the boundary nodal points of the skew plate is
shown in the Fig. 5.2.
The different values adopted for the analysis of these plates are:
Length of each side of the rhombic plate (2a) = 8
Thickness of the plate (t) = 0.08
Young’s modulus of elasticity (E) = 8.736 × 107
Poisson’s ratio (ν) = 0.3
Uniformly distributed load (q) = 16.0
y
1 12 11 10
θ
b/3
2 9
b/3
3 8
b/3
x
4 5 6 7
a/3 a/3 a/3
θ = Skew angle
y a ch 10
a/3e 11
3@ 12
Ri
1
9
α/3
2
α/3
x
3
α/3
8
4
5
6
α = included angle 7
wmax Mr max
Load Radial Present Coull and Present Coull and
Position distance Analysis Das [41] Analysis Das [41]
Unit 7.0 0.01701 0.0169 - -
load 9.0 0.01517 0.01517 0.3278 0.312
at inner 11.0 0.01640 0.0163 0.2055 0.204
radius 13.0 0.01945 0.0195 0.1651 0.186
Unit 7.0 0.01945 0.0194 0.4834 0.465
load 9.0 0.03538 0.0353 0.5058 0.492
at outer 11.0 0.05786 0.0578 0.6239 0.540
radius 13.0 0.08816 0.0876 - -
Unit 7.0 0.01551 0.0155 0.4481 0.437
load 9.0 0.02410 0.0241 0.4884 0.493
at mid 11.0 0.03424 0.0342 0.4804 0.462
radius 13.0 0.04571 0.0457 0.3852 0.384
Bounday conditions
Loading Method Simply supported Clamped
conditions w Mr w Mr
Uniformly Present 0.06359 0.2071 0.01549 0.08191
distributed Ref. [185] 0.063702 0.20625 0.015625 0.08125
load
Point Present 0.05066 0.01998
load at Ref. [185] 0.05050 - 0.01989 -
r=0
Point Present 0.02929 0.00719
load at Ref. [96] 0.02934 - 0.00728 -
r = a/2
130 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
y
12 11
1 o o 10
15 15 o
30
2 9
x
3 8
4 7
5 6
Figure 5.4: Circular plate with boundary nodal points
Rectangular plates with all edges simply supported and clamped hav-
ing aspect ratios of 1 and 0.4 are analyzed and first few frequencies ob-
tained are presented in the Table 5.7. The results are compared with those
of Leissa [87] where the plates having opposite edges simply supported
were dealt by using existing well-known exact solutions and those with
clamped supports by using the Ritz method. The results are found to be
in excellent agreement. The convergence study for the different mesh
sizes for the simply supported rectangular plate of aspect ratio 1 (square
plate) is also presented in the Table 5.8 where excellent convergence of
the element with increasing mesh divisions of the plate is obtained.
a/b SC M 1 2 3 4 5 6
1.0 SS A 19.7392 49.3480 49.3480 78.9568 98.6960 98.6960
B 19.7209 49.2753 49.2753 78.6671 98.5340 98.5340
CC A 35.992 73.413 73.413 108.27 131.64 132.24
B 35.922 73.221 73.221 107.63 131.26 131.91
0.4 SS A 11.4487 16.1862 24.0818 35.1358 41.0576 45.7950
B 11.4352 16.1403 23.9941 34.9980 41.0002 45.5792
CC A 23.648 27.817 35.446 46.702 61.554 63.100
B 23.605 27.669 35.158 46.290 60.997 62.981
A - Leissa [87]; B - Present
132 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
