## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

**www.elsevier.com/locate/tws
**

A semi-analytical model for global buckling

and postbuckling analysis of stiﬀened panels

Eirik Byklum

a,Ã

, Eivind Steen

a

, Jørgen Amdahl

b

a

Det Norske Veritas, Maritime Technology and Production Centre, Veritasveien 1,

N-1322 Høvik, Norway

b

Department of Marine Structures, Norwegian University of Science and Technology,

N-7491 Trondheim, Norway

Received 27 February 2003; received in revised form 24 November 2003; accepted 23 December 2003

Abstract

A computational model for global buckling and postbuckling analysis of stiﬀened panels

is derived. The loads considered are biaxial in-plane compression or tension, shear, and lat-

eral pressure. Deﬂections are assumed in the form of trigonometric function series, and the

principle of stationary potential energy is used for deriving the equilibrium equations. Lat-

eral pressure is accounted for by taking the deﬂection as a combination of a clamped and a

simply supported deﬂection mode. The global buckling model is based on Marguerre’s non-

linear plate theory, by deriving a set of anisotropic stiﬀness coeﬃcients to account for the

plate stiﬀening. Local buckling is treated in a separate local model developed previously.

The anisotropic stiﬀness coeﬃcients used in the global model are derived from the local

analysis. Together, the two models provide a tool for buckling assessment of stiﬀened

panels. Implemented in the computer code PULS, developed at Det Norske Veritas, local

and global stresses are combined in an incremental procedure. Ultimate limit state estimates

for design are obtained by calculating the stresses at certain critical points, and using the

onset of yielding due to membrane stress as the limiting criterion.

# 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Stiﬀened panel; Global deﬂection; Buckling; Postbuckling; Ultimate strength; Analytical

model; Energy principles

Ã

Corresponding author. Tel.: +47-67-57-99-00; fax: +47-67-57-99-11.

E-mail address: eirik.byklum@dnv.com (E. Byklum).

0263-8231/$ - see front matter #2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.tws.2003.12.006

1. Introduction

The global capacity of ships and oﬀshore structures depends to a large extent

on the buckling strength of the individual stiﬀened panels. In order to achieve

safe and economical design, it is therefore necessary to have a tool for buckling

assessment of stiﬀened panels. Such a tool should be computationally eﬃcient

and as accurate as possible. The global buckling model presented in the follow-

ing is developed as one part of such a tool. Together with a local buckling

model presented in [1], it may be used for buckling assessment of stiﬀened

panels. The models are implemented in PULS, which is a computer code for

buckling assessment developed at Det Norske Veritas. Local and global stresses

are combined in an incremental procedure [2,3], and ultimate limit state estimates

are obtained.

The stiﬀened panel is assumed to consist of a rectangular plate area with longi-

tudinal stiﬀeners in one direction and heavy transverse girders in the other direc-

tion, as shown in Fig. 1. This is a typical conﬁguration for the deck, side, or

bottom of a ship hull girder. The loads acting on a stiﬀened panel in a ship are in-

plane compression or tension, resulting from the overall hull girder bending

moment or torsion, shear force resulting from the hull girder shear force, and lat-

eral pressure resulting from internal cargo or the external sea.

The computational model for the global buckling is developed by considering

the stiﬀened panel as a plate with anisotropic stiﬀness coeﬃcients. The anisotropy

is structural, meaning that it is caused by the plate stiﬀening. The material is

assumed to be isotropic elastic. The local deformation of the plating and stiﬀeners

is accounted for by applying a set of reduced anisotropic stiﬀness coeﬃcients,

which is derived from the local buckling model [1]. Due to the local buckling

eﬀects, the stiﬀness properties are reduced compared to the initial stiﬀness.

Fig. 1. Stiﬀened panel.

E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 702

Consistent with the anisotropic/orthotropic plate theory, the global buckling

mode involves lifting the stiﬀeners out-of-plane together with the plating, as

illustrated in Fig. 2. With respect to the global and local mode interaction eﬀect as

implemented in the PULS code [2], the global deﬂections are assumed not to inﬂu-

ence the local deformation, and the procedure may therefore be viewed upon as a

kind of one-way interaction between local and global buckling.

The response of the stiﬀened plate during buckling is studied using the principle

of stationary potential energy:

dP ¼ dU þdT ¼ 0 ð1Þ

G is total potential energy, U is internal energy, T is the potential of the external

loads, and d is the variational operator. Using trigonometric functions to represent

the displacement, analytical expressions are found for the potential energy.

The stationary potential energy principle generates the nonlinear algebraic equi-

librium equations, which are next solved numerically using perturbation methods

[4]. The numerical procedure involves deriving the incremental stiﬀness matrices

and load vectors, consistent with a ﬁrst order perturbation expansion of the equi-

librium equations. By stepping along the equilibrium path in very small increments,

directly using the arc length parameter as control [5], equilibrium iterations are

abandoned and fast and suﬃciently accurate solutions are achieved. Numerical

results conﬁrming this are given in Section 5.

Previously, the large deﬂection response of unstiﬀened plates had been studied

analytically by Ueda et al. [6] and Paik et al. [7]. In these studies, isotropic elastic

plates were considered. The global deﬂection of a stiﬀened plate was studied ana-

lytically using a single degree of freedom model in [8]. The eﬀect of local defor-

mation was not accounted for. In the present work, the buckling and postbuckling

problem is solved for plates with general anisotropic stiﬀness, and for a combination

Fig. 2. Global buckling deﬂection in a stiﬀened panel.

703 E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717

of simply supported mode deﬂection and clamped mode deﬂection, using a two-

span model philosophy (Fig. 5).

2. Deﬁnition of global stiﬀness coeﬃcients

The global stiﬀness coeﬃcients C

ij

for the stiﬀened panel are deﬁned as the

change in load N

i

resulting from a change in displacement e

j

, provided that all

other displacements are kept ﬁxed. The loads considered on the global level are

deﬁned as (see Fig. 3):

N

1

axial force per unit breadth in x-direction

N

2

axial force per unit length in y-direction

N

3

shear ﬂow

M

1

resulting moment about the plate plane due to N

1

M

2

resulting moment about the plate plane due to N

2

M

3

torsional moment

The corresponding displacements are:

e

1

average strain in x-direction

e

2

average strain in y-direction

e

3

shear strain

j

1

curvature about the y-axis

j

2

curvature about the x-axis

j

3

torsion

It should be noted that these deﬁnitions are somewhat unusual, since N

3

is shear

ﬂow rather than force in z-direction, and M

3

is torsional moment rather than

moment about the z-axis. The displacement parameters used are all average values.

Hence, the stiﬀness coeﬃcients may also be considered as averaged over the panel.

Fig. 3. Deﬁnition of global forces and moments.

E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 704

Consistent with the ﬁrst order perturbation expansion of the equilibrium sol-

ution, the incremental force–displacement relation for the stiﬀened panel is [9]:

DN

1

DN

2

DN

3

DM

1

DM

2

DM

3

_

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

_

_

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

_

¼

C

11

C

12

C

13

Q

11

Q

12

Q

13

C

21

C

22

C

23

Q

21

Q

22

Q

23

C

31

C

32

C

33

Q

31

Q

32

Q

33

Q

11

Q

21

Q

31

D

11

D

12

D

13

Q

12

Q

22

Q

32

D

21

D

22

D

23

Q

13

Q

23

Q

33

D

31

D

32

D

33

_

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

_

_

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

_

De

1

De

2

De

3

Dj

1

Dj

2

Dj

3

_

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

_

_

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

_

ð2Þ

The stiﬀness matrix is symmetric, so that C

ij

¼ C

ji

and D

ij

¼ D

ji

. The stiﬀness coef-

ﬁcients may be divided into a linear and a nonlinear part:

C

ij

¼ C

L

ij

þC

NL

ij

ð3Þ

D

ij

¼ D

L

ij

þD

NL

ij

ð4Þ

Q

ij

¼ Q

L

ij

þQ

NL

ij

ð5Þ

The linear parts are the ones corresponding to classical orthotropic stiﬀness coeﬃ-

cients, and these are independent of load and displacement. The nonlinear parts

are calculated using the local buckling model, and will be functions of load and

displacement. For compressive loads they will be negative, resulting in a stiﬀness

reduction.

