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

# PLASTIC BUCKLING OF MINDLIN PLATES

TUN MYINT AUNG

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE 2006

PLASTIC BUCKLING OF MINDLIN PLATES

TUN MYINT AUNG B. Eng, (Yangon Institute of Technology)

A THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE

2006

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The author wishes to express his sincere gratitude to Professor Wang Chien Ming, for his guidance, patience and invaluable suggestions throughout the course of study. His extensive knowledge, serious research attitude and enthusiasm have been extremely valuable to the author. Also special thanks go to Professor J. Charabarty for his valuable discussions and help in the research work. The author is grateful to the National University of Singapore for providing the research scholarship during the four-year study. The author also would like to express his gratitude to his girlfriend, Ms Chuang Hui Ming, and to his friends; Mr. Kyaw Moe, Mr. Sithu Htun, Ms. Thida Kyaw, Ms. Khine Khine Oo, Mr. Kyaw Myint Lay, Mr. Vo Khoi Khoa, Mr. Tran Chi Trung, Mr. Vu Khac Kien for their kind help and encouragement. Finally, the author wishes to express his deep gratitude to his family, for their love, understanding, encouragement and continuous support.

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................... TABLE OF CONTENTS ……………………………………………………… SUMMARY …………………………………………………………………….. NOMENCLATURE ……………………………………………………………. LIST OF FIGURES …………………………………………………………….

i ii vi ix xii

LIST OF TABLES ……………………………………………………………… xviii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................... 1.1 Literature Review …………………..……………………………………. 1.1.1 Plastic Buckling Theories of Plates ……………………………… 1.1.2 Inclusion of Effect of Transverse Shear Deformation …………... 1.2 1.3 Objectives and Scope of Study ……….………………………….……... Organization of Thesis ……..……………………………………….……. 1 3 3 7 8 11

CHAPTER 2. GOVERNING EQUATIONS FOR PLASTIC BUCKLING ANALYSIS …………………………………………………….. 2.1 Mindlin Plate Theory …………………………………………………..… 2.1.1 Assumptions ……………………………………………………… 2.1.2 Displacement Components ………………………………………. 2.1.3 Strain-Displacement Relations .…………………………………... 2.2 Stress-Strain Relations in Plastic Range …................................................. 2.2.1 Derivation of Stress-Strain Relations Based on Prandtl-Reuss Equation ………………………………………………………….. 18 13 13 14 15 16 17

ii

Table of Contents

2.2.2

Derivation of Stress-Strain Relations Based on Hencky’s Deformation Theory ……………………………………………... 23 25 29 33 34 35 37 43 49 59 60 61 61 63 88 97

2.2.3 2.3

Material Modeling …………….….………….…………………...

Derivation of Energy Functional and Governing Equations ……………..

CHAPTER 3. RITZ METHOD FOR PLASTIC BUCKLING ANALYSIS .. 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 Introduction ………………………………………………………………. Boundary Conditions …………………………………………………….. Ritz Formulation in Cartesian Coordinate System ………………………. Ritz Formulation in Skew Coordinate System …………………………... Ritz Formulation in Polar Coordinate System …………………………… Solution Method for Solving Eigenvalue Problem ………………………. Computer Programs ………………………………………………………

CHAPTER 4. RECTANGULAR PLATES …………………………………. 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Introduction ……………………………………………………….…........ Uniaxial and Biaxial Compression ………………………………………. Pure Shear Loading ………………………………………………………. Combined Shear and Uniaxial Compression ………………………….....

Concluding Remarks……………………………………………………… 103

CHAPTER 5. TRIANGULAR AND ELLIPTICAL PLATES ……………… 104 5.1 5.2 5.3 Introduction ………………………………………………………………. 104 Triangular plates ………………………………………………………… Elliptical Plates …………………………………………………………... 104 112

iii

.. SKEW PLATES ……………………………………………….3 8.... 180 Internal line/curved/loop supports ……………………………………….. Elastic foundation ……………………………………………………….. 118 Uniaxial and Biaxial Loading …………………………………………….6 8. 153 Annular Plates …………………………………………………………… Circular and annular plates with intermediate ring supports …………….5 7.1 6. 203 Concluding Remarks …………………………………………………….. 148 Circular Plates …………………………………………………………….. 119 Shear Loading ……………………………………………………………. 205 iv . 145 146 CHAPTER 7.5 8. 7. PLATES WITH COMPLICATING EFFECTS …………….6 Introduction ……………………………………………………….3 6.8 Introduction ……………………………………………………………….7 8.4 7.……. 118 6.1 7.2 7. 157 168 Concluding Remarks …………………………………………………….. 133 Concluding Remarks .…………………………………………………….2 6.4 Introduction ………………………………………………………………. 185 191 194 Internal line Hinges ……………………………………………………….2 8.. 178 180 CHAPTER 8. 117 CHAPTER 6.3 7.4 8.. 181 Point supports ……………………………………………………………..Table of Contents 5... 8. CIRCULAR AND ANNULAR PLATES ……………………..4 Concluding Remarks …………………………………………………….1 8. 146 Analytical Method ………………………………………………………. 199 Intermediate in-plane loads ………………………………………………. Elastically restrained edges and mixed boundary conditions …………….

1 9..Table of Contents CHAPTER 9..... 256 v .…… 210 REFERENCES …………………………….. 207 Recommendations for Future Studies ……………………………….…………………………………. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS …………… 207 9. 222 Appendix B: Elements of Matrices ……………………………………………. 212 Appendix A: Ritz Program Codes …………………………………………….. 249 List of Author’s Publications …………………………………………………..2 Conclusions……………………………………………………………….

The explicit expressions of stress-strain relations in elastic/plastic range are derived for the first time based on the adopted plasticity theories for arbitrary in-plane loading. The present study considers. triangular. Moreover. The plates may also be subjected to in-plane normal and/or shear stresses and the edges may take any combination of boundary conditions. the total potential energy functional is formulated and the Ritz method is used for the plastic buckling analysis of plates.SUMMARY This thesis is concerned with the plastic bifurcation buckling of Mindlin plates. earlier studies have been confined to simple rectangular and circular plate shapes. It is worth noting that the Ritz method is automated for the first time for such plastic buckling plate analysis. elliptical and annular shapes in addition to the commonly treated rectangular and circular shapes. the plastic buckling of arbitrary shaped plates that include skew. On the basis of these stress-strain relations. These two theories are the incremental theory (IT) of plasticity and deformation theory (DT) of plasticity. So far. This automation is made possible by employing Ritz functions comprising the product of mathematically complete two-dimensional polynomials and boundary equations raised to appropriate powers that ensure the satisfaction of the vi . most of the limited studies on plastic buckling of plates have been based on the classical thin plate theory (which neglects the effect of transverse shear deformation). In order to capture the plastic behaviour of the plates. for the first time.05. the first-order shear deformation theory proposed by Mindlin is adopted in this study to model the plates so as to take into consideration the effect of transverse shear deformation that becomes significant when the plate thickness-towidth ratio exceed 0. two widely used plasticity theories are considered. In view of this.

The effects of transverse shear deformation. If one wish to calculate the elastic buckling stress parameter based on Mindlin plate theory. The good agreement of the results provides verification of the formulations and program codes. geometrical parameters such as aspect ratios. thicknessto-width ratios and material parameters on the plastic buckling stress parameter are investigated for various plate shapes. skew and polar coordinate systems so as to better suit the plate shapes considered. One can calculate the elastic buckling stress parameter based on the classical thin plate theory by setting the thickness-to-width ratio to a small value. Moreover. The results obtained using the developed Ritz method were compared with some limited plastic buckling solutions found in the open literature. namely Cartesian. Based on comparison and convergence studies.Summary geometric boundary conditions a priori. It can be used to study not only the plates with traditional boundary conditions and loading conditions but also the plates with complicating effects such as the presence of internal vii . The employment of MATHEMATICA enables the differentiation. The Ritz formulations are coded for use in MATHEMATICA for three types of coordinate systems. It should be remarked that the presented Ritz program codes can be used to study not only the plastic buckling of plates but also the elastic buckling of plates. it can be easily done by setting the tangent modulus and secant modulus equal to Young’s modulus. the Ritz method is found to be an efficient and accurate numerical method for plastic buckling of plates. boundary and loading conditions. the vast plastic buckling data presented in this thesis should serve as a useful reference source for researchers and engineers who are working on analysis and design of plated structures. integration and algebraic manipulations to be done in a symbolic mode and permits executions of the mathematical operations in an exact manner.

In addition to the Ritz method. internal line hinges. The general solutions of the governing equations are then substituted into the boundary equations and the resulting homogeneous equations are solved for the exact plastic buckling stress parameters. elastic foundations. This method is based on the Mindlin (1951) approach where the governing equations of the plates were transformed into standard forms of partial differential equations by using three potential functions. The exact solutions should be useful to researchers for verifying their numerical solutions. viii . intermediate in-plane loads. elastically restrained boundary conditions.Summary line/curved supports. a new analytical method is featured for handling the asymmetric buckling problems of circular and annular Mindlin plates. The treatments of these complicating effects in the formulations and solutions technique are also presented.

v. µ. k D DT E G h IT N n M nn M ns p Qn R length of plates width of plates Ramberg-Osgood parameters flexural rigidity of plates deformation theory of plasticity Young’s modulus effective shear modulus thickness of plates incremental theory of plasticity number of polynomial terms number of nodal diameters bending moment normal to the plate edge twisting moment at the plate edge degree of polynomial transverse shear force Radius of circular or annular plate stress deviator tensor displacement components s ij u . γ .NOMENCLATURE a b c. χ . ρ ix . w U V X strain energy potential energy contact function parameters used in stress-strain relations α .δ . β .

σ y .β loading ratio σ y / σ x shear strain components Kronecker delta normal strain components total effective strain effective elastic strain effective plastic strain aspect ratio of plates (a/b or b/R ) ratio of the radius of first internal ring support to the radius of circular or annular plate (b1/R) γ xy . γ xz .ε y .7 .σ z σ x .2 σ 0.85 σc σm σ x .ε z ε εe ε ζ ζ1 p κ2 λ Mindlin’s shear correction factor buckling stress parameter elastic buckling stress parameter plastic buckling stress parameter for R shear plastic buckling stress parameter for S shear nominal yield stress 2% offset yield stress secant yield stresses buckling stress hydrostatic stress (σ x + σ y + σ z ) / 3 normal stresses effective stress λe λR λS σ0 σ 0. γ yz δ ij ε x . σ 0.

axes skew angle of skew plate φ x . φ r . φθ ψ xi . θ . φ y .τ yz ν τ shear stresses Poisson’s ratio thickness-to-width ratio h/b or thickness-to-radius ratio h/R rotations about y-. x-.and r.τ xz .Nomenclature τ xy .

4. 4. 4.1 Fig. 4. 3.7 Fig.2 versus b/h ratio for SCSC square plate ………………………………………………….3 72 Fig.. 4..3 Fig. 4.2 versus b/h ratio for SSSS square plate …………………………………………………. Effect of transverse shear deformation on plastic buckling stress (DT) of a square plate ……………………………………………… Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for SSSS plate based on IT …………………………………………….2 Fig.2 Deformation of cross-section of Mindlin plates …………………… Ramberg-Osgood stress-strain relation ……………………………. Forces and moments on a plate element …………………………… Rectangular plate under in-plane compressive stresses ……………. Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for SSSS plate based on DT …………………………………………… Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for CCCC plate based on IT …………………………………………… 16 26 27 29 37 38 44 51 62 71 Fig.. 3.8 Fig.85 on the stress-strain curve …………….. 4. Normalized plastic buckling stress σ c / σ 0. Definitions of ζ and Ω …………………………………………… FSCS rectangular plate under in-plane compressive stresses ……… Normalized plastic buckling stress σ c / σ 0.7 and σ 0. 4.2 versus b/h ratio for SSSF square plate …………………………………………………. 2..4 72 Fig.3 Fig.2 Fig. 3.4 Fig. Normalized plastic buckling stress σ c / σ 0. (a) Skew coordinates and plate dimensions (b) Directions of stresses in the infinitesimal element ……………………………….5 73 73 74 76 76 77 xii Fig. 2.2 versus b/h ratio for CCCC square plate ………………………………………………… Normalized plastic buckling stress σ c / σ 0.10 .4 Fig. 2.9 Fig. 4.1 Fig. Offset yield stress …………………………………………………. Illustration of σ 0. 2. Effect of transverse shear deformation on plastic buckling stress (IT) of a square plate ……………………………………………….LIST OF FIGURES Fig. 4.6 Fig. 3.1 Fig.

4..........1 ) for (a) IT.14 Fig....05 .20 83 Fig..... 4..... 4. 4...12 Fig..25 Fig.. 4.15 Fig. Normalized plastic buckling stress σ c / σ 0... 4....26 xiii .... Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for SSSF plate based on DT …………………………………………… Contour and 3D plots of simply supported rectangular plate under uniaxial loading ( τ = 0..13 Fig. Comparison study of buckling stresses obtained by DT and IT with test results (Al-7075-T6) Comparison study of buckling stresses obtained by DT and IT with test results (Al-2014-T6) 77 78 78 79 79 80 Fig...16 Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for CCCC plate based on DT ………………………………………….11 Fig....22 Fig... 4.. (b) Elastic and (c) DT ………. 4...... Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for SCSC plate based on DT ………………………………………….. 4.2 versus modified slenderness ratio for SSSS square plate …………………………….... Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for SCSC plate based on IT …………………………………………….2 for SSSS square plate (IT) ………………………………....24 86 87 87 Fig. 4.. Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for SSSF plate based on IT ……………………………………………... 4..... 4.. 4...17 82 Fig. Effect of material properties on normalized plastic buckling stress σ c / σ 0.. Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus stress ratio β for SSSS square plate ………………………………………………………… Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus stress ratio β for CCCC square plate ………………………………………………… Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus stress ratio β for SCSC square plate ………………………………………………………… Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus stress ratio β for SSSF square plate ………………………………………………………… Mode switching with respect to stress ratio β for SSSS square plate ………………………………………………………………...19 83 Fig. 4. 4......2 for SSSS square plate (DT) ……………………………….21 84 85 Fig...... Effect of material properties on normalized plastic buckling stress σ c / σ 0.. 4..... a / b = 1..Fig....23 85 Fig..18 82 Fig....

111 Variation of λ with respect to a/b ratio for S*S*S* right angled triangular plates ……………………………………………………. 5.27 Normalized plastic buckling stress τ xy / σ 0.35 Fig. 4.. Fig. Fig.2 versus b/h ratio for SCSC square plate …………………………………………………. 102 CS*F isosceles triangular plate and coordinate system …………….33 Plastic buckling stress parameter λ xy versus aspect ratio a/b for SSSF rectangular plate ………………………………………. 5. Fig. 4...29 93 94 95 95 96 Interaction curves for SSSS rectangular plates under combined uniaxial compression and shear stresses (τ = 0. 117 Fig. 4. Fig.. 5.5 Fig.3 Fig. 5. 4. Fig.1 Fig..2 versus b/h ratio for SSSS square plate ………………………………………………….. Fig.34 Fig.2 versus b/h ratio for SSSF square plate …………………………………………………. 116 Variation of λ with respect to a/b ratio for clamped elliptical plates …………………………………………………………….4 Fig.7 xiv . 4.28 Normalized plastic buckling stress τ xy / σ 0.32 Plastic buckling stress parameter λ xy versus aspect ratio a/b for CCCC rectangular plate ……………………………………….. 4. 111 Elliptical plate under uniform compression and coordinate system ..List of Figures Fig. 105 Variation of λ with respect to a/b ratio for S*S*S* isosceles triangular plates ……………………………………………………..6 Fig.30 Normalized plastic buckling stress τ xy / σ 0. 4.2 Fig.2 versus b/h ratio for CCCC square plate ………………………………………………… Normalized plastic buckling stress τ xy / σ 0. 4.... 5. 4.36 92 93 Fig..05) ……………… 101 Normalized interaction curves for simply supported rectangular plate (a/b = 4) ……………………………………………………… 102 Normalized interaction curves for clamped rectangular plate (a / b = 4) ………………………………………………………….31 Plastic buckling stress parameter λ xy versus aspect ratio a/b for SSSS rectangular plate ………………………………………….. 5. 112 Variation of λ with respect to a/b ratio for simply supported elliptical plates ……………………………………………………. 5... 4.. 105 CS*F right-angled triangular plate and coordinate system ……….

6 Fig.2 versus b/h ratio for clamped skew plate (ψ = 30˚) …………………………………….. 6. 6. 142 142 143 143 144 144 145 153 158 Fig.3 130 131 131 132 132 133 Fig.. 6.10 Normalized buckling stress τ xy / σ 0. 6. 6.15 Fig.13 Fig. 6.. Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for simply supported skew plate (ψ = 30˚) …………………………. 6. 7.2 Variation of plastic buckling stress parameters with respect to aspect ratio for SSSS skew plate with ψ = 30˚ …………………… Variation of plastic shear buckling stress parameters with respect to aspect ratio for CCCC skew plate with ψ = 30˚ ……………….1 Fig..11 Fig. 7..8 Fig.2 versus b/h ratio for simply supported skew plate (ψ = 30˚) …………………………. 6. Normalized plastic buckling stress σ c / σ 0... 120 130 Fig. 6.16 Fig. 6... Normalized plastic buckling stress σ c / σ 0.. 6.. Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus skew angle ψ for simply supported skew plate (a/b = 1) …………………………… Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus skew angle ψ for clamped skew plate (a/b = 1) ……………………………………. 6.List of Figures Fig.7 Fig.4 Fig... Variation of plastic (R shear) buckling stress parameters with respect to skew angle of SSSS skew plate ………………………. Two kinds of shear loading conditions on skew plates (a) R shear loading and (b) S shear loading …………………………………. C-S annular plate under in-plane loading ………………………… xv . Variation of plastic (S shear) buckling stress parameters with respect to skew angle of SSSS skew plate ………………………. 6. Variation of plastic (R shear) buckling stress parameters with respect to skew angle of CCCC skew plate ……………………… Variation of plastic (S shear) buckling stress parameters with respect to skew angle of CCCC skew plate ……………………… Clamped circular plate under in-plane compressive stress ……….9 141 Fig.12 Fig..5 Fig. 6. 6.2 Skew plate under biaxial compression stresses ………………….. Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for clamped skew plate (ψ = 30˚) …………………………………….2 versus b/h ratio for simply supported skew plate ( a / b = 1 ) ………………………………….14 Fig. Normalized buckling stress τ xy / σ 0. 6.1 Fig.2 versus b/h ratio for clamped skew plate ( a / b = 1 ) …………………………………………….

DT) ……………. 7. 8..... 7.3 177 182 182 183 xvi . 7.8 166 Fig. Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for C-F annular plate ……………………………………………. Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for S-S annular plate ……………………………………………....DT.2. Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for S-F annular plate ……………………………………………. Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ring support location ζ 1 for circular plates …………………………… Critical Buckling mode shapes for C-C annular plates with various ring support locations (b/R = 0.3 Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for C-C annular plate …………………………………………….05) ………. IT) ……………….7 166 Fig. 8.. Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for F-S annular plate ……………………………………………. Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for S-C annular plate …………………………………………….4 164 Fig. 7.. 7.6 165 Fig. Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ring support location ζ 1 for annular plate ( ζ = 0. Simply supported (a) annular plate (b) circular plate with multiple concentric ring supports ………………………………………….9 167 Fig..10 167 168 Fig.2 Fig.12 Fig. h/R = 0. (b) curved and (c) loop supports …… Simulation of internal supports using point supports …………… Rectangular plate with an internal line support ………………….. Plates with internal (a) line. 7.2. 175 Fig.. 164 Fig. 7... 7.05) ………………………………………..5 165 Fig. 7. τ = 0.11 Fig.14 Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ring support location ζ 1 for annular plates ( ζ = 0.13 169 175 Fig.1 Fig. 7. Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for F-C annular plate ……………………………………………. Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for C-S annular plate ……………………………………………..15 176 Fig. 7.List of Figures Fig. Critical buckling mode shapes for C-C annular plates of various ζ ratios (DT..16 Fig. 7....2. 8. 7. 7.

8. 8. 185 190 193 199 201 204 xvii . A rectangular plate with an internal hinge under in-plane compressive stress ………………………………………………. 8.4 Fig.... Typical buckling mode shapes for bilateral and unilateral buckling of clamped rectangular plates ………………………….8 Fig.9 Critical buckling mode shapes of square plates with internal line support …………………………………………………………….. Square plates with mixed boundary conditions under uniaxial compression ………………………………………………………... 8..List of Figures Fig. 8.5 Fig. Four point supported square plate ………………………………. Rectangular plate under edge and intermediate compressive stress ……………………………………………………………. 8.7 Fig.6 Fig.

9 96 Table...11 Convergence study of plastic shear buckling stress parameters λ xy for clamped square plates under combined loadings. 4...7 Table. Table. 4. 4.5 69 71 91 92 Table. Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress parameters λ for rectangular plates under uniform biaxial loading (a/b = 2) …………………………………………………………..4 Table.85 and n for various aluminum alloys under room temperature (From Bruhn.3 67 68 Table. 4. 4.03) ………………………………………………………… 28 63 66 Table.2 Table. 101 100 100 xviii .. ν = 0. Comparison and convergence study of λ for rectangular plates under uniform uniaxial loading with various boundary conditions (a/b = 2) ………………………………………………………….1 Table. Parametric study on the value of transverse shear correction factor for simply supported square plate under biaxial loading ..03) …. σ 0. 2.8 Table.……….. 4. 4. 4.LIST OF TABLES Table... 4. Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress parameters for CCCC rectangular plates under shear ……..1 Values of σ 0.7 .6 Table.. 4.3) ………………………………………………. Table. 4. Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress parameters for SSSS rectangular plates under shear ………..10 Convergence study of plastic buckling shear stress parameters λ xy for simply supported plates under combined loadings (τ = 0. 4. Buckling mode shapes for Rectangular plate under pure shear (τ = 0.03) .. Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress parameters λ for square plates under uniform biaxial loading …. Sample basic functions for rectangular plates with various boundary conditions ……………………………………………… Comparison and convergence study of λ for square plates under uniform uniaxial loading with various boundary conditions ……. (τ = 0. 1965) …………………………..12 Comparison study of elastic shear buckling stress parameters λ xy for simply supported plates under combined loadings.001. ( τ = 0.

a/b=1) ……………………………………. Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ for CCC isosceles triangular plates ………………………………………………….5 Table... a / b = 1 ) Convergence study of plastic buckling stress parameters λ for clamped skew plate under biaxial compression σ x = σ y = σ ( β = 1 .. 5.8 Table. Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ for clamped circular (a/b = 1) and elliptical plates (a/b = 3) ………………. Convergence study of plastic buckling stress parameters λ for simply supported skew plate under uniaxial compression ( β = 0 . 6. 5. Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ for simply supported circular (a/b = 1) and elliptical plates (a/b = 3) ……...4 124 Table.List of Tables Table.2 122 Table. 5. 5.6 125 126 xix . 6. 108 Table. Convergence study of plastic buckling stress parameters λ for simply supported skew plate under biaxial compression σ x = σ y = σ ( β = 1 . a/b = 1) ……………………………………. Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ for S*S*S* isosceles triangular plates ………………………………………………….4 Table.…….. Comparison study against existing elastic solutions for simply supported skew plates (τ = 0. 6. Comparison study against existing elastic solutions for clamped skew plates (τ = 0. 6. 6.7 Table. Convergence study of plastic buckling stress parameters λ for clamped skew plate under uniaxial compression ( β = 0.5 Table.2 Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress factors λ for right angled triangular plates under uniform compression (a/b = 1) ……………………………………………. 5..3 Table.6 114 115 115 Table. Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress factors λ for elliptical plates under uniform compression (a/b=2) ………………………………………………………….1 121 Table.1 Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress factors λ for equilateral triangular plates (a / b = 3 / 2) under uniform compression ……………………………………………. 5. a/b=1) ………………………………………………….001) ……………………………...001) ………………………………………… 108 110 110 114 Table... Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress factors λ for circular plates under uniform compression ...3 123 Table.. 6.... 5. 5.

127 128 135 135 136 136 137 Table.... 6. 7. 7. ζ 1 = 0. 6.2.5 173 xx .6 ) ……………………………………………… Convergence study of plastic buckling stress parameter λ for circular plates with one concentric ring support ( ζ 1 = 0.4 ) ………………………………….. Convergence study of plastic buckling stress parameter λ for annular plates ( ζ = b / R = 0.4 172 Table.8 Table.. 6. Comparison study of plastic buckling stress parameter λ for annular plates ( ζ = b / R = 0. Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ for clamped skew plates under uniaxial compression (a/b = 1) …………………….13 Comparison study of elastic shear buckling stress parameter of skew plates under shear (a/b = 1) ………………………………… Table. 6. Convergence study of plastic buckling stress parameter λ for annular plates with one concentric ring support ( ζ = 0. Table.9 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ for simply supported skew plates under uniaxial compression (a/b = 1) ……………….11 Convergence study of plastic buckling parameters for clamped skew plates under shear loading (ψ = 45˚) ………………………. 6.16 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ R for clamped skew plates (a/b = 1) …………………………………………………… Table. 6. Table. 6. 7.12 Convergence study of plastic buckling parameters for clamped skew plates under shear loading (ψ = -45˚) ……………………….4 ) ………………………………….14 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ R for simply supported skew plates (a/b = 1) ………………………………….3 161 Table.1 Convergence and comparison study of plastic buckling stress parameter λ for circular plates under uniform radial compression ……………………………………………………. 7.15 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ S for simply supported skew plates (a/b = 1) …………………………………..2 Table.17 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ S for clamped skew plates (a/b = 1) …………………………………………………… Table. Table..List of Tables Table. 6. 6.10 Convergence study of plastic buckling parameters for simply supported skew plates under shear loading (ψ = -45˚) …………… Table.. Convergence study of plastic buckling parameters for simply supported skew plates under shear loading (ψ = 45˚) ……………. 7. Table. 6.. 6.7 Table.6 ) ……… 138 138 139 139 157 160 Table.

Comparison studies of buckling stress parameter λ square plates with mixed boundary conditions ………………………… Comparison study of unilateral buckling stress parameter λ for rectangular plates under shear …………………………………. 8.. Unilateral plastic buckling stress parameters for rectangular plates under shear (DT) ………………………………………… Buckling stress parameter λ for square plate with an internal line hinge under uniaxial loading ……………………………….1 Table. 8. 8. Convergence and comparison of plastic buckling stress parameters λ1 of rectangular plates under edge and intermediate loads. 7. 8..04 ) …………………………………….τ = 0. 8.5 Table.2 Table. 178 184 190 194 197 198 198 203 205 xxi .3 Table.4 Table.List of Tables Table.8 Comparison study between the optimal ring support radius and radius of nodal circle of second mode shape …………………… Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress parameter λ for rectangular plate with internal line supports …. Convergence and comparison study of plastic buckling stress parameter λ for four points supported square plate ……………..6 Table. 8. 8.7 Table. 8...6 Table. ( λ 2 = −50. Unilateral plastic buckling stress parameters for rectangular plates under shear (IT) ………………………………………….

and offshore structures. the design strength of these structures is commonly governed by their buckling capacities. ships. Buckling is a phenomenon in which a structure undergoes visibly large transverse deflection in one of the possible instability modes. Owing to their relatively small thickness when compared to the length dimensions. Therefore. The first event that highlighted the importance of plate buckling was related to a series of tests carried out in the laboratories of University of London on box beams for Britannia Bridge in 1845 (Walker. However. buildings. which is now referred to as local buckling. Buckling of a structural component may affect the strength or stiffness of the whole structure and even triggers unexpected global failure of the structure. the first theoretical 1 .CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Plates and plated structures are widely used in many engineering structures such as aircrafts. A number of failure cases were due to local instability. it is important to know buckling capacities of the structures in order to avoid premature failure. 1984).

loading and boundary conditions using a variety of methods for analysis. many researchers have studied the buckling of plates of various shapes. He presented the buckling analysis for rectangular plates under uniform uniaxial compression using the energy criterion of stability. Since then. In many practical problems. Therefore. 2 . the stress-strain relation is no longer linear and thus the actual buckling load is smaller than the value determined by the elastic buckling analysis. In the case of elastic buckling. but also the first to apply the energy criterion of stability to the buckling problem of plate. Research on the buckling of plates can be generally divided into two groups: elastic buckling and plastic buckling. This phenomenon may be likely to occur in the cases of plates whose materials posses a low proportional limit when compared to the nominal yield stress. a literature review on the application of plasticity theories in plastic buckling problems of plates and the success of these theories is presented.Introduction examination of buckling of plates was attributed to Bryan (1891). for example aluminium alloy and stainless steel. In the plastic range. it is assumed that the buckling stress is below the proportional limit of the plate material and the linear stress-strain relation is adopted. It should be noted that he was not only the first to analyze the stability of plates. plastic buckling analysis needs to be carried out in order to obtained more accurate buckling loads when the aforementioned conditions hold. the plates may be stressed beyond the proportional limit before the buckling take place i. buckling observed in the plastic range. however. In the next section. The application of the energy criterion was later proven to be a powerful tool for the analyses of buckling problems which could not be solved by conventional analytical methods because of the difficulty in the mathematical treatment.e.

Pride and Heimerl (1949) performed experiments on simply supported plates in order to assess the various plastic buckling theories in predicting plastic buckling stress. On the other hand. The deformation theory of plasticity (DT) was pioneered by Ilyushin (1946) and later modified by Stowell (1948) based on the assumption that no unloading take place during buckling (Shanley.1. They tested square tubes of 14S-T6 aluminum alloy. The main difference between the two theories is that IT relates plastic strain increment to the stress while DT relates the total strain to the state of stress. The results obtained were in good agreement with Stowell’s unified theory for the plastic buckling of columns and plates (1948).Introduction 1. the development of plastic buckling theories and the paradox in the plastic buckling of plates will be presented. the incremental theory (IT) was first developed by Handelman and Prager (1948). 1. They pointed out that certain postulate of the theory of plasticity which cannot be satisfied by using the stress-strain relation developed by Ilyushin (1946). It was found that the results obtained from deformation theory of plasticity (Ilyushin 1948) gave a close correlation with the test results while the incremental 3 .1 Literature Review In this section. The most commonly used theories are the deformation theory of plasticity (DT) and the incremental theory of plasticity (IT). for which each of the four plates may be considered simply supported.1 Plastic Buckling Theories of Plates Various plasticity theories have been proposed in the literature for the plastic buckling analysis of plates. 1947).

He solved the plastic buckling problem of rectangular plate under compressive edge thrust and showed that results were in fair agreement with experimental work by Pride and Heimerl (1949). many researchers have tried to justify the theoretically more acceptable incremental theory of plasticity. unloading. Generally. 4 . ElGhazaly and Sherbourne (1986) proved that the deformation theory can be used for the elastic-plastic buckling analysis of plates under nonproportional external loading and nonproportional stresses. He derived the stress-strain relations by writing the infinitely small excess strains as total differentials and computing the partial derivatives of the strains with respect to the stresses. many researchers have continued to use it for solving plastic buckling problems since the results show good agreement with experimental results. Another experimental investigation on the plastic buckling of plate was studied by Dietrich et al. even though it does not yield results that are in agreement with experimental results. the incremental theory proposed by Handleman and Prager (1948) yield the results that are higher than experimental results. Their experimental results are slightly lower than the critical buckling loads as predicted by Stowell’s theory (DT). 1950). On the other hand. and reloading situations have been conveniently considered via conducting multistage analysis after casting the constitutive relations of the deformation theory in an incremental form. Loading. Despite the fact that the deformation theory is mathematically less correct especially in nonproportional loading (Hill. For example. Pearson (1950) modified the Handelman and Prager’s calculation by the assumption of continuous loading. Bijlaard (1949) assumed that plastic deformation is governed only by the amount of elastic shearing energy.Introduction theory of plasticity (Handelman and Prager 1948) yielded results that do not agree with experimental results. (1978).

He concluded that a proper consideration of imperfections in geometry provides an explanation for the apparent plastic buckling paradox for axially compressed 5 . based on imperfection sensitivity. Dubey and Pindera (1977) also studied the effect of rotation of principal axes on the shear modulus in elastic-plastic solids. Moreover. They concluded that. lower the plastic buckling load obtained from the incremental theory. Another drawback for the corner theory is that although one can fit the appropriate corner to observe experimental results in order to obtain good agreement. Onat and Drucker (1953) tried to justify the inaccuracy of incremental theory in the plastic buckling of plates. They considered the case of an axially loaded cruciform and showed that unavoidable initial imperfections may significantly lower the plastic buckling load predicted by the incremental theory of plasticity. one cannot estimate the appropriate corner a priori. Sewell (1964) showed that the bifurcation buckling stress is rather sensitive to the direction of normal to the local yield surface. in turn. using the general von Karman non-linear plate equations. by taking proper account of the rotation of principal axes. He showed that plastic buckling load obtained from incremental theory can be reduced considerably in the presence of small initial imperfections in geometry. Neale (1975) also studied the effect of imperfections on the plastic buckling of simply supported rectangular plates. Hutchinson and Budiansky (1974) confirmed analytically OnatDrucker’s conclusion concerning imperfection sensitivity. Hutchinson (1974) pointed out that basic experiments on the multiaxial stress-strain behaviour of typical metals failed to show the occurrence of corners on yield surfaces. In addition.Introduction As another attempt. This cast doubt on the validity of any experiment that does not give proper attention to the yield surface. However. the effective shear modulus of an elastic-plastic solid can be considerably reduced from the elastic-shear modulus which.

1995. Durban and Zuckerman (1999) carried out a detailed parametric study on the elasto-plastic buckling of rectangular plates under biaxial compression by an analytical method. as another justification. plastic buckling of plates continues to remain a “paradox” for researchers in the field. Apart from confirming that the deformation theory furnishes lower buckling stresses than those computed using incremental theory. Tuğcu (1991) assumed that these non-zero stress components exist uniformly in the prebuckling state.Introduction rectangular plates. 1999. The stresses due to friction. some researchers studied elastic/plastic buckling problems of plates based on both the deformation theory and the incremental theory (for e. they reported the existence of an 6 . Shrivastava. Unlike the analysis of Gjelsvik and Lin (1987).g. 2001). are shown to effectively reduce the incremental theory buckling loads to those predicted by the deformation theory and the experimental results. Accordingly. This lends credibility to the use of the deformation theory in the prediction of bifurcation buckling load for engineering purpose. Wang et al. it leaves the value of the buckling load dependent on the amount and distribution of imperfections. which die out away from the edges. It was argued that the amount of friction required for such a reduction is less than normally expected at the loaded edges of a real test. Similarly. Durban and Zuckerman. Recently. In spite of the continuous efforts and progress made in the last few decades. where the edges effects were assumed to die out away from the edges. Shrivastava. Although this justification seems to be logical. Tuğcu (1991) also showed that incremental theory predictions were significantly reduced when small amounts of biaxial and in-plane shear stresses are included in the prebuckling state as these stresses can be produced by the experimental set-up. Gjelsvik and Lin (1987) investigated the plastic buckling of plate including the effect of friction acting on the loaded edges during tests. 1979.