SC φ M 1 2 3 4 5 6
A 25.069 52.901 72.344 84.780 - -
o
30 B 25.314 52.765 73.006 87.478 130.25 -
C 25.0219 52.5501 71.9398 83.5642 122.031 122.558
A 34.938 66.422 100.87 107.78 - -
o
SS 45 B 36.970 67.023 113.26 114.93 175.28 -
C 35.6320 66.1028 99.9479 108.844 139.403 167.678
o
60 B 73.135 112.64 209.84 233.52 323.51 -
C 66.3452 104.637 147.839 194.135 213.670 245.783
D 46.140 81.691 105.51 119.52 165.80 -
o
30 B 46.166 81.613 105.56 119.98 167.16 -
C 45.9824 81.3367 104.849 118.479 163.449 164.744
D 65.929 106.59 149.031 158.900 199.366 231.936
CC 45o B 66.330 106.77 156.34 160.25 213.58 -
C 65.4204 105.950 146.859 156.569 193.976 228.140
E 120.90 177.75 231.74 292.54 301.81 357.58
60o B 127.06 185.00 282.94 322.61 385.49 -
C 121.274 176.750 229.394 287.224 303.618 347.786
A - Liew and Lam [99]; B - Singh and Chakraverty [177]; C - Present
D - Durvasula [47]; E - Mizusawa et al. [116]
134 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
SC φ M 1 2 3 4 5 6
B 64.069 96.558 153.76 218.69 237.12 -
o
30 C 63.633 95.779 146.907 209.653 226.004 252.081
B 93.772 132.09 209.83 302.31 341.10 -
SS 45o C 92.184 129.008 184.164 251.531 323.616 331.569
o
60 B 182.44 240.11 394.64 562.85 675.53 -
C 176.098 223.932 288.403 361.768 445.835 541.334
A 128.74 159.41 213.38 287.36 340.23 -
o
30 B 128.90 159.72 215.29 291.45 341.33 -
C 128.507 158.586 211.808 284.784 339.577 356.976
A 189.18 222.07 279.78 358.94 449.26 -
o
CC 45 B 190.00 223.90 294.67 385.53 509.03 -
C 188.820 220.701 276.869 353.380 439.970 503.396
A 369.28 405.44 470.19 563.36 681.00 -
60o B 372.52 416.35 552.09 707.17 1010.4 -
C 368.474 401.809 460.590 543.175 642.036 749.318
A - Mizusawa et al. [116]; B - Singh and Chakraverty [177]; C - Present
y
x
a
y
12 11
1 10
α 2 9
a
3 8
4
5
6
7 x
a/b 1 2 3 4 5 6
A 0.9512 1.6737 2.8344 3.1078 3.7711 4.5410
1/2 B 0.9517 1.6746 2.8353 3.1090 3.7724 4.5495
C 0.9522 1.6746 2.8323 3.1052 3.7591 4.5380
A 0.7601 0.9147 1.1719 1.5311 1.9912 2.5490
1/4 B 0.7603 0.9150 1.1726 1.5323 2.0620 2.7350
C 0.7600 0.9140 1.1700 1.5272 1.9844 2.5382
A 0.7205 0.7563 0.8159 0.8994 1.0067 1.1377
1/8 B 0.7206 0.7564 0.8163 0.8999 1.0185 1.1729
C 0.7198 0.7535 0.8100 0.8896 0.9925 1.1189
A - Saliba [160]; B - Geannakakes [54]; C - Present
y c
x
b
r
ωa2 ρ
Table 5.12: Frequency parameters λ = for all
2π D
edges clamped trapezoidal plate
a/b c/b 1 2 3 4 5 6
1.0 0.2 A 11.34 19.89 23.31 30.34 36.22 39.10
B 11.38 19.93 23.34 30.37 36.19 39.06
0.4 A 9.224 15.58 19.89 24.51 29.19 34.22
B 9.177 14.79 19.82 20.24 27.37 29.02
0.6 A 7.560 13.35 16.71 22.42 23.26 29.64
B 7.164 9.84 14.77 16.64 22.32 23.46
0.8 A 6.444 12.27 13.89 19.44 21.50 25.15
B 5.209 7.43 13.05 13.43 15.99 21.27
1.5 0.2 A 19.21 30.57 42.30 43.70 58.72 60.67
B 19.16 30.44 42.08 43.46 58.32 60.14