3. Derivation of reduced stiﬀness

For calculation of the reduced stiﬀness coeﬃcients to be used in the global buck-

ling model, the total forces are written as follows:

N

M

_ _

¼

C Q

Q

T

D

_ _

L

e

j

_ _

þ

g

N

ðA

mn

Þ

g

M

ðA

mn

Þ

_ _

ð6Þ

where g

N

(A

mn

) and g

M

(A

mn

) are nonlinear terms, which are due to local buckling

eﬀects. The reduced stiﬀness coeﬃcients are then deﬁned as:

C

ij

¼

@N

i

@e

j

¼ C

L

ij

þ

@g

N

i

@e

j

ð7Þ

Q

ij

¼

@N

i

@j

j

¼ Q

L

ij

þ

@g

N

i

@j

j

ð8Þ

¼

@M

j

@e

i

¼ Q

L

ij

þ

@g

M

j

@e

i

ð9Þ

D

ij

¼

@M

i

@j

j

¼ M

L

ij

þ

@g

M

i

@j

j

ð10Þ

The reduced stiﬀness coeﬃcients are derived using the local buckling model pre-

sented in [1]. First, the resultant forces and moments are calculated by integration

705 E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717

of the membrane stress:

N

i

¼

_

h

r

ii

dz ð11Þ

M

i

¼

_

h

zr

ii

dz ð12Þ

The neutral axis of the stiﬀener is not known, since it is continuously changing

during buckling. The bending moment is therefore calculated about the middle

plate plane. The neutral axis and the neutral bending stiﬀness coeﬃcients can be

calculated once the in-plane and bending stiﬀness are determined.

For open proﬁle stiﬀeners, the following expressions were calculated in [1] for

the internal axial and transverse force:

N

1

¼ E

A

T

b

1 þ

m

2

bt

A

T

1 Àm

2

ð Þ

_ _

e

1

þ

mtE

1 Àm

2

e

2

þ

EA

s

z

gs

b

j

1

þg

N

1

ð13Þ

N

2

¼

mtE

1 Àm

2

e

1

þ

tE

1 Àm

2

e

2

þg

N

2

ð14Þ

where A

T

is the total cross-sectional area, A

s

is the stiﬀener area, and z

gs

is the dis-

tance from the plate plane to the centroid of the stiﬀener. The curvature j

1

is due

to global deﬂection. The shear force and bending moment are:

N

3

¼ Gte

3

þg

N

3

ð15Þ

M

1

¼

EA

s

b

e

1

þ

EI

b

j

1

þg

M

1

ð16Þ

where I is the moment of inertia of the whole cross-section. The stiﬀness coeﬃ-

cients are found by diﬀerentiation of the above expressions. The linear parts are

given directly as:

C

L

11

¼ E

A

T

b

1 þ

m

2

bt

A

T

1 Àm

2

ð Þ

_ _

ð17Þ

C

L

12

¼ C

L

21

¼

mtE

1 Àm

2

ð18Þ

C

L

22

¼

tE

1 Àm

2

e

2

ð19Þ

C

L

33

¼ Gt ð20Þ

Q

L

11

¼

EA

s

z

gs

b

ð21Þ

D

L

11

¼

EI

b

ð22Þ

E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 706

All other linear coeﬃcients are zero for open proﬁle stiﬀeners. The nonlinear

parts of the stiﬀness coeﬃcients are calculated as:

C

NL

ij

¼

@g

N

i

@w

L

@w

L

@e

j

ð23Þ

Q

NL

ij

¼

@g

N

i

@w

L

@w

L

@j

j

ð24Þ

D

NL

ij

¼

@g

M

i

@w

L

@w

L

@j

j

ð25Þ

where w

L

is the local deﬂection. The ﬁrst part may be found directly by diﬀeren-

tiation once g

N

and g

M

are known. They can be calculated from expressions for N

i

and M

i

derived for the local model in [1]. The second part is calculated using the

equilibrium equations for the local buckling problem. By applying partial diﬀeren-

tiation to the stationary potential energy, we get:

@ð@P=@w

L

Þ

@e

i

¼

@

2

P

@w

2

L

@w

L

@e

i

þ

@

2

P

@w

L

@e

i

¼ 0 ð26Þ

@ð@P=@w

L

Þ

@j

1

¼

@

2

P

@w

2

L

@w

L

@j

1

þ

@

2

P

@w

L

@j

1

¼ 0 ð27Þ

By introducing the incremental stiﬀness matrix K and load vectors G, deﬁned as

K ¼

@

2

P

@w

2

L

ð28Þ

G

e

i

¼

@

2

P

@w

L

@e

i

ð29Þ

G

j

1

¼

@

2

P

@w

L

@j

1

ð30Þ

we can write:

K

@w

L

@e

i

þG

e

i

¼ 0 ð31Þ

K

@w

L

@j

1

þG

j

1

¼ 0 ð32Þ

This means that

@w

L

@e

i

¼ ÀðKÞ

À1

G

e

i

ð33Þ

and

@w

L

@j

1

¼ ÀðKÞ

À1

G

j

1

ð34Þ

707 E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717

An example of how the stiﬀness coeﬃcients may change during local deformation

is given in Fig. 4. The calculations are for a steel angle bar (Table 1). The load is

axial, and the imperfection is 1 mm in the local eigenmode.

The values plotted are the ratio between the nonlinear stiﬀness coeﬃcients and

the corresponding initial values. Q

12

is divided by Q

11

since Q

L

12

is zero. The stiﬀ-

ness ratios are slightly smaller than 1.0 at the start of the analysis due to the imper-

fection. If the imperfection were larger, the stiﬀness ratios would also have smaller

initial values.

It is seen that the stiﬀness reduction is signiﬁcant for C

11

and C

22

, but the most

drastic change is for C

12

, which even changes sign. The reason is that C

12

is posi-

tive for a ﬂat plate due to the Poisson eﬀect, while it becomes negative for large

deﬂection due to membrane stretching. The change in Q

11

, Q

12

, and D

11

is small.

There is some reduction in D

n11

, which is the neutral bending stiﬀness. This coef-

ﬁcient is deﬁned in the next section.

It is seen that the stiﬀness reduction is quite localized. The reduction occurs

around the buckling strain, and the stiﬀness is almost constant after this. This is a

Fig. 4. Change in stiﬀness properties during local buckling due to axial load for steel angle bar.

E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 708

general trend found for all the stiﬀeners investigated here. For smaller imperfec-

tions the stiﬀness reduction will be even more sudden, while for larger imperfec-

tions there will be a more gradual transition.

4. Global buckling model

For the following derivations, the stiﬀeners are assumed to be in the longitudinal

direction, but transverse stiﬀening can be analyzed simply by switching panel

length and breadth. The stiﬀened panel is supported on all edges by transverse and

longitudinal girders. The length of the panel is a, while the width is B. The loads

considered are in-plane compression or tension, shear force, and lateral pressure.

The edge loads are assumed to be constant in magnitude.

Two stiﬀener spans and panel widths are included in the model. The intention is

to account properly for the eﬀect of lateral pressure on the panel. The pressure

must be carried by the stiﬀeners, and the deﬂection of the stiﬀeners may therefore

be a combination of the simply supported mode and the clamped mode (Fig. 5).

The deﬂection shape is therefore taken as a combination of sine terms and cosine

terms:

w ¼ w

s

þw

c

ð35Þ

w

0

¼ w

s

0

þw

c

0

ð36Þ

where s and c denote sine and cosine mode deﬂection, respectively:

w

s

¼

M

s

m¼1

N

s

n¼1

A

s

mn

sin

mpx

a

_ _

sin

npy

B

_ _

ð37Þ

Fig. 5. Global deﬂection of stiﬀener in simply supported mode and clamped mode.