They used an analytical method to solve for the plastic buckling of (a) uniformly loaded rectangular plates with two opposite edges simply supported while 7 .2 Inclusions of Effect of Transverse Shear Deformation Most of the aforementioned studies on plastic buckling analysis of plates adopted the classical thin plate theory.1. The thick plate results were compared with thin plate results based on both incremental (IT) and deformation theory (DT) of plasticity. both plasticity theories (IT and DT) are adopted for plastic buckling analysis of plates in order to compare the results from these two theories. the effect of transverse shear deformation should be taken into account in the plastic buckling analysis. Shrivasta (1979) and Wang et al. It is well known that the classical thin plate theory neglects the effect of transverse shear deformation. In this study.Introduction optimal loading part for the deformation theory model. (2001). It was found that the reduction due to the effect of transverse shear deformation in plastic buckling stress parameter was generally larger for IT than that for DT. One of the earlier studies on plastic buckling of thick plate was done by Shrivastava (1979). This effect becomes significant when the plate thickness increases. 1. Three cases of plastic buckling of rectangular plates were considered based on the Mindlin plate theory. However. (2001) studied the plastic buckling problems of rectangular plates based on Mindlin plate theory. Since plastic buckling is most likely to occur in relatively thick plates. this difference in the reduction was not large enough to compensate for the differences between the results from two theories. Another study on plastic buckling of thick plate was investigated by Wang et al.

for plastic buckling problems of plates with general shapes and boundary conditions. All the aforementioned studies on the plastic buckling of thick plates were solved by analytical methods for simple plate shapes and boundary conditions. (2004) developed an analytical relationship between the plastic buckling loads of thick plate and its corresponding thin plate elastic buckling loads.Introduction the other edges may take any boundary conditions (b) uniformly loaded circular plate with simply supported or clamped boundary condition. 1. the finite difference method. these calculations still result in transcendental equations which need iterative method 8 . Since elastic buckling stresses of classical thin plates are well-known. However. Therefore. due to the material nonlinearity. numerical methods such as the finite element method. Plastic buckling solutions can be calculated from corresponding elastic buckling solutions through these plasticity correction factors.2 Objectives and Scope of Study There are few analytical expressions of plasticity correction factors (Stowell. These analytical methods can only be employed for only a limited number of buckling problems of practical importance due to the complexity arising from material nonlinearity and the difficulty in getting a function to satisfy the geometric and static boundary conditions of non-simple plate shapes. the finite strip method and the Ritz method have to be used. plastic buckling stresses of thick plates can be readily obtained without the tedious nonlinear analysis to solve more complicated plastic buckling equations. Recently. 1949) in order to account for the effect of material nonlinearity. 1948. the relation is only valid for simply supported plates of polygonal shapes. However. Bijlaard. Wang et al.

Wang et al. It has been assumed that all the plates considered are initially perfectly flat. So far. The major advantage of the Ritz method is that much less computer memory is needed when compared to the finite element method (Leonard and Moon. the analytical expressions of plasticity correction factors are only available for limited loading and boundary conditions. It would be useful for the design profession if a simple computing algorithm was available. On the other hand. Hitherto. 2001). It should be noted that this thesis mainly focuses on the plastic bifurcation buckling analysis of Mindlin plates... 2003). the assumption of small deflection (effect of 9 . 1990. Therefore. The scope of this thesis is to extend the Ritz method for the plastic buckling analysis of Mindlin plates and to examine the plastic behaviour of Mindlin plates with various shapes. Smith et al. that is readily adaptable to specific problems in determining the plastic bifurcation buckling loads. the numerical plastic buckling solutions exist for several loading and boundary conditions for rectangular plates (El-Ghazaly et al. the Ritz method has been extensively used in the studies of elastic buckling and vibration problems of plates (Liew et al. 1998. 1995). Bradford and Azhari.. Moreover. boundary conditions and loading conditions. Liew and Wang. an algorithm is developed for the plastic buckling analysis of Mindlin plates. 1994. an analytical method is featured for tackling the asymmetric plastic buckling problems of circular and annular Mindlin plates. 1994.Introduction for determining the plastic buckling solutions. no analytical asymmetric buckling solutions are available in the literature for circular and annular Mindlin plates. Moreover. The analysis makes the use of the Ritz method. even for the elastic buckling case. In addition to developing a simple algorithm. Surendran. this analytical method and the exact solutions will be useful for researchers who wish to verify their numerical solutions and methods.. In this thesis. 1995. 1984.

The Ritz program code should be useful for engineers and designers who wish to perform plastic buckling analysis of plates since the procedure is simple to understand and easy to use. The program was coded in MATHEMATICA programming language which is a high level programming language that allows readers not only to understand the program easily but also be able to perform mathematical operations in a symbolic and exact manner.Introduction geometrical nonlinearity is neglected) needs to be adopted in order to obtained plastic bifurcation buckling load. (2) An analytical approach is developed for the first time in order to solve asymmetric plastic buckling problems as well as elastic buckling problems of circular and annular Mindlin plates. (3) So far plastic buckling of thick plates has been studied only for rectangular plates with two simply supported opposite edges. skew. Therefore. 10 . In summary. circular and annular plates with all possible combinations of boundary conditions. triangular and elliptical. Extensive plastic buckling results are presented for the aforementioned plate shapes. the main contributions of this thesis include: (1) Developing a Ritz formulation and program codes to tackle plastic buckling problems of Mindlin plates for various shapes (sides are defined by polynomial functions) and boundary conditions. the postbuckling analysis (which accounts the effect of geometrical nonlinearity and initial imperfections) is beyond the scope of this thesis. This study treats general plate shape and investigates the plastic buckling behaviour of various shapes such as rectangular.

Finally. In Chapter 2. 1. a brief overview of the organization of thesis is given. In Chapter 3. the detailed formulations of the Ritz method for plastic buckling of Mindlin plate based on three coordinate systems. adopting the Mindlin plate theory. the energy functional and the governing equations are presented for plastic buckling of plates under arbitrary loading. skew and polar coordinate systems are presented. right angled triangular plates and elliptical plates. In the next section. elastic restrained and mixed boundary conditions. the applicability of the Ritz method to various shapes is illustrated by considering the plastic buckling problems of isosceles triangular plates. the plastic buckling analyses are carried out by using the Ritz method with the Cartesian coordinate system. the objectives. Moreover. namely Cartesian. In Chapters 4 and 5. the explicit expressions of stress-strain relations in the plastic range are derived for the first time based on the Prandtl-Ruess and the Hencky equations. 11 . scope of study and organization of thesis are also presented. elastic foundation and intermediate in-plane loads. Chapter 4 presents the parametric studies on the plastic buckling of rectangular Mindlin plate under in-plane compressive stresses.Introduction (4) Modifications of the Ritz method for complicating effects such as the presence of internal line/curved/point supports.3 Organization of Thesis In this chapter. In Chapter 5. the background information of plate buckling and literature review on the plastic buckling of plates is presented. shear stress and the combinations of these stresses. internal line hinges.

The results are verified using existing elastic buckling solutions. modifications to the Ritz formulation are presented for handling the plastic buckling of Mindlin plates with complicating effects such as internal line/curved/point supports. In addition to the Ritz method. plastic buckling of circular and annular plates is studied by using the Ritz method with the polar coordinate system. the development of an analytical method is presented for the first time for asymmetric buckling of circular and annular plates. Chapter 9 presents conclusions of the research and recommendations for future studies. The independent check of the results by both methods confirms the correctness of the methods. skew angle and thickness-to-width ratio on the plastic buckling stress parameter are investigated.Introduction In Chapter 6. The effects of aspect ratio. plastic buckling of skew Mindlin plates is studied by using the Ritz method with the skew coordinate system. 12 . elastic foundation. In Chapter 8. In Chapter 7. internal line hinges and intermediate inplane loads. The plastic buckling analyses of circular and annular plates with/without an internal ring support are performed by both methods.

The significant effect of transverse shear deformation on the buckling stress for thick plates is taken into consideration by adopting the Mindlin plate theory. Based on these plasticity theories. the two commonly used plasticity theories. namely the incremental theory of plasticity (IT) and the deformation theory of plasticity (DT) were considered. the derivation of the stress-strain relations in the plastic range is presented in detail.1.CHAPTER 2 GOVERNING EQUATIONS FOR PLASTIC BUCKLING OF PLATES This chapter presents the derivation of the energy functional and the governing equations for the bifurcation plastic buckling of thick plates under in-plane loadings. 2. In order to capture the plastic buckling behaviour of the plate. plate analyses are based on the classical thin plate theory (also called Kirchhoff plate theory since it is first proposed by Kirchhoff. Mindlin Plate Theory Generally. 1850) in which the effect 13 .

2. i. However. the classical thin plate theory underpredicts the deflections and overpredicts the buckling loads and natural frequencies due to the effect of transverse shear deformation. contradicts the fact that the actual transverse shear strain distribution is parabolic through the thickness. As we are dealing with thick plates.1). 2. respectively. • • No in-plane deformation in the middle surface of the plate after deformation. It should be noted that the first two assumptions are the same as their classical thin plate counterparts. These constant rotations of the normals to the middle surface about y. it is necessary to adopt a more refined plate theory such as the Mindlin plate theory that will allow for the effect of transverse shear deformation. when dealing with thick plates. however. The allowance of constant rotation implies that transverse shear strain is constant through the thickness of the plate. This. As the 14 .e. The normals during bending undergo constant rotations about the middle surface while maintaining the straightness and thereby admitting a constant shear strain through the plate thickness (Fig.1 Assumptions The assumptions of the Mindlin plate theory are (Mindlin 1951): • The plate thickness remains unchanged during deformation. The third assumption that allows the constant rotation of normal is the main difference between the Mindlin plate theory and the classical thin plate theory.1.axes now become unknown independent variables and are denoted by φ x and φ y .Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates of transverse shear is normally neglected. transverse inextensibility of the plate is maintained.and x.

1a) (2.Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates constant strain (stress) violates the statical requirement of vanishing shear stress at the surface of the plate. respectively. 15 . y ) w( x. φ y the rotations about the y.1b) (2. who assumed a parabolic shear stress distribution at the outset of his plate theory formulation. respectively as shown in Fig. y . one recovers the displacement fields of the classical thin plate theory. Note that by setting φ x = −∂w / ∂x and φ y = −∂w / ∂y .and x. the displacement fields are given by.1.1.2 Displacement Components Based on the Mindlin assumptions. a shear correction factor κ 2 was proposed by Mindlin (1951) to compensate for the error.3 to κ 2 = 0. the shear correction factor κ 2 = 5 / 6 will be used in this study. by comparing the constitutive Mindlin shear force with the one proposed by Reissner (1945). Raju and Rao (1989). y . y ) (2.axes. y ) in which u. He pointed out that for an isotropic plate. z ) = zφ x ( x . u ( x . This value of shear correction factor has been commonly used for the analyses of Mindlin plates.91 for v = 0. (2005). w the transverse displacement in the z direction and φ x . y. the shear correction factor κ 2 depends on Poisson’s ratio v and it may vary from κ 2 = 0. v are in-plane displacements in the x and y directions. On the other hand.1c) v ( x . 2.76 for v = 0. z ) = zφ y ( x . for example. 2. the implicit shear correction factor of Reissner (1945) becomes κ 2 = 5 / 6 . z ) = w( x. Therefore. Liew et al.5. (2004) and Hou et al.

2b) (2.2a) (2. γ yz are given by (Mindlin.2d) 16 .1. ε y and shear strains γ xy . 1951).2c) (2. ∂u ∂x ∂v ∂y ∂u ∂v + ∂y ∂x ∂u ∂w + ∂z ∂x εx = εy = γ xy = γ xz = (2.3 Strain-Displacement Relations The normal strains ε x .Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates φx z ∂w ∂x Deformed shape w h x Undeformed shape Fig. 2.1 Deformation of cross-section of Mindlin plates 2. γ xz .

3c) γ xz = φ x + γ yz = φ y + ∂w ∂x ∂w ∂y (2.3e) 2. In the sequel.2e) In view of Eqs. the relations between stress-strain are nonlinear in the plastic range. the strain-displacement relations can be expressed as ∂φ x ∂x εx = z (2.3d) (2. the detailed derivation of stress-strain relations for commonly used plasticity theories of IT and DT are presented. 17 . (2.Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates γ yz = ∂v ∂w + ∂z ∂y (2.1a-c). the two commonly used plasticity theories (IT and DT) are considered. In this study.3a) εy = z ∂φ y ∂y (2.2 Stress-Strain Relations in Plastic Range While the strains are linearly related to the stresses by Hooke’s law in the elastic range.3b) ∂φ y ⎞ ⎛ ∂φ ⎟ γ xy = z ⎜ x + ⎜ ∂y ∂x ⎟ ⎠ ⎝ (2. It has been pointed out in Chapter 1 that many plasticity theories have been proposed in order to capture the nonlinear stress-strain relations.

j = 1. at any instant of loading. 1968). not on the stress increment required to reach this state. proportional to the instantaneous stress deviation (Mendelson.5) or 1 2 σ = {(σ x 2 2 2 − σ y ) + (σ y − σ z ) + (σ z − σ x ) + 6 τ xy + τ yz + τ zx 2 2 2 ( )} 1/ 2 (2.2.6) 18 .Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates 2. Equation (2. the state of hardening at any stage is therefore specified by the current uniaxial yield stress denoted by σ .3 (2.2. The quantity σ is known as the equivalent stress or effective stress.3) where dε ijp is the plastic strain increment. which increases with increasing plastic strain. According to the assumption that the material remains isotropic throughout the deformation.3) states that the increments of plastic strain depend on the current values of the deviatoric stress state.4) where δ ij is the Kronecker delta and σ m denotes the hydrostatic stress which is equal to (σ x + σ y + σ z ) / 3 . i.1 Derivation of Stress-Strain Relations Based on Prandtl-Reuss Equation Prandtl (1925) and Reuss (1930) assumed that the plastic strain increment is. and is given by von Mises yield criterion as follows 3 (sij sij ) 2 σ = (2.e. dλ is a positive scalar which may vary throughout the loading history and s ij is the stress deviator tensor which is given by s ij = σ ij − σ mδ ij (2. dε ijp = s ij dλ i.

2000) 3dε p 3dσ 3dσ sij = sij = 2σ 2 Hσ 2σ dε ijp = ⎛ 1 1⎞ ⎜ − ⎟ sij ⎟ ⎜E ⎝ t E⎠ (2. (2.9) By using the value of dλ from Eq. According to the generalized Hooke’s Law. Eq. the Eq.3) and (2.Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates The corresponding equivalent or effective plastic strain increment dε 2 dε ijp dε ijp 3 p is given by dε p = ( ) (2. i. the Prandtl-Reuss flow rule.10) relates the increments of plastic strain to the stress and thus such theory is called the incremental theory of plasticity.5). It can be seen that Eq. (2.10) since 1 dε p dε − dε e dε dε e 1 1 = = = − = − H dσ dσ dσ dσ Et E (2. (2.7) or 2 dε xp − dε yp 3 p +6 dε xy dε p = {( ) + (dε 2 p y − dε zp ) + (dε 2 p z − dε xp ) 2 ( ) 2 p + 6 dε yz ( ) 2 p + 6 dε zx ( )} 2 1/ 2 (2.3).9).8) In view of Eqs. may be written as (Chakrabarty.7) can be written for a work-hardening Prandtl-Reuss material as 2 = σ dλ 3 dε p (2. (2. dε is the total effective strain increment which is equal to dε e + dε p and dε e is the effective elastic strain increment. the elastic strain increment is given by: 19 .11) where Et is the tangent modulus that is equal to dσ / dε .e. (2.

(2.12) & ⎞ 3σ ⎛ E ⎛ 1 − 2ν ⎞ & ⎜ − 1⎟ sij & & Eε ij = (1 + ν ) sij + ⎜ ⎟σ kk δ ij + ⎟ ⎜E 2σ ⎝ t ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎠ (2. Using the expression for dσ / σ from Eq.14) A straightforward differentiation of Eq. the rate form of complete Prandtl-Reuss equation relating the stress rate to the strain rate is given by adding Eqs.13) during the continued loading of a plastically stressed element. (2. (2. σ y = −q . Let σ x = − p.e. the constitutive Eq. According to the usual assumption that the plate is in a state of plane stress i.15) and the fact that σ 2 = p 2 − pq + q 2 + 3s 2 at the onset of buckling. τ xy = − s at the point of bifurcation.Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates 1 − 2ν ⎛ 1 +ν ⎞ e dε ij = ⎜ δ ij dσ kk ⎟dsij + 3E ⎝ E ⎠ (2.12) Therefore.14) gives dσ σ =− (2 p − q)dσ x + (2q − p)dσ y + 6sdτ xy 2σ 2 (2. (2. σ y = − q and τ xy = − s at the point of bifurcation. (2.13) therefore furnishes a system of homogeneous equations which can be expressed in the following matrix form: 20 . σ z = τ yz = τ zx = 0 .10) and (2. the effective stress σ in Eq.3) can be expressed as 2 2 σ 2 = σ x2 − σ xσ y + σ y + 3τ xy (2.15) on setting σ x = − p .

17g) and κ 2 is the Mindlin shear correction factor.16) s2 ⎞ ⎛ Et ⎞⎛ q 2 ⎜ ⎟ c11 = 1 − 3⎜1 − ⎟⎜ + E ⎠⎝ 4σ 2 σ 2 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (2. we finally obtain the following constitutive equations: 21 .17f) 2(1 + ν ) Et E (2.17e) Et ⎛ Et ⎞ s 2 c33 = 2(1 + ν ) + 9⎜1 − ⎟ 2 E E ⎠σ ⎝ c 44 = c55 = (2.17b) (2.Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates ⎡ c11 c12 ⎧ dε x ⎫ ⎢ c 22 ⎪ dε ⎪ ⎢ ⎪ y⎪ ⎢ ⎪ ⎪ Et ⎨dγ xy ⎬ = ⎢ ⎪dγ ⎪ ⎢ ⎪ xz ⎪ ⎢ ⎪dγ yz ⎪ ⎢ sym ⎭ ⎩ ⎢ ⎣ where c13 c 23 c33 0 0 0 c 44 κ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎧ dσ x ⎫ ⎥ ⎪ dσ ⎪ ⎥⎪ y ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎥ ⎨dτ xy ⎬ 0 ⎥ ⎪dτ ⎪ ⎥ ⎪ xz ⎪ c55 ⎥ ⎪dτ ⎪ ⎩ yz ⎭ κ2 ⎥ ⎦ 0 0 0 (2. By using the process of matrix inversion.17a) E 1⎧ s 2 ⎞⎫ ⎛ E ⎞⎛ pq c12 = − ⎨1 − (1 − 2ν ) t − 3⎜1 − t ⎟⎜ + 2 ⎟⎬ 2⎩ E E ⎠⎜ 2σ 2 σ ⎟⎭ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ c13 = 3 ⎛ E t ⎞⎛ 2 p − q ⎞ s ⎜1 − ⎟⎜ ⎟ 2⎝ E ⎠⎝ σ ⎠ σ (2.17c) s2 ⎞ ⎛ E ⎞⎛ p 2 c 22 = 1 − 3⎜1 − t ⎟⎜ + 2⎟ E ⎠⎜ 4σ 2 σ ⎟ ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ (2.17d) c 23 = 3 ⎛ Et ⎞⎛ 2q − p ⎞ s ⎜1 − ⎟⎜ ⎟ 2⎝ E ⎠⎝ σ ⎠ σ (2.

19b) (c ρ 1 (2.19a) ρ 1 (c13 c 23 − c12 c33 ) 11 33 2 c − c13 ) (2.19g) and c11 sym c12 c 22 c13 c 23 c33 E ρ= Et (2.Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates β ⎡α & ⎧σ x ⎫ ⎢ γ ⎪σ ⎪ ⎢ &y ⎪ ⎪ ⎢ ⎪& ⎪ ⎨τ xy ⎬ = E ⎢ ⎢ ⎪τ& ⎪ ⎢ ⎪ xz ⎪ ⎢ & yz ⎪ ⎪τ ⎭ ⎩ ⎢ sym ⎣ where χ µ δ 0 0 0 κ 2G E ⎤ & ⎥⎧ ε x ⎫ ⎥⎪ ε ⎪ & ⎥⎪ y ⎪ ⎪& ⎪ ⎥ ⎨γ xy ⎬ 0 ⎥ ⎪γ& ⎪ ⎥ ⎪ xz ⎪ κ 2 G ⎥ ⎪γ& yz ⎪ ⎩ ⎭ E ⎥ ⎦ 0 0 0 (2.20) 22 .18) α= β= γ = χ= µ= δ= (c ρ 1 1 22 33 2 c − c 23 ) (2.19c) ρ 1 (c12 c23 − c13 c 22 ) (c12 c13 − c11c23 ) 11 22 2 c − c12 ) (2.19e) (c ρ (2.19d) ρ 1 (2.19f) G= Et E = c 44 2(1 + ν ) (2.

Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates 2. one has 3ε p sij 2σ ε ijp = (2.24) 23 . (2. (2.21) Since the strain rate vector in this case is not along the normal to the Mises yield surface in the stress space. (2.12) and Eq.2.11) and (2. (2. The incremental form of the Hencky equation Eq. the yield surface must be supposed to have locally changed in shape so that the normality rule still holds. Therefore.21) is easily found as: 3dσ 2σ ⎛ dε p ε p ⎞ 3ε p ⎟ sij + ⎜ dsij − ⎜ dσ σ ⎟ 2σ ⎠ ⎝ dε ijp = (2. The possibility of the formation of a corner on the yield surface may also be included.23) By combining Eq. one obtains the following rate form of the complete stress-strain relation for DT: ⎛ 3E 1 − 2ν & Eε ij = ⎜ ⎜ 2E − 2 ⎝ s & ⎞ E ⎞ 1 − 2ν 3σ ⎛ E ⎟ s ij ⎜ − ⎟ sij + & & δ ij σ kk + ⎟ 3 2σ ⎜ Et E s ⎟ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ (2. instead of Eq.2 Derivation of Stress-Strain Relations Based on Hencky’s Deformation Theory Unlike the Prandtl-Reuss constitutive relations. (2.22). Hencky (1924) proposed the total stress-strain relation which relates the total strain component to the current stress.23).10).22) where ε p / σ can be written as ε p ε −ε e 1 1 = = − σ σ Es E (2. and using Eqs.

16).25) (2.26e) c33 = 3 (2.24) furnishes ⎡ c11 c12 ⎧ dε x ⎫ ⎢ c 22 ⎪ dε ⎪ ⎢ y ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎢ Et ⎨dγ xy ⎬ = ⎢ ⎪dγ ⎪ ⎢ ⎪ xz ⎪ ⎢ ⎪dγ yz ⎪ ⎢ sym ⎩ ⎭ ⎢ ⎣ where ⎛ E ⎞⎛ q 2 s2 ⎞ c11 = 1 − 3⎜1 − t ⎟⎜ ⎟ ⎜ E ⎟⎜ 4σ 2 + σ 2 ⎟ ⎠ s ⎠⎝ ⎝ c13 c 23 c33 0 0 0 c 44 κ2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎧dσ x ⎫ ⎥ ⎪dσ ⎪ ⎥⎪ y ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎥ ⎨ τ xy ⎬ 0 ⎥⎪ τ ⎪ ⎥ ⎪ xz ⎪ c55 ⎥ ⎪ τ ⎪ ⎩ yz ⎭ κ2 ⎥ ⎦ 0 0 0 (2. (2.25) has the same form as Eq.26f) ⎛ E E c 44 = c55 = ⎜ 3 t − (1 − 2ν ) t ⎜ E E ⎝ s (2.26a) ⎛ Et Et ⎞⎛ pq 1⎧ s 2 ⎞⎫ c12 = − ⎨1 − (1 − 2ν ) − 3⎜1 − ⎟ ⎜ E ⎟⎜ 2σ 2 + σ 2 ⎟⎬ ⎟⎜ 2⎩ E ⎠⎭ s ⎠⎝ ⎝ c13 = E ⎞ 2p − q ⎞ s 3⎛ ⎜1 − t ⎟⎛ ⎜ E ⎟⎜ σ ⎟ σ 2⎝ ⎠ s ⎠⎝ (2. the stress-strain relation for DT can be simply expressed as in the matrix form as that given in Eq.18).26d) (2. the constitutive equation (Eq.26g) It can be seen that Eq.Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates In view of Eq. Therefore. by the process of matrix inversion. (2. The corresponding parameters 24 . 2. (2.15). (2.26c) ⎛ E ⎞⎛ p 2 s2 ⎞ c 22 = 1 − 3⎜1 − t ⎟⎜ + 2⎟ ⎜ E ⎟⎜ 4σ 2 σ ⎟ ⎠ s ⎠⎝ ⎝ c 23 = E ⎞⎛ 2q − p ⎞ s 3⎛ ⎜1 − t ⎟⎜ ⎜ E ⎟ σ ⎟σ 2⎝ ⎠ s ⎠⎝ ⎛ Et E E ⎞ s2 − (1 − 2ν ) t + 9⎜1 − t ⎟ 2 ⎜ E ⎟σ Es E s ⎠ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ (2.26b) (2.

28b) 25 . (2. β .. one obtains c −1 ⎛σ E = 1 + kc⎜ ⎜σ Et ⎝ 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ . c >1 (2..27).Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates α .26a-g) into Eqs. c is a dimensionless constant that describes the shape of the stress-strain relationship with c = ∞ for elastic-perfectly plastic response and k is the horizontal distance between the knee of c = ∞ curve and the intersection of the c curve with the σ / σ 0 = 1 line as shown in Fig. By differentiating both sides of Eq.27) where σ 0 is a nominal yield stress depending on the value of k. µ . (2. G and ρ for DT can be obtained by substituting c11 .19) and (2.. χ . one obtains c −1 ⎛σ E = 1 + k⎜ ⎜σ Es ⎝ 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ .28a) while after some manipulations and by noting that E s = σ / ε .3 Material Modeling The strain hardening plastic behavior of most structural materials used in aerospace and off-shore applications can be adequately described by the strain-stress relationship proposed by Ramberg and Osgood (1943) as follow σ ⎛σ ⎞ ε = +k 0 ⎜ ⎟ E E ⎜σ0 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ σ c (2. c >1 (2.2. γ .... and noting that the tangent modulus Et = dσ / dε . 2.20). (2. δ . 2.2. c 44 of Eq.

29a) c = 1+ σ ln 0.29b) σ 0 = σ 0.7 σ 0.Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates 1.5 1+k 0 0 1 2 3 4 Eε σ0 Fig.2 Ramberg-Osgood stress-strain relation Based on the materials in the experiments of Aitchison and Miller (1942).29c) 26 .7 (2. 2.85 (2.5 c = 2 c= 3 c=5 c = 10 c = 20 σ σ0 1 c=∞ σ ⎛σ ⎞ ε = +k 0 ⎜ ⎟ E E ⎜σ0 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ σ c 0. Ramberg and Osgood assumed the expressions of k and c as: 3 7 ln 17 7 k= (2.

only three parameters ( E .7E σ 0.85 are the secant yield stresses corresponding to the intersections of the stress-strain curve and the lines of slope 0.Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates where σ 0.31) 27 .27) was proposed by Hill (1944) by using a 2% offset yield stress.7 σ 0.1. for σ 0 and is given by c ⎛ σ ε = + 0.85 ε Fig.2 . The modified version of Eq.85 on the stress-strain curve With the above assumption of k = 3/7.002⎜ ⎜σ E ⎝ 0. σ 0.85E 0.2 σ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ (2.7E and 0.7 and σ 0. 2.301 ⎛σ ⎞ log⎜ 0. These parameters are given by Bruhn (1965) for a wide range of materials and some of them are shown in Table 2.3.7 and σ 0. σ 0.1 ⎠ (2.3 Illustration of σ 0.85E respectively from the origin as shown in Fig.30) c= 0.7 . (2. 2. c ) are needed to specify the Ramberg-Osgood stress-strain model. σ E 0.2 ⎟ ⎜σ ⎟ ⎝ 0.

σ 0. Table 2.2 E 106 psi σ tu ksi σ 0.7 35 70 50 36 34.6 31 9.7 10.1 is the 1% offset stress as shown in Fig.5 in 6061-T6.5 34 63 20 11.9 12.5 62 65 65 42 76 52 40 38 35 67 52. 4340 Heat Treated Aluminum Alloys 2014-T6 Forgings 29.2 63 23 6.0 26. 4140.25 7075-T6.1 10.5 48 105 37 9.249 6.85 ksi c h ≤ 4 in 2024-T3 Sheet & Plate Heat treated.25 in 2024-T4 Sheet & Plate Heat treated.3 38 14 12. h ≤ 0. 1965) Material Stainless Steel AISI 301 ¼ Hard Sheet Transverse Compression Longitudinal Compression AISI 301 ¾ Hard Sheet Transverse Compression Longitudinal Compression Low Carbon & Alloy Steels AISI 4130.2 h < 0.0 125 125 80 43 73 28.85 and c for various aluminum alloys under room temperature (Bruhn.5 Magnesium Alloys AZ61A Extrusions h ≤ 0.2 ksi σ 0.7 10.0 125 113 111 102 10.5 15.1.4 27.Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates in which σ 0. Heated & aged 10.0 150 150 118 58 116.7 ksi σ 0. Bare Sheet & Plate h ≤ 0.2 4.9 27.9 5.3 19 28 .7 . h ≤ 0.3 39 36.0 26.7 10.4. 2. Values of σ 0.

(2.30). Eq.001 0.002 E σ 0. have been used.2 σ 0.27) will be used herein. 2000) 1 ∫ {σ& x ε& x + σ& y ε& y + τ&xy γ& xy + τ&xz γ& xz + τ& yz γ& yz }dV 2V U= (2. Therefore.32) 29 . (2. both Ramberg-Osgood models.30) can be deduced from it by equating σ 0 = σ 0. 2.4.1 0 0. Offset yield stress ε In the literature. It can be seen that Eq. (2.e.2 . 2.2 and k = 0. (2.002 Fig.27) and Eq.27) is the more general form of Ramberg-Osgood model since Eq.3 Derivation of Energy Functional and Governing Equations The strain energy functional of the Mindlin plate is given by (Chakrabarty.Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates σ σ 0. (2. i. the more general Ramberg-Osgood formula Eq.

18) or Eq. ⎜ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ A (2. (2. . y.2a-e) and the stress-strain relations given by either of Eq.35) which can be expressed in the form: ∂φ y ∂φ y ⎞ ⎛ ∂φ ∂φ y ∂w ∂w ⎟dxdy Π = ∫∫ F ⎜ x. w. x .33) where A is the plate area and dA = dxdy The potential energy V for the plate subjected to uniform in-plane compressive stresses is given by 2 2 ⎛ ∂w ⎞ 1 ⎡ ⎛ ∂w ⎞ ⎛ ∂w ⎞⎛ ∂w ⎞⎤ V = − ∫ ⎢σ x h⎜ ⎟ + σ y h⎜ ⎟ + 2τ xy h⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟⎥ dA ⎜ ∂y ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ 2 A⎢ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠⎝ ∂y ⎠⎥ ⎝ ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ (2.25) and after the integration over the plate thickness. . .34) The total potential energy functional can be expressed as Π = U +V (2.Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates In view of Eqs. the strain energy functional can be expressed as 1 αEh 3 ⎛ ∂φ x ⎞ γEh 3 ⎛ ∂φ y ⎜ U= ∫ ⎜ ⎟ + 2 A 12 ⎝ ∂x ⎠ 12 ⎜ ∂y ⎝ 2 ⎞ βEh 3 ⎛ ∂φ x ⎟ + ⎜ ⎟ 6 ⎝ ∂x ⎠ 2 ⎞⎛ ∂φ y ⎟⎜ ⎜ ⎠⎝ ∂y ⎞ δEh 3 ⎛ ∂φ x ∂φ y ⎞ ⎟+ ⎟ ⎟ 12 ⎜ ∂y + ∂x ⎟ ⎜ ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ 2 + µEh 3 ⎛ ∂φ y ∂φ y ∂φ ∂φ y ⎞ χEh 3 ⎛ ∂φ x ∂φ x ∂φ x ∂φ y ⎞ ⎟ ⎟+ ⎜ ⎜ + + x 6 ⎜ ∂x ∂y 6 ⎜ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ⎟ ∂y ∂y ⎟ ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ ⎝ 2 2 ⎡⎛ ∂w ⎞ ⎛ ∂w ⎞ ⎤ ⎟ ⎥ dA +κ Gh ⎢⎜ φ x + ⎟ + ⎜φ y + ∂x ⎠ ⎜ ∂y ⎟ ⎥ ⎢⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎦ ⎣ 2 (2. . (2.φ y .φ x . (2.36) 30 .

In view of Eqs. y (2.33). x and (•) . x ⎝ (2. the Euler-Lagrange differential equations associated with the minimization of the total potential energy functional with respect to arbitrary variation of w. y ⎞ ∂ ⎛ ∂F ⎟− ⎜ ⎟ ∂y ⎜ ∂φ ⎠ ⎝ y.37c) where (•) . x ⎝ ⎞ ∂ ⎛ ∂F ⎟− ⎜ ⎟ ∂y ⎜ ∂φ ⎠ ⎝ x.38a) ∂ ⎧αEh 3 ∂φ x β Eh 3 ∂φ y χEh 3 ⎛ ∂φ x ∂φ y ⎞⎫ ∂w ⎞ ⎪ ⎪ ⎜ ⎟⎬ − κ 2 Gh⎛ φ x + + + + ⎜ ⎟ ⎨ ∂x ⎪ 12 ∂x ∂x ⎟⎪ ∂x ⎠ 12 ∂y 12 ⎜ ∂y ⎝ ⎝ ⎠⎭ ⎩ + ∂ ⎧δEh 3 ⎪ ⎨ ∂y ⎪ 12 ⎩ ⎛ ∂φ x ∂φ y ⎞ µEh 3 ∂φ y χEh 3 ∂φ x ⎫ ⎪ ⎜ ⎜ ∂y + ∂x ⎟ + 12 ∂y + 12 ∂x ⎬ = 0 ⎟ ⎪ ⎝ ⎠ ⎭ ⎛ ∂φ x ∂φ y ⎜ ⎜ ∂y + ∂x ⎝ ⎞⎫ ⎛ ∂w ⎞ ⎪ ⎟⎬ − κ 2 Gh⎜ φ y + ⎟ ⎜ ⎟⎪ ∂y ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠⎭ (2.38c) (2. the governing equations are given by ⎛ ∂φ x ∂φ y ⎞ ∂ ∂w ∂ ∂w + ∇ 2 w⎟ − σ x h − σ yh + ⎟ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y ⎝ ∂x ⎠ κ 2 Gh⎜ ⎜ − ∂ ⎛ ∂w ⎞ ∂ ⎛ ∂w ⎞ ⎜τ xy h ⎟ − ⎜τ xy h ⎟=0 ⎜ ⎟ ∂y ∂x ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ (2.35). 1968): ⎞ ∂ ⎛ ∂F ⎟− ⎜ ⎟ ∂y ⎜ ∂w.37a) ∂F ∂ ⎛ ∂F − ⎜ ∂φ x ∂x ⎜ ∂φ x . (2. x ⎝ ∂F ∂ ⎛ ∂F − ⎜ ∂φ y ∂x ⎜ ∂φ y . y refer to the differentiation with respect to x and y respectively.38b) ∂ ⎧ γEh 3 ∂φ y β Eh 3 ∂φ x µEh 3 ⎪ + + ⎨ ∂y ⎪ 12 ∂y 12 ∂x 12 ⎩ ∂ ⎧ δEh 3 ⎪ + ⎨ ∂x ⎪ 12 ⎩ ⎛ ∂φ x ∂φ y ⎞ µEh 3 ∂φ y χEh 3 ∂φ x ⎫ ⎪ ⎜ ⎜ ∂y + ∂x ⎟ + 12 ∂y + 12 ∂x ⎬ = 0 ⎟ ⎪ ⎝ ⎠ ⎭ 31 . (2. y ⎠ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟=0 ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎟=0 ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎟=0 ⎟ ⎠ ∂F ∂ ⎛ ∂F − ⎜ ∂w ∂x ⎜ ∂w.Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates Using calculus of variations.34) and (2.37b) (2. φ x and φ y are respectively given by (Forray.