0.4 A 16.38 24.45 33.73 37.55 45.30 51.11
B 16.34 24.33 33.09 37.39 41.95 50.75
0.6 A 13.74 19.54 27.93 32.93 39.76 42.05
B 13.69 18.47 22.74 30.12 32.83 41.46
0.8 A 11.44 16.60 25.27 28.29 34.02 37.40
B 11.00 13.11 17.97 26.41 28.19 32.47
2.0 0.2 A 29.12 43.43 59.34 66.76 77.08 90.87
B 29.02 43.17 58.88 66.31 76.36 89.82
0.4 A 25.55 35.91 47.02 59.27 60.59 73.47
B 25.48 35.73 46.69 58.53 60.25 70.86
0.6 A 22.10 28.98 37.03 48.01 54.44 62.53
B 22.05 28.74 34.96 40.99 50.82 54.21
0.8 A 18.72 23.58 31.48 42.99 48.05 55.06
B 18.60 21.49 25.48 33.16 44.41 47.92
A - Liew and Lam [101]; B - Present
138 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
1
12
2 11
b 10
3 9
8
x
4 5 6 7
a
r
2 ρ
Table 5.13: Frequency parameters λ = ωa for trian-
D
gular plates
SC b/a 1 2 3 4 5 6
A 49.35 99.76 128.4 169.1 200.3 249.8
1.0 B 49.34 98.69 128.30 167.80 197.46 246.86
C 49.23 98.30 127.51 166.75 195.53 243.80
A 34.28 65.69 91.99 108.0 140.9 161.9
1.5 B 34.28 65.59 91.86 107.48 139.39 162.42
C 34.21 65.35 91.35 106.78 137.85 157.87
A 27.76 49.91 74.85 81.84 107.4 122.2
SS 2.0 B 27.76 49.88 74.88 81.51 108.43 121.65
C 27.70 49.69 74.15 80.91 105.05 118.88
A 24.15 41.15 60.65 72.28 84.92 104.2
2.5 B 24.14 41.14 61.145 71.99 86.49 103.66
C 24.09 40.94 60.06 71.45 82.33 101.31
A 21.85 35.63 51.27 66.73 71.03 92.84
3.0 B 21.84 35.65 52.15 66.67 73.97 94.15
C 21.78 35.42 50.60 65.70 68.35 85.93
A 93.78 157.79 194.77 242.80 277.67 335.77
1.0 B 93.78 157.78 194.76 242.81 277.71 335.84
C 93.49 157.44 193.65 241.65 275.54 332.22
A 53.44 82.43 113.51 121.92 152.09 168.68
CC 2.0 B 53.44 82.44 113.70 122.03 153.32 168.77
C 53.30 81.89 112.41 121.17 149.99 166.38
A 42.75 61.00 80.80 99.90 104.12 129.69
3.0 B 45.75 61.05 81.26 100.27 107.33 132.72
C 42.50 60.27 79.18 98.10 101.22 121.99
A - Kim and Dickinson [78]; B - Geannakakes [54]; C - Present
140 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
o
90
x
Ri
Ro
(D = 1, ρh = 1, ν = 0, Ro= 1, α = 90o )
SC Ri /Ro M 1 2 3 4 5
0 A 48.20 86.89 103.02 135.89 161.86
B 48.74 87.39 104.17 136.14 162.93
CCCC
SC a/b M 1 2 3 4 5 6
A 4.935 13.898 13.898 25.613 25.613 29.724
B 4.935 13.898 13.898 25.613 25.613 29.720
1 C 4.935 13.898 13.898 25.613 25.613 29.720
D 4.938 13.910 13.910 25.623 25.647 29.785
E 4.962 13.890 13.890 25.495 25.579 29.642
A 13.213 23.641 38.325 46.149 57.616 62.764
2 D 13.254 23.648 38.370 46.214 57.948 62.991
E 13.733 24.215 40.555 46.954 61.375 62.060
A 27.080 40.114 56.908 78.315 98.515 104.549
SS 3 D 27.164 40.123 57.099 79.279 98.730 110.496
E 28.793 41.274 63.767 89.222 101.305 118.383
A 45.916 61.953 81.536 106.454 135.629 170.688
4 D 46.076 61.999 82.245 109.023 148.809 171.261
E 49.015 64.332 94.829 125.100 161.641 174.742
continued in the next page . . . . . .