Table 1

Dimensions for stiﬀened steel plate

Stiﬀener a (m) b (m) t (m) h (m) t

w

(m) b

f

(m) t

f

(m) r

f

(MPa)

Angle bar 2.73 0.85 0.0165 0.350 0.012 0.100 0.017 355

709 E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717

w

c

¼

M

c

m¼1

N

c

n¼1

A

c

mn

2

1 Àcos

2mpx

a

_ _ _ _

sin

npy

B

_ _

ð38Þ

w

s

0

¼

M

s

m¼1

N

s

n¼1

B

s

mn

sin

mpx

a

_ _

sin

npy

B

_ _

ð39Þ

w

c

0

¼

M

c

m¼1

N

c

n¼1

B

c

mn

2

1 Àcos

2mpx

a

_ _ _ _

sin

npy

B

_ _

ð40Þ

The anisotropic material law for plane stress, using the stress resultants N

1

, N

2

,

and N

3

, is:

N

1

N

2

N

3

_

_

_

_

¼

C

11

C

12

C

13

C

21

C

22

C

23

C

31

C

32

C

33

_

_

_

_

e

1

e

2

c

3

_

_

_

_

ð41Þ

The corresponding ﬂexibility relation is needed for derivation of the stress func-

tion. It is written as:

e

1

e

2

c

3

_

_

_

_

¼

M

11

M

12

M

13

M

21

M

22

M

23

M

31

M

32

M

33

_

_

_

_

N

1

N

2

N

3

_

_

_

_

ð42Þ

The stiﬀness relation for the resultant bending moments is:

M

1

M

2

M

3

_

_

_

_

¼

D

11

D

12

D

13

D

21

D

22

D

23

D

31

D

32

D

33

_

_

_

_

j

1

j

2

j

3

_

_

_

_

ð43Þ

It is assumed that there is no coupling between resultant forces and moments, i.e.

all Q

ij

terms are zero. This can be done by performing a neutralization of the stiﬀ-

ness coeﬃcients, as explained in [2]. This means that the bending stiﬀness coeﬃ-

cients are redeﬁned so that no coupling occurs. The neutral bending stiﬀness matrix

**DD is calculated from the original stiﬀness as
**

DD ¼ DÀQ

T

C

À1

Q. For simplicity, the

symbol D is used in the following to denote the neutral bending stiﬀness matrix.

Using large deﬂection plate theory [10], the general requirement for strain com-

patibility can be written as:

e

x;yy

þe

y;xx

Àc

xy;xy

¼ w

2

;xy

Àw

;xx

w

;yy

þ2w

0;xy

w

;xy

Àw

0;yy

w

;xx

Àw

;yy

w

0;xx

ð44Þ

Following the same approach as was used in [11], a stress function F is deﬁned

in terms of the stress resultants N

i

in the stiﬀened plate, so that:

N

1

¼ F

;yy

ð45Þ

N

2

¼ F

;xx

ð46Þ

N

3

¼ ÀF

;xy

ð47Þ

E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 710

Using the material law as deﬁned above, and introducing the stress function F, the

compatibility equation for the anisotropic plate can be written as:

M

1111

F

;yyyy

þM

2222

F

;xxxx

þð2M

1122

þM

1212

ÞF

;xxyy

À2M

1112

F

;xyyy

ÀM

2221

F

;yxxx

¼ w

2

;xy

þ2w

0;xy

w

;xy

Àw

;xx

w

;yy

Àw

0;yy

w

;xx

Àw

;yy

w

0;xx

ð48Þ

The solution to this equation is more complex than for an isotropic plate, due to

the nonzero coeﬃcients M

1112

and M

2221

. A solution is found by assuming the

stress function to consist of the following terms:

F ¼ F

0

þF

s1

þF

s2

þF

c1

þF

c2

þF

sc1

þF

sc2

ð49Þ

where

F

0

¼ À

S

x

y

2

t

2

À

S

y

x

2

t

2

ÀS

xy

xyt ð50Þ

F

s1

¼

2M

s

0

2N

s

0

f

s1

mn

cos

mpx

a

_ _

cos

npy

B

_ _

ð51Þ

F

s2

¼

2M

s

0

2N

s

0

f

s2

mn

sin

mpx

a

_ _

sin

npy

B

_ _

ð52Þ

F

c1

¼

2M

c

0

2N

c

0

f

c1

mn

cos

2mpx

a

_ _

cos

npy

B

_ _

ð53Þ

F

c2

¼

2M

c

0

2N

c

0

f

c2

mn

sin

2mpx

a

_ _

sin

npy

B

_ _

ð54Þ

F

sc1

¼

M

s

þM

c

0

N

s

þ2N

c

0

f

sc1

mn

sin

mpx

a

_ _

cos

npy

B

_ _

ð55Þ

F

sc2

¼

M

s

þM

c

0

N

s

þ2N

c

0

f

sc2

mn

cos

mpx

a

_ _

sin

npy

B

_ _

ð56Þ

711 E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717

By substitution of the assumed stress function into the compatibility equation, it

is found that the coeﬃcients f

1

mn

and f

2

mn

must be:

f

s1

mn

¼

1

4a

2

B

2

ðK1s ÀK2s

2

=K1sÞ

rspq

b

s

rspq

A

s

rs

A

s

pq

þA

s

rs

B

s

pq

þA

s

pq

B

s

rs

_ _

ð57Þ

f

s2

mn

¼ À

K2s

K1s

f

s1

mn

ð58Þ

f

c1

mn

¼

1

4a

2

B

2

ðK1c ÀK2c

2

=K1cÞ

rspq

b

c

rspq

A

c

rs

A

c

pq

þA

c

rs

B

c

pq

þA

c

pq

B

c

rs

_ _

ð59Þ

f

c2

mn

¼ À

K2c

K1c

f

c1

mn

ð60Þ

f

sc1

mn

¼

1

4a

2

B

2

ðK1sc ÀK2sc

2

=K1scÞ

rspq

b

sc

rspq

A

s

rs

A

c

pq

þA

s

rs

B

c

pq

þA

c

pq

B

s

rs

_ _

ð61Þ

f

sc2

mn

¼ À

K2sc

K1sc

f

sc1

mn

ð62Þ

where

K1s ¼

m

4

a

4

M

2222

þ

m

2

n

2

a

2

B

2

ð2M

1122

þM

1212

Þ þ

n

4

B

4

M

1111

ð63Þ

K2s ¼ 2

m

3

n

a

3

B

M

2221

þ2

mn

3

aB

3

M

1112

ð64Þ

K1c ¼ 16

m

4

a

4

M

2222

þ4

m

2

n

2

a

2

B

2

ð2M

1122

þM

1212

Þ þ

n

4

B

4

M

1111

ð65Þ

K2c ¼ 16

m

3

n

a

3

B

M

2221

þ4

mn

3

aB

3

M

1112

ð66Þ

K1sc ¼

m

4

a

4

M

2222

þ

m

2

n

2

a

2

B

2

ð2M

1122

þM

1212

Þ þ

n

4

B

4

M

1111

ð67Þ

K2sc ¼ À2

m

3

n

a

3

B

M

2221

À2

mn

3

aB

3

M

1112

ð68Þ

and f

0,0

is deﬁned as zero. The coeﬃcients b

s

rspq

, b

c

rspq

, and b

sc

rspq

can be found in [12].