19a-g). χ . By using the boundary conditions at the plate edges. γ . β . the aforementioned governing equations can be solved for plastic buckling stress. 32 . (2.Governing Equations for Plastic Buckling Analysis of Plates in which the parameters α . µ . δ are given by Eqs.

it is proposed that the displacement functions be approximated by the product of mathematically complete.CHAPTER 3 RITZ METHOD FOR PLASTIC BUCKLING ANALYSIS This chapter presents the formulations of the Ritz method for plastic buckling of Mindlin plates under in-plane compressive loadings. In this version of Ritz method. namely the Cartesian. one obtains a system of homogeneous equations which forms the governing eigenvalue equation. the skew and the polar coordinate systems for use in handling plates of various shapes. 33 . The Ritz formulations will be presented for three different types of coordinate systems. two-dimensional polynomial functions and basic functions comprising boundary equations that are raised to appropriate powers so as to ensure the satisfaction of the geometric boundary conditions at the outset. By minimizing the total potential energy functional with respect to the parameterized displacement functions.

the displacement function.. ℜ( x.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis 3. Therefore it is sometime referred to as the Rayleigh-Ritz method. The static boundary conditions need not be satisfied by these approximate functions. Leissa (2005) investigated carefully the historical works of Rayleigh and Ritz and came to conclusion that Rayleigh’s name should not be attached to the Ritz method.1) in which φi ( x.. ∂ci i = 1. Rayleigh (1911) published a book where he complained that Ritz had not recognized his similar work (Rayleigh. the Ritz method has been widely used because of its simplicity in implementation. a set of homogeneous equations is obtained as follows ∂Π = 0. Two years after Ritz’s paper (1909). y ) i =1 (3..2) For buckling and vibration problems. 1877). the above set of homogeneous equations is reduced to eigenvalue and eigenvector problems. y ) are the approximate functions which individually satisfies at least the geometric boundary conditions to ensure convergence to the correct solutions. Since then. m (3. determining frequencies and mode shapes. Walter Ritz published a paper that demonstrates his famous method for minimizing a functional. y ) is approximated by a finite linear combination of the trial functions in the form m ℜ( x. 34 ..1 Introduction In 1909.. However. y ) ≈ ∑ ciφi ( x.2... In the Ritz method. By minimizing the energy functional Π with respect to each of the unknown coefficients ci.

Some of the commonly used trial functions in the Ritz method for plate analysis are the products of eigenfunctions of vibrating beams (Leissa. in this study.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis The exact solution is obtained if infinite terms are adopted in Eq. However. it is impractical to use infinite number of terms and so the number of terms is usually truncated to N terms in applications. the latter trial functions can be used for the analysis of plates of general shape and boundary conditions while the others may not be so convenient. 1975. (1) Simply Supported Edge (S and S*) 35 . 1985) and two dimensional polynomial functions with appropriate basic functions (Bhat.. Among them. the spline functions (Mizusawa. 1995). the generated beam functions (Bassily and Dickinson. 1989. mathematically complete. 1990). Liew. 1993. 1998). Narita and Leissa. 3. Geannakakes. Laura et al. Liew and Wang. Dickinson and Li. the computational accuracy may also be increased since the polynomial functions admit exact calculations of differentiation and integration of the functions (Liew et al.1). the beam characteristic orthogonal polynomials (Bhat. 1986).2 Boundary Conditions The following boundary conditions are considered for the plastic buckling problems of Mindlin plates. 1978). 1987. (3. 1973. 1992. two-dimensional polynomial functions are adopted together with basic functions comprising boundary equations that are raised to appropriate powers in order to ensure the satisfaction of the geometric boundary conditions. 1982.. 1990. Therefore. The choice of the approximate functions is very important in order to simplify the calculations and to guarantee convergence to the exact solution. Moreover.

φs = 0. w = 0 in which φ n is the rotation of the mid-plane to the edge. M ns = 0.6) where Qn is the transverse shear force in the normal direction n to the plate edge and N nn is the inplane compressive force in the normal direction of the edge. commonly referred to as the soft type simply supported edge. Qn − N nn ∂w =0 ∂n (3.3) The second kind (S*). (3) Free Edge (F) For a free edge. M ns the twisting moment at the edge as shown in Fig. w = 0 (3. requires M nn = 0. requires M nn = 0. φ s = 0. 3. w = 0 (3. which is commonly referred to as the hard type simply supported edge. M ns = 0. The first kind (S).4) where M nn is the bending moment normal to the edge. (2) Clamped Edge (C) The boundary conditions for a clamped edge are φ n = 0. and φ s the rotation of the mid-plane normal in the tangent plane sz to the plate edge. 36 . the boundary conditions are (3.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis There are two kinds of simply supported edges for Mindlin plates.5) M nn = 0.1.

clamped or free edges.η = .2) and the following nondimensional terms are introduced: 2x 2y h 2w a . For generality and convenience.3 Ritz Formulation in Cartesian Coordinate System Consider an isotropic. A = dξdη a b b b b ξ= (3. length a. w = . 3. 3. ζ = .Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis Fig. rectangular plate of uniform thickness h.7) 37 .2. σ y and uniform shear stress τ xy as shown in Fig. 3. width b and subjected to in.plane uniform compressive stresses of magnitudes σ x .τ = .1 Forces and moments on a plate element 3. The edges of the plate may take on any combination of simply supported. the coordinates are normalized with respect to the maximum length dimensions (a and b as shown in Fig.

2) and (3. λ y = 2 .33) and (2. D = π D 12(1 − ν 2 ) π D π D (3. 3. (2. ⎧αEh 3 ⎛ ∂φ ⎞ 2 γEh 3 ⎛ ∂φ y ⎞ 2 βEh 3 ⎛ ∂φ ⎞⎛ ∂φ y ⎪ x ⎜ x⎟ + ζ 2⎜ ⎨ ⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎜ ∂η ⎟ + 6 ζ ⎜ ∂ξ ⎟⎜ ∂η ⎟ 12 ⎜ ∂ξ ⎟ 12 ⎝ ⎠⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎪ ⎝ ⎠ ⎩ ∂φ x ⎞ δEh 3 ⎛ ∂φ x ∂φ y ⎞ µEh 3 ∂φ y ⎛ ∂φ y ⎜ζ + ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ∂η + ∂ξ ⎟ + 6 ∂η ζ ⎜ ∂ξ + ζ ∂η ⎟ ⎟ 12 ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠ + 1 U = ∫∫ 2ζ A ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ χEh 3 ∂φ x 6 ∂ξ ⎛ ∂φ x ∂φ y ⎞ ⎜ζ ⎜ ∂η + ∂ξ ⎟ ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ 2 2 ∂w ⎞ ⎤ 1 ∂w ⎞ ⎛ ⎟ + ⎜φ y + ⎟ ⎥ dξdη ⎢⎜ φ x + ⎜ ∂η ⎟ ⎥ ζ ∂ξ ⎟ ⎜ ⎠ ⎝ ⎢⎝ ⎠ ⎦ ⎣ + κ 2 Ghb 2ζ 2 ⎡⎛ 4 (3.10) 38 .Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis τ xy hb 2 σ y hb 2 σ x hb 2 Eh 3 λ x = 2 . η σy τxy x. λ xy = 2 .8) y. the strain energy and potential energy functionals in Eqs.9) 2 ⎡ ⎛ ∂w ⎞ 2 ⎛ ∂w ⎞ ∂w ∂w ⎤ 1 π 2 Eh 3 ⎟ + λ y ⎜ζ ⎟ + 2λ xy ζ V =− ⎢λ x ⎜ ⎥ dξdη ⎜ ∂η ⎟ ∂ξ ∂η ⎥ 8ζ 12(1 − ν 2 ) ∫∫ ⎢ ⎜ ∂ξ ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ A ⎣ ⎦ (3. in view of Eqs (3. ξ σx τxy a σy b σx Fig.3).34) become respectively.2 Rectangular plate under in-plane compressive stresses Then.

1998) p q w w (ξ .15c) 39 . ci. φ m .η ) = ∑∑ emφ m (ξ . the total potential energy functional Π is given by Π = U +V (3.η ) q =0 i =0 p q (3. di. d m . ei the unknown coefficients to be varied with the subscript m given by m = ( q + 1)( q + 2) / 2 − i and the total numbers of c m .15b) (3.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis Therefore.12b) y φ y (ξ .14) w x y The functions φ m .η ) = ∑∑ c mφ m (ξ .η ) q =0 i =0 p q (3.η ) q =0 i =0 (3. em are given by ( p + 1)( p + 2) 2 (3.11) The adopted admissible p-Ritz functions for the deflection and rotations of the plate are given by (Liew et al.12a) x φ x (ξ .15a) (3.12c) where p is the degree of the complete polynomial space.13) N= (3. φ m are given as follow: w φ m = φbwξ iη q −i x φ m = φbx ξ iη q −i y φ m = φby ξ iη q −i (3.η ) = ∑∑ d mφ m (ξ .

17c) where ne is the number of edges. φbw = ∏ [Γ j (ξ .η ) = φbw (c0 + c1ξ + c3η ) (3.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis In view of Eqs. and φby are the basic functions which are the product the boundary equations raised to appropriate power so the admissible Ritz functions satisfy the geometric boundary conditions as follow. φbx .direction Ω xj = ⎨ ⎩1 simply supported ( S ) in the x . Ω y are given by j j ⎧0 free( F ) Ωw = ⎨ j ∗ ⎩1 simply supported ( S and S ) or clamped (C ) ⎧0 free ( F ) or simply supported ( S *) or ( S ) in the y .16b) The functions φbw .η )]Ω ne j =1 w j (3. (3.18a) (3.16a) For p = 2 w (ξ .direction Ωy = ⎨ j ⎩1 simply supported ( S ) in the y .η )]Ω ne j =1 x j (3. Ω xj .18c) On the basis of foregoing energy functional and p-Ritz functions. w (ξ . (3. the application of the Ritz method yields: 40 . for example: For p = 1.17b) φby = ∏ [Γ j (ξ .12a-c) give the mathematically complete two dimensional polynomials which follow the Pascal-type of expansion.15a-c). the Eqs.η ) = φbw c1 + c 2ξ + c3η + c 4ξ 2 + c5ξη + c6η 2 ( ) (3.direction or clamped (C ) ⎧0 free ( F ) or simply supported ( S *) or ( S ) in the x .17a) φbx = ∏ [Γ j (ξ .η )]Ω ne j =1 y j (3.18b) (3.direction or clamped (C ) (3. Γ j the boundary equation of the jth edge and Ω w .

Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis ∂Π ∂Π ∂Π ..19) where m = 1.23a) 41 .11) and (3.19) yields the following homogeneous set of equations ⎧c ⎫ [K ]⎪d ⎪ = {0} ⎨ ⎬ ⎪e ⎪ ⎩ ⎭ (3. ⎪: ⎪ ⎪c m ⎪ ⎩ ⎭ ⎧ d1 ⎫ ⎪d ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ d = ⎨ 2⎬. (3. The substitution of Eqs.20) where vectors c.21a-c) The matrix [K] has a structure of ⎡ K cc K cd ⎢ K dd ⎢ ⎢ symmetric ⎣ K ce ⎤ ⎥ K de ⎥ K ee ⎥ ⎦ (3.22) and its elements are given by w w ⎡ κ 2 G ⎛ 1 ∂φ w ∂φ jw ∂φiw ∂φ j ⎞ λx 1 ∂φ iw ∂φ j i ⎜ ⎟− = ∫∫ ⎢ 2 +ζ ⎜ ∂η ∂η ⎟ 48(1 − ν 2 ) ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ A ⎢ ⎠ ⎣ 4τ E ⎝ ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ w ⎛ ∂φ iw ∂φ jw ∂φ iw ∂φ jw ⎞⎤ λ xy ∂φiw ∂φ j ⎜ ⎟⎥ dξdη ζ − − + ∂η ∂ξ ⎟⎥ 48(1 − ν 2 ) ∂η ∂η 48(1 − ν 2 ) ⎜ ∂ξ ∂η ⎝ ⎠⎦ K cc ij λy (3. (3.N.12a-c) into Eq.0. ⎪ : ⎪ ⎪d m ⎪ ⎩ ⎭ ⎧ e1 ⎫ ⎪e ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ e=⎨ 2⎬ ⎪: ⎪ ⎪ em ⎪ ⎩ ⎭ (3.….2.0 ∂cm ∂d m ∂em (3. . d and e are given by ⎧ c1 ⎫ ⎪c ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ c = ⎨ 2⎬. = 0.

µ .N and α . δ . G are parameters depending on the material properties and stress level as shown in Chapter 2.…. β .23f) where i. χ . 2. j = 1. The lowest eigenvalue corresponds to the critical plastic bifurcation buckling stress.20) to zero and solving the characteristic equation for the roots (eigenvalues).23b) ce K ij = (3.23e) + ζκ 2 G y y ⎤ φi φ j ⎥ dξdη 4 Eτ 2 ⎦ (3. 42 . The plastic buckling stress parameter can be obtained by setting the determinant of the [K ] matrix in Eq. (3. γ .23d) ⎡ β ∂φix ∂φ jy δ ∂φix ∂φ jy = ∫∫ ⎢ + 12 ∂ξ ∂η 12 ∂η ∂ξ A ⎢ ⎣ µζ ∂φix ∂φiy χ ∂φix ∂φiy ⎤ + + ⎥ dξdη 12 ∂η ∂η 12ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎦ y y y ⎡ γζ ∂φ y ∂φ jy δ ∂φiy ∂φ j µ ⎛ ∂φiy ∂φ j ∂φiy ∂φ j ⎞ ee i ⎟ + + ⎜ + K ij = ∫∫ ⎢ ∂η ∂ξ ⎟ 12 ∂η ∂η 12ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ 12 ⎜ ∂ξ ∂η A ⎢ ⎝ ⎠ ⎣ (3.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis cd K ij = κ 2 G ⎡ ∂φiw x ⎤ φ j ⎥ dξdη ⎢ 4τ 2 E ∫∫ ⎣ ∂ξ ⎦ A κ 2 G ⎡ ∂φiw y ⎤ φ j ⎥ dξdη ⎢ζ 4τ 2 E ∫∫ ⎣ ∂η ⎦ A (3.23c) K dd ij ⎡ α 1 ∂φ x ∂φ jx δζ ∂φ x ∂φ jx χ ⎛ ∂φ x ∂φ jx ∂φ x ∂φ jx ⎞ i i ⎟dξdη = ∫∫ ⎢ + + ⎜ i + i ∂η ∂ξ ⎟ 12 ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ 12 ∂η ∂η 12 ⎜ ∂ξ ∂η A ⎢ ⎝ ⎠ ⎣ ζκ 2 G x x ⎤ + φi φ j ⎥ dξdη 4 Eτ 2 ⎦ K de ij (3.

the hard type simply supported boundary condition of oblique edge can be readily implemented in a skew coordinate system while the Ritz formulation with the Cartesian coordinate system has to be modified in order to implement that this kind of boundary condition. y ) = φ x ( x . oblique width b and skew angle ψ as shown in Fig.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis 3.3a that these coordinates are related by (Liew et al. y ) sinψ + φ y ( x . Consider a skew plate of uniform thickness h with length a.24b) The rotations φ x .25b) The relationship between the partial derivatives of rectangular and skew coordinates are given by ∂ (•) ∂ (•) = ∂x ∂x ∂ (•) ∂ (•) ∂ (•) =− tanψ + secψ ∂y ∂x ∂y (3. φ y can be expressed in the skew coordinate system as φ x ( x.4 Ritz Formulation in Skew Coordinate System For the analysis of skew or parallelogram plates. y ) cosψ φ y ( x. The expression of energy functional in skew coordinate system can be readily obtained by transforming of Cartesian coordinate system into skew coordinate system.26a) (3. y ) = −φ x ( x .26b) 43 . it is more expedient to adopt the skew coordinate system.25a) (3. y ) (3. 3. For example.3a. 3. 1998) x = x − y tanψ y = y secψ (3.24a) (3. It can be seen from Fig.

Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis For generality and convenience.η φy . ζ = . w = . (3. (a) Skew coordinates and plate dimensions (b) Directions of stresses in the infinitesimal element In view of Eqs.τ = . x . 3.33) become 2 U = ∫∫ A 1 2ζ ⎡ 3 αEh 3 ⎛ ∂φ x ⎜ ⎢cos ψ 12 ⎜ ∂ξ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ βEh 3 ⎟ + cosψ ⎟ 6 ⎠ ⎧ 2 ⎛ ∂φ ⎪ x ⎨sin ψ ⎜ ⎜ ∂ξ ⎪ ⎝ ⎩ ⎞ ⎛ ∂φ ⎟ − sinψ ⎜ x ⎟ ⎜ ∂ξ ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎞⎛ ∂φ y ⎟⎜ ⎟⎜ ∂ξ ⎠⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ − ζ sinψ ∂φ x ∂φ x ∂φ ∂φ y ⎫ γEh 3 +ζ x + secψ ⎬ ∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ ∂η ⎭ 12 ∂φ y ⎧ 2 ∂φ x − sinψ ⎨sin ψ ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎩ 44 .27).η = . the strain energy functional in Eq.27) φx y φx y . (2. the following nondimensional terms are adopted: h a 2x 2y 2w . ξ a/2 a/2 (a) τxy σx σy (b) Fig.3. A = dξdη a b b b b ξ= (3.φy ψ b/2 b/2 x.24) to (3.

(3.28) The potential energy functional. V. λ xy used in Eq.3b. of the in-plane uniform loads is given by 2 ⎧ 2 ⎛ ∂w ⎞ 2 ⎛ ∂w ⎞ ∂w ∂w 1 π 2 Eh 3 ⎡ ⎪ V = ∫∫ ⎢λ x cosψ ⎜ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ∂ξ ⎟ + λ y secψ ⎨ζ ⎜ ∂η ⎟ + 2ζ sinψ ∂ξ ∂η ⎟ 2 8ζ 12(1 − ν ) ⎢ ⎪ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ A ⎩ ⎣ 2 ⎧ ∂w ∂w ⎫ ⎛ ∂w ⎞ ⎫⎤ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ − sinψ ⎜ ⎬ + 2λ xy ⎨ζ ⎟ ⎜ ∂ξ ⎟ ⎬⎥ dξdη ⎪ ∂ξ ∂η ⎪ ⎠ ⎪⎥ ⎝ ⎭⎦ ⎩ ⎭ ⎛ ∂w ⎞ − sin ψ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ∂ξ ⎟ ⎠ ⎝ 2 2 (3. 3. 45 . in the skew coordinate system is obtained by summing the strain energy functional and the potential energy functional.29) are based on the stress resultants on an infinitesimal rectangular element as shown in Fig.29) The total potential energy functional. Π . It should be noted that the plastic buckling stress parameters. λ x . λ y .Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis ∂φ y ⎫ ∂φ y ⎫ ∂φ ∂φ x ∂φ δEh 3 ⎧ −ζ x − − ζ sinψ x + ζ ⎬ ⎨2 sinψ ⎬ + cosψ 12 ⎩ ∂η ∂ξ ⎭ ∂ξ ∂η ∂η ⎭ − 2 2 µEh 3 ⎧ ⎪ 6 ∂φ y ⎛ ∂φ x ∂φ y ⎞ ⎛ ∂φ x ∂φ y ⎞ ⎜ζ ⎟ ⎟ −ζ + + ⎨sinψ ⎜ ζ ⎜ ∂η ∂ξ ⎟ ∂ξ ⎟ ∂η ⎜ ∂η ⎪ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎩ 2 + sinψ ∂φ x ∂ξ ∂φ ∂φ y ⎞⎫ ⎛ ∂φ ∂φ ⎪ ⎟⎬ ⎜ 2 sin 2 ψ x − 3ζ sinψ x − 3 sinψ y + 2ζ ⎟⎪ ⎜ ∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ ∂η ⎠⎭ ⎝ ∂φ y ⎫ ∂φ x ∂φ χEh 3 ∂φ x ⎧ − cos ψ −ζ x − ⎨2 sinψ ⎬ ∂ξ ⎭ ∂ξ ∂η 6 ∂ξ ⎩ 2 + cosψ κ 2 Ghb 2 ⎧⎛ ⎪ 4 2 ∂w ∂w ⎞ ⎛ ⎟ + ⎜ ζφ y − ζ sinψφ x − tanψ ⎨⎜ ζ cosψφ x + ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎠ ⎝ ⎪⎝ ⎩ 2 ∂w ⎞ ⎟ + ζ secψ ∂η ⎟ ⎠ ⎫⎤ ⎪ ⎬⎥ dξdη ⎪⎥ ⎭⎦ (3.

12 to 3.η )]Ω ne j =1 x j (3.η ) q =0 i =0 p q (3.η ) q =0 i =0 p q (3.η ) = ∑∑ d mφ m (ξ . and φby are the basic functions which are the product the boundary equations raised to appropriate power so the admissible Ritz functions satisfy the geometric boundary conditions as follows: φbw = ∏ [Γ j (ξ .η )]Ω ne j =1 y j (3.32b) φby = ∏ [Γ j (ξ .η ) q =0 i =0 (3.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis The admissible Ritz displacement functions for the skew coordinate system have the same form as those for the rectangular coordinate system (Eqs.η )]Ω ne j =1 w j (3.32c) 46 . φ m are given by: w φ m = φbw ξ iη q −i x φ m = φbx ξ iη q −i (3.18) except for the notation of the coordinate system.31a) (3.31b) (3.30b) y φ y (ξ .η ) = ∑∑ c mφ m (ξ . 3.30c) w x y where the functions φ m .31c) y φ m = φby ξ iη q −i The functions φbw . φ m . However. for clarity and convenience. these admissible functions for skew coordinate system are repeated as follows: p q w w (ξ .30a) x φ x (ξ . φbx .η ) = ∑∑ emφ m (ξ .32a) φbx = ∏ [Γ j (ξ .

direction or clamped (C ) ⎧0 free ( F ) or simply supported ( S *) or ( S ) in the x .34a) cd K ij = κ 2G 4 Eτ 2 κ 2G 4 Eτ 2 ⎡ ∂φiw x ∂φ w ⎤ φ j − ζ sinψ i φ jx ⎥ dξdη ∫∫ ⎢ ∂ξ ∂η ⎦ A ⎣ ⎡ ∂φiw y ∂φ w ⎤ ζ φ j − sinψ i φ jy ⎥ dξdη ∫∫ ⎢ ∂η ∂ξ ⎦ A ⎣ (3. Ω xj = ⎨ ⎩1 simply supported ( S ) in the x .direction.33c) By substituting the displacement functions given by Eqs. Γ j the boundary equation of the jth edge and Ω w . (3.33a) (3. the resulting eigenvalue equation has the same form as Eq.30a-c) into Eq. Ω y are given by j j ⎧0 free( F ).direction.19). Ωw = ⎨ j ∗ ⎩1 simply supported ( S and S ) or clamped (C ) ⎧0 free ( F ) or simply supported ( S *) or ( S ) in the y .34b) ce K ij = (3. (3.20) and the elements of the matrix [K ] are given by w ⎡ ⎧ 1 ∂φ w ∂φ jw ⎛ ∂φiw ∂φ jw ∂φiw ∂φ jw ⎞⎫ ∂φiw ∂φ j ⎪ ⎪ i ∫∫ ⎢secψ ⎨ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ + ζ ∂η ∂η − sinψ ⎜ ∂ξ ∂η + ∂η ∂ξ ⎟⎬ ⎜ ⎟⎪ ⎪ A ⎢ ⎝ ⎠⎭ ⎩ ⎣ w w ⎧ ⎛ ∂φiw ∂φ jw ∂φiw ∂φ jw ⎞ ⎪ ∂φi ∂φ j ⎟ − sinψ ⎜ + ⎨ζ ⎜ ∂ξ ∂η ∂η ∂ξ ⎟ ⎪ ∂η ∂η ⎩ ⎝ ⎠ K cc ij κ 2G = 4 Eτ 2 w 2 λ x π 2 cosψ ∂φiw ∂φ j λ y π secψ − − 48ζ (1 − ν 2 ) ∂ξ ∂ξ 48(1 − ν 2 ) w ⎫ ⎧ λ xy π 2 ⎪ ∂φiw ∂φ jw ∂φiw ∂φ jw sin 2 ψ ∂φiw ∂φ j ⎪ + + ⎬− 2 ⎨ ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎪ 48(1 − ν ) ⎪ ∂ξ ∂η ∂η ∂ξ ⎭ ⎩ w 2 sinψ ∂φiw ∂φ j ⎫⎤ ⎪ ⎬⎥ dξdη ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎪⎥ ⎭⎦ − (3.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis where ne is the number of edges. (3.direction or clamped (C ) (3.34c) 47 .33b) (3. Ωy = ⎨ j ⎩1 simply supported ( S ) in the y . Ω xj .

34d) y x ⎡⎧ γ ⎛ ∂φ x ∂φ jy ∂φix ∂φ jy ⎞ ∂φ jy ⎫ sin 2 ψ ∂φix ∂φ j ⎪ ⎪ de ⎟ − ζ ∂φi + sinψ ⎜ i K ij = ∫∫ ⎢⎨− tanψ + ⎬ ⎜ ∂η ∂ξ ⎟ ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ ∂ξ ∂η ⎠ ∂η ∂η ⎪ A ⎢⎪ ⎝ ⎩ 12 ⎭ ⎣ ⎧ ∂φix ∂φ jy 2 sinψ ∂φix ∂φ jy ⎫ ⎧ ∂φix ∂φ jy sinψ ∂φix ∂φ jy ⎫ δ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ − + cosψ ⎨ − ⎬ ⎬ + cosψ ⎨ ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎪ 12 12 ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎪ ⎪ ∂η ∂ξ ⎪ ∂ξ ∂η ⎭ ⎩ ⎭ ⎩ β + y y y ∂φ x ∂φ j ∂φ x ∂φ j χ µ ⎧ 3 sin 2 ψ ∂φix ∂φ j ⎪ +ζ i + ⎨ cos 2 ψ i ∂ξ ∂ξ 12 ⎪ ζ ∂η ∂η 12ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎩ ⎤ ⎛ ∂φix ∂φ jy ∂φix ∂φ jy ⎞⎫ κ 2 G ⎟⎪ − −2 sinψ ⎜ sinψ cosψφ ix φ jy ⎥ dξdη + ⎬ ⎜ ∂ξ ∂η ∂η ∂ξ ⎟⎪ 4 Eτ 2 ⎥ ⎝ ⎠⎭ ⎦ (3.34e) y y y ⎡γ ⎧ sin 2 ψ ∂φiy ∂φ jy ∂φ y ∂φ j ∂φ y ∂φ j ∂φ y ∂φ j ⎫ ⎪ ⎪ ee − sinψ i − sinψ i +ζ i K ij = ∫∫ ⎢ secψ ⎨ ⎬ ∂ξ ∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ ∂ξ ∂η ∂η ∂η ⎪ ⎪ ζ A ⎢ ⎩ ⎭ ⎣12 y y y y δ cosψ ∂φiy ∂φ j µ ⎧ 2 sinψ ∂φiy ∂φ j ∂φiy ∂φ j ∂φiy ∂φ j ⎫ ⎪ ⎪ + + ⎨ + + ⎬dξdη 12 ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ 12 ⎪ ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ ∂ξ ∂η ∂η ∂ξ ⎪ ⎭ ⎩ 48 .Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis K dd ij x x ⎡α ⎧ sin 2 ψ ∂φix ∂φ jx ∂φix ∂φ j γ 1 ∂φix ∂φ j ⎪ 3 = ∫∫ ⎢ cos ψ + tanψ sinψ ⎨ − sinψ ζ ∂ξ ∂ξ 12 ∂ξ ∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ ⎪ ζ A ⎢ ⎣12 ⎩ x x x ⎧2 ∂φix ∂φ j ∂φix ∂φ j ⎫ β ∂φix ∂φ j ⎪ ⎪ − sinψ +ζ ⎬ + sinψ cosψ ⎨ sinψ ∂ξ ∂η ∂η ∂η ⎪ 12 ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎪ζ ⎭ ⎩ x x x x ⎧4 ∂φix ∂φ j ∂φix ∂φ j ⎫ δ ∂φix ∂φ j ∂φix ∂φ j ⎪ ⎪ 2 − − +ζ ⎬ + cosψ ⎨ sin ψ ∂η ∂ξ ∂ξ ∂η ⎪ 12 ∂ξ ∂ξ ∂η ∂η ⎪ζ ⎭ ⎩ ⎛ ∂φix ∂φ jx ∂φix ∂φ jx ⎞⎫ χ ⎧ x ∂φ jx ∂φ ix ∂φ jx ⎜ ⎟⎪ + cos 2 ψ ⎪ ∂φi − sinψ + + ⎬ ⎨ ⎜ ∂η ∂ξ ∂ξ ∂η ⎟⎪ 12 ∂ξ ∂η ⎪ ∂η ∂ξ ⎝ ⎠⎭ ⎩ x x ⎧ ∂φ x ∂φ j 3 sinψ 4 sinψ ∂φix ∂φ j ⎫ µ ⎪ ⎪ + sinψ ⎨− ζ i + ⎬ ζ 2 ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎪ 6 ∂η ∂η ⎪ ⎭ ⎩ x ⎤ 2 sin 2 ψ ∂φix ∂φ j ⎫ κ 2 G ⎪ − ζ cosψφ ix φ jx ⎥ dξdη ⎬+ ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎪ 4 Eτ 2 ζ ⎥ ⎭ ⎦ ⎛ ∂φix ∂φ jx ∂φ ix ∂φ jx ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ + ⎜ ∂η ∂ξ ∂ξ ∂η ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (3.

Based on the assumptions of the Mindlin plate theory. z ) = zφ r ( r .θ ) where u r . Therefore. uθ are in-plane displacements in the r and θ directions. the transformation procedure involves some lengthy mathematical manipulations.…. j = 1.34f) where i. θ ) (3. z ) = w(r . The corresponding straindisplacement relations are given by ∂φ r ∂r ε rr = z (3.N.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis + ⎤ κ 2G ζ cosψφ iy φ jy ⎥ dξdη 2 4 Eτ ⎦ (3.θ . However.θ . 2.36b) 49 .35a) (3.5 Ritz Formulation in Polar Coordinate System The energy functionals in polar coordinates can be obtained from the corresponding Cartesian coordinates equations by using the relations x = r cos θ and y = r sin θ . z ) = zφθ (r . θ . respectively and φ r . the procedure would be simpler if the energy functional is derived directly from the strain-displacement relations in the polar coordinates. φθ are rotation about θ and r axes respectively. the displacement components in the polar coordinates can be expressed as u r ( r . 3.θ ) w(r .36a) ε θθ = ⎜ z ⎛ ∂φθ ⎞ + φr ⎟ r ⎝ ∂θ ⎠ (3.35c) uθ (r .35b) (3.

36e) In view of Eq. the strain energy functional and potential energy functional can be expressed in polar coordinates as: ∂φ ⎞ γEh 3 ⎛ ∂φ ⎞ 1 ⎡ αEh 3 ⎛ ∂φ r ⎞ β Eh 3 ∂φ r ⎛ U = ⎢ ∫∫ ⎜φr + θ ⎟ + ⎜φr + θ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ + 2 ∂θ ⎠ ∂θ ⎠ 12r ⎝ 2 ⎢ A 12 ⎝ ∂r ⎠ 6r ∂r ⎝ ⎣ 2 2 δEh 3 ⎛ ∂φθ ∂φ r ⎞ µEh 3 − ⎜ φθ − ⎟ + ∂r ∂θ ⎠ 6 12r 2 ⎝ ⎞ φθ ⎟− 2 ⎟ r ⎠ 2 ⎧ 1 ∂φθ ⎨ ⎩ r ∂θ ⎛ ∂φθ 1 ∂φ r ⎜ ⎜ ∂ξ + r ∂θ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ ⎛ 1 ∂φ 1 ∂φθ + φr ⎜ 2 r + ⎜ r ∂η r ∂ξ ⎝ + ∂φθ − φθ ∂ξ ∂φ ⎛ ⎜φr + θ ⎜ ∂η ⎝ ⎞⎫ χEh 3 ∂φ r ⎛ 1 ∂φ r ⎟⎬ + ⎜ ⎟ 6 ∂ξ ⎜ r ∂η ⎠⎭ ⎝ 2 2 ⎧⎛ ⎞ 1 ∂w ⎞ ⎫⎤ ∂w ⎞ ⎛ ⎪ ⎪ ⎟ + κ 2 Gh ⎨⎜ φ r + + ⎜ φθ + ⎟ ⎬⎥ rdrdθ ⎟ ⎟ r ∂θ ⎠ ⎪⎥ ∂r ⎠ ⎝ ⎪⎝ ⎠ ⎩ ⎭⎦ (3.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis γ rθ = z⎜ ⎛ 1 ∂φ r ∂φθ φθ ⎞ + − ⎟ r ⎠ ∂r ⎝ r ∂θ ∂w ∂r 1 ∂w r ∂θ (3. η) by the following relations: R [(1 + ζ ) + (1 − ζ )ξ ] 2 r= (3.36c) γ rz = φ r + γ θz = φθ + (3.36a-e). θ) can be transformed into a set of nondimensional coordinates (ξ.38) where σ rr . (3. σ θθ are the inplane stresses in the radial and tangential directions.39a) 50 .37) V =− 2 2 1 ⎡ 1 ⎛ ∂w ⎞ 2 ∂w ∂w ⎤ ⎛ ∂w ⎞ σ rr h⎜ ⎟ + σ θθ h 2 ⎜ ⎟ + τ rθ h ⎢ ⎥rdrdθ r ∂r ∂θ ⎥ 2 ∫∫ ⎢ r ⎝ ∂θ ⎠ ⎝ ∂r ⎠ A ⎣ ⎦ (3. The polar coordinates (r.36d) (3. respectively and τ rθ is the shear stress.

Ω = 2π Ω R ζR Ω R (c) Sectorial plate ζ = 0. Ω ≠ 0 (d) Annular sectorial plate ζ ≠ 0. Note that. Ω ≠ 0 Fig. 3. 3. in order to avoid singularity problems in the case of a circular plate. R r θ R ζR (a) Circular plate ζ = 0.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis θ = Ωη 1 2 (3.4 Definitions of ζ and Ω 51 .g. Ω) are defined in order to get the limits of integration from -1 to 1 as shown in Fig. 10-7) and the inner edge is made free. Ω = 2π (b) Annular plate ζ ≠ 0. ζ needs to be set to a very small number (e.39b) where the parameters (ζ.4.

becomes ⎡ (1 − ζ ) ⎛ 1 ∂w ⎞ π 2 Eh 3 Ω ⎛ ∂w ⎞ ⎜ V =− ⎢λ r ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ∂ξ ⎟ + λθ Ω ⎜ r ∂η ⎟ ⎟ 2 ∫∫ 24(1 − ν ) A ⎢ (1 − ζ ) ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠ ⎣ 2 2 + 2λ rθ 1 ∂w ∂w ⎤ r dξdη r ∂ξ ∂η ⎥ ⎦ (3.40a) λr = σ hR 2 τ hR 2 σ rr hR 2 . w = . the strain energy functional can be expressed as (1 − ζ )Ω ⎡αEh 3 U= ∫∫ ⎢ 12 8 ⎢ A ⎣ 2 ⎛ 2 ∂φ r ⎜ ⎜ (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ ⎝ 2 ⎞ ∂φ r ⎛ 2 2 ∂φθ βEh 3 ⎟ + ⎜φr + ⎜ ⎟ 6 (1 − ζ )r ∂ξ ⎝ Ω ∂η ⎠ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ∂φθ ⎜φ + + 2 ⎜ r Ω ∂η 12r ⎝ γEh 3 ⎛ ⎞ δ ⎟ + ⎟ 12r 2 ⎠ ⎛ 2r ∂φθ 2 ∂φ r ⎜ φθ − − ⎜ (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ Ω ∂η ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 + µEh 3 ⎧ 2 ∂φθ ⎛ 2 ∂φθ 2 ∂φ r ⎜ ⎨ ⎜ (1 − ζ )r ∂ξ + Ωr 2 ∂η 6 ⎩ Ω ∂η ⎝ ∂φθ ⎞ 2 ⎛ 2 2 ∂φθ ⎟ − 2 φθ ⎜ φ r + ⎜ ⎟ r Ω ∂η (1 − ζ )r ∂ξ ⎠ ⎝ ⎞⎫ ⎟⎬ ⎟ ⎠⎭ ⎞ ⎛ 2 ∂φ r ⎟ + 2φ r ⎜ ⎜ Ωr 2 ∂η ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ + + χEh 3 6 2 ∂φ r (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ ⎛ 2 ∂φ r 2 ∂φθ ⎜ ⎜ Ωr ∂η + (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ − φθ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ (3.τ = .42) 52 . V. the following nondimensional terms are adopted r h w . A = dξdη R R R r= (3.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis For generality and convenience. λrθ = rθ 2 π 2D π D π D (3.41) 2 2 ⎧⎛ 2 ∂w ⎞ ⎛ 2 ∂w ⎞ ⎫⎤ ⎪ ⎪ ⎟ + ⎜ φθ + ⎟ ⎬⎥ r dξdη + κ GhR ⎨⎜ φ r + ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ Ωr ∂η ⎠ ⎪⎥ (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ ⎠ ⎝ ⎪⎝ ⎩ ⎭⎦ 2 2 The potential energy functional. λθ = θθ2 .40b) In view of aforementioned nondimensional terms.