144 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
0.2 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.5 2.0
A 26.97 13.17 6.24 5.13 4.19 4.04 3.99 4.13 4.32 3.98
B 27.0 13.2 6.25 5.14 4.20 4.04 4.00 4.13 - -
C - - - - - - - - 4.34 -
D - - - - - - - - - 4.00
A - Present Analysis; B - Timoshenko and Gere [184];
C - Fried and Schmitt [52]; D - C. R. C. of Japan [30]
BC φ A B C D E F G
Simply Supported
10 × 10 14.7091
12 × 12 14.6803
14 × 14 14.666
16 × 16 14.656 14.68
4×4 3.83696
Simply Supported
6×6 4.02363
8×8 4.09947
10 × 10 4.13905
12 × 12 4.16403
14 × 14 4.1824
16 × 16 4.19765 4.20
from 0◦ to 60◦ with all edges simply supported and clamped are pre-
sented in the Table 5.20 along with the results of other investigators such
as Mukhopadhyay and Mukherjee [135], Mizusawa et al. [118], Fried
and Schmitt [52], Yoshimura and Iwata [193], Wittrick [190], Durvasula
and Nair [49]. The results are in good agreement. Best agreement is
obtained with Durvasula.
5.3 Arbitrary Stiffened Plates 151
The buckling loads for the simply supported and the clamped bare circular
plates are computed and the results are presented in the form of the pa-
rameter k = (Nr )cr a2 /D where (Nr )cr is the critical compressive force
uniformly distributed around the edge of the plate, a is the radius of the
circular plate and D is the flexural rigidity of the plate. The results are
presented in the Table 5.21 for various mesh divisions of the whole plate
to study the convergence of the buckling parameter and they are com-
pared with the analytical values of Timoshenko and Gere [184]. There is
excellent agreement between the results.
Y 0.2542.54
A A
25.4
0.254
X
SECTION AT A-A
25.4
5 2
E = 11721 x 10 N/mm
ν = 0.3
All dimensions are in mm.
Distributed Load
Source
Eccentric Concentric
Rossow and Ibrahimkhail [157] 34.722 115.722
NASTRAN 37.846 -
STRUDL - 115.291
Present Method 34.696 115.875
y 6.35
B B
127
A
1524
Stiffeners
A
12.7
Section at A-A
6.35
x
762
76.2
5 2
E = 2.0684 x 10 N/mm
ν = 0.3 12.7
Section at B-B
All dimensions are in mm.
y
508
2540
A A
x
4.7752
5 2
152.4
E = 2.06843 x 10 N/mm
ν = 0.3
14.224
76.2
Section at A-A
Specimen t E ν P
2
No. (mm) (N/mm ) (N )
SPEC1 4.445 2977 0.35 176.59
SPEC2 4.445 2977 0.35 161.03
SPEC3 4.445 2977 0.35 61.39
5.3 Arbitrary Stiffened Plates 167
A B
y d
L
C C
x
t
A
B
a
b
Figure 5.31: Stress at the beam soffit of the slab with edge
beams
B
¸
45
®
¸
90
3
y :
® Transverse Beams ?
¸ X
90
X 6
¸ - Y
® ¸ - ¾ 6
22
¸
90
- Y
®
¸ ?
90
>
® Longitudinal Beams Section at X-X
¸ U
45
® 3
A o A ?
6
45
j B 6
Y
3 30
0 - ¾ 6
22
j ?
Y
3 Section at Y-Y
Stiffener
A A 0.254
2.54
0.254
Section at A-A
25.4
All dimensions are in mm.
plate are found to be 1.1496 × 10−4 and 3.6068 × 10−4 whereas those
of Rossow and Ibrahimkhail [157] for the square stiffened plate being
1.367 × 10−4 and 4.556 × 10−4 for the eccentric and the concentric stiff-
eners respectively. Hence the central deflection of a centrally stiffened
plate is reduced by approximately 16% and 21% for eccentric and con-
centric stiffeners respectively when the plate configuration is changed
from the square one to the circular one keeping the side of the square
plate and the diameter of the circular one same, the reduction in the plate
area being about 21%. This result is presented for the first time.