The potential of internal energy is generally written as

U ¼

1

2

_

V

re dV ð69Þ

The strain is ﬁrst divided into a constant membrane part e

m

and a linearly varying

bending part e

b

¼ zj. Integration is then performed over the thickness in order to

E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 712

express the potential energy as a function of stress resultants:

U ¼

1

2

_

V

rðe

m

þe

b

ÞdV ð70Þ

¼

1

2

_

V

re

m

dV þ

1

2

_

V

zrj dV ð71Þ

¼

1

2

_

A

Ne

m

dV þ

1

2

_

V

Mj dV ð72Þ

¼ U

m

þU

b

ð73Þ

By substitution of the material law, the membrane energy is written as:

U

m

¼

1

2

M

11

_

A

N

2

1

dA þM

22

_

A

N

2

2

dA þM

33

_

A

N

2

3

dA

_

þ2M

12

_

A

N

1

N

2

dA þ2M

13

_

A

N

1

N

3

dA þ2M

23

_

A

N

2

N

3

dA

_

ð74Þ

The membrane energy is calculated by substitution of the stress function and inte-

grating over the plate area. The ﬁnal expression can be found in [12]. The bending

energy is:

U

b

¼

1

2

D

11

_

A

j

2

1

dA þD

22

_

A

j

2

2

dA þD

33

_

A

j

2

3

dA

_

þ2D

12

_

A

j

1

j

2

dA þ2D

13

_

A

j

1

j

3

dA þ2D

23

_

A

j

2

j

3

dA

_

ð75Þ

The resulting expression is found by substituting j

1

¼ w

;xx

, j

2

¼ w

;yy

, and

j

3

¼ 2w

;xy

, and performing the integration. The result is given in [12].

The energy due to in-plane tension or compression load is:

T

c

¼

_

2a

0

_

2B

0

N

1

u

;x

dy dx þ

_

2a

0

_

2B

0

N

2

v

;y

dy dx ð76Þ

The shear energy is:

T

s

¼ N

3

_

2a

0

_

2B

0

ðu

;y

þv

;x

Þdy dx ð77Þ

The energy due to lateral pressure is:

T

lp

¼ À

_

2a

0

_

2B

0

pw dy dx ð78Þ

It is seen that contribution from the sine deﬂection to the lateral pressure energy

vanishes upon integration. This is due to the anti-symmetry of the sine deﬂection.

Physically, this means that lateral pressure will only give rise to deﬂection in the

713 E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717

cosine mode. For combined loads, the deﬂection will be a combination of the two.

All ﬁnal expressions can be found in [12].

5. Results

For veriﬁcation of the computational model developed, analyses were performed

using the nonlinear ﬁnite element code ABAQUS.

In the ﬁrst case, the anisotropic material option was applied for the case of an

unstiﬀened plate. This means that all the in-plane stiﬀness coeﬃcients may be given

independently, while the bending stiﬀness is given directly by integration over the

thickness.

Fig. 6 shows the nondimensional load-shortening response for an 840 Â980 Â

11 mm aluminium plate with elastic modulus E ¼ 70 000 MPa and yield stress

r

f

¼ 240 MPa. A combination of lateral pressure p ¼ 0:2 MPa, corresponding to a

20 m water column, and transverse compression, S

y

¼ 240 MPa, is applied pro-

portionally. The combination of in-plane and out-of-plane loads gives a deﬂection

mode in between simply supported and clamped. In order to check the model with

anisotropic stiﬀness, the stiﬀness was arbitrarily chosen so that C

1112

¼ C

2221

¼

C

iso

1212

. The imperfection is 10 mm in the eigenmode.

It is seen that this load combination results in a snap-back response. The reason

is that the imperfection and the transverse loading gives a deﬂection in the simply

supported mode in the ﬁrst part of the analysis, while the lateral pressure eventu-

ally forces the deﬂection into a clamped mode. It is seen that the agreement

between the results from the model and from ABAQUS is very good. This shows

that the ﬁrst order perturbation expansion works very well even for such a complex

Fig. 6. Load–average strain response for anisotropic plate subjected to combined transverse load and

lateral pressure.

E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 714

response. Also, the lateral pressure eﬀect, which gives a resulting deﬂection mode

in between simply supported and clamped, is well taken care of.

In order to check the bending stiﬀness formulations, analyses are performed

using a stiﬀened panel in ABAQUS. It is desirable to compare the model with a

stiﬀened panel deﬂecting in a pure global mode, i.e. without local buckling of plate

and stiﬀeners. One way to achieve this is to model a panel with very large plate

thickness compared to the panel dimensions. Such a panel is likely to deﬂect glo-

bally without local deformations.

A stiﬀened panel consisting of three aluminium proﬁles (Table 2) is modelled in

ABAQUS. The thickness of the plate, the web, and the ﬂange is increased from the

original dimensions given in the table to 50 mm. This geometry is so stocky that

the resulting deformation is purely in the global mode. Analyses are performed on

the stiﬀened panel in ABAQUS for axial and transverse loading, with an imperfec-

tion in the global mode equal to 3.6 mm. Analyses are then performed with the

global buckling model using linear anisotropic stiﬀness coeﬃcients according to the

stiﬀener dimensions, as explained previously. The results are shown in Fig. 7. It is

seen that the agreement is very good.

In Fig. 8, the response of this panel under axial loading, calculated using linear

stiﬀness coeﬃcients, is compared with the response calculated using reduced stiﬀ-

ness resulting from local buckling analysis. The imperfection is 3.2 mm in the local

mode and 3.6 mm in the global mode. It is seen that the global deﬂection is larger

when the reduced stiﬀness is applied, as expected. In this analysis, the stiﬀness

Table 2

Dimensions for aluminium stiﬀeners

Stiﬀener a (m) b (m) t (m) h (m) t

w

(m) b

f

(m) t

f

(m) r

f

(MPa)

Tee bar 2.4 0.32 0.005 0.075 0.005 0.040 0.005 240

Fig. 7. Load–average strain response due to pure global buckling for stiﬀened panel subjected to axial

compression (left) and transverse compression (right).

715 E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717

coeﬃcients input to the global model are gradually reduced, corresponding to the

current load factor.

6. Concluding remarks

A computational model for the analysis of global buckling and postbuckling of

stiﬀened panels has been derived. The model was developed as part of a tool for

buckling assessment of stiﬀened panels. It is formulated using large deﬂection plate

theory and energy principles. Any combination of biaxial in-plane compression or

tension, shear, and lateral pressure may be analyzed. The procedure is semi-ana-

lytical in the sense that all energy formulations are derived analytically, while a

numerical method is used for solving the resulting set of equations, and for incre-

menting the solution. The load–deﬂection curves produced by the proposed model

are compared with results from nonlinear FEM. Good correspondence is achieved,

and the eﬃciency of the calculations is high.

The global model is combined with a local buckling model in the DNV com-

puter code PULS [13]. In this program, the ultimate strength of panels is estimated

by checking the stress at certain critical points at each increment. Using the von

Mises yield criterion, the onset of yielding is taken as the collapse load for design

purposes. This is conservative, and a sound, design approach, since yielding will

give unwanted permanent deformations in the structure.

Acknowledgements

This study has been performed with support from the Norwegian Research

Council and Det Norske Veritas.

Fig. 8. Load–average strain response during axial load calculated from global buckling model using lin-

ear and nonlinear stiﬀness coeﬃcients.

E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 716

References

[1] Byklum E, Amdahl J. A simpliﬁed method for elastic large deﬂection analysis of plates and stif-

fened panels due to local buckling. Thin-Walled Structures 2002;40(11):923–51.

[2] Det Norske Veritas. PULS 1.5 theory manual. 2003.

[3] Byklum E, Amdahl J. Nonlinear buckling analysis and ultimate strength prediction of stiﬀened steel

and aluminium panels. The Second International Conference on Advances in Structural Engineer-

ing and Mechanics, Pusan. 2002.

[4] Huseyin K. Nonlinear theory of elastic stability. Leyden: Nordhoﬀ International Publishing; 1975.

[5] Steen E. Application of the perturbation method to plate buckling problems. Research report in

mechanics 98-1, University of Oslo, 1998.

[6] Ueda Y, Rashed S, Paik J. An incremental Galerkin method for plates and stiﬀened plates. Compu-

ters and Structures 1987;27(1):147–56.