45c) 53 .η ) q =0 i =0 (3.η ) = ∑∑ emφ m (ξ . φbr .η ) = ∑∑ c mφ m (ξ . w r θ The functions φ m .Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis The Ritz displacement functions can be written as follows: p q w w (ξ .η ) = ∑∑ d mφ m (ξ .η )]Ω ne j =1 ne r j (3. dm. em the unknown coefficients and the subscript m is given by Eq.43b) θ φθ (ξ .44b) (3. cm.η )]Ω ne j =1 w j (3.44c) θ θ φ m = φb ξ iη q −i θ in which the basic functions φbw . and φb are the product of boundary equations with appropriate power as follows: φbw = ∏ [Γ j (ξ .η ) q =0 i =0 p q (3.43c) where p is the degree of the complete polynomial space. φ m are given as follows: w φ m = φbwξ iη q −i r φ m = φbr ξ iη q −i (3. φ m .43a) r φ r (ξ .45a) φbr = ∏ [Γ j (ξ .8).η )]Ω j =1 θ j (3.η ) q =0 i =0 p q (3.45b) θ φb = ∏ [Γ j (ξ . (3.44a) (3.

Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis where ne is the number of edges.47c) r ⎡ αΩr ∂φir ∂φ j Ω(1 − ζ ) ⎧ γ r r κ 2 Gr r r ⎫ dd + φi φi ⎬ K ij = ∫∫ ⎢ φi φ j + ⎨ 4 12r Eτ 2 ⎣12(1 − ζ ) ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎩ ⎭ A r r βΩ ⎧ r ∂φ j ∂φir r ⎫ (1 − ζ )δ ∂φir ∂φ j ⎪ ⎪ + + φj ⎬+ ⎨φi ∂ξ 24 ⎪ ∂ξ ⎪ 12Ωr ∂η ∂η ⎩ ⎭ 54 . Γ j the boundary equation of the jth edge and Ω w . Ω θj = ⎨ ⎩1 simply supported ( S ) or clamped (C ) The elements of matrix [K ] are given by w w ⎡ κ 2 G ⎧ Ωr ∂φiw ∂φ j (1 − ζ ) ∂φiw ∂φ j ⎫ ⎪ ⎪ cc K ij = ∫∫ ⎢ 2 ⎨ + ⎬ Ωr ∂η ∂η ⎪ Eτ ⎪ (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ ∂ξ A ⎣ ⎭ ⎩ (3.46b) (3. Ω rj = ⎨ ⎩1 clamped (C ) ⎧0 free ( F ) or simply supported ( S *).47a) K cd ij κ 2 G Ωr ∂φiw r = ∫∫ φ j dξdη Eτ 2 2 ∂ξ A κ 2 G (1 − ζ ) ∂φiw θ φ j dξdη 2 ∂η Eτ 2 (3.47b) ce K ij = ∫∫ A (3. Ω rj .46c) − ⎧ λ r Ωr ∂φiw ∂φ jw λθ (1 − ζ ) ∂φiw ∂φ jw π2 ⎪ + 2 ⎨ Ωr ∂η ∂η 12(1 − ν ) ⎪ (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎩ ⎛ ∂φiw ∂φ jw ∂φiw ∂φ jw ⎞⎫⎤ ⎟⎪⎥ dξdη + λ rθ ⎜ + ⎬ ⎜ ∂ξ ∂η ∂η ∂ξ ⎟⎪⎥ ⎝ ⎠ ⎭⎦ (3. Ωw = ⎨ j ∗ ⎩1 simply supported ( S and S ) or clamped (C ) ⎧0 free ( F ) or simply supported ( S *) or ( S ).46a) (3. Ωθj are given by j ⎧0 free( F ).

j = 1.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis r ∂φ jr ⎞ χ ⎛ ∂φir ∂φ jr ∂φir ∂φ jr ⎞⎤ ⎛ (1 − ζ ) µ ⎞⎛ ∂φ i r r ⎜ ⎟+ ⎜ ⎟⎥ dξdη + +⎜ φ j + φi ⎟ ∂η ⎟ 12 ⎜ ∂ξ ∂η ∂η ∂ξ ⎟⎥ 24r ⎠⎜ ∂η ⎝ ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠⎦ (3. the deflection and rotations of the plate may be written as (Irie et al.47d) ⎡ β ∂φir ∂φ θ γ (1 − ζ ) r ∂φ θ δ ∂φir ∂φ θ G (1 − ζ ) ∂φir θ j j j de K ij = ∫∫ ⎢ φj + + − φi 12 ∂ξ ∂η 24r 24 Er ∂η ∂η 12 ∂η ∂ξ A ⎢ ⎣ θ θ µ ⎛ (1 − ζ ) ∂φir ∂φ j Ω r ∂φ j (1 − ζ )Ω r θ ⎞ φi φ j ⎟ + ⎜ + φi − ⎟ 12 ⎜ r Ω ∂η ∂η 2 4r ∂ξ ⎠ ⎝ θ χΩ ⎛ 2r ∂φir ∂φ j ∂φir θ ⎞⎤ ⎜ φ j ⎟⎥ dξdη − ⎟⎥ 24 ⎜ (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎝ ⎠⎦ + (3. 2. For the special cases of circular and annular plates.47e) K ee ij ⎡ (1 − ζ )γ ∂φiθ ∂φ θ κ 2 GΩr (1 − ζ ) θ θ GΩ ⎧ r ∂φiθ ∂φ θ ⎪ j j = ∫∫ ⎢ + φi φ j + ⎨ 2 12 E ⎪ (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ ∂ξ 4 Eτ A ⎢ ⎣ 12Ωr ∂η ∂η ⎩ ∂φ θ ⎞⎫ (1 − ζ ) θ θ 1 ⎛ ∂φ iθ θ j θ ⎜ ⎟⎪ + φ + φi φi φ j − ⎬ ⎜ ∂ξ j ∂ξ ⎟⎪ 4r 2⎝ ⎠⎭ + θ θ ∂φ θ ⎞⎫⎤ µ ⎧ ∂φiθ ∂φ j ∂φiθ ∂φ j (1 − ζ ) ⎛ ∂φiθ θ ⎪ j ⎟⎪⎥ dξdη ⎜ φ j + φiθ − + ⎬ ⎨ ⎜ ∂η ∂η ∂ξ ∂η ⎟⎪⎥ 12 ⎪ ∂ξ ∂η 2r ⎝ ⎠ ⎭⎦ ⎩ (3.…. 1982) w (ξ .η ) = φθ (ξ ) sin(nπη ) where n is the arbitrary integer number which represents the number of nodal diameter..47f) where i.48b) (3.η ) = φ r (ξ ) cos(nπη ) φθ (ξ .η ) = w (ξ ) cos(nπη ) (3. 55 .48a) (3.N .48c) φ r (ξ .

49a) ⎧0 S 2 = ∫ sin 2 (nπη )dη = ⎨ ⎩1 −1 1 when n = 0 when n > 0 for n = 0.52a) φ r (ξ ) = ∑ d iφir i =1 (3.49a-c).50) (3.51) In this special case. (3..49c) In views of Eqs.52b) 56 .. 2.. 1.Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis It should be noted that the trigonometric functions which appear in the energy integration can be calculated as follows: 1 ⎧1 when n = 0 S1 = ∫ cos 2 (nπη )dη = ⎨ ⎩2 when n > 0 −1 (3. the Ritz displacement functions may be assumed as: N w (ξ ) = ∑ ciφiw i =1 N (3. (3.49b) −1 ∫ cos(nπη ) sin(nπη )dη = 0 1 (3. .. the strain energy and potential energy functionals can be expressed as (1 − ζ )Ω ⎡αEh 3 ⎛ 2 ∂φ r U= ∫∫ ⎢ 12 S1 ⎜ (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ ⎜ 8 ⎝ A ⎢ ⎣ 2 ⎞ ∂φ 2 β Eh 3 ⎟ + S1 r (φ r + nφθ ) ⎟ 6 (1 − ζ )r ∂ξ ⎠ 2 + γEh 3 12r 2 S1 (φ r + nφθ ) 2 ⎞ ⎛ 2r ∂φθ S 2 ⎜ φθ − + + nφ r ⎟ 2 ⎟ ⎜ (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ 12r ⎠ ⎝ δ 2 2 ⎧⎛ 2 ∂w ⎞ 1 ⎪ ⎪ ⎞ ⎫⎤ ⎛ ⎟ + S 2 ⎜ φθ − nw ⎟ ⎬⎥ r dξ + κ GhR S1 ⎨⎜ φ r + ⎟ ⎜ r (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ ⎠ ⎠ ⎪⎥ ⎝ ⎪⎝ ⎭⎦ ⎩ 2 2 2 2 ⎧ ⎛ 2 ∂w ⎞ (1 − ζ )Ω π 2 Eh 3 ⎪ ⎪ ⎛1 ⎞ ⎫ ⎟ + S 2 λθ ⎜ nw ⎟ ⎬r dξdη V =− Sλ ⎜ 2 ∫∫ ⎨ 1 r ⎜ ⎟ 8 12(1 − ν ) A ⎪ ⎝r ⎠ ⎪ ⎝ (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ ⎠ ⎩ ⎭ (3.48a-c) and (3..

The functions φiw .53c) φ = ∏ [Γ j (ξ )]Ω w b ne j =1 w j (3. φir . d i . and φb are the basic functions given by (3. ei are the unknown coefficients. (3.54a) φbr = ∏ [Γ j (ξ )]Ω ne j =1 ne r j (3. j The elements of matrix [K ] in Eq.53a) (3. φbr .54c) where ne is the number of edges.52c) where N is the degree of the one-dimensional polynomial and ci .53b) (3.54b) φbθ = ∏ [Γ j (ξ )]Ω j =1 θ j (3.46a-c).20) become w ⎫ ⎡ κ 2 G ⎧ Ωr ∂φ w ∂φ j (1 − ζ )Ω 2 ⎪ ⎪ cc + K ij = ∫∫ ⎢ 2 ⎨ S1 i n S 2φiwφ jw ⎬ ∂ξ ∂ξ 4r Eτ ⎪ (1 − ζ ) ⎪ A ⎣ ⎩ ⎭ 57 . φiθ are the product of the one-dimensional polynomial and basic functions as follows φiw = φbwξ i φir = φbr ξ i φiθ = φbθ ξ i θ where the functions φbw . Γ j the boundary equation of the jth edge and Ω w . Ω θj are given by Eqs. Ω rj .Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis φθ (ξ ) = ∑ eiφiθ i =1 N (3. (3.

55e) K ee ij ⎡ (1 − ζ )γ ∂φiθ ∂φ θ κ 2 GΩr (1 − ζ ) θ θ GΩ ⎧ r ∂φiθ ∂φ θ ⎪ j j + = ∫∫ ⎢ φi φ j + ⎨ 2 12 E ⎪ (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ ∂ξ 4 Eτ A ⎢ ⎣ 12Ωr ∂η ∂η ⎩ ∂φ θ ⎞⎫ (1 − ζ ) θ θ 1 ⎛ ∂φ iθ θ j θ ⎜ ⎟⎪ + φi φ j − φ + φi ⎬ ⎜ ∂ξ j ∂ξ ⎟⎪ 4r 2⎝ ⎠⎭ + θ θ ∂φ θ ⎞⎫⎤ µ ⎧ ∂φiθ ∂φ j ∂φiθ ∂φ j (1 − ζ ) ⎛ ∂φiθ θ ⎪ j ⎟⎪⎥ dξdη ⎜ φ j + φiθ − + ⎬ ⎨ ⎜ ∂η ∂η ∂ξ ∂η ⎟⎪⎥ 12 ⎪ ∂ξ ∂η 2r ⎝ ⎠ ⎭⎦ ⎩ (3. 2.55f) where i.55d) K de ij θ θ ⎡ βΩ ∂φ θ δΩ ∂φir ∂φ j G (1 − ζ ) ∂φir θ ∂φir ∂φ j γ (1 − ζ )Ω j r nS1 nS1φi nS 2 φj + + − = ∫∫ ⎢ 48r 24 24 Er ∂η ∂η ∂ξ ∂η ∂ξ ∂η A ⎢ ⎣ 24 θ θ µ ⎛ (1 − ζ ) ∂φir ∂φ j Ω r ∂φ j (1 − ζ )Ω r θ ⎞ φi φ j ⎟ + ⎜ + φi − ⎟ 12 ⎜ r Ω ∂η ∂η 2 4r ∂ξ ⎠ ⎝ θ χΩ ⎛ 2r ∂φir ∂φ j ∂φir θ ⎞⎤ ⎜ − φ j ⎟⎥ dξdη ⎟⎥ 24 ⎜ (1 − ζ ) ∂ξ ∂ξ ∂ξ ⎝ ⎠⎦ + (3.N .55a) ⎦ cd K ij = ∫∫ A κ 2 G Ωr ∂φiw r S1 φ j dξdη ∂ξ Eτ 2 2 (3. j = 1. 58 .Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis − w ⎫⎤ ⎧ λ r Ωr ∂φ w ∂φ j λθ (1 − ζ )Ω 2 π2 ⎪ ⎪ S1 i n S 2φiwφ jw ⎬⎥ dξdη + 2 ⎨ 4r ∂ξ ∂ξ 12(1 − ν ) ⎪ (1 − ζ ) ⎪⎥ ⎩ ⎭ (3.….55c) K dd ij ⎤ ⎧ r ∂φ jr ∂φir r ⎫ (1 − ζ )Ωδ 2 ⎪ ⎪ + + S1 ⎨φi φj ⎬+ n S 2φ ir φ jr ⎥ dξdη ∂ξ 24 ⎪ ∂ξ 48r ⎪ ⎥ ⎩ ⎭ ⎦ βΩ (3.55b) K ce ij κ 2 G (1 − ζ )Ω nS 2φiwφ θ dξdη = ∫∫ j 2 4 Eτ A r ⎫ ⎡ αΩr ∂φir ∂φ j Ω(1 − ζ ) ⎧ γ κ 2 Gr = ∫∫ ⎢ + S1 S1φir φ jr + S1φir φir ⎬ ⎨ 2 12(1 − ζ ) ∂ξ ∂ξ 4 Eτ ⎩12r ⎭ A ⎣ (3.

χ . δ . the matrix [K ] depends nonlinearly on the stresses since the parameters α . the Sturm sequence iteration method with bisection strategy was adopted.g. µ . 1978). It was found that the built-in function “Eigenvalues” in MATHEMATICA (Wolfram. a simple bisection algorithm is used to solve 59 . which are less than λ trial is equal to the number of negative eigenvalues of [K (λ trial )] . G contains the buckling stress term. γ . Upon identifying the value of λ trial that gives one negative eigenvalue. the following procedure was adopted for the calculations of plastic buckling stresses. 1999) can be used instead of Gaussian elimination. the value of λ trial which gives one negative eigenvalue is sought. the aforementioned eigenvalue problems can be expressed in the standard form of generalized eigenvalue problem and a standard eigenvalue routine. The use of built-in function “Eigenvalues” is found to be faster than using the Gaussian elimination in the determination of number of eigenvalues that are smaller than the trial stress. 1974). the Sturm sequence procedure is done by the Gaussian elimination which reduces the matrix in to an upper triangular matrix form (Gupta. A trial stress value of λ is first assumed and the eigenvalues of matrix [K (λtrial )] are calculated. Normally. β .Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis 3. The number of sign changes in the diagonal elements of the triangular matrix indicates the number of eigenvalues of the matrix that are smaller than the trial stress level. can be used to solve the problem. for plastic buckling. In order to solve this nonlinear eigenvalue problem.6 Solution Method for Solving Eigenvalue Problem For elastic buckling. Therefore. for e. However. Since the number of eigenvalues of [K ]. EISPAC (Smith et al..

The program codes and detailed explanations of the codes are given in Appendix A. 3.7 Computer Programs Three computer programs have been written in MATHEMATICA language for the foregoing Ritz formulations. The last program.33a-f) and it is to compute the plastic buckling stress of skew plates. is for determining the plastic buckling stresses of rectangular. called BUCKRITZPOLAR. called BUCKRITZSKEW. 3. called BUCKRITZRE. Another program. is written based on the skew coordinate formulations (Eqs. 3. the lowest eigenvalue of the matrix [K ] will not be missed. elliptical and trapezoidal plates and it is based on the aforementioned rectangular coordinate formulations (Eqs. 60 .Ritz Method for Plastic Buckling Analysis the characteristic equation of the matrix [K ] until the desired accuracy of the solution is achieved.23af). triangular. In this way. is used to solve the plastic buckling problems of circular and annular plates and it is based on the polar coordinate system. One program.

The preparation of the input file for the program code is so simple that only the basic functions and desired degree of polynomial need to be defined. biaxial compressive stress ( σ x . clamped and free edges. 4. shear stress ( τ xy ) and combinations of these stresses as shown in Fig. σ y ). apart from the usual information on the material and geometric properties of the plate such as aspect 61 . The Ritz program code is called BUCKRITZRE and it is given in Appendix A. The program code is designed to handle Mindlin plates subjected to any combinations of in-plane and shear stresses and arbitrary boundary conditions.1 Introduction This chapter is concerned with the plastic buckling analysis of rectangular Mindlin plates under uniaxial compressive stress ( σ x ).CHAPTER 4 RECTANGULAR PLATES 4. The Ritz method associated the rectangular Cartesian coordinate system is employed for the plastic bifurcation buckling analyses of such plates.1. The boundary conditions of the plate edges may take on any combination of simply supported.

E = 10. a clamped boundary condition at x = b / 2 and a simply supported boundary condition at y = b / 2 as shown in Fig. comparison studies are carried out against existing plastic buckling solutions wherever available.33. 4. a typical aerospace material of Al 7075 T6 is adopted.7 = 70 ksi.1.2 = 67 ksi and the Ramberg-Osgood parameters k = 3/7 and c = 9.5 × 10 6 psi. For brevity and convenience. η σy τxy S x. In order to verify the results. σ 0. σ 0.1 FSCS rectangular plate under in-plane compressive stresses In computing the buckling solutions.Rectangular Plates ratio and thickness-to-width ratio. The effect of thickness-to-width ratio. a simply supported boundary condition at y = −b / 2 . aspect ratio. loading ratio and material properties on the plastic buckling behaviour of rectangular plates are investigated. ξ σx F C S σx a σy b Fig. y. 62 . The sample basic functions for rectangular Mindlin plates with various boundary conditions are given in Table 4. the boundary conditions of the plate will be represented by a four-letter designation. Its material properties are: Poisson’s ratio ν = 0. For example. 4.1.2 . a FSCS plate will have a free boundary condition at x = − a / 2 .

G.1 Sample basic functions for rectangular plates with various boundary conditions Boundary conditions Basic functions φbw SSSS (ξ + 1)1 (η + 1)1 (ξ − 1)1 (η − 1)1 φbx φby φbw (ξ + 1) 0 (η + 1)1 (ξ − 1) 0 (η − 1)1 (ξ + 1)1 (η + 1) 0 (ξ − 1)1 (η − 1) 0 (ξ + 1)1 (η + 1)1 (ξ − 1)1 (η − 1)1 (ξ + 1) 1 (η + 1) 1 (ξ − 1) 1 (η − 1) 1 CCCC φbx φby φbw (ξ + 1) 1 (η + 1) 1 (ξ − 1) 1 (η − 1) 1 (ξ + 1) 1 (η + 1) 1 (ξ − 1) 0 (η − 1) 1 CSFS φbx φby (ξ + 1) 1 (η + 1) 1 (ξ − 1) 0 (η − 1) 1 (ξ + 1) 1 (η + 1) 0 (ξ − 1) 0 (η − 1) 0 4.1a) 63 . (3.20). β . δ . χ . γ . Therefore.2 Uniaxial and Biaxial Compression For generality. the plastic buckling stress parameter λ = σ c hb 2 /(π 2 D) can be determined by solving the eigenvalue equation given in Eq. σ y is expressed in terms of σ x as σ y = β σ x . the loading ratio β = 0 represents an applied uniaxial stress while β = 1 indicate an applied uniform biaxial stress. Since τ xy = 0 . µ used in stressstrain relations become simpler and can now be expressed in an explicit form given by for the deformation theory of plasticity (DT) ⎡ ⎛ E E ⎞ βσ 2 ⎤ 3E + (1 − 2ν )⎢2 − (1 − 2ν ) t − 3⎜1 − t ⎟ 2x ⎥ ⎜ E ⎟ σ Es E s ⎠ ⎝ ⎣ ⎦ ρ= (4. the parameters α .Rectangular Plates Table 4. For a given value of loading ratio β .

β .1g) ρ = (5 − 4ν ) − (1 − 2ν ) 2 (4.Rectangular Plates α= ⎛ E ⎞σ 2 ⎤ 1⎡ 4 − 3⎜1 − t ⎟ x2 ⎥ ⎢ ⎜ E ⎟σ ρ⎣ s ⎠ ⎝ ⎦ 2 ⎛ Et Et ⎞ β σ x ⎤ 1⎡ ⎟ 2 ⎥ ⎢2 − 2(1 − 2ν ) − 3⎜1 − ⎜ E ⎟ σ E ρ⎣ s ⎠ ⎝ ⎦ 2 ⎛ E ⎞ β 2σ x ⎤ 1⎡ 4 − 3⎜1 − t ⎟ ⎢ ⎜ E ⎟ σ2 ⎥ ρ⎣ s ⎠ ⎝ ⎦ (4. χ . the expressions of α .2d) δ= G 1 = E 2(1 + ν ) (4.2c) γ = (4. 64 . δ .1d) δ= G = E 1 ⎛ E ⎞ 2ν + ⎜ 3 − 1⎟ ⎜ E ⎟ ⎝ s ⎠ (4.2a) α= 2 1⎡ ⎛ E ⎞σ ⎤ 4 − 3⎜1 − t ⎟ x2 ⎥ ⎢ ρ⎣ E ⎠σ ⎦ ⎝ 2 E 1⎡ ⎛ E ⎞ βσ ⎤ 2 − 2(1 − 2ν ) t − 3⎜1 − t ⎟ 2x ⎥ ⎢ ρ⎣ E E⎠ σ ⎦ ⎝ 2 2 1⎡ ⎛ E ⎞β σx ⎤ 4 − 3⎜1 − t ⎟ ⎢ ⎥ E⎠ σ2 ⎦ ρ⎣ ⎝ (4. G.1e) χ =µ =0 σ = σ x 1− β + β 2 for the incremental theory of plasticity (IT) 2 Et ⎛ E ⎞ βσ − 3(1 − 2ν )⎜1 − t ⎟ 2x E E⎠ σ ⎝ (4.2e) Noted that by setting E s = E . µ based on DT reduced to those corresponding to IT.1b) β= (4.2b) β= (4.1c) γ = (4.1f) (4. γ .

It can be seen that the solutions for SSSS plates converge very fast while a higher polynomial 65 . for the special case of uniformly stressed simply supported rectangular plate (i. For a square plate ( ζ = 1 ). 2001a).e. Therefore Eq. the integers m and n become unity for the lowest plastic buckling stress parameter λc . the exact expression of plastic buckling stress parameter λ can be expressed in a neat transcendental equation given by 12ακ 2 (1 − v 2 )( m 2 + n 2ζ 2 ) E 12ζ 2κ 2 + π 2ατ 2 ( m 2 + n 2ζ 2 ) G λ= (4. Such supported rectangular plates allow us to verify the convergence of the Ritz solutions because of the availability of analytical solutions (Wang et al.2 to 4. β = 1 ). are presented in Tables 4. the analysis given in Wang (2001a) can be further simplified by noting that ( α − β − 2G / E ) = 0.5 for comparison purposes.5.3) furnishes 12ακ 2 (1 − v 2 ) λc = E 6κ 2 + π 2ατ 2 G (4.2 to 4.4) The analytical solutions. It is worth noting that. Durban and Zuckerman (1999) and Wang et al. (4.3) where m and n are the integers depending on the buckling mode shape of the plate. Convergence and comparison studies for square (a/b = 1) and rectangular (a/b = 2) plates under uniaxial and biaxial compression are shown in Tables 4.Rectangular Plates Rectangular plates with two opposite sides simply supported while the other two sides take on any combination of boundary conditions are first considered. After some simplifications. which were derived by Handleman and Prager (1948). Shrivastava (1979). (2001a).

4581 4.7954 3. (2001a) τ = 0. However.8455 1.0177 1. the solutions from the Ritz method converge well when the degree of polynomial p = 12 is used.0000 4.9632 1.9616 4. the results from Shrivasta (1979) are slightly higher than the present results. Hence.4636 3.5278 3.001 IT DT 4. This shows that the accuracy of plastic buckling results determined by the Ritz method is excellent.9144 3.8407 2.0000 4. This is attributed by the fact that Shrivasta’s results shown in Tables 4.5950 0.2 are recalculated from the truncated expressions presented in his paper. Generally.050 IT DT 3.2 Comparison and convergence study of λ for square plates under uniform uniaxial loading with various boundary conditions.5193 1.8409 1.4969 2.0149 1. Table 4.8419 1.9632 1.8388 1. BC p 2 4 6 8 Wang et al.9616 τ = 0.1990 0.9631 1. (2001a) Shrivastava (1979) Handleman and Prager (1948) 8 10 12 14 Wang et al.4955 2. It was found that the present results are slightly lower than the corresponding results of Handleman and Prager (1948) and Durban and Zuckerman (1999).1 IT DT 3.0000 4.9632 1. It can be seen that the converged results are found to be within 0.8254 τ = 0.9631 1.4581 4.9144 3.0021 4.7627 0.0000 4. (2001).1908 0.7958 3.7619 0.0021 4.5740 1.0151 1.7700 SSSS FSFS 66 .7718 2.8256 1.0000 1.8058 __ 1.8265 1.7954 2.0149 0.7954 3.7619 0.7619 0.0000 4.9144 0.8735 3.9632 1.4955 3.9631 1.0000 4.9631 1.9250 3.9205 __ 0.8552 1.08% of analytical solutions given by Wang et al. This is due to the neglect of the effect of transverse shear deformation in their analysis. the degree of polynomial p = 12 will be used for all subsequent calculations.0000 __ 1.1908 0.0380 1.8299 1.4955 2.9144 3.0000 4.1908 3.Rectangular Plates degree is needed for plates with free edges.

0000 1.0000 4.3397 3.0506 3.2828 2.0000 __ 2.0334 1.0503 3.1854 2.001 τ = 0.2310 2.4759 2.0198 2.7954 2.7954 2.7667 CSFS Table 4.0349 1. (2001a) τ = 0.7972 2.2828 2.9948 1.1852 2.3037 2.7671 0.3038 2.0206 2.0303 2.0489 2.0389 1.2293 τ = 0.0404 2.0341 1.7479 0.0000 4.0131 2.0124 2.2310 2.0326 DT 0.0064 1.9146 0.1059 1.0366 1.0000 2.0461 2.7667 0.0353 1.0318 1.9708 2.0334 1.0251 2.3933 1.2310 2.0348 1.0204 τ = 0.0155 2.2828 2.0222 2.0080 2.7672 0. (2001a) SSFS Table 4.1852 2.0503 3.9914 τ = 0.3019 2.3037 2.2310 2.7682 0.050 IT DT IT DT 2.7954 2.3 Comparison and convergence study of λ for rectangular plates under uniform uniaxial loading with various boundary conditions (a/b = 2) BC p 4 6 8 10 Wang et al.2839 1.0565 2.0378 2.0339 1.9849 1.2828 2.2829 2.1852 2.0507 1.1852 2.2811 2.0344 2.0001 4.0655 3.1835 2.1852 2.7954 __ 2.0404 1.05 IT 3.0479 2.3037 2.7729 0.0348 DT 0. (2001a) 8 10 12 14 Wang et al.9068 __ 0.3423 3.3222 3.0333 1.2828 2.0021 1.3225 3.0235 2.0000 4.7687 0.0186 2.0000 4.0341 2.0914 1.7667 0.7667 0.0462 2.2311 2.3038 2.1854 2.0000 4.0369 2.1 IT 3.7666 SSSS FSFS SSFS 67 .1 IT 1.0114 4.0371 2.3222 3. (2001a) Handleman and Prager (1948) 8 10 12 14 Wang et al.0114 4.7667 0.7667 0.9078 0.7701 0.9069 0.3037 2.2829 2.0125 2.2310 2.7667 0.7667 0.7672 0.9778 1.9952 1.2293 DT 4.0101 2.001 IT 4.5001 3.9944 2.0001 4.3019 2. (2001a) 8 10 12 14 Wang et al.0569 1.2310 2.1852 2.2811 2.0455 2.3037 2.Rectangular Plates BC p 8 10 12 14 Wang et al.2 Continued τ = 0.7717 0.1835 2.9069 0.0155 DT 2.7670 0.0212 2.7667 0.3037 2.2828 2.0212 2.0334 1.0454 2.2310 2.

1099 τ = 0.8713 1.0157 1.7670 1.6865 0.001 τ = 0.7236 0.6865 0.0287 1.2314 2.7716 1.6567 0. (2001a) 8 10 12 14 Wang et al.2314 2.1104 1.0777 DT 1.0047 1.2314 2.2314 2.0780 1.0777 τ = 0.0072 1.0284 1.0053 1.7682 1.3 Continued τ = 0.8484 0.Rectangular Plates BC p 8 10 12 14 Wang et al.7667 1.0789 1.0287 1.075 IT DT 1.9033 0.9953 2.001 IT 2.1104 1.8720 1.0462 2.0000 2.9033 1.0816 1.0326 0.0907 0.9032 1.2297 2.8713 1.0010 2.9159 0.6401 0.0790 1.7666 Table 4.2314 2. (2001a) CSFS Table 4.0000 2.1104 1.8084 0.6249 0.7300 0.0000 2.9054 0.9158 1.2314 2.1 IT 0.8713 1.6865 0.0073 1.0779 1.1104 1. (2001a) τ = 0.0187 2.0815 1.0081 2.0287 1.8086 0.7300 0.9159 0.1104 1.6401 0.9159 0.0047 1.0045 1.2297 2.0045 1.0000 2.8649 1.6775 0.7236 0.6775 0.0001 2.7236 0.0010 2.05 IT DT IT DT 2.0342 2.0046 1.6661 0.7236 0.2314 2.6775 0.0000 0.1099 DT 2.4.0287 1.9159 0.9915 τ = 0.0287 1.6775 0.6401 0.2291 2.8649 1.6567 0.9054 0.6567 0.8713 0.7346 0.9159 0.9041 0.9159 0.0365 0.6401 0.7445 0.2291 2.7300 0.8084 0. (2001a) 8 10 12 14 Wang et al.0000 2.0073 1.9969 1.9158 1.0199 1.7236 DT 0.9035 0.0287 1.050 IT 2.8649 0.0781 1.6865 0.6567 0.0332 0.9035 0.9033 0.1104 1.6775 SSSS FSFS SSFS CSFS 68 .0778 1.1104 1.0000 2.0287 1.1104 1.6249 0.2314 2.0253 2.0287 1.0000 0.8084 0.6249 0.7300 0.6249 0. BC p 2 4 6 8 Wang et al.6401 0.8656 1. Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress parameters λ for square plates under uniform biaxial loading.9159 0.9041 0.6250 0.9159 0.0503 0.0044 1.6865 0. (2001a) Durban and Zuckerman (1999) 8 10 12 14 Wang et al.0284 1.6567 0.0054 1.8649 1.

6351 0.9286 0.2361 1.4388 1.6385 0.6527 0.6527 0.6254 0.9390 0.9704 0.9632 0.9390 0.2508 1.9752 0. 1.6402 0.2 to 4.9704 0.9753 0.6574 0.9753 0.9670 0.9753 0.9587 0.9833 0.6622 0.2363 1. 0.9753 0.6402 0.6254 0.9654 DT 1.9274 0.9833 0.6527 0.6384 0.9389 (2001a) 8 10 SSFS 12 14 0.9833 0.9831 τ = 0.9661 0.9257 0.2500 1.6402 0.Rectangular Plates Table 4.6351 0.6254 0.9390 0.9833 Wang et al.9833 0.9390 0.6574 0.2363 1.9297 0.9661 0.9601 0. 0.9615 0.6351 0.7180 0.6623 0.9257 0.2500 DT 1.6868 0. BC p 2 4 6 8 τ = 0. 4.050 IT 1.9274 0.9752 (2001a) 8 10 CSFS 12 14 0.2361 1.9389 0. 0.9753 0.6402 0.6574 0.2500 1.9670 0.9685 0.001 IT 1.9593 0.2363 0.2361 0.6574 DT 0.9654 τ = 0. Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress parameters λ for rectangular plates under uniform biaxial loading (a/b = 2).9833 0.2500 0.9833 0.5.9586 0.5 for square plates under unaxial ( β = 0 ) and biaxial compressive stresses ( β = 1 ).1 IT 0.9297 0.6869 0.4158 1.2500 (2001a) 8 10 FSFS 12 14 0.9390 0.9632 0.4388 1.6835 0.9833 0.2500 1.9753 0.9390 0.6402 0.6257 0.2508 1.6622 0.6384 0. It can be seen that the buckling stresses associated with 69 .6868 0.9593 0.6622 0.9266 0.2371 1.9390 Wang et al.9753 Wang et al.6527 0.6351 0.9390 0.9265 0.9601 0.9615 0.9285 0.9685 0.6351 0.6574 0.4151 1.6868 0.6384 SSSS Wang et al.6527 0.9753 0.6384 0.2369 1.6254 0.9831 (2001a) Effect of thickness-to-width ratio and transverse shear deformation The variations of normalized plastic buckling stress with respect to b/h ratios are shown in Figs.

the dashed lines refer to the classical thin plate theory and the solid lines represent the Mindlin plate theory. 4. The buckling stress. It can be seen that the influence of the effect of transverse shear deformation increases when the plastic buckling stress increases. On the other hand. IT and DT) converge to the elastic buckling curve as b/h ratio increases since buckling takes place in the elastic range for large b/h ratios. IT and DT. In Figs. which is equivalent to that of the classical thin plate theory (CPT).2 to 4. Moreover.2 to 4. This is because the effect of transverse shear deformation depends on the value of plastic buckling stress as shown in Figs. The effect is not significant for plastic buckling when compared to that of the elastic buckling counterparts.6 and 4. i. 70 . 4. all the plastic buckling curves (i. The difference between the buckling stresses obtained based on IT and DT increases with the b/h ratio decreases. 4.5.8% and 1% in the cases of elastic theory. the difference is more significant for more restrained boundary conditions for the same b/h ratio. It can be seen that the effect of transverse shear deformation lowers the buckling stress and the effect is more significant when the plate is relatively thick. the reductions for SSSS square plate under biaxial compression (b/h = 6) are about 13%.e.Rectangular Plates DT are consistently lower than their IT counterparts. Note that.5.e. 4. plate thickness increases. the reductions are larger for the buckling stress associated with IT when compared with the corresponding reductions in their DT counterparts. For example. can be readily obtained by setting a large number κ 2 = 1000 for the shear correction factor (see Table 4. the buckling curves based on the classical thin plate theory are also presented with the view to examine the effect of transverse shear deformation.7. respectively. Generally.6). in Figs.