Mode sequences
Mesh
size 1 2 3 4 5 6
8×8 49.453 62.656 71.857 81.373 107.896 113.321
Present
has the undesirable locking effects for very thin plates. Since the width to
thickness ratio of this plate is 600 the plate can be considered as very thin.
They observed that the results did not converge until the shear stiffness
of the very thin plate was reduced artificially to that of a thin plate which
clearly depicts the effect of shear locking inherent in the element based
on Mindlin plate bending theory.
182 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
600 mm
7 2
E = 6.87 x 10 N/mm
ν = 0.34
600 mm
-6 3
ρ = 2.78 x 10 Kg/mm
A A
20 mm
1 mm
3 mm
SECTION AT A-A
Rao et al. [154] studied the effect of the eccentricity of the stiffener on the
frequencies by investigating the same square plate as in the previous ex-
ample but with a stiffener of 20mm×3mm size (Fig. 5.38). Sheikh [173]
solved this problem by the spline finite strip method. Using the present
element, the problem is analyzed for the free vibration and the results are
compared with those of Sheikh [173] in the Table 5.32 where the results
5.3 Arbitrary Stiffened Plates 183
p
Table 5.33: Frequency parameter [ω(a/π)2 ρt/D] of
square cross-stiffened plate with concentric stiff-
eners having all edges clamped
(EIs /Da = 10.0, As /at = 0.1)
method and the spline finite strip method respectively in Table 5.34.
Madsen [104] in his analysis neglected the in-plane displacements whereas
Sheikh and Mukhopadhyay [173] analyzed by both neglecting and in-
cluding the in-plane displacements. The present investigation has been
carried out by including the in-plane displacements. The results agree
well with those of Sheikh and Mukhopadhyay [173] and with the solu-
tion of the differential equations of Madsen [104]. It appears that for this
problem inplane displacements do not influence the natural frequencies
significantly.
p
Table 5.35: Frequency parameter [ω(a/R)2 ρt/D] of sim-
ply supported multi-stiffened rectangular plate
with concentric stiffeners in one direction
a a 1
N M =1 =
b b 2
A B C A B C
1 2.602 2.697 2.611 1.345 1.363 1.348
3 2 5.375 5.833 5.378 2.602 2.678 2.610
3 8.043 7.989 8.062 4.346 4.440 4.343
4 10.340 10.103 10.346 5.375 5.110 4.878
1 1.464 1.493 1.470 0.757 0.767 0.754
2 3.026 3.170 3.027 1.464 1.488 1.460
4 3 4.556 4.700 4.569 2.447 2.486 2.443
4 5.847 6.143 5.798 3.026 3.000 2.739
1 0.163 0.166 0.164 0.084 0.086 0.085
12 2 0.336 0.349 0.337 0.163 0.168 0.152
3 0.508 0.521 0.510 0.272 0.277 0.271
4 0.651 0.670 0.647 0.336 0.318 0.281
N - No. of panels; M - Mode sequence number;
A - Wah [187]; B - Mukherjee and Mukhopadhyay [122];
C - Present
5.3 Arbitrary Stiffened Plates 187
11 2
E = 2.051 x 10 N/mm
3
450 mm
A A ρ = 7825 Kg/m
ν = 0.3
650 mm
4.98 mm
20 mm
3 mm
3 mm
10 mm
SECTION AT A-A
Figure 5.39: Simply supported rectangular plate with a cen-
tral eccentric stiffener
188 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
609.6 mm
A A
25.4 mm
101.6 mm
25.4 mm
SECTION AT A-A
Figure 5.40: Simply supported rectangular plate with con-
centric stiffeners in one direction
5.3 Arbitrary Stiffened Plates 189
p
Table 5.36: Frequency parameter [ω(a/R)2 ρh/D] of a
simply supported multi-stiffened skew plate hav-
ing concentric stiffeners in one direction
a/b = 1 a/b = 2
S M A B C D A B C D
1 1.447 1.493 1.493 1.489 0.747 0.767 0.767 0.761
o
0 2 2.990 3.170 3.170 3.065 1.447 1.488 1.488 1.473