[7] Paik J, Thayamballi A, Lee S, Kang S. A semi-analytical method for the elastic–plastic large deﬂec-

tion analysis of welded steel or aluminium plating under combined in-plane and lateral pressure

loads. Thin-Walled Structures 2001;39:125–52.

[8] Steen E. Elastic buckling and postbuckling of eccentrically stiﬀened plates. International Journal of

Solids and Structures 1989;25(7):751–68.

[9] Steen E. Buckling of stiﬀened plates using a Shanley model approach. Research report in mechanics

99-1, University of Oslo, 1999.

[10] Marguerre K. Die mittragende Breite der gedruckten Platte. Luftfahrtsforschung 1937;14(3):121–8.

[11] Levy S. Bending of rectangular plates with large deﬂection. Report 737, NACA, 1942.

[12] Byklum E. Ultimate strength analysis of stiﬀened steel and aluminium panels using semi-analytical

methods. PhD thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 2002.

[13] Det Norske Veritas. PULS 1.5 user’s manual. 2003.

717 E. Byklum et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717

. 1. The stiﬀened panel is assumed to consist of a rectangular plate area with longitudinal stiﬀeners in one direction and heavy transverse girders in the other direction. the stiﬀness properties are reduced compared to the initial stiﬀness. 1. Introduction The global capacity of ships and oﬀshore structures depends to a large extent on the buckling strength of the individual stiﬀened panels. The loads acting on a stiﬀened panel in a ship are inplane compression or tension. which is a computer code for buckling assessment developed at Det Norske Veritas. meaning that it is caused by the plate stiﬀening. Fig.3]. This is a typical conﬁguration for the deck. shear force resulting from the hull girder shear force. The computational model for the global buckling is developed by considering the stiﬀened panel as a plate with anisotropic stiﬀness coeﬃcients. Stiﬀened panel. Local and global stresses are combined in an incremental procedure [2. The models are implemented in PULS. or bottom of a ship hull girder. and ultimate limit state estimates are obtained. side. it is therefore necessary to have a tool for buckling assessment of stiﬀened panels. and lateral pressure resulting from internal cargo or the external sea. The local deformation of the plating and stiﬀeners is accounted for by applying a set of reduced anisotropic stiﬀness coeﬃcients.702 E. resulting from the overall hull girder bending moment or torsion. In order to achieve safe and economical design. Such a tool should be computationally eﬃcient and as accurate as possible. The global buckling model presented in the following is developed as one part of such a tool. Due to the local buckling eﬀects. as shown in Fig. it may be used for buckling assessment of stiﬀened panels. Together with a local buckling model presented in [1]. Byklum et al. The anisotropy is structural. The material is assumed to be isotropic elastic. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 1. which is derived from the local buckling model [1].

The stationary potential energy principle generates the nonlinear algebraic equilibrium equations. [6] and Paik et al. [7]. . and d is the variational operator. By stepping along the equilibrium path in very small increments. equilibrium iterations are abandoned and fast and suﬃciently accurate solutions are achieved. and the procedure may therefore be viewed upon as a kind of one-way interaction between local and global buckling. the large deﬂection response of unstiﬀened plates had been studied analytically by Ueda et al. With respect to the global and local mode interaction eﬀect as implemented in the PULS code [2]. the global deﬂections are assumed not to inﬂuence the local deformation. 2. The response of the stiﬀened plate during buckling is studied using the principle of stationary potential energy: dP ¼ dU þ dT ¼ 0 ð1Þ G is total potential energy. In these studies. Using trigonometric functions to represent the displacement. and for a combination Fig. which are next solved numerically using perturbation methods [4]. U is internal energy. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 703 Consistent with the anisotropic/orthotropic plate theory. isotropic elastic plates were considered. directly using the arc length parameter as control [5]. the buckling and postbuckling problem is solved for plates with general anisotropic stiﬀness. Global buckling deﬂection in a stiﬀened panel. The global deﬂection of a stiﬀened plate was studied analytically using a single degree of freedom model in [8]. 2. In the present work. The numerical procedure involves deriving the incremental stiﬀness matrices and load vectors. Previously. Byklum et al. Numerical results conﬁrming this are given in Section 5. consistent with a ﬁrst order perturbation expansion of the equilibrium equations. as illustrated in Fig. the global buckling mode involves lifting the stiﬀeners out-of-plane together with the plating. T is the potential of the external loads.E. analytical expressions are found for the potential energy. The eﬀect of local deformation was not accounted for.

Hence. using a twospan model philosophy (Fig. The loads considered on the global level are deﬁned as (see Fig. Deﬁnition of global stiﬀness coeﬃcients The global stiﬀness coeﬃcients Cij for the stiﬀened panel are deﬁned as the change in load Ni resulting from a change in displacement ej. The displacement parameters used are all average values. since N3 is shear ﬂow rather than force in z-direction. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 of simply supported mode deﬂection and clamped mode deﬂection. Byklum et al.704 E. 3): N1 N2 N3 M1 M2 M3 axial force per unit breadth in x-direction axial force per unit length in y-direction shear ﬂow resulting moment about the plate plane due to N1 resulting moment about the plate plane due to N2 torsional moment The corresponding displacements are: e1 e2 e3 j1 j2 j3 average strain in x-direction average strain in y-direction shear strain curvature about the y-axis curvature about the x-axis torsion It should be noted that these deﬁnitions are somewhat unusual. the stiﬀness coeﬃcients may also be considered as averaged over the panel. 5). provided that all other displacements are kept ﬁxed. Deﬁnition of global forces and moments. and M3 is torsional moment rather than moment about the z-axis. 2. . 3. Fig.

The reduced stiﬀness coeﬃcients are then deﬁned as: Cij ¼ Qij ¼ ¼ @Ni @gNi L ¼ Cij þ @ej @ej @Ni @gNi ¼ QL þ ij @jj @jj ð7Þ ð8Þ ð9Þ ð10Þ @gMj @Mj ¼ QL þ ij @ei @ei @Mi @gMi L Dij ¼ ¼ Mij þ @jj @jj The reduced stiﬀness coeﬃcients are derived using the local buckling model presented in [1]. the incremental force–displacement relation for the stiﬀened panel is [9]: 3 2 32 3 2 De1 C11 C12 C13 Q11 Q12 Q13 DN1 6 DN2 7 6 C21 C22 C23 Q21 Q22 Q23 76 De2 7 7 6 76 7 6 6 DN3 7 6 C31 C32 C33 Q31 Q32 Q33 76 De3 7 7¼6 76 7 6 ð2Þ 6 DM1 7 6 Q11 Q21 Q31 D11 D12 D13 76 Dj1 7 7 6 76 7 6 4 DM2 5 4 Q12 Q22 Q32 D21 D22 D23 54 Dj2 5 DM3 Q13 Q23 Q33 D31 D32 D33 Dj3 The stiﬀness matrix is symmetric. which are due to local buckling eﬀects. Byklum et al. the resultant forces and moments are calculated by integration . Derivation of reduced stiﬀness For calculation of the reduced stiﬀness coeﬃcients to be used in the global buckling model. For compressive loads they will be negative. and will be functions of load and displacement. and these are independent of load and displacement. so that Cij ¼ Cji and Dij ¼ Dji . resulting in a stiﬀness reduction. First. 3.E. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 705 Consistent with the ﬁrst order perturbation expansion of the equilibrium solution. the total forces are written as follows: L N C Q e gN ðAmn Þ ¼ þ ð6Þ M QT D j gM ðAmn Þ where gN(Amn) and gM(Amn) are nonlinear terms. The nonlinear parts are calculated using the local buckling model. The stiﬀness coefﬁcients may be divided into a linear and a nonlinear part: L NL Cij ¼ Cij þ Cij ð3Þ ð4Þ ð5Þ Dij ¼ DL þ DNL ij ij Qij ¼ QL ij þ QNL ij The linear parts are the ones corresponding to classical orthotropic stiﬀness coeﬃcients.