8649 1.2 versus b/h ratio for SSSS square plate 71 .7346 0.7300 0.0000 2.5 1.8830 0.8896 1.10 0.0000 2.6210 0.Rectangular Plates Table 4.8830 1.8084 0.25 σ 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 b/h Fig.3729 0.6711 0.3729 0.8713 1.3694 0.20 0.6700 0.2 0.6710 0.05 1.8168 0.001 2.8896 0.15 0.2239 0.0000 0. 4.0000 2.6 Parametric study on the value of shear correction factor for simply supported square plate under biaxial loading.2 Normalized plastic buckling stress σc/σ0. κ2 Mindlin plate theory Classical thin plate theory 5/6 1000 - τ = 0.0000 1.25 β =0 a b σ 1 σc/σ0.5 0.8168 0.2270 0.6429 0.6700 Incremental theory of plasticity Deformation theory of plasticity Mindlin plate theory Classical thin plate theory 5/6 1000 2.7346 0.75 β =1 a Elastic IT DT βσ b 0.2270 1.0000 2.

Rectangular Plates

1.5

β =0

1.25

σ

a b

σc/σ0.2

1

0.75

βσ

σ

a b

β =1

Elastic IT DT

20 25 30 35 40

0.5

0.25 5 10 15

b/h

Fig. 4.3 Normalized plastic buckling stress σc/σ0.2 versus b/h ratio for CCCC square plate

1.5

β =0

1.25

σ

a b

σc/σ0.2

1

0.75

β =1

a b

σ

Elastic IT DT

15 20 25 30 35 40

0.5

βσ

0.25 5 10

b/h

Fig. 4.4 Normalized plastic buckling stress σc/σ0.2 versus b/h ratio for SCSC square plate

72

Rectangular Plates

1.5

1.25

1

σc/σ0.2

σ

0.75

a b

σ

β =0

0.5

βσ

a b

β =1

Elastic IT DT

σ

0.25

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

b/h

Fig. 4.5 Normalized plastic buckling stress σc/σ0.2 versus b/h ratio for SSSF square plate

0.15

0.12

CPT

SSSS plate (Mindlin)

σ c h3 / D

(Mindlin)

0.09

0.06

CCCC plate (Mindlin)

0.03

0.00 0 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.12 0.15

σ c h 3 / D (CPT)

Fig. 4.6 Effect of transverse shear deformation on plastic buckling stress (IT) of a square plate

73

Rectangular Plates

0.015

CPT

0.012

SSSS plate (Mindlin)

σ c h3 / D

(Mindlin)

0.009

CCCC plate (Mindlin)

0.006

0.003

0 0 0.003 0.006 0.009 0.012 0.015

σ c h 3 / D (CPT)

Fig. 4.7 Effect of transverse shear deformation on plastic buckling stress (DT) of a square plate

**Effect of aspect ratio a/b
**

The variations of plastic buckling stress parameters with respect to aspect ratios a/b are presented in Figs. 4.6 to 4.13 for various boundary conditions. Aspect ratios between 0.5 and 4.0 are considered since the buckling capacity has the most significant variation over this range of aspect ratios. Generally, it is found that the plastic buckling stress parameters are almost constant for aspect ratios greater than 4. The thickness-towidth ratios in these figures are chosen in order to capture the plastic buckling behaviour when the normalized buckling stress ( σ c / σ 0.2 ) is in the vicinity of unity. Therefore, according to Figs. 4.2 to 4.5, τ = 0.05 is used for SSSS, SCSC, CCCC plates while τ = 0.1 is used for SSSF plates. In order to observe the effect of loading ratio, we consider β = 0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75 and 1.

74

Rectangular Plates

For the cases of SSSS, CCCC, SCSC, it can be seen that some of the buckling curves are composed of individual curve segments that correspond to different buckling modes. This is due to the fact that the number of half-sine waves in the buckling mode shape of the plates increases as the aspect ratio increases. The locations of cusps, at the aspect ratios of coincident buckling modes, are not the same for different plate thicknesses because of the effect of transverse shear deformation. It was also found that these cusps locations depend on the plasticity theories used. For example, the buckling mode comprises two half sine waves for IT while the plate buckles in the shape of one half sine wave in the cases of elastic buckling and plastic buckling based on DT for h/b = 0.05 and a/b = 1.1 (see Fig 4.14). This information would be useful when one needs to assume the distribution pattern of initial imperfection that yield the lowest buckling load in a postbuckling analysis. The phenomena of mode switching disappear at a certain value of β . For example, a smooth buckling curve is obtained when β = 0.5 in the case of SSSS plates. In contrast to the aforementioned cases, the plastic buckling stress parameters decrease monotonically with increasing aspect ratios in the case of SSSF plates, regardless of the value of β , i.e. no mode switching phenomenon is observed. When the buckling curves of different values of β are compared, the buckling stress parameters are observed to decrease as the value of β increases except for some cases of a / b < 1 . For a/b <1, an unexpected behaviour of buckling stress parameter with respect to β value is observed. This behaviour is due to mode switching which will be proven later.

75

Rectangular Plates

4

3.5

β =0 β = 0.25 β = 0.5 β = 0.75 β = 1.0

λ = σxhb2/(π2D)

3

2.5

2

1.5

1

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Aspect ratio a/b Fig. 4.8 Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for SSSS based on IT

3.5

3

β =0 β = 0.25 β = 0.5

λ = σxhb2/(π2D)

2.5

2

β = 0.75

1.5

β = 1.0

1 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Aspect ratio a/b Fig. 4.9 Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for SSSS based on DT

76

5 β =0 3.25 λ = σxhb2/(π2D) 3 β = 0.0 2 0.25 β = 0.25 β = 0.5 3 Aspect ratio a/b Fig.5 2.5 2 2.5 1 1.75 2.Rectangular Plates 8 7 λ = σxhb2/(π2D) 6 5 β =0 β = 0. 4.10 Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b 3.5 3 Aspect ratio a/b Fig.5 β = 0.5 β = 0.11 Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b 77 . 4.75 3.75 4 3 β = 1.0 2.5 2 2.25 0.75 β = 1.5 1 1.

5 2 2.5 5 β =0 4.5 λ = σxhb2/(π2D) 4 β = 0.0 3.5 3 Aspect ratio a/b Fig.5 β = 1. 4.5 1 1.75 2.Rectangular Plates 5.25 β = 0. 4.5 3 Aspect ratio a/b Fig.75 2.13 Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for SCSC based on DT 78 .0 2.25 β = 0.5 2 2.5 3 2.5 β =0 λ = σxhb2/(π2D) 3 β = 0.5 β = 0.75 β = 1.5 β = 0.5 1 1.25 0.25 3.5 2 0.12 Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for SCSC based on IT 3.

Rectangular Plates

1.25

1

β =0 β = 0.25 β = 0.5 β = 0.75

λ = σxhb2/(π2D)

0.75

0.5

0.25

β =1

0

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Aspect ratio a/b Fig. 4.14 Plastic buckling stress parameter versus aspect ratio a/b for SSSF based on IT

1.25

1

β =0

λ = σxhb2/(π2D)

β = 0.25 β = 0.5 β = 0.75

0.75

0.5

0.25

β =0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Aspect ratio a/b Fig. 4.15 Plastic buckling stress parameter versus aspect ratio a/b for SSSF based on IT

79

Rectangular Plates

(a)

(b)

(c)

Fig. 4.16. Contour and 3D plots of simply supported rectangular plate under uniaxial loading ( τ = 0.05, a/b = 1.1) for (a) IT, (b) Elastic and (c) DT

**Effect of loading ratio β
**

Figures 4.15 to 4.18 show the variations of plastic buckling stress parameter λ over a range of loading ratio β for square plates with various boundary conditions. Since the thickness-to-width ratio τ has a strong influence on the plastic buckling behaviour, four different thickness-to-width ratios, namely τ = 0.001, 0.05, 0.075, and 0.1 are considered. In the case of τ = 0.001 , it can be seen that the IT curves coincide with their corresponding DT curves for all boundary conditions. Moreover, the plastic buckling stress parameter decreases steadily with the increasing value of loading ratio β . For large thickness-to-width ratios, the plastic buckling stress parameter may decrease or increase with increasing β . The optimal value of β for the maximum buckling capacity in DT curves is observed. For example, the maximum buckling strength (DT) is obtained when the value of β ≈ 0.5 in CCCC and SCSC plates for

τ = 0.075 and 0.1 . In contrast to DT buckling curves, the concave buckling curves of

80

Rectangular Plates

IT are observed except for SSSF plate. In the case of SSSF, the IT and DT buckling curves are close to each other and the optimal value of β is found to be about 0.4. These unexpected behaviours were also observed in Figs. 4.7 to 4.9 and Fig. 4.11 for small a/b ratios. Similar observations were also reported in Durban and Zuckerman (1999). It is believed that these unexpected buckling behaviours are observed due to the mode switching. In order to verify this hypothesis, we perform an analytical analysis where the numbers of half wave of buckling shapes were predetermined. The analysis is carried out for SSSS square plate and the results are shown in Fig. 4.19. In this figure, the solid lines refer to the buckling mode shape with m = 1 and n = 1 while the dashed lines represent the buckling mode shape with m = 2 and n = 1 (m and n are numbers of half wave in the x and y direction, respectively). It can be seen that the plate always buckles with a mode shape associated with m = 1 and n = 1 for small thickness-towidth ratios, regardless of the loading ratio. However, for large thickness-to-width ratios, the plate first buckles in a m = 2, n = 1 mode shape up to certain value of loading ratio and then the critical mode shape changes to a m = 1, n = 1 mode shape as the loading ratio increases. This m = 2 mode shape is not evident in the case of elastic buckling for a square plate. Only in the plastic buckling, such a two half sine waves buckling mode shape is possible depending on the loading ratio for a square plate.

81

Rectangular Plates

5

IT

4

λ = σxhb2/(π2D)

τ = 0.001 τ = 0.05 τ = 0.075

DT

3

2

1

τ = 0.1

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Stress ratio β Fig. 4.17 Plastic buckling stress parameter versus stress ratio β for SSSS square plate

12

10

τ = 0.001

IT DT

λ = σxhb2/(π2D)

8

6

τ = 0.05

4

τ = 0.075

τ = 0.1

2

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Stress ratio β Fig. 4.18 Plastic buckling stress parameter versus stress ratio β for CCCC square plate

82

Rectangular Plates

8

IT

τ = 0.001

6

DT

λ = σxhb2/(π2D)

τ = 0.05

4

τ = 0.001

τ = 0.1

2

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Stress ratio β Fig. 4.19 Plastic buckling stress parameter versus stress ratio β for SCSC square plate

2

IT

1.5

τ = 0.001 τ = 0.05 τ = 0.075

DT

λ = σxhb2/(π2D)

1

τ = 0.1

0.5

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Stress ratio β Fig. 4.20 Plastic buckling stress parameter versus stress ratio β for SSSF square plate

83

The normalized buckling curves are presented in Figs 4.025 τ = 0.1 1 0 0 Stress ratio β Fig. 84 . This effect can be incorporated in the slenderness ratio (b/h) as shown in Fig. The buckling curves are found to be shifted to the right if the ratio E / σ 0 increases. 2.001 τ = 0.75 τ = 0. 4.21 for various Ramberg-Osgood parameters c and E / σ 0.05 0. 4.21 Mode switching with respect to stress ratio β for SSSS square plate Effect of material properties The aforementioned discussions are based on the analysis with Al 7075-T6 and the results may vary if a different material is used. It can be seen that the buckling capacity increases before a certain stress level and after that it decreases as the value of c increases.20 and 4. a parametric study is carried out for SSSS square plate under uniaxial compression in order to examine the effect of material properties on the buckling capacity. Therefore.2.22.7 ratios.5 τ = 0.001 0.Rectangular Plates 7 6 λ = σxhb2/(π2D) 5 4 3 2 1 τ = 0.25 0. This behaviour can be explained by the trends of the stress-strain curves with respect to the c value which were shown in Fig.

5 c = 10 1 σc/σ0.5 1.22 Effect of material properties on normalized plastic buckling stress σ c / σ 0.23 Effect of material properties on normalized plastic buckling stress σ c / σ 0.2 for SSSS square plate (DT) 85 . 4.25 E/σ0 = 150 E/σ0 = 500 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 b/h Fig.75 c = 15 0.5 0. 4.Rectangular Plates 1.25 c=2 c=5 c = 10 c=2 c=5 c = 10 1 c = 15 σc/σ0.2 c = 15 0.2 0.2 for SSSS square plate (IT) 2 c=2 c=5 1.5 E/σ0 = 150 E/σ0 = 500 0 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 b/h Fig.

7 / E in the value of slenderness ratio. Therefore the b 12(1 − ν 2 ) (where λe = σ e hb 2 / D is the elastic h λe commonly used slenderness ratio buckling parameter) becomes λ = σ 0. 4.22 that the effect of the variation of E / σ 0.7 / σ e .25 1 σc/σ0.5 0. 4.24 Normalized plastic buckling stress σ c / σ 0.24.25 IT DT 0 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 b h E /(100σ 0.5 1. On the other hand the results 86 . 4.75 0. where σ e refers to the elastic buckling stress.Rectangular Plates 1.2 versus modified slenderness ratio for SSSS square plate Comparison with experiments It has been shown in Fig.23 and 4.7 ) Fig. the comparison studies against test data for rectangular plates under uniaxial compression are presented in Figs. It can be seen that the test results are in favour with the results obtained by DT which violates the fundamental rule of plastic flow of metal.2 0.7 can be absorbed by multiplying σ 0. Since the plastic buckling stresses obtained by IT and DT differ greatly when the thickness to width ratio is large.

5 2 2.5 1 λ 1.5 0.5 1 λ 1. which is regarded as most satisfactory theory for treating plasticity problems. are significantly higher than test data for small slenderness ratios.75 0.25 Elastic σc a b σc 1 DT σc σ 0.2 DT 0. 1. 4.26 Comparison study of buckling stresses obtained by DT and IT with test results (Al-2014-T6) 87 .75 0.25 Comparison study of buckling stresses obtained by DT and IT with test results (Al-7075-T6) 1.5 Fig.Rectangular Plates given by analysis based on IT.5 IT 1.5 IT 1.5 Fig. 4.25 Anderson (1956) 0 0 0.2 0.25 Pride (1949) 0 0 0.25 Elastic σc a b σc 1 σc σ 0.5 Anderson (1956) 0.5 2 2.

5g) α =γ = (4. (2.5f) χ =µ =0 For incremental theory of plasticity (IT) 1 1 −ν 2 (4. β . the in-plane stresses σ x and σ y are set to zero in Eqs.5a) ρ= E ⎤ 3E ⎡ + (1 − 2ν )⎢2 − (1 − 2ν ) s ⎥ Es E⎦ ⎣ 4 (4.Rectangular Plates 4.6b) 88 .5e) G= (4.5b) α =γ = ρ (4. γ . χ .19a-g) and Eq. G.5d) δ= (4. Hence the effective stress σ and the parameters α .6a) β= ν 1 −ν 2 (4. (2. δ .3 Pure Shear Loading In the case of pure shear.20). µ become as follows For deformation theory of plasticity (DT) 2 σ = 3τ xy (4.5c) β= Es ⎤ 1⎡ ⎢2 − 2(1 − 2ν ) E ⎥ ρ⎣ ⎦ 1 ⎞ ⎛ E 2ν + ⎜ 3 − 1⎟ ⎟ ⎜ E ⎠ ⎝ t E ⎛ E ⎞ 2ν + ⎜ 3 ⎜ E − 1⎟ ⎟ ⎝ s ⎠ (4.

The latter modulus is equal to Eδ in the present study. It was found that the results obtained by using the secant modulus method are consistently lower than the present results based on DT and IT. they are 89 . In view of modified secant method. A. Bijlaard (1949) and Gerard and Becker (1957).6d) where τ xy is the shear stress. An erratum was reported by Peters (1954) who pointed out that the symbols. B. the plasticity reduction factor η becomes Gs/G. are consistently higher than the present Ritz results for both thicknessto-width ratios (τ = 0.001 and τ = 0.6c) G= E 2(1 + ν ) (4. B. For comparison purposes. and F appearing in the case 6 of Table 5 are not the same symbols as A. 21 of Bijlaard (1949).05). the plastic buckling stress parameters are computed from their corresponding elastic thin plate results by multiplying with the plasticity reduction factors which were derived by Gerard (1948). which are obtained by Bijlaard’s (1949) formula.7 and 4. This is due to an error in the parameters used in the plastic reduction factor formula. It can be seen that p = 12 is sufficient for reasonably converged results and therefore. p = 12 will be used for subsequent calculations. Bijlaard (1949).Rectangular Plates δ= 1 ⎞ ⎛ E 2ν + ⎜ 3 − 1⎟ ⎟ ⎜ E ⎠ ⎝ t (4. and F as given in Eq. Instead. The convergence studies in Tables 4. it was found that the results. Gerard (1948) modified the secant modulus method for plates under shear by replacing the secant modulus Es with the shear secant modulus Gs.8 show the convergence of the results with respect to the degree of polynomial.

90 . the effect of shear deformation is more pronounced in the case of IT than DT. The effect of transverse shear deformation can be observed by comparing the solid lines (Mindlin plate theory) and dashed lines (classical thin plate theory). the paper by Bijlaard (1947) is not accessible to the author and hence the corrected results cannot be computed and verified. the present results agree well with the solutions obtained from plasticity reduction factor reported in Table 2 of Gerard and Becker (1957). Unfortunately.26. It is interesting to note that the IT buckling curves are parallel with the elastic buckling curves for small b/h ratios. When the thickness-to-width ratio τ = 0.025. 36 of Bijlaard (1947).Rectangular Plates the same symbols as those given in Eq. On the other hand. Effect of transverse shear deformation and thickness-to-width ratio The variations of normalized buckling stress with respect to b/h ratio are shown in Figs. the present solutions are however slightly lower than Gerard’s solutions due to the effect the transverse shear deformation. In general. 4.23 to 4.

6246 8 6.3387 9.1513 __ __ 4.5460 6.6923 5.3252 12 9.1091 5.8401 5.1513 5.2671 5.8464 5.7814 6.1325 5.8402 5.5460 6.6326 5.8606 5.Rectangular Plates Table 4.2673 5.0377 __ __ 4.6246 5.0427 5.8403 3 DT IT 5.3244 Gerard (1946) Bijlaard (1949) Gerard and Becker (1957) 0.3252 9.2176 5.1550 5.7903 6.3673 Gerard (1948) Bijlaard (1949) Gerard and Becker (1957) __ __ 5.6187 5.5460 __ __ 6.8401 __ __ 5.6246 5.4319 5.6246 __ __ 5.5460 __ 5.1327 5.001 8 9.3246 plate results 0.3246 9.4319 __ __ 4.2008 14 6.7 Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress parameters for SSSS rectangular plates under shear a/b τ p 1 IT DT IT 6.4321 5.5858 __ 5.025 __ __ 9.5951 5.8402 5.3387 10 9.2718 5.7503 __ 9.1514 5.7437 5.6326 5.3246 - 6.8403 __ 5.4975 5.4507 __ 5.5949 5.5982 5.5460 6.8404 5.0379 5.5327 6.6249 5.5460 2 DT IT 5.5544 6.2008 5.3610 6.4344 5.7815 6.8793 5.8404 5.3244 9.6249 5.5460 6.1330 91 .6246 4 DT Elastic thin 9.7437 5.5463 6.1385 5.8403 5.9706 5.2047 10 6.6875 5.8464 5.7820 6.5463 6.5949 5.5544 6.2670 5.2010 12 6.7260 __ 6.3245 14 9.2503 __ 5.3245 9.

2984 9.248 10.4231 6.4269 7.75 a b τxy/σ0.2690 __ 6.8601 9.025 8 11.4208 __ 5.1910 10 11.4493 6.4936 9.248 10.3406 9.6044 6.248 8.248 10.642 14 14.1889 Gerard (1948) Gerard and Becker (1957) 1 10.2480 10.642 14.27 Normalized plastic buckling stress τ xy / σ 0.4973 __ 6.2 0.6356 6.4211 7.1889 14 11.0692 6.1781 7.5635 8.325 9.6610 6.4709 9.2 versus b/h ratio for SSSS square plate 92 .5 0.262 10.2984 8.5070 7.6143 8.8601 9.4280 7.5575 9.Rectangular Plates Table 4. 4.3573 __ 5.6432 __ 6.4936 9.5353 9.3405 9.6421 plate results 0.578 10.8 Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress parameters for CCCC rectangular plates under shear a/b τ p 1 IT DT IT 2 DT IT 9.578 10.2952 4 DT Elastic thin 14.6029 6.8463 __ 7.659 14.325 10.642 14.1994 7.5343 3 DT IT 9.5341 9.3875 10.3723 7.5341 7.1770 7.6516 7.5615 8.5353 9.001 8 14.642 0.3101 6.643 14.262 10.643 12 14.5615 __ 5.4440 τ xy 0.659 10 14.3658 __ 5.25 Elastic IT DT 0 20 30 40 50 60 70 b/h Fig.1890 12 11.1769 7.0587 6.9557 6.0591 6.6245 6.5575 9.

4.5 Elastic IT DT 0.25 10 20 τ xy a b 30 40 50 60 70 b/h Fig.2 0.2 versus b/h ratio for SCSC square plate 93 .2 0.75 τxy/σ0.Rectangular Plates 1 0.29 Normalized plastic buckling stress τ xy / σ 0.25 10 20 30 τ xy a b 40 50 60 70 b/h Fig.28 Normalized plastic buckling stress τ xy / σ 0. 4.75 τxy/σ0.2 versus b/h ratio for CCCC square plate 1 0.5 Elastic IT DT 0.

2 versus b/h ratio for SSSF square plate Effect of aspect ratio a/b The variations of plastic buckling stress parameters with respect to aspect ratio a/b are shown in Figs.75 τ xy a b τxy/σ0. It is observed that the buckling mode switches in the cases of SSSS and CCCC but the locations of cusps cannot be seen clearly in those figures. Typical buckling mode shapes of rectangular plates under shear are shown in Table 4.9 for various aspect ratios by using DT. 4. On the other hand.29 for SSSS.25 Elastic IT DT 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 b/h Fig. 4. 94 .Rectangular Plates 1 0.27. 4.5 0.28 and 4.2 0.30 Normalized plastic buckling stress τ xy / σ 0. CCCC and SSSF rectangular plates respectively. no mode switching phenomenon is observed in the case of SSSF.

05 Elastic λxy=τxyhb2/(π2D) 15 τ xy a b IT 10 5 DT 0 0.5 4 Aspect ratio a/b Fig. a/b.5 2 2.5 3 3.31 Plastic buckling stress parameter. λxy.4.32 Plastic buckling stress parameter. for SSSS rectangular plate 40 Elastic 30 τ = 0. λxy.4.5 4 Aspect ratio a/b Fig.5 1 1.025 τ = 0.5 3 3. a/b.05 τ xy IT a b λxy=τxyhb2/(π2D) 20 DT 10 0 0.025 τ = 0. versus aspect ratio. versus aspect ratio.5 1 1. for CCCC rectangular plate under shear stress 95 .5 2 2.Rectangular Plates 25 20 τ = 0.

03) BC a/b 3D Plot Contour Plot 1 SSSS 2 4 96 .05 λxy=τxyhb2/(π2D) τ xy 10 a b 0 0.5 3 3.Rectangular Plates 20 τ = 0.4.5 4 Aspect ratio a/b Fig. a/b.33 Plastic buckling stress parameter.5 2 2.5 1 1. for SSSF rectangular plate under shear stress Table 4. (τ = 0.025 τ = 0. λxy.9 Buckling mode shapes for rectangular plates under pure shear. versus aspect ratio.

4 Combined Shear and Uniaxial Compression In practice. In the case of plastic buckling. Elastic buckling of plates under such combined inplane loads has been studied by many researchers and well documented in text books such as Timoshenko and Gere (1961).Rectangular Plates Table 4. Peters (1954) conducted experiments on long square tubes and compared the results with plastic buckling stresses predicted by the flat plate theory. structural plate elements are often subjected to both inplane compressive and shear loads simultaneously. The results were found to agree 97 . 1 CCCC 2 4 1 SSSF 2 4.10 Continued.

(2003) studied the plastic buckling of rectangular plate under various loading conditions. Recently. With the 98 . It can be seen that the differences between the plastic buckling stress parameters obtained by IT and DT are more pronounced when the plate is under pure shear (i.11 for rectangular plates under uniaxial (in the x-direction) and shear stresses.30 for simply supported.10 and 4. λx = 0 ). However. The converged results are obtained within reasonable accuracy when the degree of polynomial p =12 is used. the comparison study is performed against existing elastic buckling solutions and shown in Table 4. The convergence studies of buckling stress parameters are shown in Tables 4. It was found that the shear buckling results based on IT were highly sensitive to the presence of axial loads while those based on DT were less affected. Hitherto. there are apparently no study being done on the plastic buckling of rectangular Mindlin plates under uniaxial compression and shear loads.12. Owing to the lack of plastic buckling solutions. The interaction curves for the plastic buckling shear and uniaxial stresses are shown in Fig. their study was confined to the classical thin plate theory and to the case where the external shear stress is small.e. Smith et al. rectangular plates with a/b = 1 and a/b = 4. This is due to the fact that the existing solutions were obtained by using 10 terms of the Fourier series that represent the deflected shape and it is believed that these solutions have not converged yet. Another theoretical study was performed by Tugcu (1996) based on the incremental theory of plasticity and the deformation theory of plasticity with the view to understand the effect of axial force on the shear buckling of long plate strips. 4. The buckling stress parameters obtained in this study are slightly lower than the corresponding existing elastic solutions obtained by Batdorf and Stein (1947).Rectangular Plates well with the theoretical results obtained by Stowell (1949) and an interaction formula was proposed.

the classical thin plate theory overpredicts the plastic buckling load parameters as it normality assumption stiffens the plate by not permitting any transverse shear deformation. 4).Rectangular Plates presence of a small value of uniaxial compression. 4. the reductions in shear plastic buckling stress parameters given by IT are larger than their corresponding DT counterparts. He went on to propose a simple interaction 2 formula. This is consistent with Tugcu’s (1996) observation that the plastic buckling shear stress parameters based on IT are more sensitive to the presence of uniaxial compression than their DT counterparts. Moreover. It can be seen from these figures 99 . In order to examine the effect of transverse shear deformation. Peters (1954) found that the experimentally obtained plastic buckling loads of simply supported plates are in good agreement with the theoretical plastic buckling results computed by Stowell (1948). As expected. In order to investigate the validity of Peters’ formula for different thickness-to-width ratios τ .05 . the interaction curves based on IT are affected significantly by the aspect ratios whereas the corresponding DT interaction curves are negligibly affected by the aspect ratios for the thickness-towidth ratio τ = 0. It is found that the reductions due to the effect of shear deformation in the results obtained by IT are generally larger than those reductions in their DT counterparts. where R xy is the ratio of shear stress to the critical shear stress due to pure shear and R x is the ratio of uniaxial stress to the critical buckling stress due to pure uniaxial compression. the normalized theoretical interaction curves based on DT for various thickness to width ratios are determined and compared with the interaction curves of Peters’ formula (see Figs. the interaction curves based on the classical thin plate theory are presented in Fig. Rxy + Rx2 = 1 .30 as well.

1577 5.2198 3.1578 5.3953 3.3972 4.9907 3.3940 3.2193 DT 4.7229 4.2197 6. Rxy + Rx = 1 (Batdorf and Stein.0189 4.03) p λx 1 a/b = 1 a/b = 2 a/b = 4 8 10 12 14 8 10 12 14 2 IT 10.0173 4.8502 3.1577 4.0518 10.4233 4.5069 IT 7.0169 DT 4.8142 3.5752 DT 3.3178 3.9846 3.3376 7.8265 4. (τ = 0.3793 4.8656 6.0981 6.0527 10.0067 5.8230 3.4735 3. Table 4.9897 3.2306 6.9635 8.9898 3.3807 4. p λx 1 a/b = 1 a/b = 2 a/b = 4 8 10 12 14 8 10 12 14 2 IT 5.4271 3.5760 3.8144 3.9469 8.5753 3.4735 3.1084 7.6833 4.6471 4.0060 4.8152 3.3792 3.6780 4.5069 4.9825 3.0118 5.8760 IT 7.8216 3.0267 3.8685 5.8904 4.Rectangular Plates that the shapes of the interaction buckling curves depend on the thickness-to-width ratios and that the theoretical curves are bounded by the curves obtained by Peters’ 2 2 formula R xy + R x2 = 1 and the elastic interaction formula.3166 Table 4.11 Convergence study of plastic buckling shear stress parameters λ xy for clamped square plates under combined loadings.4740 3.9468 DT 5.1827 5.5381 4.9824 3.4496 6.10 Convergence study of plastic buckling shear stress parameters λ xy for simply supported plates under combined loadings (τ = 0.1586 5. 1947).4573 6.03).8761 4.8215 3.4734 IT 4.0170 4. Therefore it can be concluded that Peters’ formula provides an upper bound solution and it overestimates the buckling capacity of the plates with small to moderate thickness-to-width ratios.3744 4.9897 3.7985 4.8760 4.0062 5.5082 4.0704 10.0984 7.2201 4.8768 4.3167 3.3440 3.0517 8.7996 4.5752 3.3666 100 .6013 5.2216 4.2199 4.4132 7.7100 6.5577 DT 4.8142 IT 4.3939 DT 3.9478 8.7985 4.

56 4. a/b = 2 IT.85 2.68 3.29 2.Rectangular Plates Table 4.34 Interaction curves for SSSS rectangular plates under combined uniaxial compression and shear stresses (τ = 0.02 4.05) 101 . a/b = 4 0 0. a/b = 1 IT.62 4. ν = 0.46 6.00 2 6.21 3.5 1 1. ( τ = 0.55 4.12 Comparison study of elastic buckling shear stress parameters λ xy for simply supported plates under combined loadings.5 4 0 λx = σxhb2/(π2D) Fig.001.66 4.71 4. a/b = 1 λxy = τxyhb2/(π2D) Classical thin plate theory τxy σx a b σx 5 4 3 2 1 DT.94 1 2 4 7 Mindlin plate theory 6 IT.10 3 4.92 8. 4.85 5. a/b = 4 DT.60 5.5 2 2.3) a/b λx Present study Batdorf and Stein (1947) Present study Batdorf and Stein (1947) Present study Batdorf and Stein (1947) 1 7.5 3 3.11 5.

4.05 0.35 Normalized interaction curves for simply supported rectangular plate (a/b = 4) 1.2 Rx Fig.Rectangular Plates 1.1 0.8 Rxy 0.2 1 τ = 0.001 τ = 0.2 0.6 0.025 τ = 0.05 τ = 0.6 Rxy 0.2 Rx Fig.2 2 Rxy + Rx = 1 2 2 Rxy + Rx = 1 0 0 0.8 1 1.36 Normalized interaction curves for clamped rectangular plates (a/b = 4) 102 .8 0.2 0 0 0.4 τ = 0.001 τ = 0. 4.025 τ = 0.8 1 1.6 0.1 0.6 0.4 0.2 1 τ = 0.2 0.4 2 Rxy + Rx = 1 2 2 Rxy + Rx = 1 0.4 0.

The locations of cusps. The effect of transverse shear deformation is taken into account in the analysis by adopting the Mindlin plate theory. the plastic buckling solutions are close to their elastic counterparts while. the plastic buckling solutions are substantially lower than their elastic counterparts. With the presence of a small value of uniaxial compression. Generally. the reductions in shear plastic buckling stress parameters given by IT are larger than their corresponding DT counterparts. at the aspect ratios of coincident buckling modes. The difference increases with increasing thickness-to-width ratios. loading ratio β on the plastic buckling stress parameters were investigated. 103 .5 Concluding Remarks The plastic buckling behaviour of rectangular Mindlin plates under uniaxial. for large thickness ratios. are different from those locations in the case of elastic buckling. Moreover. It was found that the buckling mode switches at particular aspect ratios for SSSS and CCCC plates. the effect of transverse shear deformation lowers the plastic buckling stress parameter and the effect is more pronounced for the results obtained by IT when compared with their DT counterparts.Rectangular Plates 4. biaxial and shear stresses are examined based on the extensive buckling results generated by the Ritz computer code. This indicates that the plastic buckling mode shape may be different from its elastic counterpart for a given aspect ratio. For small thickness-to-width ratios. The effects of aspect ratios a/b. thickness-to-width ratios τ . the cusps locations also depend on the type of plasticity theory used. the plastic buckling stress parameters obtained by IT are larger than their DT counterparts. As in the case of elastic buckling.

This will be illustrated in this chapter by considering the plastic buckling problems of isosceles triangular plates. the Ritz method can be employed to solve arbitrary plate shapes which are expressed by polynomial functions. right angled triangular plates and elliptical plates. All that is needed is to modify the integration limits and the basic functions depending on the plate shapes and boundary conditions.1 and 5. 5. The boundary conditions for the triangular plates are represented by a three-letter designation which is arranged in the 104 .2 Triangular Plates Consider isosceles and right-angled triangular plates under uniform compressive stress as shown in Figs 5.2.CHAPTER 5 TRIANGULAR AND ELLIPTICAL PLATES 5. In fact.1 Introduction In the previous chapter. plastic buckling problems of rectangular plates were investigated by using the Ritz method based on the Cartesian coordinate system. respectively.

1 for CS*F isosceles triangular plate and Fig. 5. see Fig.2 CS*F right-angled triangular plate and coordinate system σ 105 . 5. 5. For example.1 CS*F isosceles triangular plate and coordinate system σ x. ξ b σ y.Triangular and Elliptical Plates order starting from the left end edge (x = 0) followed by the other edges in an anticlockwise direction.2 for CS*F right-angled triangular plate. y. 5. η b x. η σ F C S* σ a Fig. ξ C F S* σ a Fig.

The relationship is given by λp ⎛ π 2 λ pτ 2 E ⎞ ⎟ α ⎜1 − ν 2 − ⎜ 12κ 2 G ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ = λe (5. (4.5)1 (η + 0.Triangular and Elliptical Plates In order to illustrate the compositions of the basic functions. the subscript e refers to the elastic buckling solutions and the parameters α .2) (5.5ξ − 0.1b) and (4.3) φbw = (ξ + 1)1 (η + 1)1 (ξ + η ) 0 = (ξ + 1)(η + 1) φbx = (ξ + 1)1 (η + 1) 0 (ξ + η ) 0 = (ξ + 1) φby = (ξ + 1)1 (η + 1) 0 (ξ + η ) 0 = (ξ + 1) (5.1) (5.5) φbx = (ξ + 1)1 (η − 0.1e) or Eqs. G are given by Eqs.5ξ − 0.5) (5.5ξ + 0.5) 0 = (ξ + 1)(η − 0.5) 0 (η + 0.5ξ + 0. (4. The basic functions for these plates are given by for CS*F isosceles triangular plate φbw = (ξ + 1)1 (η − 0.5) 0 (η + 0. 106 .5) 0 = (ξ + 1) φby = (ξ + 1)1 (η − 0.5) 0 = (ξ + 1) for CS*F right angled triangular plate (5.5ξ − 0. we use the CS*F isosceles and CS*F right angled triangular plates examples.5ξ + 0.6) Note that a relationship between the plastic buckling solutions of polygonal Mindlin plates and their corresponding elastic buckling solutions based on classical thin plate theory was presented by Wang (2004).2b) and (4.4) (5.5ξ + 0.2e) depending on the type of plasticity theory used.7) where the subscript p refers to the plastic buckling solutions.