3 4.562 4.700 4.700 4.590 2.437 2.486 2.486 2.453
4 5.780 6.143 6.143 5.843 2.727 3.000 3.000 2.755
1 1.580 1.581 1.564 0.810 0.813 0.815 0.858
15o 2 3.263 3.372 3.221 1.525 1.549 1.552 1.426
3 4.922 4.934 4.789 2.659 2.651 2.659 2.626
4 6.102 6.416 5.800 2.789 2.842 2.849 2.787
1 1.986 1.895 1.979 0.989 0.995 0.986 1.050
o
30 2 3.890 4.029 4.064 1.736 1.800 1.775 1.900
3 5.809 5.736 5.605 2.992 3.139 3.108 3.185
4 6.923 7.316 6.592 3.303 3.255 3.276 3.246
1 2.964 2.649 2.828 1.445 1.431 1.409 1.508
45o 2 5.342 5.431 5.560 2.295 2.403 2.310 2.320
3 8.016 7.866 7.793 3.613 3.950 3.786 3.661
4 8.925 9.376 8.457 4.903 4.735 4.791 4.828
1 4.888 3.547
o
60 2 8.507 4.360
3 12.353 5.854
4 13.857 7.833
A - Bhandari et al. [21];
B - Mukherjee and Mukhopadhyay [122]
(Slope along the boundaries not restrained);
C - Mukherjee and Mukhopadhyay [122]
(Slope along the boundaries restrained); D - Present Analysis;
190 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
609.6 mm
b
A
θ
A
25.4 mm
101.6 mm
25.4 mm
SECTION AT A-A
c
600 mm
600 mm (b)
p
Table 5.38: Frequency parameter [ωa2 ρt/D] of annular
sector plate with concentrically placed circum-
ferential edge stiffeners
b = 50
o
22.5
a = 25
0.5
0.5
SECTION AT A-A
Annular sector plates simply supported on two radial edges having stiff-
eners along the two circumferential edges (Fig. 5.44) presented by Mukher-
jee and Mukhopadhyay [123] are solved and the first six natural frequen-
cies obtained are compared in Table 5.39. Stiffeners of two sizes (S1 and
S2) as shown in the Fig. 5.44 are considered in the analysis. Mukher-
jee and Mukhopadhyay [123] analyzed the problem using finite element
5.3 Arbitrary Stiffened Plates 195
method and Sheikh and Mukhopadhyay [173] used the spline finite strip
method. The results agree well for all the frequencies.
b = 50
o
22.5
a = 25
4 x 0.5
8 x 0.25
0.5
4 x 0.5
0.5
4 x 0.5
(Stiffener S1)
(Stiffener S2)
SECTION AT A-A
Figure 5.44: Annular sector plate with eccentrically placed
circumferential stiffeners
196 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
p
Table 5.39: Frequency parameter [ωa2 ρt/D] of annular
sector plate with eccentrically placed circumfer-
ential edge stiffeners
Stiffener
Mode sequences
Method
1 2 3 4 5 6
A 23.445 30.041 44.436 56.250 77.176 81.324
S1 P 23.172 29.276 42.981 55.975 75.013 81.895
A 19.466 26.978 41.382 51.955 74.442 77.792
S2 B 19.011 27.514 40.779 50.196 73.203 76.433
P 19.041 26.359 40.671 49.283 72.866 75.635
P - Present;
A - Mukherjee and Mukhopadhyay [123];
B - Sheikh and Mukhopadhyay [173]
5.3 Arbitrary Stiffened Plates 197
T Mode sequences
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
S1 H 50.152 63.410 74.132 84.243 111.990 118.338
C1 58.475 72.467 96.724 111.189 139.549 149.083
S2 H 54.371 65.101 79.808 84.584 116.531 118.676
C2 63.216 74.660 104.865 111.880 145.922 156.153
S3 P 11.35 11.70 12.65 12.65 17.42 24.81 24.96
C3 13.22 14.84 16.58 16.58 23.25 28.71 30.08
T - Type of plate
H - Frequency in Hz
p
P - Frequency parameter [ω(a/π)2 ρt/D]
5.3 Arbitrary Stiffened Plates 199
600 mm
7 2
E = 6.87 x 10 N/mm
ν = 0.34 -6
3
ρ = 2.78 x 10 Kg/mm
A A
20 mm
1mm
3 mm
SECTION AT A-A
450 mm
650 mm
20 mm
4.98 mm
3 mm
3 mm 11 2
E = 2.051 x 10 N/mm
3
10 mm ρ = 7825 Kg / m
ν = 0.3
SECTION AT A-A
and the third mode frequencies are found to be lower whereas there is
hardly any change in the frequency of the sixth mode. The results are
presented for the first time.