The curvature j1 is due to global deﬂection.706 E. For open proﬁle stiﬀeners. The stiﬀness coeﬃcients are found by diﬀerentiation of the above expressions. The shear force and bending moment are: N3 ¼ Gte3 þ gN3 M1 ¼ EAs EI j1 þ gM1 e1 þ b b ð15Þ ð16Þ where I is the moment of inertia of the whole cross-section. the following expressions were calculated in [1] for the internal axial and transverse force: EAs zgs AT m2 bt mtE 1þ j1 þ gN1 e2 þ ð13Þ e1 þ N1 ¼ E A T ð 1 À m2 Þ 1 À m2 b b N2 ¼ mtE tE e1 þ e 2 þ gN 2 1 À m2 1 À m2 ð14Þ where AT is the total cross-sectional area. and zgs is the distance from the plate plane to the centroid of the stiﬀener. The bending moment is therefore calculated about the middle plate plane. The neutral axis and the neutral bending stiﬀness coeﬃcients can be calculated once the in-plane and bending stiﬀness are determined. Byklum et al. since it is continuously changing during buckling. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 of the membrane stress: ð Ni ¼ rii dz h ð11Þ ð12Þ Mi ¼ ð zrii dz h The neutral axis of the stiﬀener is not known. The linear parts are given directly as: L C11 AT m2 bt 1þ ¼E AT ð1 À m2 Þ b mtE 1 À m2 ð17Þ ð18Þ ð19Þ ð20Þ ð21Þ ð22Þ L L C12 ¼ C21 ¼ L C22 ¼ tE e2 1 À m2 L C33 ¼ Gt QL ¼ 11 DL ¼ 11 EAs zgs b EI b . As is the stiﬀener area.

The second part is calculated using the equilibrium equations for the local buckling problem. They can be calculated from expressions for Ni and Mi derived for the local model in [1]. Byklum et al. we get: @ð@P=@wL Þ @ 2 P @wL @2P ¼ þ ¼0 2 @e @ei @wL @ei @wL i @ð@P=@wL Þ @ 2 P @wL @2P ¼ þ ¼0 @j1 @w2 @j1 @wL @j1 L @2P @w2 L @2P @wL @ei @2P @wL @j1 ð26Þ ð27Þ By introducing the incremental stiﬀness matrix K and load vectors G. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 707 All other linear coeﬃcients are zero for open proﬁle stiﬀeners. The nonlinear parts of the stiﬀness coeﬃcients are calculated as: NL Cij ¼ @gNi @wL @wL @ej @gNi @wL @wL @jj @gMi @wL @wL @jj ð23Þ ð24Þ ð25Þ QNL ¼ ij DNL ¼ ij where wL is the local deﬂection. By applying partial diﬀerentiation to the stationary potential energy.E. The ﬁrst part may be found directly by diﬀerentiation once gN and gM are known. deﬁned as K¼ ð28Þ ð29Þ ð30Þ Gei ¼ Gj1 ¼ we can write: K K @wL þ Gei ¼ 0 @ei @wL þ G j1 ¼ 0 @j1 ð31Þ ð32Þ This means that @wL ¼ ÀðKÞÀ1 Gei @ei and @wL ¼ ÀðKÞÀ1 Gj1 @j1 ð34Þ ð33Þ .

The stiﬀ12 ness ratios are slightly smaller than 1. The calculations are for a steel angle bar (Table 1). The change in Q11. Byklum et al. There is some reduction in Dn11. and D11 is small. Q12 is divided by Q11 since QL is zero. and the imperfection is 1 mm in the local eigenmode. Q12. 4.0 at the start of the analysis due to the imperfection. Change in stiﬀness properties during local buckling due to axial load for steel angle bar. and the stiﬀness is almost constant after this. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 An example of how the stiﬀness coeﬃcients may change during local deformation is given in Fig.708 E. The reduction occurs around the buckling strain. while it becomes negative for large deﬂection due to membrane stretching. which even changes sign. . which is the neutral bending stiﬀness. The values plotted are the ratio between the nonlinear stiﬀness coeﬃcients and the corresponding initial values. The reason is that C12 is positive for a ﬂat plate due to the Poisson eﬀect. The load is axial. the stiﬀness ratios would also have smaller initial values. This coefﬁcient is deﬁned in the next section. but the most drastic change is for C12. It is seen that the stiﬀness reduction is quite localized. 4. It is seen that the stiﬀness reduction is signiﬁcant for C11 and C22. This is a Fig. If the imperfection were larger.

Byklum et al. For smaller imperfections the stiﬀness reduction will be even more sudden. the stiﬀeners are assumed to be in the longitudinal direction.100 tf (m) 0. and lateral pressure.012 bf (m) 0.E. Global deﬂection of stiﬀener in simply supported mode and clamped mode. 4. Two stiﬀener spans and panel widths are included in the model. shear force. The stiﬀened panel is supported on all edges by transverse and longitudinal girders. The edge loads are assumed to be constant in magnitude.73 b (m) 0. The deﬂection shape is therefore taken as a combination of sine terms and cosine terms: w ¼ ws þ wc w0 ¼ ws 0 þ wc 0 mpx npy sin a B where s and c denote sine and cosine mode deﬂection. while for larger imperfections there will be a more gradual transition.350 tw (m) 0. The length of the panel is a. while the width is B. respectively: ws ¼ Ms Ns XX m¼1 n¼1 ð35Þ ð36Þ As sin mn ð37Þ Fig. 5. Global buckling model For the following derivations.017 709 rf (MPa) 355 general trend found for all the stiﬀeners investigated here. . The intention is to account properly for the eﬀect of lateral pressure on the panel. and the deﬂection of the stiﬀeners may therefore be a combination of the simply supported mode and the clamped mode (Fig.0165 h (m) 0. but transverse stiﬀening can be analyzed simply by switching panel length and breadth. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 Table 1 Dimensions for stiﬀened steel plate Stiﬀener Angle bar a (m) 2. The loads considered are in-plane compression or tension. 5).85 t (m) 0. The pressure must be carried by the stiﬀeners.

yy þ 2w0. is: 2 3 2 N1 C11 C12 4 N2 5 ¼ 4 C21 C22 N3 C31 C32 law for plane stress. For simplicity.710 c E.yy N2 ¼ F. 32 3 e1 C13 C23 54 e2 5 C33 c3 ð41Þ The corresponding ﬂexibility relation is needed for derivation of the stress function. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 Mc Nc XX Ac mn m¼1 n¼1 w ¼ 2 2mpx 1 À cos a npy sin B ð38Þ ws ¼ 0 wc 0 Ms Ns mpx npy XX Bs sin sin mn a B m¼1 n¼1 Mc Nc XX Bc mn m¼1 n¼1 ð39Þ ¼ 2 2mpx 1 À cos a npy sin B ð40Þ The anisotropic material and N3.e.xx À w. the symbol D is used in the following to denote the neutral bending stiﬀness matrix.xx N3 ¼ ÀF. Byklum et al.xy ¼ w2 À w.yy w. This can be done by performing a neutralization of the stiﬀness coeﬃcients.xx w. It is written as: 2 3 2 e1 M11 4 e2 5 ¼ 4 M21 c3 M31 2 3 2 M1 D11 4 M2 5 ¼ 4 D21 M3 D31 M12 M22 M32 32 3 N1 M13 M23 54 N2 5 M33 N3 32 3 j1 D13 D23 54 j2 5 D33 j3 ð42Þ The stiﬀness relation for the resultant bending moments is: D12 D22 D32 ð43Þ It is assumed that there is no coupling between resultant forces and moments. so that: N1 ¼ F.xy ð45Þ ð46Þ ð47Þ .xx . The neutral bending stiﬀness matrix D is calculated from the original stiﬀness as D ¼ D À QT CÀ1 Q.yy w0. N2. as explained in [2]. Using large deﬂection plate theory [10]. This means that the bending stiﬀness coeﬃcients are redeﬁned so that no coupling occurs. i.xy À w0.xy w.xx À cxy. all Qij terms are zero. the general requirement for strain compatibility can be written as: ex. using the stress resultants N1.yy þ ey.xy ð44Þ Following the same approach as was used in [11]. a stress function F is deﬁned in terms of the stress resultants Ni in the stiﬀened plate.