2. For simply supported equilateral triangular plates. This is due to the different implementation of simply support boundary condition as discussed in the previous paragraph. However. a modification in the formulations is needed and it will be discussed in Chapter 8. p = 10 will be adopted for the subsequent calculations of plastic buckling solutions of triangular plates.1 and 5. S*S*S*. (5. In view of this result. (5. Table 5.8). Therefore. no 107 .001). Eq. However.1 presents the comparison and convergence studies on the plastic buckling stress parameters of equilateral triangular plates with various boundary conditions. the buckling results for the simply supported edge of soft type become closer to their hard type counterparts when the plate thickness is thin (for example τ = 0. it can be seen that present results are slightly less than the corresponding results obtained by Eq.7) can be expressed as 48ακ 2 (1 − v 2 ) E 9κ 2 + 4π 2 ατ 2 G λp = (5. Han (1960) gave the elastic buckling solution λe = 16 / 3 for simply supported equilateral triangular plates ( a / b = 3 / 2 ). From Tables 5. it can be seen that the results associated with the degree of polynomial p = 10 show satisfactory convergence. For other boundary conditions. In order to handle the hard type of simply supported edge.8) Note that the above equation is valid only for simply supported edge of hard type (S).2. CCC and S*CC.Triangular and Elliptical Plates Based on the classical thin plate theory. The convergence study for right-angled triangular plate with a/b = 1 is presented in Table 5. the adopted Ritz functions in Ritz method fail to satisfy the geometric boundary condition of this hard type of simply supported edge when the plate edges are inclined (as in triangular plates) or curved (as in elliptical plates) edges.

0396 τ = 0.5489 4.9998 4.8033 4.8340 (Elastic) 10.3551 4.6050 10. Table 5.5219 1.3518 __ 4.6050 Table 5.Triangular and Elliptical Plates plastic buckling results are available in the literature and thus comparison studies are made only with existing elastic buckling results.6217 4.6180 2.5218 1.2072 __ 3.6572 2.5605 1.8173 __ 3.0192 3.6106 1.6050 10. (1994) 8 S*CC 10 12 14.001 .6193 4.6971 2.5538 1.6138 __ 4.1413 (Elastic) 10.3331 5.3661 1.2074 3.0684 3.001 IT DT 5.7428 2.6147 2.6920 2.3530 1.3331 5.9997 4.4130 10.0490 τ = 0.5973 1.8351 14.5218 8 10 S*S*S* 12 Wang et al.0681 1.5857 3.4139 10.3332 τ = 0.5801 __ 3.1.7441 2.0133 __ 1.9998 4.3520 1.1417 14.6207 3.6050 10.5183 1.1625 14.0497 3.6051 10.6905 2.5548 1.4139 10.2301 3.0491 3.050 IT DT 2.3332 5.5163 8 10 S*S*S* 12 Xiang et al.6542 2.1412 14.075 IT DT 1. BC p τ = 0.3537 4.3330 5.050 IT DT 2.0405 3.6533 2. (1994) 8 S*CC 10 108 .1625 14.2301 __ 3. BC p τ = 0.5883 __ 1.5883 1.3330 5.3537 __ 3.3331 5.8175 4.2072 3.8038 4.001 IT DT 4.2 Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress factors λ for right angled triangular plates under uniform compression (a/b = 1).8340 14.7492 2.9998 4.6164 2.3331 5.075 IT DT 1.6051 10.6038 1.6885 3.1412 14.9998 4.5883 1.4130 τ = 0.9997 (Elastic) 14.6193 __ 3.3670 1.6171 3.3912 1.8351 14. It can be seen that results agree well with existing elastic solutions when the thickness-to-width ratio τ = 0.9997 4.5487 __ 3.0713 3.5973 __ 1. Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress factors λ for equilateral triangular plates (a/b = 3 / 2 ) under uniform compression. (2004) 8 10 CCC Xiang et al. (1994) 8 10 CCC 12 Xiang et al.8340 14.6046 1.3662 1.1417 14.

It can be seen that the reduction increases with increasing thickness-to-width ratios.05. isosceles and right angled triangular plates. It should be noted that the buckling curve of τ = 0. Generally. The reductions are shown as the percentages of the classical thin plate solutions.4 show the effect of transverse shear deformation on the plastic buckling stress parameters of simply supported and clamped isosceles triangular plates.0. three thickness-to-width ratios are considered (i. Effect of aspect ratio The variations of plastic buckling stress parameter λ with respect to the aspect ratio are shown Figs. It can be seen that the inclusion of the effect of transverse shear deformation in the analysis lowers buckling stress parameters.4 for simply supported.0. the plastic buckling stress parameter decreases with increasing aspect ratios.3 and 5.001 may be regarded as an elastic buckling curve.Triangular and Elliptical Plates Effect of transverse shear deformation Tables 5.1 ). In order to show the effect of thickness-to-width ratios. Hence the deviation of plastic buckling stress parameters from the corresponding elastic parameters can be seen for various aspect ratios. Generally. τ = 0. those reductions associated with IT are larger than their DT counterparts.3 and 5.e. 109 . 5.001.

0584 1.12% 0.9990 0% 10.025 Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff 0.8917 1.6956 5.7262 0% 2.2820 0% 11.7262 2.2837 14.32% Kirchhoff 0.34% a/b = 2 IT 7.0000 7.7262 2.16% 3.4068 11.7262 2.2837 28.8271 7.06% 0.95% Elastic 7.5474 8.3500 2.0000 9.5888 4.72% DT 2.6893 1.4332 12.3361 1.62% 7.36% Table 5.2244 20.7262 0% 2.001 Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff 0.98% Kirchhoff 0.7262 2.8280 0% 7.43% Elastic 2.3982 0.6119 8.6221 2.53% 0.1 Mindlin Difference Elastic 28.0271 39.7001 1.0166 3.1522 28.4750 7.9990 0% 8.97% 9.51% 110 .Triangular and Elliptical Plates Table 5.7262 2.8280 0% 7.2837 26.6893 1.2820 0% 28.0000 9.69% 1.3117 0.3714 2.8271 7.48% DT 7.6893 1.5 IT 10.2837 28.0000 9.11% 10.8271 7.7760 0.8924 47.2820 0% 12.8271 7.9054 0.0000 9.4427 7.2632 23.3587 1.1 Mindlin Difference Elastic 10.8280 0% 7.2837 28.48% DT 10.9990 0% 8.9676 0.7261 2.4259 2.7261 2.7262 0% 2.61% 28.8929 4.8677 10.4129 7.34% DT 28.8271 6.7577 2.53% 2.001 Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff 0.025 Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff 0.13% 2.4777 11.53% 0.49% a/b = 2 IT 2.9343 0.5 IT 28.3 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ for S*S*S* isosceles triangular plates τ Plate theory a/b = 0.4 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ for CCC isosceles triangular plates τ Plate theory a/b = 0.4190 7.

001 τ = 0. 5.3 Variation of λ with respect to a/b ratio for S*S*S* isosceles triangular plates 5 b 4 σ a τ = 0.25 1.5 3 3.75 2 Aspect ratio a/b Fig.5 0.4 Variation of λ with respect to a/b ratio for S*S*S* right angled triangular plates 111 .5 4 Aspect ratio a/b Fig.10 IT DT λ = σhb2/(π2D) 5 4 3 2 1 0 0.Triangular and Elliptical Plates 8 7 6 σ b a τ = 0.001 τ = 0.05 τ = 0.25 0.10 IT DT λ = σhb2/(π2D) 3 2 1 0 1 1.5 2 2.05 τ = 0. 5.75 1 1.5 1.

5.5. y.14) 112 .3 Elliptical Plates Consider an elliptical plate of constant thickness h and aspect ratio a/b as shown in Fig.11) φbw = (ξ 2 + η 2 − 1)1 = (ξ 2 + η 2 − 1) φbx = (ξ 2 + η 2 − 1)1 = (ξ 2 + η 2 − 1) φby = (ξ 2 + η 2 − 1)1 = (ξ 2 + η 2 − 1) (5.5 Elliptical plate under uniform compression and coordinate system The basic functions for the Ritz formulations are given by: for simply supported elliptical plate φbw = (ξ 2 + η 2 − 1)1 = (ξ 2 + η 2 − 1) φbx = (ξ 2 + η 2 − 1) 0 = 1 φby = (ξ 2 + η 2 − 1) 0 = 1 for clamped elliptical plate (5.10) (5.9) (5.13) (5.Triangular and Elliptical Plates 5. η σ x. The plate is subjected to in-plane uniform compressive stress σ . The problem is to determine the plastic buckling stress of such loaded elliptical plates. ξ b a Fig. 5.12) (5.

no studies been done on plastic buckling of elliptical plates despite a few studies (Voinovsky-Krieger. 1994a) been conducted on the elastic buckling of such plates. The exact expression of plastic buckling parameter for circular plates under uniform compression can be expressed in the transcendental form of ΩJ 0 ( Ω ) β = 1− J 1 (Ω ) α for simply supported plates (5. very small thickness-towidth ratio ( τ = 0. It can be seen that satisfactory convergence is achieved when the degree of polynomial p = 10 is used. Note that.001 ) is adopted in the Ritz plastic buckling analysis.15) λ= ακ 2 (1 − v 2 ) 0. 1937. The converged solutions are found to agree well with the existing solutions. 2). 1993b. Shibaoka.16) where J n (•) is Bessel function of the first kind of order n and 12π 2 λκ 2 Ω=b α (12κ 2 (1 − v 2 ) − λπ 2τ 2 E / σ 0 (5.. comparison studies can only be carried out against existing elastic buckling solutions.17) The convergence and comparison studies are shown in Tables 5.6 for simply supported and clamped circular and elliptical plates for various aspect ratios (a/b = 1. as a special case..5 and 5. Wang and Liew. Therefore.Triangular and Elliptical Plates There are hitherto. 2001a). 1956. 113 . In order to obtain elastic buckling stress parameters.8225 2 E σ0 ατ for clamped plates 2 (5. Wang et al.6722κ + 0. the elliptical plate becomes a circular plate when a/b = 1 and the analytical plastic buckling solutions for circular plates are available (Wang et al.

(1994a) 8 Clamped 10 Wang et al.7536 2.9503 τ = 0.7 and 5.9759 0.7536 τ = 0.9673 1.9673 1.5403 2.0663 1. (2001a) τ = 0.7322 1.001 IT 1.4152 1.236 (Elastic) 4.3379 __ 1.7536 2.9503 5.2286 4.2280 1.9673 DT 1.6617 2.001 IT 1.6623 1.2281 1.2467 1.2467 1. It can be seen that the effect of transverse shear deformation lower the plastic buckling stress parameters.2467 1.2271 1.2265 __ 2.7322 1.6623 1.2266 __ 2.0690 1. (2001a) 8 Clamped 10 Wang et al.2286 4.7322 1. BC p 8 Simply supported 10 12 Wang et al.9035 DT 1.8 show the effect of transverse shear deformation on the plastic buckling stress parameters of simply supported and clamped circular and elliptical plates.Triangular and Elliptical Plates Table 5.6622 2.075 IT 0.0690 1.9503 5.9810 __ 1.9503 DT 1.6 Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress factors σhb 2 /(π 2 D ) for elliptical plates under uniform compression (a/b=2).9811 0.9762 0.2467 τ = 0.2286 4.5403 __ τ = 0.7322 5.2270 1.5564 1.231 (Elastic) Effect of transverse shear deformation Tables 5.6617 1.9503 5.4152 1.4152 Table 5.6054 2.9503 5.2467 1.5564 __ DT 0.9758 __ 1.5 Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress factors σhb 2 /(π 2 D ) for circular plates under uniform compression (a/b=1). (1994a) τ = 0.6054 __ DT 1.050 IT 1.0663 1.3379 1. The effect on the plastic buckling stress parameters 114 .9035 2.6617 1.075 IT 1.2467 DT 1. BC p 8 Simply 10 supported Wang et al.2286 4.9814 0.0663 1.0690 1.7322 1.7322 5.9035 2.050 IT 1.

07% 0.1834 1.8859 1.40% 1.9504 5.81% 0.1834 0% 0% 0% 1.7267 0.9504 1.0377 4.1787 1.001 Thin plate Mindlin Difference Thin plate Mindlin Difference Thin plate Mindlin Difference 1. the reductions are larger for the buckling stress associated with IT when compared with the reduction in DT counterparts.6611 0.100 5.1299 0.7322 0% 1.7267 0.01% DT 5.9937 5.1834 1.1834 1.7 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ for simply supported circular (a/b = 1) and elliptical plates (a/b = 3) h/b Plate theory Elastic 0.7322 0% 1.91% 5.1834 1.56% 4.6686 0.8405 1.9001 5.1834 1.0049 0.1834 1.9503 0% 5.9504 5.6522 1.1787 1.6761 0.7322 1.0392 4.100 Table 5.8 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ for clamped circular (a/b = 1) and elliptical plates (a/b = 3) h/b Plate theory Elastic 0.6735 0.0392 0% 0% 0% 4.6762 0.40% 0.32% 1.8439 1.1834 0.11% Elastic a/b = 3 IT DT 4.86% a/b = 1 IT 1. Table 5.8833 14.1834 1.32% 0.9504 5.38% DT 1.12% 0.Triangular and Elliptical Plates obtained by using both plasticity theories is not as significant as that on corresponding elastic buckling stress parameters.001 Thin plate Mindlin Difference Thin plate Mindlin Difference Thin plate Mindlin Difference 5.8631 1.9503 0% 5.52% 1.7322 0% 1.0063 4.7322 1.0392 4.8179 11.08% a/b = 1 IT 5.9037 5.0628 1.3583 0.025 0.7322 1.7322 1.7322 1.9504 5.01% 0. Generally.8258 3.6459 4.81% 4.97% 0.81% 0.025 0.9503 0% 5.32% 0.1834 1.38% Elastic a/b = 3 IT DT 1.1787 0.6481 4.7322 1.0392 4.0392 4.8728 0.0392 4.7267 0.0392 4.7322 1.5721 1.0050 4.54% 115 .40% 0.3030 0.6788 0.0392 1.0378 4.96% 0.

Triangular and Elliptical Plates Effect of aspect ratio The variations of plastic buckling stress parameter with respect to the aspect ratio are shown in Figs.050 τ = 0. 5.6 Variation of λ with respect to a/b ratio for simply supported elliptical plates 116 . plastic buckling stress parameters decreases with increasing aspect ratios.001 τ = 0.6 and 5. 5. the variation of plastic buckling stress parameters with respect to aspect ratio is negligible.5 1.5 2 2. the plastic buckling stress parameters obtained by using IT and DT are close to each other for simply supported elliptical plates.25 1 0.5 3 Aspect ratio a/b Fig. For large thickness-to-width ratios.75 0.100 IT DT λ = σhb2/(π2D) 1.5 1 1. 2 σ b a 1.7 for simply supported and clamped elliptical plates.75 τ = 0. Interestingly. Generally.

050 τ = 0. 117 .Triangular and Elliptical Plates 7 6 5 b a σ τ = 0. The results are verified by comparing with the limited existing elastic and plastic solutions.7 Variation of λ with respect to a/b ratio for clamped elliptical plates 5. it can be concluded that the developed Ritz method can be readily applied for the plastic buckling analyses of arbitrarily shaped plates with sides are defined by polynomial functions.001 τ = 0. right angled triangular plates and elliptical plates.5 3 Aspect ratio a/b Fig.5 2 2.4 Concluding Remarks The applicability of the Ritz method for various plate shapes is demonstrated by solving the plastic buckling problems of isosceles triangular plates.100 IT DT λ = σhb2/(π2D) 4 3 2 1 0 1 1. Based on the triangular and elliptical plate examples. 5.

CHAPTER 6

SKEW PLATES

6.1

Introduction

Buckling behaviour of skew plates is especially important to engineers who are involved in designing aircraft wings, missile fins and skew bridges. The elastic buckling of skew plates has been studied extensively by many researchers who employed various numerical methods for solutions. Anderson (1951), Wittrick (1953), Mizusawa et al. (1980) and Wang et al. (1992) used the Ritz method, York and Williams (1995) adopted the Lagrangian multiplier method, Huyton and York (2001) made used of the commercial finite element software ABAQUS and Wang et al. (2003) employed the differential quadrature method. When the skew plates are thick, the effect of transverse shear deformation must be considered. Otherwise the buckling capacity will be overestimated. The buckling problem of thick skew plates was

118

Skew Plates

investigated by Kitipornchai et al. 1993, Wang et al. 1993a and Xiang et al. 1995. However, there are hitherto no plastic buckling solutions for thick skew plates published in the literature. This chapter presents for the first time the plastic buckling solutions of thick skew plates. The plastic bifurcation buckling problem of skew Mindlin plates is solved by using the Ritz method. The skew coordinate system is adopted because it is the most natural coordinate system for this plate shape. The detailed formulation of the Ritz method using the skew coordinate system was presented in Section 3.4 and the computer code called BUCKRITZSKEW was developed (see in Appendix A). In the calculations of plastic buckling stress, both the incremental theory (IT) and the deformation theory (DT) of plasticity were adopted. The effects of transverse shear deformation, thickness-to-width ratios, aspect ratios and skew angles on the plastic buckling stress parameters are investigated. For convenience and clarity, the letters, IT and DT, will be stated in the parentheses to indicate the plasticity theories used. For example, λ (IT) refers to the plastic buckling stress parameter λ based on IT. In generating the numerical results, a typical aerospace material Al 7075 T6 is adopted. The material has the following properties: Poisson’s ratio ν = 0.33, E = 10.5 × 10 6 psi, σ 0 = σ 0.7 = 70 ksi, σ 0.2 = 67 ksi and the

Ramberg-Osgood parameters k = 3/7, c = 9.2 .

6.2

Uniaxial and Biaxial Loading

Consider a skew plate of uniform thickness h, length a, oblique width b and skew angle ψ as shown in Fig. 6.1. The plate is subjected to in-plane uniaxial or biaxial compressive stresses and the boundary conditions of the plate edges may take any

119

Skew Plates

combination of simply supported, clamped and free edge conditions. The problem at hand is to determine the plastic bifurcation stress of such a loaded plate.

η

σ y = βσ x

σx

ψ

a/2 a/2

b/2 ξ

σx

σ y = βσ x

Fig. 6.1. Skew plate under biaxial compression stresses

**The plastic buckling stress parameters λ x , λ y used in the program code are defined
**

by:

σ x hb 2 λx = 2 = λ π D

λy = σ y hb 2 π 2D

= βλ

(6.1)

(6.2)

where λ is the key parameter to be evaluated. Before generating the buckling results, convergence studies of the plastic buckling stress parameter λ = σ x hb 2 /(π 2 D) with respect to the degree of polynomial functions were conducted. Tables 6.1 to 6.4 present typical convergence studies for simply supported and clamped skew plates. Monotonic convergence is observed with an increasing degree of polynomials for the Ritz approximate functions. The convergence rate is found to be slower when the skew angle increases. Generally, a polynomial

120

Skew Plates

degree set of p = 14 is found to furnish converged solutions. This degree of polynomial will be used to calculate all subsequent buckling results. Table 6.1. Convergence study of plastic buckling stress parameters λ for simply supported skew plate under uniaxial compression ( β = 0 , a/b=1)

h/b

p IT 8 10

ψ = 0o

DT 4.0000 4.0000 __ __ __ 3.9848 3.9848 __ __ __ 2.7954 2.7954 2.7954 __ __

ψ = 30 o

IT 6.0105 5.9637 5.9361 5.9184 5.9062 5.9621 5.9163 5.8893 5.8719 5.8599 4.6798 4.6069 4.5547 4.5192 4.4937 DT 6.0105 5.9637 5.9361 5.9184 5.9062 5.9544 5.9092 5.8825 5.8652 5.8534 3.0723 3.0632 3.0574 3.0535 3.0508

ψ = 45 o

IT 10.8428 10.5315 10.3651 10.2528 10.1710 9.6919 9.4476 9.3321 9.2549 9.1977 7.8187 7.3994 7.2705 7.1860 7.1015 DT 10.8428 10.5315 10.3651 10.2528 10.171 9.3467 9.1711 9.0815 9.0202 8.9736 3.4149 3.3831 3.3696 3.3614 3.3551

4.0000 4.0000 __ __ __ 3.9850 3.9850 __ __ __ 3.4955 3.4955 3.4955 __ __

0.001

12 14 16 8 10

0.025

12 14 16 8 10

0.05

12 14 16

In order to check the correctness of the program, comparison studies are shown in Tables 6.5 and 6.6 against existing elastic buckling solutions because there are no plastic buckling solutions available in the open literature. The elastic buckling solutions can readily be obtained from the plastic buckling analysis program by setting Et = E s = E . Alternatively, elastic buckling solutions can also be obtained by setting the thickness-to-width ratio to a small value (for eg. τ = 0.001) in the plastic buckling analysis. This is because the plastic buckling solutions approach the corresponding

121

Skew Plates

elastic buckling solutions for relatively thin plates. It can be seen from Tables 6.5 and 6.6 that thin plate (τ = 0.001) plastic buckling results agree well with all existing elastic buckling solutions for clamped skew plates. For simply supported skew plates, the present results agree with some existing solutions (Fried and Schmitt, 1972; Kitipornchai et al, 1993; Saadatpour et al., 2002) but are slightly higher than the existing solutions obtained by Saadatpour et al. (1998), Huyton and York (2001) and Wang et al. (2003). This is due to the treatment of the corner condition as discussed in the paper by Wang et al. (1992).

Table 6.2. Convergence study of plastic buckling stress parameters λ for simply supported skew plate under biaxial compression σ x = σ y = σ ( β = 1 , a/b=1)

h/b

p IT 8 10

ψ = 0o

DT 2.0000 2.0000 __ __ __ 1.9927 1.9927 __ __ __ 1.8649 1.8649 __ __ __

ψ = 30 o

IT 2.5757 2.5597 2.5500 2.5437 2.5393 2.5634 2.5474 2.5378 2.5315 2.5271 2.1672 2.1607 2.1567 2.1541 2.1523 DT 2.5757 2.5597 2.5500 2.5437 2.5393 2.5634 2.5474 2.5378 2.5315 2.5271 2.1497 2.1436 2.1398 2.1373 2.1356

ψ = 45 o

IT 3.8364 3.7640 3.7167 3.6836 3.6592 3.8068 3.7348 3.6874 3.6541 3.6293 2.5255 2.5093 2.4985 2.4909 2.4852 DT 3.8364 3.7640 3.7167 3.6836 3.6592 3.8068 3.7347 3.6874 3.6540 3.6293 2.4742 2.4605 2.4512 2.4446 2.4397

2.0000 2.0000 __ __ __ 1.9927 1.9927 __ __ __ 1.8713 1.8713 __ __ __

0.001

12 14 16 8 10

0.025

12 14 16 8 10

0.05

12 14 16

122

5382 13.4179 11.3547 5.7832 8.3880 7.617 20.2042 20.8350 7.6173 12.0739 10.4115 3. a/b = 1) h/b p IT 8 10 ψ = 0o DT 10.2690 7.9350 __ 5.6945 13.5476 13.9750 3.5382 13.05 12 14 16 123 .9772 9.8328 12.2756 11.6272 3.9751 9.0739 10.0737 __ __ 8.7831 __ 3.3926 10.3881 10.Skew Plates Table 6.5378 13.9352 8.7879 11.5476 13.4300 3.9361 8.3715 7.6054 3.4146 3.3007 11.7833 8.617 20.6098 3.0764 10.9930 12.8042 10.6543 13.5399 13.2398 3.025 12 14 16 8 10 0.1172 11.6083 20.9351 8.6083 20.2042 20.2680 9.3.5378 10.8009 13.4113 3.1786 11.3885 10.7840 8.0177 10.1172 15.0737 __ __ 8.2716 3.4743 10.6046 10. Convergence study of plastic buckling stress parameters λ for clamped skew plate under uniaxial compression σ x ( β = 0 .0764 10.2784 7.6543 13.3441 5.0101 10.3451 5.2392 __ ψ = 30 o IT DT ψ = 45 o IT 22.9753 9.5399 13.4112 0.001 12 14 16 8 10 0.6271 11.2392 3.6760 3.1346 20.1346 20.3439 __ 13.2392 3.7524 DT 22.

6251 6.0438 DT 6.3037 5.3044 5.2282 5.3044 5.6151 6.0546 9.5891 3.4245 3.2285 5.8550 6.5726 3.8550 6.7957 __ __ 0.6249 3.8854 8.6250 6.2294 5.8550 6.0546 9.05 12 14 16 124 .6150 6.8618 6.8324 - ψ = 45 o IT 10.2295 5.Skew Plates Table 6.9203 9.6155 6.4308 8.0293 3.8550 6.5286 8.5721 DT 10.8561 6.5722 3.8854 8.6150 2.8883 9.8324 2.0439 3.8618 6.3036 __ __ 5.6829 2.3037 5.8549 6.4654 8.2298 5.4855 8.0439 3.2280 __ 2. a/b = 1) h/b p IT 8 10 ψ = 0o DT 5.8561 6.4919 8.8326 2.4851 3.5746 3.6254 6.8549 6.0292 3.4.8953 9.6828 __ __ ψ = 30 o IT 6.9203 9.001 12 14 16 8 10 0.8953 9.4259 8.0292 5.0443 3.2281 5.3036 __ __ 5.6278 6.7957 2.7957 2.4248 8.0328 3.4866 8.025 12 14 16 8 10 0.2293 __ 2. Convergence study of plastic buckling stress parameters λ for clamped skew plate under biaxial compression σ x = σ y = σ ( β = 1 .6178 6.8883 9.8324 2.6829 2.0297 3.

356 double Fourier series.3 10.80 8.Skew Plates Table 6. (2002) Ritz Method3 Wang et al.918 6.061 9. 2 orthogonal polynomial functions.001) a/b References Uniaxial compression (β = 0) Durvasula (1971) Fried and Schmitt (1972) Kitipornchai et al. (1993) Huyton and York (2001) Present Study Biaxial Compression ( β = 1) 1 2 1 3 Differential 4.000 4.616 1. (1993) Present Study Ritz Method3 Ritz Method Ritz method Ritz Method 3 3 3 2.000 __ 4.67 10.756 9.356 2.000 4.625 12.250 1.684 2.000 __ 4.2 10.000 4.927 1 Saadatpour et.904 5.41 5.M Ritz Method2 4.000 2. simple polynomial functions 125 .000 __ 4.253 10. al.000 6.897 5.544 1.905 8.621 5. (1998) Galerkin Method Huyton and York.616 3.03 5.39 10.3 8.000 2 Wang et al. Comparison study against existing elastic solutions for simply supported skew plates (τ = 0.250 2.103 9.91 5.000 1. (2003) Present Study Durvasula (1971) Kitipornchai et al.59 5.000 Quadrature Method Ritz Method3 Ritz Method1 Ritz Method2 ABAQUS Ritz Method3 4. (1993) Present Study Wang et al. (2001) ABAQUS Saadatpour et al.5.684 3.544 2. (1993) Method ψ = 0o ψ = 30 o ψ = 45 o Ritz Method1 F.868 5.83 5.85 5.E.

1 20.7 and 6. Comparison study against existing elastic solutions for clamped skew plates (τ = 0.106 20.Skew Plates Table 6.208 10.538 10.107 10. The Kirchhoff plate (classical thin plate) solutions are obtained by setting the shear correction factor κ 2 = 1000 as discussed in Chapter 4.07 10.172 Ritz Method4 Ritz Method3 Ritz Method3 Ritz Method3 Ritz Method3 5. (1993) 2 Huyton and York (2001) Present Study Biaxial compression ( β = 1) Ashton(1969) 1 Wang et al.788 Wang et al.888 9.304 5. (1993) Huyton and York. (2001) 1 Saadatpour et al.07 10.304 3.074 __ 10. 4 beam characteristic functions Effect of transverse shear deformation and thickness-to-width ratio Tables 6.981 6.636 13.208 5.10 20.074 7.092 9.6. It 126 .923 6.1 15. (2003) Present Study Kitipornchai et al.538 13.54 13.135 15.923 3.283 10.867 13.39 5.44 20.001) a/b Uniaxial compression (β = 0) Wittrick (1953) Durvasula (1970) Kitipornchai et al.854 6. simple polynomial functions. (2002) Wang et al.112 20.788 7.284 21.58 13.538 13.30 10. 2 double Fourier series.5 13.64 20. (1993) Present Study 2 1 3 Method Ψ = 0˚ Ψ = 30˚ Ψ = 45˚ Ritz Method1 Galerkin Method Ritz Method ABAQUS Ritz Method3 Differential Quadrature Method Ritz Method3 Ritz Method ABAQUS Ritz Method 3 2 2 __ 10. (1993) Present Study trigonometric series.854 5.197 15.888 7.867 __ 7.8 show the effect of transverse shear deformation on the plastic buckling stress parameter λ for simply supported and clamped skew plates under uniaxial compressive stress.

1861 4.2528 0% 0% 0% 10.9184 0% 5.001 Kirchhoff Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff Mindlin Difference 5.68% 7.0275 1. the effect of transverse shear deformation is more significant in the case of clamped boundary condition than in the case of simply supported boundary condition.0536 0.1714 9.1 127 .50% 3.83% 1. The effect is more pronounced as the thickness-to-width ratio and the skew angle increases.2530 10.3182 9.9184 5.3614 0.66% ψ = 30 o IT 5.30% Elastic ψ = 45 o IT DT 10.8671 3.9184 5.3895 3.8652 0.0202 0.6296 4.Skew Plates can be seen that the effect of transverse shear deformation lowers the plastic buckling stress parameter λ .9184 5.9184 5.76% 10.8950 5.1496 1.2530 9.2530 10.52% 5.2530 10.025 0.53% 0. Moreover.58% 3.9184 5.2530 10.54% 7.8833 13.0700 3.01% 10.9184 0% 5.2549 0.2530 8.2560 16.8876 0.8719 0.35% 0.4651 7.6199 4.51% 4.38% 4.9638 0. Generally. Table 6.5279 7.71% DT 5.7 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ for simply supported skew plates under uniaxial compression (a/b = 1) h/b Plate theory Elastic 0.9513 1.05 0.04% 5.9184 5.7978 2.9184 0% 5. the reductions due to the effect of transverse shear deformation for the plastic buckling stress parameter λ x (IT) are larger than those for λ x (DT).5265 6.0724 9.2528 10.0034 2.5192 2.88% 9.2528 10.35% 9.9019 5.

0420 10.05 0.1366 13.5387 7.Skew Plates Table 6.3555 13.0006 24.9751 2.94% 20.8 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ for clamped skew plates under uniaxial compression (a/b = 1) h/b Plate theory Elastic 0. Effect of aspect ratio a/b The variations of plastic buckling stress parameter λ with respect to the aspect ratio are shown in Figs.5382 13.5310 7. respectively. Generally.45% 3.00% 1.1346 20.5387 13.1366 20.1 13.3635 17.5387 7.03% 0.1523 11.0363 5.96% 33.89% 3.0947 1.3.8833 10.2683 10.2 and 6. 6.14% 3.5387 13.18% 2. the plastic buckling stresses differ appreciably from the corresponding elastic buckling stresses.1346 20.5 for.001 Kirchhoff Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff Mindlin Difference ψ = 30 o IT DT Elastic 13.33% 0.5382 13.6054 2.1366 12.97% The variations of plastic buckling stress parameter λ with respect to b/h ratio are shown in Figs.9399 12.2690 7. simply supported and clamped skew plates under uniaxial compressive stress.02% 1.3881 9.78% 13. the IT buckling curves are higher than the corresponding DT buckling curves and the difference increases as b/h ratio decreases.4 and 6.1368 20.4113 1. 128 .9365 1.1366 12.3825 19.0531 13. But for larger plate thicknesses i.5382 0% 0% 0% 13.61% 20.5387 10. As in the rectangular plate solutions.5% ψ = 45 o IT DT 20.2756 3. It can be seen that the plastic buckling stresses approach the elastic buckling stresses as the plate thickness decreases.025 0.e.44% 8.6796 3.4957 12.1346 0% 0% 0% 20.16% 25. smaller b/h ratios.4987 8.8042 11.43% 0. 6.5387 13.4633 3.1368 20.9412 1.1688 32. The thin plate buckling curves are also shown as dashed lines for comparison purposes.19% 12.4965 10.2673 5.8328 11.

However. for relatively thick plates (for example τ = 0. These kinks indicate the mode switching. τ = 0. Generally. simply supported and clamped skew plates under uniaxial compressive stress.05 ). respectively. only the positive skew angles are considered in Figs.7 for.Skew Plates there are some kinks in the buckling curves.7. 6. It should be noted that the plastic buckling stress parameters for skew plates with negative skew angles are the same as those for skew plates with positive skew angles since the loading conditions are symmetric.05 ).05). the difference between λ (IT) and λ (DT) increases with increasing skew angles. for relatively large thickness-to-width ratios (for example. 6. However.6 and 6. It is interesting to note that the plastic buckling stress parameter λ (DT) is almost constant with respect to the aspect ratio when the thickness-to-width ratio is large ( τ = 0. these kinks cannot be seen clearly in the buckling curves and the buckling capacity gained due to mode switching effect is negligible. the effect of skew angle on the plastic buckling stress parameter is rather insignificant. Therefore. Effect of skew angle ψ The effect of skew angle on the plastic buckling stress parameter is shown in Figs. 129 .6 and 6. It can be seen that the plastic buckling stress parameter increases with increasing skew angles for small thicknessto-width ratios.

2 Normalized plastic buckling stress σc/σ0.Skew Plates 1.4 1.4 σc Elastic IT DT 10 20 30 40 50 60 0.8 0. 6.2 σc 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 b/h Fig.4 1.2 0.2 versus b/h ratio for clamped skew plate (ψ = 30˚) 130 .6 0.6 β =1 σc a b Elastic IT DT 0.4 0.2 0 b/h Fig.2 β =0 30˚ 1 σc a b σc σc/σ0.2 versus b/h ratio for simply supported skew plate (ψ = 30˚) 1. 6.2 0.2 β =0 30˚ 1 σc a b σc σc/σ0.3 Normalized plastic buckling stress σc/σ0.8 β =1 σc a b 0.

Skew Plates 10 λ = σxhb2/(π2D) 8 Elastic IT DT τ = 0.025 τ = 0.05 30˚ σx a b σx 6 4 2 0.5 3 Aspect ratio a/b Fig.4 Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for simply supported skew plate (ψ = 30˚) 30 25 Elastic IT DT τ = 0.5 2 2.05 30˚ λ = σxhb2/(π2D) σx a b σx 20 15 10 5 0 0. 6.5 1 1.5 3 Aspect ratio a/b Fig.025 τ = 0.5 1 1.5 Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus aspect ratio a/b for clamped skew plate (ψ = 30˚) 131 .5 2 2. 6.

001 τ = 0.6 Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus skew angle ψ for simply supported skew plate (a/b = 1) 25 20 τ = 0.050 IT DT σx a b ψ σx λ = σxhb2/(π2D) 8 6 4 2 0 0 15 30 45 Skew angle ψ Fig.050 IT DT σx a b ψ σx λ = σxhb2/(π2D) 15 10 5 0 0 15 30 45 Skew angle ψ Fig.001 τ = 0.Skew Plates 12 10 τ = 0.025 τ = 0. 6.7 Plastic buckling stress parameter λ versus skew angle ψ for clamped skew plate (a/b = 1) 132 . 6.025 τ = 0.