5.3 Arbitrary Stiffened Plates 201
is varied from 5 to 25. The torsional inertia of the stiffener has been ne-
glected in the analysis. The results are compared with the semi-analytic
finite difference results of Mukhopadhyay [131] and they agree fairly
well.
As /bt
CCCC CSSC
Present [131] Present [131]
0.05 24.25 25.46 17.35 17.32
5 0.10 24.25 25.46 17.15 17.05
0.20 24.25 25.46 16.41 16.27
0.05 24.25 - 17.94 -
10 0.10 24.25 - 17.93 -
0.20 24.25 - 17.90 -
0.05 24.25 25.46 18.03 18.36
15 0.10 24.25 25.46 18.03 18.36
0.20 24.25 25.46 18.02 18.34
0.05 24.25 25.46 18.070 -
20 0.10 24.25 25.46 18.068 -
0.20 24.25 25.46 18.064 -
0.05 24.25 - 18.09 18.46
25 0.10 24.25 - 18.09 18.46
0.20 24.25 - 18.09 18.46
204 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
As /bt
1 2
Present [184] [135] Present [184] [131]
0.05 11.84 12.0 11.72 7.93 7.96 7.93
5 0.10 11.02 11.1 10.93 7.27 7.29 7.28
0.20 9.64 9.72 9.70 6.24 6.24 6.24
0.05 15.73 16.0 16.0 10.16 10.20 10.16
10 0.10 15.73 16.0 16.0 9.33 9.35 9.33
0.20 15.49 15.8 15.44 8.02 8.03 8.02
0.05 15.73 16.0 16.0 12.36 12.4 -
15 0.10 15.73 16.0 16.0 11.36 11.4 -
0.20 15.73 16.0 16.0 9.77 9.80 -
0.05 15.73 16.0 - 14.52 14.6 -
20 0.10 15.73 16.0 - 13.36 13.4 -
0.20 15.73 16.0 - 11.51 11.6 -
5.3 Arbitrary Stiffened Plates 205
As /bt
is varied from 5 to 20. The torsional inertia of the stiffener has been
neglected in the analysis. These results are presented for the first time.
206 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
stiffener and the results are presented in the form of buckling parameter
k = (Nr )cr a2 /D where (Nr )cr is the critical compressive force uniformly
distributed around the edge of the plate, a is the radius of the circular plate
and D is the flexural rigidity of the plate . The results are presented in
the Table 5.46. These results are presented for the first time.
Chapter - 6
CONCLUSIONS
6.1 Summary
The investigation carried out in this thesis may be summarized as fol-
lows:
• A stiffened plate bending element has been proposed for the anal-
ysis of the stiffened plates by combining the 12 degrees of free-
dom rectangular basic ACM element and a four-noded rectangu-
lar plane stress element of 8 degrees of freedom. For this stiffened
plate element, a general curved stiffener element has been proposed
209
210 CONCLUSIONS
6.2 Conclusions
Based on the present investigation, the following concluding remarks can
be made:
• The elements proposed for the bare and stiffened plate analyses are
well equipped to model the arbitrary shape of the plate, though they
are based on simplest rectangular plate bending element.