xy À w.yxxx ¼ w2 þ 2w0.xx . the compatibility equation for the anisotropic plate can be written as: M1111 F. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 711 Using the material law as deﬁned above. A solution is found by assuming the stress function to consist of the following terms: F ¼ F0 þ Fs1 þ Fs2 þ Fc1 þ Fc2 þ Fsc1 þ Fsc2 where Sx y2 t Sy x2 t À À Sxy xyt 2 2 ð49Þ F0 ¼ À ð50Þ Fs1 ¼ 2Ms 2Ns mpx npy XX s1 fmn cos cos a B 0 0 ð51Þ Fs2 ¼ 2Ms 2Ns mpx npy XX s2 fmn sin sin a B 0 0 ð52Þ Fc1 ¼ 2Mc 2Nc XX 0 0 c1 fmn cos 2mpx npy cos a B ð53Þ Fc2 ¼ 2Mc 2Nc XX 0 0 c2 fmn sin 2mpx npy sin a B ð54Þ Fsc1 ¼ Ms þMc NX c X s þ2N 0 0 sc1 fmn sin mpx a cos npy B ð55Þ Fsc2 ¼ Ms þMc NX c X s þ2N 0 0 mpx npy sc2 fmn cos sin a B ð56Þ . Byklum et al.E.xx w.xxxx þ ð2M1122 þ M1212 ÞF.xx À w.xy w.xy ð48Þ The solution to this equation is more complex than for an isotropic plate.yy À w0.xyyy À M2221 F.yy w0.yy w. and introducing the stress function F. due to the nonzero coeﬃcients M1112 and M2221.xxyy À 2M1112 F.yyyy þ M2222 F.

0 is deﬁned as zero. Integration is then performed over the thickness in order to . Byklum et al. bc . and bsc can be found in [12]. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 By substitution of the assumed stress function into the compatibility equation. rspq rspq rspq The potential of internal energy is generally written as ð 1 U¼ re dV ð69Þ 2 V The strain is ﬁrst divided into a constant membrane part em and a linearly varying bending part eb ¼ zj.712 E. it 1 2 is found that the coeﬃcients fmn and fmn must be: X 1 s1 s s s s s s fmn ¼ 2 2 bs ð57Þ rspq Ars Apq þ Ars Bpq þ Apq Brs 2 =K1sÞ 4a B ðK1s À K2s rspq s2 fmn ¼ À K2s s1 f K1s mn X 1 c c c c c c bc rspq Ars Apq þ Ars Bpq þ Apq Brs 2 =K1cÞ À K2c rspq ð58Þ ð59Þ c1 fmn ¼ 4a2 B2 ðK1c K2c c1 f K1c mn c2 fmn ¼ À ð60Þ ð61Þ sc1 fmn ¼ X 1 bsc As Ac þ As Bc þ Ac Bs rs pq pq rs 4a2 B2 ðK1sc À K2sc2 =K1scÞ rspq rspq rs pq K2sc sc1 f K1sc mn sc2 fmn ¼ À ð62Þ where K1s ¼ m4 m 2 n2 n4 M2222 þ 2 2 ð2M1122 þ M1212 Þ þ 4 M1111 a4 aB B m3 n mn3 M2221 þ 2 3 M1112 a3 B aB m4 m 2 n2 n4 M2222 þ 4 2 2 ð2M1122 þ M1212 Þ þ 4 M1111 a4 a B B m3 n mn3 M2221 þ 4 3 M1112 3B a aB ð63Þ ð64Þ ð65Þ ð66Þ ð67Þ ð68Þ K2s ¼ 2 K1c ¼ 16 K2c ¼ 16 K1sc ¼ m4 m2 n2 n4 M2222 þ 2 2 ð2M1122 þ M1212 Þ þ 4 M1111 4 a aB B m3 n mn3 M2221 À 2 3 M1112 3B a aB K2sc ¼ À2 and f0. The coeﬃcients bs .

x Þdy dx ð77Þ The energy due to lateral pressure is: ð 2a ð 2B Tlp ¼ À pw dy dx 0 0 ð78Þ It is seen that contribution from the sine deﬂection to the lateral pressure energy vanishes upon integration. Physically.yy .xy . The ﬁnal expression can be found in [12]. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 713 express the potential energy as a function of stress resultants: ð 1 U¼ rðem þ eb ÞdV 2 V ð ð 1 1 m ¼ re dV þ zrj dV 2 V 2 V ð ð 1 1 Nem dV þ Mj dV ¼ 2 A 2 V ¼ Um þ Ub By substitution of the material law. the membrane energy is written as: ð ð ð 1 2 2 2 M11 N1 dA þ M22 N2 dA þ M33 N3 dA Um ¼ 2 A A A ð ð ð þ2M12 N1 N2 dA þ 2M13 N1 N3 dA þ 2M23 N2 N3 dA A A A ð70Þ ð71Þ ð72Þ ð73Þ ð74Þ The membrane energy is calculated by substitution of the stress function and integrating over the plate area. and performing the integration. This is due to the anti-symmetry of the sine deﬂection. j2 ¼ w.E. Byklum et al.xx . this means that lateral pressure will only give rise to deﬂection in the .x dy dx þ N2 v. The result is given in [12].y þ v. The energy due to in-plane tension or compression load is: ð 2a ð 2B ð 2a ð 2B Tc ¼ N1 u. and j3 ¼ 2w.y dy dx ð76Þ 0 0 0 0 The shear energy is: Ts ¼ N3 ð 2a ð 2B 0 0 ðu. The bending energy is: ð ð ð 1 D11 j2 dA þ D22 j2 dA þ D33 j2 dA Ub ¼ 1 2 3 2 A A A ð ð ð þ2D12 j1 j2 dA þ 2D13 j1 j3 dA þ 2D23 j2 j3 dA ð75Þ A A A The resulting expression is found by substituting j1 ¼ w.

5. It is seen that this load combination results in a snap-back response. analyses were performed using the nonlinear ﬁnite element code ABAQUS. The reason is that the imperfection and the transverse loading gives a deﬂection in the simply supported mode in the ﬁrst part of the analysis. In order to check the model with anisotropic stiﬀness. Fig. Byklum et al. Load–average strain response for anisotropic plate subjected to combined transverse load and lateral pressure. the anisotropic material option was applied for the case of an unstiﬀened plate. . It is seen that the agreement between the results from the model and from ABAQUS is very good. The imperfection is 10 mm in the eigenmode. 6 shows the nondimensional load-shortening response for an 840 Â 980 Â 11 mm aluminium plate with elastic modulus E ¼ 70 000 MPa and yield stress rf ¼ 240 MPa. A combination of lateral pressure p ¼ 0:2 MPa. All ﬁnal expressions can be found in [12]. Results For veriﬁcation of the computational model developed. In the ﬁrst case. the stiﬀness was arbitrarily chosen so that C1112 ¼ C2221 ¼ iso C1212 . while the bending stiﬀness is given directly by integration over the thickness. This means that all the in-plane stiﬀness coeﬃcients may be given independently. 6.714 E. Sy ¼ 240 MPa. and transverse compression. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 cosine mode. the deﬂection will be a combination of the two. corresponding to a 20 m water column. The combination of in-plane and out-of-plane loads gives a deﬂection mode in between simply supported and clamped. is applied proportionally. This shows that the ﬁrst order perturbation expansion works very well even for such a complex Fig. For combined loads. while the lateral pressure eventually forces the deﬂection into a clamped mode.