In order to differentiate between the results of R shear and S shear loads. 6. 6.3 Shear Loading There are two kinds of in-plane shear loadings when dealing with shear buckling problem of skew plates.Skew Plates 6. The second kind is shear loading being applied uniformly along the plate edges as shown in Fig.8 Two kinds of shear loading conditions on skew plates: (a) R shear loading and (b) S shear loading The first kind of shear loading is referred to as R shear loading while the second kind is referred to as S shear loading. The first kind of shear loading is the shear loading acting along the two horizontal edges where the traction is a pure shear stress. the traction consists of both shear and normal stresses of such magnitude that every infinitesimal rectangular element is in a state of pure shear.8a. whereas along the two other oblique edges. τ xy = R b a τ xy = R (a) ψ 2τ xy tanψ τ xy = S b a τ xy = S (b) 2τ xy tanψ Fig.8b. The first kind of shear loading is depicted in Fig. the subscript R will be used to indicate the former loads while 133 . 6.

the degree of polynomial p = 14 is adopted for all subsequent computations for R shear and S shear buckling stresses.12 show the convergence studies that were carried out for the skew plates with relatively large skew angles (ψ = 45˚ and ψ = -45˚) because it has been found in the previous section that more polynomial terms are required for highly skew plates. the present result is lower than the existing results by about 11% for simply supported skew plate of ψ = 30˚ under S shear loading. (6. It is believed that some of the previously published results may not have converged. It can be seen that the results are close except for some cases. λ x = λ y = 0 λ xy = λ s .4) (6. The comparison studies verify somewhat the correctness of the present formulation and the accuracy of the present Ritz results. For example. Generally. λ x = −2λ s tanψ for R shear loading: for S shear loading. 134 .5) Tables 6. it can be seen that the 14th degree of polynomials in the displacement functions are sufficient to ensure converged solutions.9 to 6. The following symbols are used to denote the plastic buckling stress parameters λ xy = λ R .Skew Plates the subscript S will denote the latter kind of load. Table 6. Therefore.001 in the plastic buckling analysis. comparisons can only be made with elastic buckling solutions by setting τ = 0.13 shows the comparison study between the present buckling results and existing shear buckling solutions. Since no plastic shear buckling solutions are available.

132 2.148 7.823 4.392 10.153 39.039 39.248 2.411 5.871 135 .794 4.464 61.361 10.913 3.766 1.840 1.590 λS 6.Skew Plates Table 6.978 7.001 a/b p IT DT IT τ = 0.353 Table 6.709 34.638 12.000 22.205 23.967 12.840 1.361 10.132 7.464 61.978 5.868 14.517 10.698 49.053 4.265 3.517 10.558 9.638 12.458 9.597 23.458 9.597 23.147 2.039 39.153 39.393 9.361 1.138 2.317 1.205 23.133 2.053 4.508 12.619 49.392 10.001 a/b p IT DT IT τ = 0.382 2.558 9.379 17.983 7.009 5.129 10.201 7.050 DT λR 8 1 10 12 14 8 2 10 12 14 26.766 7.150 2.840 1.283 4.482 61.325 10.387 1.881 3.411 5.979 7.050 DT λR 8 1 10 12 14 8 2 10 12 14 9.347 λS 61.000 22.135 2.201 λS 1.9 Convergence study of plastic buckling parameters for simply supported skew plates under shear loading (ψ = 45˚) τ = 0.495 17.083 39.978 5.600 61.212 2.089 4.451 λR 9.367 1.590 λS 6.775 34.043 λR 26.861 34.482 61.738 5.853 5.766 1.840 1.879 17.300 1.979 7.566 49.600 61.146 λS 1.508 12.093 9.736 34.303 1.868 14.393 9.528 49.347 λS 61.967 12.994 4.10 Convergence study of plastic buckling parameters for simply supported skew plates under shear loading (ψ = -45˚) τ = 0.336 9.853 5.083 39.203 2.300 19.358 1.148 2.414 2.794 4.709 9.089 4.353 10.007 39.043 λR λS λR 2.371 2.007 39.150 5.981 5.373 2.766 1.451 λR λS λR 2.

375 9.380 19.637 49.437 2.904 8.887 7.285 7.587 20.108 89.873 32.769 13.376 9.176 8.376 24.897 1.823 49.080 21.381 54.051 89.394 19.308 2.310 2.365 2.836 1.049 11.441 1.742 31.389 2.872 6.897 1.042 89.836 24.709 13.050 DT λR 8 10 1 12 13 14 8 10 2 12 13 14 36.490 14.258 22.181 6.897 1.285 7.109 14.940 27.990 31.422 61.996 19.Skew Plates Table 6.836 1.161 19.366 2.039 89.081 14.307 λS 1.445 1.738 22.032 28. Convergence study of plastic buckling parameters for clamped skew plates under shear loading (ψ = 45˚) τ = 0.039 89.375 9.459 61.11.995 λS 9.638 49.968 23.769 16.365 2.872 6.001 a/b p IT DT IT τ = 0.769 16.626 19.108 89.940 54.386 1.471 24.685 13.317 λS 1.345 2.555 61.739 λR λS λR 2.198 61.600 6.626 19.067 21. Convergence study of plastic buckling parameters for clamped skew plates under shear loading (ψ = -45˚) τ = 0.996 19.001 a/b p IT DT IT τ = 0.394 19.725 19.050 DT λR 8 1 10 12 14 8 2 10 12 14 λS λR λS λR λS λR 2.205 28.417 61.431 1.856 9.500 2.376 16.12.170 61.442 2.739 λR 36.404 1.170 61.324 2.897 1.376 9.636 8.148 6.049 11.725 19.628 6.433 1.168 61.318 2.205 136 .307 2.047 18.587 20.826 20.365 2.168 61.769 16.418 61.432 1.042 89.198 61.995 λS 9.470 24.170 24.170 24.892 6.738 22.555 61.836 1.528 8.458 2.051 89.742 31.463 1.241 24.241 24.655 49.385 1.873 32.436 2.836 6.892 6.685 Table 6.768 15.588 8.856 9.826 10.709 13.380 19.990 31.628 6.161 19.

873 27.348 c λR 31.00d 22.14 to 6.830c 26.54a 7.161 __ __ 16. The effect is more pronounced for the skew plates with larger thickness-to-width ratios and more 137 .616 14.92d __ 89.11 12.080 17.66b __ 24.778 6.0167 11.13 Comparison study of elastic buckling stress parameter of skew plates under shear (a/b = 1) Skew angle -45˚ -30˚ -15˚ 15˚ Researchers Present Others Present Others Present Others Present Others Present Others Present Others SSSS CCCC λR 22. the classical thin plate (Kirchhoff) solutions are presented as well.738 32.539 7.241c __ c 21.08b d 30˚ 45˚ a Durvasula (1971). It can be seen that the Mindlin plate solutions are smaller than their corresponding classical thin plate solutions due to the effect of transverse shear deformation. e Wittrick (1954). These thin plate solutions are obtained by setting the shear correction factor κ 2 = 1000 as discussed in Chapter 4.292 22.324e 24.963 17.794 9.347 10.64b 16.7 a λS 5.28d 39.686c 6.674c __ 61.24b 14.596 16.76d 11.903 23.39b 16.4a 7. Effect of transverse shear deformation and thickness-to-width ratio Tables 6. In order to examine the effect of transverse shear deformation.039 24.432 10.150 7.17 show the effect of transverse shear deformation on the plastic buckling stress parameter λ R and λ S for simply supported and clamped skew plates.61a 7.886 39.7a 9.Skew Plates Table 6.354 14.835 7.07f 9. fArgyis (1965) Yoshimura (1963).56 b λS 9.063c 14.1a 12.868 27.451 64.04f 5. b Durvasula (1970). Hamada (1959).285 __ 9.

5714 8.57% IT DT 26.57% ψ = 45o IT 9.025 Mindlin 7.3470 0% 6.0761 7.8683 7. Table 6.4549 53.7139 5.3471 9.4049 6.2590 0.001 Mindlin 7.0132 3.4509 0.2074 48.50% Elastic 9.3470 0% 7.80% 7.94% 9.8731 0% 0% 22.17% DT 61.8742 26.1496 Difference 0% Kirchhoff 7.1496 0.57% 54.39% 22.27% Elastic 61.59% Elastic Kirchhoff 7.97% Table 6.0180 54.1496 0% 6.6943 10. Generally. λ R (Elastic and IT) and λ S (Elastic and IT) are more influenced by the effect of transverse shear deformation than their DT counterparts.09% Kirchhoff 0.8792 1.8008 7.8051 0.1496 0.0199 3.001 Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff 0.8731 0% 26.3887 5.8742 24.4505 0.1497 7.01% 56.050 Mindlin 6.4509 0.43% 5.0083 5.8742 26.9371 Difference 2.4708 6.0707 3.31% 2.8742 26.01% 61.3471 9.0310 22.15 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ S for simply supported skew plates (a/b = 1) h/b Plate theory ψ = 30 o Elastic 26.3470 0% 9.3471 9.1496 0% 5.1029 21.60% 1.98% 0.4509 0.0399 2.4549 59.48% DT 7.8742 26.050 Mindlin Difference 138 .002 13.43% 1.3663 0.4549 61.1316 0.1442 2.8731 26. the buckling stress parameters.75% ψ = 45o IT 61.88% 61.8400 2.14 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ R for simply supported skew plates (a/b = 1) h/b Plate theory ψ = 30 o IT 7.7996 2.3471 9.76% Kirchhoff 7.0296 0.0033 1.4549 61.32% 2.1497 7.30% 26.1046 2.1496 0.01% 6.7807 7.25% DT 9.9823 0.3471 9.4549 61.025 Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff 0.Skew Plates restrained boundary conditions.6957 0.5278 3.3488 7.2548 2.0953 Difference 0.2551 2.

79% IT DT 16.24% ψ = 45o IT 89.73% 2.1733 14.2715 12.9687 2.20% 0.33% IT DT 39.14% 39.5960 0% 16. for simply supported and clamped skew plates with ψ = 30 o .8860 16.0423 7.89% 1.3052 30.46% Elastic 89.58% 89.7018 6.20% 1.0404 23.Skew Plates Table 6. with respect to b/h ratios are shown in Figs.0404 24.4582 7.9122 0.88% DT 24.64% 24.9704 7.8888 39.050 Mindlin Difference The variations of plastic buckling stresses.0382 2.65% 0.7553 7.06% ψ = 45o IT 24.9607 1.10.01% 24.8966 3.8872 2. Owing to the fact that the S shear loading is equivalent to the R shear loading plus a uniaxial tensile loading for ψ > 0 .17 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ S for clamped skew plates (a/b = 1) h/b Plate theory ψ = 30 o Elastic 39.0389 0.2375 4.01% 0% 35.9 and 6.8860 0.1713 83.3027 6.0389 0.0404 24.3948 2.5960 0.09% Kirchhoff 0.5968 14.9718 9.01% 39.4363 34. the plastic buckling strength of plate in S shear case should be higher than that 139 .0404 24.56% 35.3654 2.46% Elastic 24.5968 16.6344 1.001 Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff 0.68% 16.6331 18.33% 18. respectively.01% 18. R shear and S shear.5968 16.1713 70.56% 13.4363 12.8888 16.5960 0% 0% 13.1713 89. 6.1609 0.5968 39.0123 3.01% 6.1627 7.3948 3.4171 11.1649 3.5960 16.16 Effect of transverse shear deformation on λ R for clamped skew plates (a/b = 1) h/b Plate theory ψ = 30 o Elastic 16.025 Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff 0.4578 2.8897 13.12% 71.27% Kirchhoff 0.8888 38.0389 0.4160 2.1609 0.1713 89.2715 8.01% 82.01% 7.050 Mindlin Difference Table 6.2337 21.6309 16.5968 16.1519 2.15% DT 89.8029 77.01% 89.3052 11.9019 13.8888 34.025 Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff 0.5968 16.0404 20.2645 61.001 Mindlin Difference Kirchhoff 0. The buckling curves based on the classical thin plate theory are presented as dashed lines for comparison purposes.1609 0.7362 6.01% 1.1713 89.

The difference is more pronounced for the skew plates with large thickness-to-width ratios and small aspect ratios (i. 6. This is due to the presence of high tensile stress. as discussed before. This fact is always correct for elastic and IT buckling curves.16 show the variations of λ R and λ S with respect to the skew angle ψ for simply supported and clamped skew plates.11 and 6. the shear plastic buckling stress parameters based on IT are found to be higher than those based on DT. it can be seen from Fig. It can be seen that λ R (IT) decreases first and then increases when the skew angle ψ increases from -45˚ to +45˚. λ S (DT) may be smaller than λ R (DT) for small b/h ratios. λ R (IT) for a 140 . λ R and λ S . For R shear case. a / b < 1 ) Effect of skew angle ψ Figures 6.10 that. 6. However. Effect of aspect ratio a/b The variations of shear plastic buckling stress parameters. the kinks (that indicate buckling mode switching) along the curves are obvious for both IT and DT buckling curves. On the other hand the locations of these kinks for S shear case are not as obvious as in R shear case.Skew Plates in R shear case. Note that the plastic buckling results for positive shear loading of skew plates with negative skew angles will be same as those for negative shear loading of skew plates with positive skew angles. with respect to aspect ratios are shown in Figs. For a given aspect ratio and thickness ratio. Generally.12. However. It can be seen that λ R and λ S based on DT are more sensitive to the thickness-towidth ratios than their IT counterparts. these kinks for DT buckling curves fade away as the thickness-to-width ratio increases.13 to 6.e.

6.Skew Plates skew plate with negative skew angle are higher than those for a skew plate with a corresponding positive skew angle.75 a b Elastic IT DT τxy/σ0. However. Therefore. The variation of λ R (DT) and λ S (DT) with respect to the skew angle is the same as their IT counterparts for small thickness-to-width ratios. the variations of λ R (DT) and λ S (DT) with respect to the skew angle are almost constant. for a skew plate with positive skew angle. for larger thickness-to-width ratios. the values of λ S (IT) increase with increasing skew angles ψ from -45˚ to +45˚. In another word.2 0.5 R shear 0. On the other hand.2 versus b/h ratio for simply supported skew plate (a/b =1) 141 . λ R (IT) in the case of positive shear loading is lower that its negative shear loading counterpart. 1 S shear 30˚ 0.25 a b 30˚ 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 b/h Fig. the direction of the shear stresses that cause a lower plastic buckling stress parameter λ R (IT) is the one that tends to increase the skewness of the plate.9 Normalized buckling stress τxy/σ0.

10 Normalized buckling stress τxy/σ0.5 1 1.025 τ = 0. Variation of plastic buckling stress parameters with respect to aspect ratio for SSSS skew plate with ψ = 30˚ 142 .5 1 1.11. 6.5 3 3.015 τ = 0.Skew Plates 1 30˚ a b S shear 0.5 4 0 0.2 versus b/h ratio for clamped skew plate (a/b = 1) 14 40 12 τ = 0.25 b 30˚ 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 b/h Fig.5 Elastic IT DT R shear a 0.5 2 2. 6.050 a b IT DT 30 30˚ a b 10 λxy 8 30˚ 20 6 4 10 2 0 0.75 τxy/σ0.2 0.5 4 Aspect ratio a/b Aspect ratio a/b Fig.5 3 3.5 2 2.

13. Variation of plastic shear buckling stress parameters with respect to aspect ratio for CCCC skew plate with ψ = 30˚ 25 20 τ = 0.5 4 0 0.Skew Plates 20 τ = 0. 6.5 2 2.5 1 1.5 1 1.12.01 τ = 0.5 2 2. Variation of plastic (R shear) buckling stress parameters with respect to skew angle of SSSS skew plate 143 . 6.02 τ = 0.5 4 Aspect ratio a/b Aspect ratio a/b Fig.001 τ = 0.5 10 30˚ 3 3.5 3 3.03 15 60 IT DT 30˚ a b 50 λR 10 λS 40 30 20 5 a b 0 0.050 IT DT a b +ψ 15 λR 10 5 0 -45 -30 -15 0 15 30 45 Skew angle ψ Fig.025 τ = 0.

6.14. Variation of plastic (R shear) buckling stress parameters with respect to skew angle of CCCC skew plate 144 .025 τ = 0.15. Variation of plastic (S shear) buckling stress parameters with respect to skew angle of SSSS skew plate 35 30 τ = 0.050 20 a b +ψ IT DT λS 10 0 -45 -30 -15 0 15 30 45 Skew angle ψ Fig.Skew Plates 30 τ = 0.03 IT DT a b +ψ 25 20 λR 15 10 5 0 -45 -30 -15 0 15 30 45 Skew angle ψ Fig.001 τ = 0. 6.02 τ = 0.001 τ = 0.

and skew angles on the plastic buckling stress parameters were discussed. 145 .02 τ = 0. biaxial and shear stresses are examined. plastic buckling analysis of skew plates was carried out using the Ritz method based on the skew coordinate system.16.001 τ = 0. The effects of aspect ratios. thickness to width ratios. Generally. In order to include the effect of transverse shear deformation.Skew Plates 30 a b 20 τ = 0.03 IT DT +ψ λS 10 0 -45 -30 -15 0 15 30 45 Skew angle ψ Fig. the effect of transverse shear deformation lowers the buckling stress parameters and the effect is more pronounced in the case of the plastic buckling stress parameters obtained by using IT than in the case of their DT counterparts. The plastic buckling behaviour of skew plates under unaxial.4 Concluding Remarks In this chapter. the Mindlin plate theory was adopted. Variation of plastic (S shear) buckling stress parameters with respect to skew angle of CCCC skew plate 6. 6.

. 2000). Liew et al. Laura et al. Their buckling capacities need to be calculated when applied in situations where in-plane compressive of forces act on the plates. does not necessarily lead to the desired lowest critical load. It had been found that the buckling mode shape for an 146 .. instrument mounting bases for space vehicles and microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) devices (Su and Spearing.CHAPTER 7 CIRCULAR AND ANNULAR PLATES 7. 1989.1 Introduction Circular and annular plates are used in turbine disks. Wang et al. The assumption of axisymmetric buckling. 1994a. submarines. 1993c.. (Raju and Rao. 2004). The elastic axisymmetric buckling problems (where the deflection surface is assumed to be axisymmetric) of circular and annular plates have been studied by many researchers. however.

The elastoplastic buckling of annular plate under pure shear was studied by Ore and Durban (1989). the asymmetric buckling problems of circular and annular plates have also been studied (Gerard. 1978. Thevendran and Wang. Therefore. All the aforementioned studies.Circular and Annular Plates annular plate. When dealing with relatively thick plates. however. 1996. Kosel and Bremec (2004) investigated the elastoplastic buckling of annular plates under uniform loading by using the finite different method. Wang. 2003). The Ritz method using the polar coordinate system is employed for the analysis and the program is coded in MATHEMATICA language (see Appendix A for the program called BUCKRITZPOLAR). Recently. an analytical approach is presented for the asymmetric plastic buckling problems of Mindlin circular and annular plates There are hitherto no analytical solution is available for the asymmetric buckling problems of Mindlin circular and annular plates. In this chapter. Otherwise the buckling load will be overestimated because the neglect of the effect of transverse shear deformation stiffens the plates. the plastic buckling of circular and annular Mindlin plates is studied. These studies are based on the classical thin plate (Kirchhoff) theory which neglects the effect of transverse shear deformation. 1958. although an analytical method for elastic buckling was presented by Yamaki (1958) based on the classical thin plate theory. which corresponds to the lowest critical load. are confined to the elastic buckling problems. 1971). In order to verify the numerical plastic buckling results. it is necessary to use thick plate theories such as the Mindlin plate theory for accurate buckling load. Majumdar. may be axisymmetric or asymmetric depending on the inner radius to outer radius ratio and edge boundary conditions (Yamaki. Readers who are interested in the analytical approach for elastic buckling problems of such Mindlin plates may refer to the paper by Wang and Tun 147 .

1a) αEh 3 ⎧ φr 1 ⎛ ∂φθ ⎞ 1 ⎛ ∂φr ⎞ ∂ 2φr ⎫ βEh 3 ⎟− ⎜ ⎟− ⎨ + ⎜ ⎬− 12 ⎩ r 2 r 2 ⎝ ∂θ ⎠ r ⎝ ∂r ⎠ ∂r 2 ⎭ 12 ∂w ⎫ Gh 3 ⎧ +κ Gh ⎨φr + ⎬− ∂r ⎭ 12 ⎩ 2 ⎧ 1 ⎛ ∂ 2φθ ⎞ ⎫ ⎟⎬ ⎨ ⎜ r ⎜ ∂r∂θ ⎟ ⎭ ⎠ ⎩ ⎝ ⎞⎫ ⎟⎬ = 0 ⎠⎭ ⎧1 ⎨ 2 ⎩r ⎛ ∂ 2φr ⎞ 1 ⎛ ∂ 2φθ ⎞ 1 ⎛ ∂φθ ⎜ 2 ⎟+ ⎜ ⎜ ∂θ ⎟ r ⎜ ∂r∂θ ⎟ − r 2 ⎜ ∂θ ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ (7. Following the work of Mindlin (1951). (2. the rotations ( φ r .e.36a-c) can be expressed in the polar coordinate system as (κ 2 ⎡ ∂φ φ 1 ⎛ ∂φ Gh − σh ∇ 2 w + κ 2 Gh ⎢ r + r + ⎜ θ r r ⎝ ∂θ ⎣ ∂r ) ⎞⎤ ⎟⎥ = 0 ⎠⎦ (7. The governing equations for the buckling of Mindlin plate under uniform compressive stresses shown in Eqs. φθ ) can be defined in terms of potentials ( ϕ . In the next section. the analytical approach for solving plastic buckling of circular and annular plates under uniform stress is featured.1c) where ∇ 2 (•) = ∂ 2 (•) / ∂r 2 + (1 / r )∂ (•) / ∂r + 1 / r 2 ∂ 2 (•) / ∂θ 2 . σ rr = σ θθ = σ .2a) 148 . 7.1b) αEh 3 ⎧ 1 ⎛ ∂ 2φθ ⎨ ⎜ 12 ⎩ r 2 ⎜ ∂θ 2 ⎝ Gh 3 + 12 ⎞ 1 ⎛ ∂φr ⎞ ⎫ β Eh 3 ⎟+ 2 ⎜ ⎟ r ∂θ ⎟ ⎬ + 12 ⎝ ⎠⎭ ⎠ ⎧ 1 ⎛ ∂ 2φr ⎞ ⎫ 1 ∂w ⎫ ⎧ 2 ⎨ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ∂r∂θ ⎟ ⎬ − κ Gh ⎨φθ + r ∂θ ⎬ ⎭ ⎩ ⎠⎭ ⎩r ⎝ ⎧ 1 ⎛ ∂ 2φr ⎞ 1 ⎛ ∂φr ⎞ ∂ 2φθ 1 ⎛ ∂φθ ⎞ φθ ⎫ ⎟+ 2 ⎜ ⎟− ⎬=0 ⎟+ 2 + ⎜ ⎨ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ r ⎝ ∂r ⎠ r 2 ⎭ ⎩ r ⎝ ∂r∂θ ⎠ r ⎝ ∂θ ⎠ ∂r (7.Circular and Annular Plates Myint Aung (2005).2 Analytical Method Consider a circular or annular Mindlin plates subjected to a uniform radial compressive stress i. H ) as ( ) φr = ∂ϕ 1 ∂H + ∂r r ∂θ (7.

respectively. and subtraction of Eqs.3b) and (7.1a-c) become ⎡ σh ⎞ ⎤ ⎛ ∇ 2 ⎢ϕ + ⎜1 − 2 ⎟ w⎥ = 0 ⎝ κ Gh ⎠ ⎦ ⎣ 2 ⎫ ⎧ ⎫ 12κ 2 G ∂ ⎧ 2 (ϕ + w)⎬ − 1 ∂ ⎨⎛α − β − 2G ⎞ 1 ∂ ϕ ⎬ ⎜ ⎟ ⎨α∇ ϕ − 2 2 E ⎠ r ∂θ ⎭ ∂r ⎩ Eh ⎭ r ∂r ⎩⎝ (7. (7.4b) The potential H may be separated from ϕ and w by differentiation.2b) In view of Eqs. Eqs.3c) For plates under uniform radial compressive stresses. σ rr = σ θθ = σ . the value of the expression α − β − 2G / E = 0 for both IT and DT.4b).Circular and Annular Plates φθ = 1 ∂ϕ ∂H − r ∂θ ∂r (7.4a) and (7.2a-b) and after some simplifications. (7. addition. These equations become 149 .4a) and 1 ∂ r ∂θ 2 ⎡ 2 ⎤ ⎛ 12κ 2 G (ϕ + w)⎥ − G ∂ ⎜ ∇ 2 − 12κ α∇ ϕ − ⎢ ⎜ Eh 2 h2 ⎣ ⎦ E ∂r ⎝ ⎞ ⎟H = 0 ⎟ ⎠ (7.3c) become. (7. i. 2 ⎞ ⎛ ∂ ⎛ 2 12κ 2 G ⎜ α∇ ϕ − (ϕ + w)⎟ + G ∂ ⎜ ∇ 2 − 12κ ⎟ rE ∂θ ⎜ ∂r ⎜ Eh 2 h2 ⎠ ⎝ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟H = 0 ⎟ ⎠ (7. Eqs.3b) 1 ∂ ⎧ 2 12κ 2 G 2G ⎞ ∂ 2ϕ ⎫ ⎛ (ϕ + w) + ⎜ α − β − ⎟ 2 ⎬ ⎨α∇ ϕ − E ⎠ ∂r ⎭ r ∂θ ⎩ Eh 2 ⎝ 12κ 2 G ⎞ 1 ∂ ⎧⎛ 2G ⎞ 1 ∂ 2 H ⎫ ∂ ⎛G 2 H⎟− − ⎜ ∇ H− 2 ⎟ r ∂r ⎨⎜ α − β − E ⎟ r ∂θ 2 ⎬ = 0 ∂r ⎜ E h E ⎠ ⎠ ⎩⎝ ⎭ ⎝ (7. In view of this.3a) + 1 ∂ r ∂θ ⎧G 2 12κ 2 G 2G ⎞ ∂ 2 H ⎫ ⎛ H + ⎜α − β − ⎟ ⎨ ∇ H− 2 ⎬=0 E ⎠ ∂r 2 ⎭ h E ⎝ ⎩E (7. (7.e.

(7. w1 .5b) It now remains to separate ϕ and w between Eq.7a-b) and (7.5) can be rewritten as ϕ = (Λ 1 − 1) w1 + (Λ 2 − 1) w2 In view of Eqs. (7.9a) (7. It is observed that these equations are satisfied by ϕ = (Λ − 1) w (7. (7.6) into Eqs.9b) For clarity.8). (7.Circular and Annular Plates ⎛ 12κ 2 ∇2 ⎜∇2 − 2 ⎜ h ⎝ ⎞ ⎟H = 0 ⎟ ⎠ (7. the following nondimensional terms are introduced 150 . Eq. For generality and convenience. (7.7b) Therefore. respectively. The constant can be obtained by substituting Eq.5a) ⎡ ⎤ 12κ 2 G (ϕ + w)⎥ = 0 ∇ 2 ⎢∇ 2ϕ − 2 Eh ⎣ ⎦ (7. (7.7a) Λ2 = σh κ 2 Gh (7. Θ 2 and Θ 3 . w2 and H will be denoted as Θ1 .5b) can be written as ∇ 2 w1 = 0 ⎡ ⎢ ⎢∇ 2 − ⎢ αEh 3 ⎢ 12 ⎣ ⎤ ⎥ σh ⎥ w2 = 0 ⎛ σh ⎞⎥ − 1⎟ ⎥ ⎜ 2 ⎝ κ Gh ⎠ ⎦ (7.3a) and (7. (7. Eq.3a) and Eq.6) where Λ is a constant.8) (7.5b).5b) Λ1 = 0 (7.

10c) σhR 2 λ= 2 π D (7. φθ ) can be defined in terms of three potential functions Q1. Q3 as ⎞ ∂Θ 2 1 ∂Θ 3 ∂Θ1 ⎛ λτ 2 E + +⎜ − 1⎟ 2 2 ∂r ⎜ 12(1 − ν )κ G ⎟ ∂r r ∂θ ⎠ ⎝ ⎞ 1 ∂Θ 2 ∂Θ 3 1 ∂Θ1 ⎛ λτ 2 E − +⎜ − 1⎟ 2 2 r ∂θ ⎜ 12(1 − ν )κ G ⎟ r ∂θ ∂r ⎠ ⎝ φr = − (7.12a) (7. (7. (7. Eqs. Therefore. Q2.11b) (7.2a-b).9a-b) can be rewritten in terms of nondimendional terms Θ1 . (7. r the normalized radial coordinate and τ the thickness-to-radius ratio.12b) (7.10d) where w is the normalized deflection.11a) φθ = − (7. Θ 2 and Θ 3 : ∇ 2 Θ1 = 0 (7.12c) (∇ 2 + δ 22 Θ 2 = 0 ) (∇ 2 + δ 32 Θ 3 = 0 ) where 151 .10a) (7.11c) w = Θ1 + Θ 2 The governing equations.10b) τ = (7.Circular and Annular Plates w= r= w R r R h R (7. ie. the transverse deflection w and the rotations ( φ r . in view of Eqs.5a).

and the variables ∆ 1 . (7. 1995) ⎧log r ⎫ Θ1 = A1 r n cos(nθ ) + B1 ⎨ − n ⎬ cos(nθ ) ⎩r ⎭ Θ 2 = A2 Rn (∆ 2 r ) cos(nθ ) + B2 S n (∆ 2 r ) cos(nθ ) Θ 3 = A3 Rn (∆ 3 r ) sin( nθ ) + B3 S n (∆ 3 r ) sin(nθ ) (7.16) j = 2. B3 are unknown constants. S n (∆ j χ ) .3 (7.14c) where the upper form of Eq. (7.13b) It can be seen that Eqs.3 (7.15) ⎧ J n (∆ j r ) if δ j2 ≥ 0 ⎪ Rn ( ∆ j r ) = ⎨ 2 ⎪ I n (∆ j r ) if δ j < 0 ⎩ 2 ⎧ ⎪ Yn (∆ j r ) if δ j ≥ 0 S n (∆ j r ) = ⎨ 2 ⎪ K n (∆ j r ) if δ j < 0 ⎩ j = 2. B2 .Circular and Annular Plates δ 22 = λ ⎛ ⎞ λτ 2 E α 1 − ν ⎜1 − ⎜ 12(1 − ν 2 )κ 2 G ⎟ ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ( 2 ) (7.14a) is used for n = 0 (axisymmetric buckling) and the lower form for n ∫ 0 (asymmetric buckling). and Yn (•) and K n (•) are Bessel functions of the second kind and the modified second 152 . respectively.3 (7.17) The parameters A1 . A3 . The functions Rn (∆ j χ ). ∆ 2 are given by ⎧ ⎪δ ∆j =⎨ j ⎪ Im(δ j ) ⎩ if δ j2 ≥ 0 if δ j2 < 0 j = 2. J n (•) and I n (•) are Bessel functions of the first kind and the modified first kind of order n.13a) δ =− 2 3 12κ 2 τ2 (7. n is the number of nodal diameters. and B1 .14a) (7. A2 .12a-c) are Bessel equations and the general solutions of these equations are given by (Chiang.14b) (7.

shear modulus G. as shown in Figure 7.1 Clamped circular plate under in-plane compressive stress 153 . and Poisson’s ratio ν . respectively. plastic buckling problems of circular and annular plates with and without internal ring supports will be solved by using the Ritz method and the aforementioned analytical method. Young’s modulus E.1. In the sequel. isotropic. circular plate of radius R. uniform thickness h. The plate is subjected to a uniform compressive in-plane stress σ along its circular edge. R σ h σ R σ Fig. 7. 7.3 Circular plates Consider a moderately thick.Circular and Annular Plates kind of order n.

2 = 61.21b) ⎛ ∂w ⎞ Qr = κ 2 Gh⎜ + φr ⎟ ⎠ ⎝ ∂r (7.3485. Qr + σh (7. M rr = 0 . an aluminum alloy Al 2024 T6 is adopted with the following properties: Poisson’s ratio ν = 0. and the Ramberg-Osgood parameters k = 0.7 × 10 6 psi. φθ = 0 (7.20a-c) where the bending moment M rr .Circular and Annular Plates For numerical results. φ r = 0 .21c) 154 .18a-c) Clamped edge w = 0 .32 .4 ksi. c = 20. M rθ = 0 . twisting moment M rθ and shear force Qr are given by Eh 3 12 ⎡ ∂φ r β ⎛ ∂φθ ⎢α ∂r + r ⎜ φ r + ∂θ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞⎤ ⎟⎥ ⎠⎦ M rr = (7. φθ = 0 (7. The following typical boundary conditions at the edges are considered: Simply supported edge w = 0 . σ 0 = σ 0. E = 10.21a) M rθ = Gh 3 ⎡ 1 ⎛ ∂φ r ⎞ ∂φθ ⎤ ⎢ r ⎜ ∂θ − φθ ⎟ + ∂r ⎥ 12 ⎣ ⎝ ⎠ ⎦ (7.19a-c) Free edge ∂w =0 ∂χ M rr = 0 .

B2 . (7.Circular and Annular Plates The Ritz method and the developed analytical method will be used to determine the plastic buckling stress parameter so as to provide an independent check on the solutions. which are the product of boundary equations with appropriate power. ζ needs to be set to a very small number (e. The basic θ functions φbw . and φb . 155 . Yn (δ 2 r ) and K n (δ 2 r ) are infinite as r approaches zero.23) Analytical Method For the circular plate. φ r .14a-c) must vanish in order to avoid singularity for the displacement fields w . B3 in Eq. are given by φbw = (ξ − 1)1 (ξ + 1) 0 ⎫ ⎪ φbr = (ξ − 1) 0 (ξ + 1) 0 ⎬ θ φb = (ξ − 1)1 (ξ + 1) 0 ⎪ ⎭ φbw = (ξ − 1)1 (ξ + 1) 0 ⎫ ⎪ φbr = (ξ − 1)1 (ξ + 1) 0 ⎬ θ φb = (ξ − 1)1 (ξ + 1) 0 ⎪ ⎭ for simply supported circular plates (7. φbr .g. The inputs needed in the program code are the material properties such as c. k. 10-7) and the inner edge is made free. E / σ 0 . the arbitrary constants B1 . φθ at the center of the plate.22) for clamped circular plates (7. geometric properties such as h/R and the basic functions (boundary conditions). since log (r ) . Ritz Method In order to avoid singularity problems in the case of circular plate.