• The number of examples dealt for the static, free vibration and sta-
bility analyses of bare and stiffened plates using these elements
have encountered no numerical difficulties during the computation
showing their versatility in the analysis of arbitrary plate domain.
• The stiffener in the stiffened plate bending element has been mod-
elled as a general curved discrete element whose position, orien-
tation and disposition are independent of the nodal networks of
212 CONCLUSIONS
the plate and thus has a distinct advantage over the other model of
stiffened plate element. Any number of stiffeners having different
shape and size can be accommodated anywhere inside the element
making its use attractive enough.
• The present study has been confined to the linear range of analysis.
With little effort, this proposition can be easily extended to include
the works relating to large deflection and large amplitude vibration
analyses of bare and stiffened plates of arbitrary shape.
• The plates studied here are of uniform thickness. The elements can
be modified to incorporate the plates of varying thickness. In a
similar manner, the study can be extended to the stiffeners having
varying depth.
International Journal
1. Manoranjan Barik and Madhujit Mukhopadhyay, “Finite element
free flexural vibration analysis of arbitrary plates”, Finite Elements
in Analysis and Design, 29, pp. 137-151, 1998.
215
216 LIST OF PUBLICATIONS
Conference
1. Madhujit Mukhopadhyay,Y. V. Satish Kumar and Manoranjan
Barik, “A novel analysis of grillage structures using stiffened plate
bending element”, Trends in Structural Engineering Towards the
21st Century: Structural Engineering Convention 1997, Indian In-
stitute of Technology, Madras, Chennai, pp.55-62, 1997.
Bibliography
217
218 BIBLIOGRAPHY
[11] Ayad, R., Dhatt, G., and Batoz, J. L. A new hybrid-mixed vari-
ational approach for Reissner-Mindlin plates: The MiSP Model.
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 42,
1149–1179, 1998.
[15] Bapu Rao, M. N., Guruswamy, P., Venkateswara Rao, M., and
Pavitran, S. Studies on vibration of some rib-stiffened cantilever
plates. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 57, 389–402, 1978.
[25] Bhimaraddi, A., Moss, P. J., and Carr, A. J. Finite element anal-
ysis of orthogonally stiffened annular sector plates. Engineering
Mechanics Division, Proc. of ASCE, 115, 2074–2088, 1989.
[37] Cheung, Y. K., Tham, L. G., and Li, W. Y. Free vibration and
static analysis of general plate by spline finite strip. Computational
Mechanics, 3, 187–197, 1989.
[66] Hovichitr, I., Karasudhi, P., Nishino, F., and Lee, S. L. A ra-
tional analysis of plates with eccentric stiffeners. IABSE Proceed-
ings, P4/77, 1–14, 1977.
[69] Irie, T., Yamada, G., and Ida, H. Free vibration of stiffened trape-
zoidal cantilever plate. Journal of Acoustical Society of America,
72, 1508–1513, 1982.
[74] Just, D. J. Behavior of skewed beam and slab bridge decks. Jour-
nal of the Structural Division., ASCE, 107(ST2), 299–316, 1981.
[75] Kalani, M., Joshi, U. M., and Kolhe, B. K. Finite element anal-
ysis of curved stiffened systems. In Proceedings of the Third In-
ternational Conference in Australia on Finite Element Methods,
pages 65–80. The University of New Southwales, 1979.
[96] Li, W. Y., Cheung, Y. K., and Tham, L. G. Spline finite strip anal-
ysis of general plates. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE,
112, 43–54, 1986.
[100] Liew, K. M., Lam, K. Y., and Chow, S. T. Free vibration analysis
of rectangular plates using orthogonal plate functions. Computers
and Structures, 34, 79–85, 1990.
[181] Tham, L. G., Li, W. Y., Cheung, Y. K., and Chen, M. J. Bend-
ing of skew plates by spline-finite-strip method. Computers and
Structures, 22, 31–38, 1986.
242 BIBLIOGRAPHY