is compared with the response calculated using reduced stiﬀness resulting from local buckling analysis.005 715 rf (MPa) 240 response. which gives a resulting deﬂection mode in between simply supported and clamped. with an imperfection in the global mode equal to 3. 8. It is seen that the global deﬂection is larger when the reduced stiﬀness is applied. Analyses are performed on the stiﬀened panel in ABAQUS for axial and transverse loading. In order to check the bending stiﬀness formulations. This geometry is so stocky that the resulting deformation is purely in the global mode. Load–average strain response due to pure global buckling for stiﬀened panel subjected to axial compression (left) and transverse compression (right). The results are shown in Fig. is well taken care of. without local buckling of plate and stiﬀeners.32 t (m) 0. and the ﬂange is increased from the original dimensions given in the table to 50 mm. It is seen that the agreement is very good. the response of this panel under axial loading. In Fig. analyses are performed using a stiﬀened panel in ABAQUS.E. Such a panel is likely to deﬂect globally without local deformations.005 bf (m) 0. One way to achieve this is to model a panel with very large plate thickness compared to the panel dimensions. calculated using linear stiﬀness coeﬃcients.040 tf (m) 0.6 mm in the global mode.e.4 b (m) 0. 7.2 mm in the local mode and 3. Also. The imperfection is 3. Analyses are then performed with the global buckling model using linear anisotropic stiﬀness coeﬃcients according to the stiﬀener dimensions. . the web. the lateral pressure eﬀect. i.6 mm. It is desirable to compare the model with a stiﬀened panel deﬂecting in a pure global mode. 7. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 Table 2 Dimensions for aluminium stiﬀeners Stiﬀener Tee bar a (m) 2. as explained previously. Byklum et al. In this analysis. The thickness of the plate. the stiﬀness Fig.005 h (m) 0. A stiﬀened panel consisting of three aluminium proﬁles (Table 2) is modelled in ABAQUS.075 tw (m) 0. as expected.

shear. the ultimate strength of panels is estimated by checking the stress at certain critical points at each increment. Load–average strain response during axial load calculated from global buckling model using linear and nonlinear stiﬀness coeﬃcients. The model was developed as part of a tool for buckling assessment of stiﬀened panels. and the eﬃciency of the calculations is high. Any combination of biaxial in-plane compression or tension. coeﬃcients input to the global model are gradually reduced. and lateral pressure may be analyzed. .716 E. Byklum et al. In this program. 8. It is formulated using large deﬂection plate theory and energy principles. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 Fig. 6. Using the von Mises yield criterion. since yielding will give unwanted permanent deformations in the structure. Concluding remarks A computational model for the analysis of global buckling and postbuckling of stiﬀened panels has been derived. and a sound. the onset of yielding is taken as the collapse load for design purposes. This is conservative. The procedure is semi-analytical in the sense that all energy formulations are derived analytically. The global model is combined with a local buckling model in the DNV computer code PULS [13]. corresponding to the current load factor. and for incrementing the solution. The load–deﬂection curves produced by the proposed model are compared with results from nonlinear FEM. while a numerical method is used for solving the resulting set of equations. Good correspondence is achieved. Acknowledgements This study has been performed with support from the Norwegian Research Council and Det Norske Veritas. design approach.

1998.5 user’s manual. NACA. Research report in mechanics 98-1. Luftfahrtsforschung 1937. Buckling of stiﬀened plates using a Shanley model approach. [10] Marguerre K. Elastic buckling and postbuckling of eccentrically stiﬀened plates. 1975. Rashed S. [7] Paik J.5 theory manual. / Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 701–717 717 References [1] Byklum E. Byklum et al. Nonlinear buckling analysis and ultimate strength prediction of stiﬀened steel and aluminium panels. A semi-analytical method for the elastic–plastic large deﬂection analysis of welded steel or aluminium plating under combined in-plane and lateral pressure loads. 2003. Research report in mechanics 99-1. Lee S. 2003. Nonlinear theory of elastic stability. 1942. Computers and Structures 1987. PULS 1. [4] Huseyin K. Ultimate strength analysis of stiﬀened steel and aluminium panels using semi-analytical methods. International Journal of Solids and Structures 1989.39:125–52.E. [3] Byklum E.14(3):121–8. [8] Steen E. An incremental Galerkin method for plates and stiﬀened plates. Application of the perturbation method to plate buckling problems. University of Oslo. [6] Ueda Y. Pusan. Thin-Walled Structures 2002. Amdahl J. University of Oslo. [11] Levy S. The Second International Conference on Advances in Structural Engineering and Mechanics.40(11):923–51. Bending of rectangular plates with large deﬂection. [2] Det Norske Veritas. Thayamballi A. PULS 1. Paik J. Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Die mittragende Breite der gedruckten Platte. Thin-Walled Structures 2001. Kang S. Report 737.27(1):147–56. [13] Det Norske Veritas. 2002.25(7):751–68. [12] Byklum E. [9] Steen E. Amdahl J. . [5] Steen E. A simpliﬁed method for elastic large deﬂection analysis of plates and stiffened panels due to local buckling. 1999. PhD thesis. Leyden: Nordhoﬀ International Publishing. 2002.

- ANSYS Theory Reference
- Chapter 01
- GLOBAL BUCKLING
- Two Phase Flow Presentation
- Title, Contents
- Chapter 14 - Seismic Design
- Ansys Mechanical Training
- 9-JU_postbuckling
- Static & Dynamic analysis of piping system
- VIV Analysis of Pipeline
- Cable_pulling Edsa Manual
- Buckling Strength of Structural Plates
- nchrp_rpt_611
- Asd vs Lrfd_forwebsite
- 16_stress_analysis
- Design of Steam Piping System Including Stress Analysis
- SACS Advanced Offshore Structure Design Analysis
- Design of Steam Piping System Including Stress Analysis
- Structural Steel Design Fabrication and Construction 00
- Ansys Manual
- Stuctural analysis using ansys
- Calculations of DNV RP C201
- Ansys Tutorial
- An Introduction to Pipeline Pigging
- Pipeline Pigging (Visit http://Piping-Info.Blogspot.com)
- 18 - Free Spanning Pipelines
- 85361572 Structural Stability W F Chen E M
- Steel Design After College
- ASME B36.10 -

Skip carousel

- Joseph Schmidinger and Tung-Sol Electric Inc., in No. 15830 v. Marie J. Welsh, James W. Welsh and Welflash, Inc., Oxford Electric Corporation and Its Hudson Lamp Division, Hudson Lamp Co., Inc., Best Mfg. Co., and Its Hudson Lamp Co., Inc., Division, in No. 15831, 383 F.2d 455, 3rd Cir. (1967)
- Flexural Behaviour of Concrete Encased Cold Formed Steel Channel Section
- Compression Buckling Analysis of Vertical Tail Stiffened Panels
- As 4100-1998 Steel Structures
- tmpA127
- Design and Comparison of Steel Roof Truss with Tubular Section (using SP
- Structures for Space Operations
- Modeling and Analysis of Telescopic Hydraulic Cylinder for Increase Load Capacity
- Parametric Study of Dome
- Performance Evolution of Tie Rod in Suspension System of Car Using Finite Element Approach
- Performance Evaluation and Optimization of Tie rod in Suspension System of Car for a Buckling study using Theoretical and Experimental approach
- tmp554A.tmp

- 151_GustoMSC 08.107 - Hydr. Jacking System HPE
- Fleet Moorings - Dm26_5
- Finite Element Method
- Wartsila SP a Id Windfarm b
- FEA Steps
- Guidlines for Mooring
- Saginaw Steel Reference Handbook
- Weld design by FEA
- Tees - Structural Sizes
- Corrugated Panel - Buckling Check
- Cars Bill of Sale
- Article2 Fea Weld
- Section Modulus 012004
- HiPAP Family Brochure v3 Lowres
- DNV PO Unit Lifting Design Standard2-7-3

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulClose Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Close Dialog## This title now requires a credit

Use one of your book credits to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

Loading