25) A2 ] .1 for simply supported and clamped circular plates. (7. It can be seen that the degree of polynomial p = 8 is found to furnish the converged Ritz results and these results are in total agreement with the analytical solutions.24) becomes: [K ]2×2 {Φ}2×1 = {0}2 x1 where {Φ}3×1 = [ A1 T (7.25) to be zero. (7. 156 . a set of homogeneous equations can be derived by implementing the foregoing boundary conditions and these equations can be expressed in the following matrix form [K ]3×3 {Φ}3×1 = {0}3 x1 where {Φ}3×1 = [ A1 A2 T (7.24) or Eq.Circular and Annular Plates In view of Eqs. The elements of the [K ] matrix are given in the Appendix B. (7. (7. φθ and the derivative with respect to θ are zero everywhere and Eq. It should be noted that. in the case of axisymmetric buckling. The plastic buckling stress parameter λ is evaluated by setting the determinant of [K ] in Eq.14a-c). Results The convergence and comparison studies are shown in Table 7.24) A3 ] . Therefore one can easily write the algorithm in other programming languages by using these matrix elements.

isotropic annular plate of outer radius R and inner radius b.4837 1.05 IT DT 0. C-S denotes an annular plate with clamped (C) outer edge and simply supported (S) inner edge.6125 0.4876 1.4240 0. The plate is subjected to a uniform compressive in-plane stress σ along its edges as shown in Fig.4715 0.4305 0.4305 Method 4 6 Clamped 8 Analytical Method 1. 7.4240 0.4715 τ = 0 .6321 0.4292 0.4240 0.1.4291 0.4715 1. free (F) boundary conditions at the outer and inner edges.4291 0.4305 0.6331 0.5031 1.4305 0.4 Annular plates Consider a moderately thick.4876 τ = 0.4240 0.4291 0.4876 1.5031 1.4291 1.4715 1. simply supported (S). the boundary conditions of annular plates are denoted by two letter symbols.4715 1.6125 0. For brevity.4291 0.4715 1.4240 0. 157 .6125 7.4305 1. an extensive study on the plastic buckling behaviour of annular Mindlin plates is conducted for all possible combinations of clamped (C).4240 0. The problem at hand is to determine the plastic buckling stress of such plates.001 IT DT 0. Convergence and comparison study of plastic buckling stress parameter λ for circular plates under uniform radial compression BC p 4 6 Simply 8 supported Analytical 0. uniform thickness h.4240 0.4837 1.4876 1.6130 0.6321 0.4306 0.4305 0.4240 0.1 IT DT 0.4291 1.Circular and Annular Plates Table 7.2.4292 0. eg.6321 0.4876 1. Owing to the practical importance thereof.4876 τ = 0.4306 0.

2 C-S annular plate under in-plane loading Ritz Method The computer program called BUCKRITZPOLAR is used to determine the plastic buckling stress parameter of the aforementioned buckling problem of annular plate. and φb .24a) (7. φbr . In θ order to demonstrate the input expressions for the basic functions φbw . 7. the sample expressions of basic functions for C-S annular plates are given by φbw = (ξ − 1)1 (ξ + 1)1 = (ξ − 1)(ξ + 1) φbr = (ξ − 1)1 (ξ + 1) 0 = (ξ − 1) θ φb = (ξ − 1)1 (ξ + 1)1 = (ξ − 1)(ξ + 1) (7.24c) 158 .Circular and Annular Plates σ σ σ R σ σ b σ h Fig.24b) (7.

4 .25) B3 ] . Table 7.25) to be zero. The elements of the [K ] matrix are given in the Appendix B. a set of homogeneous equations can be derived by implementing the boundary conditions (7. It can be seen that converged results are obtained when the degree of polynomial p = 10.18a-c.19a-c.001.Circular and Annular Plates Analytical Method In view of Eqs.20a-c) at the both edges of annular plate and the system of equations can be expressed in the following matrix form [K ]6×6 {Φ}6×1 = {0}6 x1 where {Φ}6×1 = [A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 T (7. It can be seen that the analytical results agree well with the corresponding Ritz buckling solutions.3 compares the results obtained by using the Ritz method and the analytical method with the existing elastic buckling solutions. 7.14). Moreover. Results and Discussions Convergence studies of the Ritz results are shown in Table 7. (7. (17.2 for annular plate with ζ = b / R = 0. 7. it is found that these plastic buckling solutions agree well with the existing elastic solutions when the thickness to outer radius ratio τ = 0. The plastic buckling stress parameter λ is evaluated by setting the determinant of [K ] in Eq. 159 .

5608 160 .2119 0.8111 3.6803 0.2 Convergence study of plastic buckling stress parameter λ for annular plates ( ζ = b / R = 0.3356 10.9390 3.7826 3.6802 0.9652 2.2124 0.3227 2.3549 2.2137 0.3534 2.6621 τ = 0 .2125 0.3370 10.7688 0.3343 0.6677 0.1 IT DT 1.0251 0.7821 3.9390 0.6802 0.5608 0.3343 10.7995 1.5741 0.9652 0.5622 0.9652 2.0251 0.2137 0.2125 0.5741 0.3534 2.6632 0.2137 0.3343 10.2124 0.1166 0.6803 0.3227 2.5608 0.7993 1.6802 τ = 0.6622 0.6622 0.2124 0.3343 10.7993 1.2138 0.0251 0.2137 0.2137 0.9652 2.9390 3.5758 0.9652 2.2133 0.2135 0.7993 1.2344 0.3534 2.3345 10.2138 0.Circular and Annular Plates Table 7.2133 0.6622 0.2124 0.2133 0.5609 0.001 IT DT 2.3241 2.2133 0.2137 0.9652 2.2137 11.5741 0.2119 0.2135 0.1166 3.2137 0.3343 10.7993 0.2124 0.9652 2.1166 3.3372 10.2133 0.7821 3.2124 3.6677 0.2133 0.3227 2.9652 2.9390 3.7821 3.2133 3.3534 2.9700 2.6623 0.1166 3.9390 3.2124 0.0255 0.3227 0.2133 0.9700 2.7688 0.1168 3.6802 0.2124 0.05 IT DT 2.8197 10.6632 0.0251 0.5742 0.4 ) BC p 4 6 8 10 12 4 6 8 10 12 4 6 8 10 12 4 6 8 10 12 SS SF CC FC τ = 0.6829 0.2123 0.2119 0.6623 0.6829 0.

407 (3) 2.289 (0) 5.3 Comparison study of plastic buckling stress parameter λ = σhR 2 /(π 2 D ) for annular plates ( ζ = b / R = 0.224 (0) __ __ __ __ S-S 2.232 (0) 2.964 (0) 2. (1994b) Yamaki (1958) Analytical Method Ritz Method Wang et al.485 (0) 1. (1994b) Yamaki (1958) Analytical Method Ritz Method Wang et al.233 (0) 2.399 (0) 2.05 0.465 (0) 6.700 (1) 2.961 (0) 2.949 (0) __ __ 1.001 Elastic 10.708 (3) __ C-C 2.961 (0) 2.676 (0) 0.089 (0) 1.334 (3) 10.224 (0) 2.302 (0) 5.696 (1) 0. (1994b) Yamaki (1958) Analytical Method Ritz Method Wang et al.335 (3) 10.586 (3) 3.399 (0) __ __ __ __ S-C 161 .708 (3) 0.648 (0) __ __ 0.427 (0) 1.654 (0) 0. Thickness-to-outer radius ratio.387 (1) __ __ 0.089 (0) 1.432 (0) 2.103 (0) 2.080 (0) 1.654 (0) __ __ 0.315 (3) 10.486 (0) 6.296 (0) DT 0.080 (0) __ __ __ __ C-F 2.948 (0) 0.407 (3) 2.428 (0) __ __ 0.4 ).648 (0) 0.080 (0) 1.Circular and Annular Plates Table 7.586 (3) __ __ 3.965 (0) 5.676 (0) __ __ C-S 1.696 (1) __ __ 0.120 (3) 3.302 (0) 5.080 (0) 1.1 IT DT IT 3.611 (0) __ __ 0.497 (1) 2.127 (3) __ BC Reference Analytical Method Ritz Method Wang et al. τ 0.103 (0) 1. (1994b) Yamaki (1958) Analytical Method Ritz Method Wang et al.465 (0) 6.498 (1) __ __ __ __ 2.700 (1) 2. (1994b) Yamaki (1958) 0.336 (3) 6.610 (0) 0.432 (0) 2.386 (1) 2.

193 (1) 0.542 (1) 0. (1994b) Yamaki (1958) Analytical Method Ritz Method F-C Wang et al. the buckling stress increases first and later decreases as ζ increases.211 (0) __ __ 0.10 for various boundary conditions.653 (2) 0. (1994b) Yamaki (1958) Analytical Method Ritz Method F-S Wang et al.543 (1) 0.05 0.653 (2) __ __ __ __ 0.212 (0) 0.671 (2) 0.542 (1) __ __ 0.001 Elastic 0. τ 0.195 (1) 0.212 (0) 0.214 (0) 0.199 (1) 0. the plastic buckling stress parameters decreases monotonically while in F-S annular plates.212 (0) 0. (1994b) Yamaki (1958) 0.195 (1) __ __ __ __ The variations of plastic buckling stress parameter λ with respect to aspect ratios ζ are shown in Figs.193 (1) __ __ BC Reference 0.196 (1) 0.3 to 7. and F-S annular plates.543 (1) __ __ 0.212 (0) 0.Circular and Annular Plates Table 7. while in C-S.193 (1) 0. It can be seen that plastic buckling stress parameters increase with increasing value of ζ except for S-F and F-S annular plates.672 (2) 0.195 (1) 0.680 (2) 0.685 (2) 0.211 (0) __ __ 0. 7.653 (2) 0.211 (0) 0.196 (1) 0. It can be seen that the number of nodal diameters of the buckled surface of the plate increases in C-C annular plate as the aspect ratio ζ increases.212 (0) 0. In the S-F annular plate.212 (0) __ __ __ __ 0.653 (2) 0. the plates first buckle in asymmetric modes with one nodal 162 .195 (1) 0.199 (1) DT 0.1 IT DT IT 0.213 (0) 0. S-S.211 (0) 0.193 (1) __ __ Analytical Method Ritz Method S-F Wang et al.3 Continued Thickness-to-outer radius ratio.

the buckle mode takes on an axisymmetric forms (i. for greater thickness-to-outer radius ratios. The differences between the results from DT and IT plasticity theories are also examined.Circular and Annular Plates diameter (i. ζ . It is interesting to note that the buckling stress parameters obtained by DT do not much vary with respect to ζ ratio when the boundary conditions are either simply supported or clamped and thickness-to-outer radius ratio is large.e.11 for C-C annular plates of various aspect ratios ζ . It has been founded that the discrepancies increase with increasing aspect ratio ζ and thickness-to-outer radius ratio τ . the results obtained by IT and DT may differ each other since the plastic buckling stress increases with increasing thickness-to-outer radius ratio. The sample critical buckling mode shapes are shown in Fig. the buckling stress parameters from both theories are identical for the considered thickness-to-outer radius ratios.e. However. This is because the buckling stresses for these boundary conditions are much lower than nominal yield stress for the considered thickness-to-outer radius ratios due to the less restrained boundary conditions.e. 163 . the buckling stress parameters are identical for S-F and F-S annular plates for a particular thickness ratio. In F-C annular plate. Apart from F-C annular plate. However. It is interesting to note that. the number of nodal diameter n changes from one to two and then changes back to one and followed by zero as the ratio ζ increases. This is because the buckling stress parameter λ increases with increasing aforementioned ratios and consequently the effective modulus used in IT and DT progressively differ each other. n = 1) and after a particular value of ζ ratio. 7. n = 0). as far as axisymmetric buckling (n = 0) is concerned. in S-F and F-S annular plates. irrespective of the hole size i. the remaining types of annular plates always buckle in an axisymmetric mode.

1 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.05) n n =1 1 n= n= 1 n=0 2 n =1 DT (τ = 0.7 0.0 n DT & IT ( τ = 0.4 0.05) n 3 = 4 n = 5 DT ( τ = 0.1) λ = σhR2/π2D = 4 n =1 DT (τ = 0.5 0.001) n= 6 λ = σhR2/π2D n= IT ( τ = 0. 7.7 0. 7.Circular and Annular Plates 12 n = 3 10 8 6 4 2 0 0.05) n =1 n =1 n=2 n= n =4 n=4 n=5 n = DT ( τ = 0.3 0.1 0.6 6 0.05) 164 .1) n=2 n=3 n =4 n=5 0.3 Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for C-C annular plate 12 10 8 IT & DT (τ = 0.001) IT (τ = 0.2 0.4 Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for C-S annular plate n = 6 n= 0 0 0 IT (τ = 0.3 0.1) n=0 0 0 0.8 ζ Fig.2 0.8 ζ Fig.1) 5 n= =1 2 IT ( τ = 0.

1) n=0 n=0 λ = σhR2/π2D 3 2 1 DT (τ = 0.1) 0 0.001) IT (τ = 0.5 Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for C-F annular plate 8 6 IT & DT (τ = 0.1) λ = σhR2/π2D 4 DT (τ = 0.3 0.001) IT (τ = 0.6 Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for S-S annular plate 165 .4 0.Circular and Annular Plates 5 4 DT (τ = 0.0 0. 7.8 ζ Fig.5 0.05) IT & DT (τ = 0.05) 2 n =1 n=0 n=0 DT (τ = 0.8 ζ Fig.5 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.7 0.05) IT (τ = 0.1 0.7 0.1) n =1 0 0.05) IT (τ = 0.0 0.4 0.2 0. 7.

1) λ = σhR2/π2D 8 6 n= n =1 0 4 DT (τ = 0.1) n= 0 0.1 0. 7.5 0.1 0.2 0.3 ζ Fig.7 0.05) 0.2 0.1) 0.0 0.0 0.Circular and Annular Plates 12 10 IT & DT (τ = 0.5 IT & DT (τ = 0.6 0. 0.001.05) DT (τ = 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.8 ζ Fig. 7.3 IT & DT (τ = 0.1 0.8 n=0 n=0 2 n =1 0 0.4 λ = σhR2/π2D 0.6 0.7 Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for S-C annular plate 0.8 Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for S-F annular plate 166 .7 0.3 0.05) IT (τ = 0.001) IT (τ = 0.2 0.5 0.

15 0.10 IT & DT (τ = 0. 7.05) IT & DT (τ = 0.7 0.20 n= 0 λ = σhR2/π2D 0.0 λ = σhR2/π2D n = 0 n 1.3 0.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.9 Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for F-C annular plate 0.5 IT (τ = 0.Circular and Annular Plates 3.4 0.3 0.05) IT (τ = 0.5 0.1 0.00 0.4 0.6 =1 1.0 n= 2 n= 2 n=0 0.0 DT (τ = 0.2 0.2 0.8 ζ Fig.001) n= 1 0.8 ζ Fig.0 0. 7.5 n= 0 2.5 n =1 n=2 n =1 n 0.05 0.1) 0.6 0.1) 0.001) = 1 2.25 IT & DT (τ = 0.05) IT & DT (τ = 0.1 0.10 Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ζ ratio for F-S annular plate 167 .1) DT (τ = 0.

5 ζ = 0. The rings are assumed to be rigid so that zero deflection is imposed along the ring supports.65 Fig. bm. The analysis will be carried out by using both Ritz method and developed analytical method. inner radius b and thickness h under uniform compressive stress σ . The plate may have simply supported or clamped edge support conditions and m concentric ring supports with radii b1.Circular and Annular Plates ζ = 0. b2.2 ζ = 0.11. 168 .….6 ζ = 0. Critical buckling mode shapes for C-C annular plates of various ζ ratios (DT. τ = 0.05 ζ = 0.12.05) 7.4 ζ = 0.5 Circular and annular plates with intermediate ring supports Consider a circular of radius R and thickness h or an annular plate of outer radius R. The problem at hand is to determine the plastic buckling stress of such ring supported circular or annular plates. 7. 7. as shown in Fig.

7. The sample modified basic functions for the C-F annular plate with one internal ring support at ζ 1 = b1 / R are given by: φbw = (ξ − 1)1 (ξ + 1) 0 [ξ − (2ζ 1 − 1 − ζ ) /(1 − ζ )] (7.Circular and Annular Plates σ σ σ h b1 R (a) b R bm bm b2 b1 (b) Fig. The modification for internal supports in the basic functions of the Ritz method for general shapes will be discussed in Chapter 9.12 Simply supported (a) annular plate (b) circular plate with multiple concentric ring supports Ritz Method The plastic buckling stress parameter for the circular and annular plates with internal ring supports can be easily obtained by modifying the basic function for transverse deflection in the Ritz program called BUCKRITZPOLAR.26) 169 .

20).Circular and Annular Plates Analytical Method The circular or annular plate with m ring support can be divided into m+1 segments. a homogeneous system of equations can be derived by implementing the boundary conditions at the edges and the interface conditions between the segments as follow: 170 . φ rm +1 . The governing equations of each segment are given by Eq.27a) (7.14a-c). the arbitrary constants B1m +1 . the following essential and natural boundary conditions must be satisfied between the two segments. where i is the integer number which counts the number of segments starting from the outer edge. In order to satisfy the ring support conditions. Not that for m circular plates with internal ring supports.27c) (7.27e) (7. B3m +1 must vanish in order to avoid singularity for the displacement fields w m +1 . The boundary conditions for the periphery edge of the circular plates or the inner and outer edges of the annular plates are given in Eqs. (7. B2 +1 .27b) (7. wi = 0 (7.27f) w i +1 = 0 φθi − φθi +1 = 0 φ ri − φ ri +1 = 0 i i M rr − M rr+1 = 0 + M riθ − M riθ 1 = 0 In views of Eqs.18 to 7. and to ensure the continuity requirements of deflections. (7. φθm +1 at the center of the m+1th circular segment. (7. rotations and moments along the interface of the ith segment and the (i+1)th segment.27d) (7.1a-c) and the equations for each segments will be denoted by a superscript i.

It can be seen that the converged Ritz results agree well with the analytical solutions. Although the formulations were presented to cater for multiple supports. only the plastic buckling behaviour of circular and annular plates with a single ring support will be studied in this section.4 and 7.28b) to be zero. (7.5 show the convergence studies of plastic buckling stress parameter obtained by using the Ritz method for annular and circular plates with an internal ring support and the results are compared against the analytical solutions.28a) or (7. Note that the bracketed values shown in the tables indicate the number of nodal diameter for the critical buckling mode shape. Results and Discussion Tables 7.Circular and Annular Plates for annular plates with internal ring supports [K ]6( m+1)×6( m+1) {Φ}6( m+1)×1 = {0}6( m+1)×1 for circular plates with internal ring supports (7. 171 .28a) [K ]6( m+1)−3×6( m+1)−3 {Φ}6( m+1)−3×1 = {0}6( m+1)−3×1 (7.28b) The plastic buckling stress parameter λ can be determined by setting the determinant of matrix [K ] in Eq.

5690 (0) DT 0.15 for circular plates and annular plates.2005 4.9893 0.6323 2.8301 1.9652 0.1960 4.001 IT 8.5586 (0) 1.8695 1.1960 (0) 0.7792 12.05 IT 3.8805 1.7939 12.9872 0.6453 0.Circular and Annular Plates Table 7.8288 1.5589 6.8295 1.0275 (0) 0.8398 1.7792 12.9872 0.7182 0.4765 (0) 1.5678 (0) S-S S-F C-C F-C Effect of the location of ring support The variations of plastic buckling stress parameters with respect to ring support radius are shown in Figs.5984 6.6907 0.4140 4.9893 0.6907 0.5586 (0) 1.9655 0.9647 (0) τ = 0 .6983 6.9651 0.6907 0.7793 12.5821 2.4766 2.9874 0.6983 6.5815 (0) 1.1960 4.5679 0.2727 2.7165 0.8849 0.9675 0.6323 2.8677 (0) 13.8678 1.8681 1.7165 0.9655 0.4789 2.5880 2.7165 (1) 0.5681 0.8679 1.7067 0.5592 6.5603 6.8821 0.5680 0.9675 0.5679 0.6451 0.6430 2.6451 (0) 0.8681 1.9652 0.0124 2.8040 (0) 0. 7.8296 1.9870 (0) DT 8.4819 12.6323 2.5691 0.9886 0.5691 0.5679 0.5984 6.5589 6.8299 1.9651 0.7792 12.6911 0.9647 (0) DT 2.5603 6.1 IT 3.6361 3.7165 0. ζ 1 = 0.7792 (0) 0.5692 0.8805 1.5592 6.9870 (0) τ = 0.8679 1.6 ) BC p 4 6 8 10 12 Analytical Method 4 6 8 10 12 Analytical Method 4 6 8 10 12 Analytical Method 4 6 8 10 12 Analytical Method τ = 0.2.6323 (0) 0.4768 2.8821 0.8695 1.9871 0.4 Convergence study of plastic buckling stress parameter λ for annular plates with one concentric ring support ( ζ = 0.9871 0.8823 0.1960 4.8410 1.9874 0.0287 2.6451 0.6451 0.7792 (0) 0.6361 3.8284 1.8677 (0) 13. It can be seen that the critical buckling mode shape of circular and annular plates with an internal ring support may not be the same as that of corresponding plates without 172 .13 to 7.5693 0.5727 2.6907 (0) 0.7939 12.5691 0.8678 1.8285 1.4766 2.6326 2.8312 1.7792 12.5817 2.0307 2.6361 3.8822 0.0489 2.6451 0.7165 0.8821 (0) __ 3.4819 12.5818 2.7793 12.9886 0.6363 3.8293 (0) 4.9666 0.9666 0.8282 (0) 2.0292 2.

2373 2.0377 (0) τ = 0.8726 0.6638 2.2283 2. 7.1863 2.2281 2.6635 (0) 3.1664 2.9922 0. For example.6474 0.6473 (0) 0.0385 3.2295 2.1801 2. in the presence of an internal ring support of small radius.6474 0.6488 0.6644 2.1663 2. Note that the simply supported edge becomes clamped edge when the internal ring support is close to that edge. Sample 3D pictures of the critical buckling mode shapes are shown in Fig. Therefore.9907 (0) DT 0.2370 2.0406 3.2369 2.1804 3. the buckling curve approaches that of S-C annular plate.1804 3.2385 2.6474 0.2469 2.6640 2.001 IT 2.1720 2.9914 0.0483 3.6664 2.1725 2.1662 (0) 2.0385 3.9916 0.2367 (0) DT 2.6573 0.0377 (0) DT 2.6551 0.16 for C-C annular plate of ζ = 0.6549 (0) S-S S-F 173 .0390 3.1719 (0) 2.6638 2.0390 3.7354 2.9949 0.5 Convergence study of plastic buckling stress parameter λ for circular plates with one concentric ring support ( ζ 1 = 0.1720 2. For example.6474 0.8520 0.1664 2.6664 2.1 IT 0.2572 2. these hollow circles indicate the change in the critical buckling mode shape with respect to the ring support radius.7354 2.1721 2.6 ) BC p 4 6 8 10 12 Analytical Method 4 6 8 10 12 Analytical Method τ = 0. The hollow circles along the buckling curves represent the ring support radius where the two buckling mode shapes give the same buckling load.6635 (0) 3.Circular and Annular Plates internal ring supports.2278 (0) τ = 0 .6549 0.2280 2.2 .05 IT 2.0406 3. when the internal ring support is close to the inner edge of S-S annular plate.0358 0.8519 (0) 1. Table 7. the critical buckling mode shape of a clamped circular plate change from an axisymmetric buckling mode shape (without ring support) to an asymmetric mode shape with one nodal diameter (with ring support).8521 0.8520 0.8525 0.6640 2.6550 0.6644 2.6549 0.0483 3.1669 2.

the nature of calculation of optimal location of a ring support is iterative and thus the calculation is computationally expensive.Circular and Annular Plates Optimal location of ring support The presence of an internal ring support increases the value of plastic buckling stress parameters.e. n = 0) when the plates are supported by a ring support at the optimal locations. The locations of optimal ring support are denoted by black dots in the Figs. It can be seen that these optimal locations are influenced by the boundary conditions.6. except S-C annular plate. Of interest in the design of supported circular plate is the optimal location of the internal ring support for the maximum buckling load. Therefore. This optimality condition is examined for plastic buckling of circular and annular Mindlin plates in Table 7.13 to 7. 7. Chou at el. 174 . However. τ and the type of plasticity theory used. ζ .4291 to 2.15. It is interesting to note that all plates.2192 by introducing a ring support. buckle in an axisymmetric mode shape (i. (1999) found that the optimal locations of internal ring supports for vibration of circular plates are found at the nodal circles of the corresponding internally unsupported plates. it can be concluded that the nodal circles of the second buckling modes of internally unsupported circular and annular plates can be used as optimal location of internal ring support in order to achieve the maximum buckling load in design. For example. the buckling stress parameter for a simply supported circular plate increases from 0. It can be seen that the radii of nodal circles of the second buckling modes of internally unsupported circular and annular plates are not exactly the same as but are close to the corresponding iteratively computed optimal ring support radii.

7.2 2 0.95 Ring support locations ζ 1 = b1 / R Fig.5 2 S-C n= 0 n=1 2 = n=0 S-S 2 0.85 0.2.13 Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ring support location ζ 1 for annular plate ( ζ = 0.5 C-C 4 n= 0 n= 1 λ = σhR2/π2D n= C-S 3.95 Ring support radius ζ 1 = b1 / R Fig.2. DT) 175 .4 S-C S-S 2.75 0.35 0. 7.65 0.25 0.5 1 n= n=0 2 2 n = n= 3 n n=1 n= 1 1 n= 2.45 0.85 0.Circular and Annular Plates 4.55 0.6 C-S n=0 λ = σhR2/π2D n 2 n= =2 1 n= n=1 0 n=2 n= n= 1 n=0 2 n= n=0 n= 1 n=1 2.45 0. IT) 2.14 Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ring support location ζ 1 for annular plates ( ζ = 0.25 0.65 0.35 0.8 C-C 2.55 0.75 0.

Circular and Annular Plates 2.4 0.8 1.4 1.8 1 Ring support locations ζ 1 = b1 / R Fig.2 IT DT 1 0 0.6 0. 7.2 1 Clamped 2 n= n=1 0 λ = σhR2/π2D Simply supported 1.15 Variation of buckling stress parameter λ with respect to ring support location ζ 1 for circular plates 176 .6 n=0 n = 2.6 1.4 2.2 0.

DT. h/R = 0.Circular and Annular Plates ζ 1 = b1 / R = 0.7.16 Critical Buckling mode shapes for C-C annular plates with various ring support locations (b/R = 0.05) 177 .65 ζ 1 = b1 / R = 0.3 ζ 1 = b1 / R = 0.2.5 ζ 1 = b1 / R = 0.7 Fig.

2672 0.7797 0.4692 0.7859 0.5504 0.6547 0.2663 ζ1 ζ1 Nodal circle radius 0.7508 0.8230 0.6855 0.7406 0.7841 0.Circular and Annular Plates Table 7.4687 0.6015 0.2 S-S C-C S-C C-S S-S C-C S-C C-S 0.7782 0.5547 0.2688 0.7499 0.4699 0.2663 Optimal ζ1 Nodal circle radius 0.6022 0. The matrix elements for the analytical method are also provided in Appendix B for readers who want to use other programming 178 .4618 0.6563 0.7258 0. The program code for the Ritz methods using the polar coordinate system are written in MATHEMATICA and it is given in Appendix A.5 Simply supported circular plates Clamped circular plates 7.7238 0.5174 0. Moreover.7496 0.8269 0.7504 0.7086 0.7625 0.5445 0.6 Concluding Remarks Plastic buckling analyses of Mindlin circular and annular plates with and without an internal ring support under a uniform stress were carried out by using the Ritz method.6853 0.5544 0.6949 0.6926 0.7500 0.6934 0.7064 0.4681 0.2703 Annular plates ζ = 0.6902 0.7208 0.6922 0.6031 0.7499 0.8285 0.2663 Annular plates ζ = 0.8215 0.7340 0.4625 0.6011 0.6031 0.8298 0.6 Comparison study between the optimal ring support radius and radius of nodal circle of second mode shape Elastic BC Optimal IT Optimal DT Nodal circle radius 0.7101 0.7641 0.6953 0.5180 0. the buckling problems were also solved analytically.8280 0.6016 0.

Circular and Annular Plates

languages so that programs can be easily obtained. The analytical solutions will be useful to researchers who wish to verify their numerical methods and solutions. The Ritz results and analytical results are found to agree well. Moreover, these plastic buckling solutions are in good agreement with the existing elastic buckling solution when the plate is thin. Generally, the plastic buckling stress parameters obtained by using DT were consistently lower than their IT counterparts. It was found that the locations of the nodal circles of the second axisymmetric buckling modes of internally unsupported circular and annular plates are useful in guiding designers for maximum buckling capacity in designing such plates with an internal ring support.

179

CHAPTER 8

PLATES WITH COMPLICATING EFFECTS

8.1

Introduction

This chapter considers Mindlin plates with complicating effects such as the presence of internal line/curved supports, point supports, mixed boundary conditions, elastic foundations, internal line hinges and intermediate in-plane compressive stress. So far, the application of the Ritz method for plastic buckling analysis has been presented for Mindlin plates with various edge supports conditions. In this chapter, we show how the Ritz method may be used to accommodate the aforementioned complicating effects in plastic buckling analysis. Although the treatments are presented in the rectangular coordinate system only, one can readily recast the treatments in the polar coordinates or the skew coordinates by using suitable coordinate transformation relations. For numerical results, we adopt the aerospace material Al-7075-T6 with the properties:

180

Plates with Complicating Effects

Poisson’s ratio ν = 0.33 , E = 10.5 × 10 6 psi, σ 0.7 = 70 ksi and the Ramberg-Osgood parameters k = 3 / 7 , c = 9.2 .

8.2

Internal line/curved/loop supports

Consider a plate with internal line/curved/loop supports as shown in Fig. 8.1. These internal supports are assumed to impose a zero deflection (w = 0) along its length. This addition geometrical constraint can be taken care of in the Ritz method by the modification of the basic function for the transverse deflection as follows ⎛ ⎝ ⎞⎛ ⎠⎝ ⎞ ⎠

φbw = ⎜ ∏ [Γi (ξ ,η )]Ω ⎟⎜ ∏ Ξ j (ξ ,η ) ⎟ ⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟

w j

ne

ns

(8.1)

i =1

j

where the underlined term is contributed by the presence of internal supports, in which

**Ξ j being the equation of the jth support and ns the number of these internal supports.
**

The rest of the formulations remain unchanged as presented in Chapter 4. This method can handle any number of arbitrarily oriented/shaped internal supports as long as the locations of these supports can be represented by analytical expressions except for line/curved supports whose ends do not terminate at the plate boundary. The line/curved supports whose ends do not terminate at the plate edges can be simulated by a series of point constraints along the supports as shown in Fig. 8.2. The treatment of these point supports in Ritz method will be discussed in Section 8.3.

181

Plates with Complicating Effects

Line support

Curve support

Loop support

(a)

(b)

(c)

Fig. 8.1 Plates with internal (a) line, (b) curved and (c) loop supports

Line support

Curve support

Point supports to simulate internal support

Fig. 8.2 Simulation of internal supports using point supports

For sample numerical results, consider a rectangular plate which is supported internally by a rigid internal line support as shown in Fig. 8.4. The plate is subjected to a uniaxial in-plane compressive stress σ x . For the considered internal line support, the underlined term in Eq. 8.1 is given by

182

Plates with Complicating Effects

∏Ξ

j

ns

j

(ξ ,η ) = ∏ (ξ − α j )

j

ns

(8.2)

where α j is the coordinate of jth line support in ξ direction as shown in Fig. 8.3.

Internal line support

η

α ja σx

a

b

ξ

σx

Fig. 8.3 Rectangular plate with an internal line support

The convergence and comparison studies are shown in Table 8.1 and the some sample critical buckling mode shapes are shown in Fig. 8.4 for simply supported square plates with internal line supports. It can be seen that the satisfactory convergence is achieved when the degree of polynomial p = 12 is used. It is found that the converged results agree well with the analytical elastic buckling solutions derived by Xiang (2003) when the plate is thin ( τ = 0.001 ).

183

6154 8.2499 6.3168 5.3974 10.6119 10.2499 6.1281 6.3878 10.0.2500 8.5 184 .3174 5.0721 3.1338 6.1401 4.6445 8.3165 6.5869 8.0765 3.2501 6.5287 3.8205 __ 8.2703 5.3883 10.8770 2.5469 3.7 -0.0.8769 2.1644 4.2499 6.6443 __ DT 5.8599 7.001 IT 5.2500 8.2655 __ 6.1363 3.2645 5.1279 __ 7.8206 7.3686 4.386 τ = 0.9192 2.8658 7.5287 __ 3.1406 4.2499 6.2661 5.3217 5.2499 6.6235 8.025 IT 5.6119 10.5469 __ 4.6996 8.0718 3.9192 2.8769 __ 2.5470 3.6154 8.0718 __ 3.386 DT 5.8769 2.3168 5.2501 6.1366 3.2642 5.3883 10.1401 __ 4.4337 4.7289 10.5287 3.7289 10.1279 6.6235 8.3174 5.05 IT 3.2637 __ 6.8554 __ 8.5867 __ τ = 0.6478 8.5.3669 4.6 0 -0.1279 6.1363 __ -0.9021 7.3217 5.7.1 Convergence and comparison studies of plastic buckling stress parameter λ for rectangular plate with internal line supports αj p 6 8 10 12 Xiang (2003) 6 8 10 12 Xiang (2003) 6 8 10 12 Xiang (2003) 6 8 10 12 Xiang (2003) τ = 0.5287 3.5469 3.9192 __ 3.2664 5.1495 3.1338 __ 7.8249 7.3177 5.1340 6.2499 6.6154 8.8555 7.6154 8.6996 8.2684 5.3669 __ DT 2.3177 5.Plates with Complicating Effects Table 8.3974 10.3165 6.7659 8.5901 8.3878 10.9192 2.7033 8.1338 6.

8.n p (8..5.4 Critical buckling mode shapes of square plates with internal line support 8. These geometric constraints due to point supports can be taken into 185 .6 line supports α1 = 0 α 1 = −0.2) where n p is the number of point supports and ξ i and η i are coordinates of the ith point support.e.2. The transverse deflections are zero at the location of point supports. α 2 = 0. α 2 = 0.7 Fig.Plates with Complicating Effects line support line support α 1 = −0..3 Point supports Consider a Mindlin plate with point supports which are located at the edges or inside the plate. i..7..5 α 1 = −0. w(ξ i .η i ) = 0 i = 1.

N .Plates with Complicating Effects account by several ways. In this approach. The following are some common methods that are used to simulate the point supports in the Ritz method... j = 1.. n p (8..2...5) where N is the number of polynomial terms given by Eq.. the constraint conditions (Eq... (1) Lagrangian multiplier method The point constraint may be incorporated into the total energy functional by using Lagrangian multipliers as np Π = U + V + ∑ Li w(ξ i .14).4) where the elements of the H submatrix are given by hij = φiw (ξ j . (1994) in order to solve the vibration problems of Mindlin plate on point supports.η j ) i = 1...η i ) i =1 (8.. 8. By substituting the coordinates of internal point 186 ..3) where Li is the ith Lagrangian multiplier.. This yields the eigenvalue equation as ⎡K cc ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎣ H⎤⎧ c ⎫ ⎥⎪ ⎪ 0 ⎥ ⎪d ⎪ ⎨ ⎬=0 0 ⎥⎪ e ⎪ ⎥ 0 ⎥ ⎪L ⎪ ⎦⎩ ⎭ K cd K dd K ce K de K ee (8. (3.2) is used to reduce the dimensions of the eigenfunction while the matrix remains positive definite. (2) Using constraint functions This approach was first used by Liew et al.2.

3.Plates with Complicating Effects supports in to the approximate function for transverse deflection (Eq.20) yields 187 . then the Eq.8) where I is the identity matrix of ( N − n p ) × ( N − n p ) .9) The substitution of Eq. we have ⎡S −1 R ⎤ ˆ c=⎢ ⎥c I ⎦ ⎣ (8. (8. (8.2) can be expressed as [C]n × N {c}n ×1 = 0 p p (8. (8.7) where S is the positive definite matrix of n p × n p .6) Assuming that n p is less than N. From Eq. The unknown coefficient c can now be expressed in terms of modified unknown coefficient c as ⎡S −1 R ⎤ ˆ = P⎢ c = Pc ⎥ c = Bc ⎣ I ⎦ (8. R the matrix of n p × ( N − n p ) .12a).7). the constraint functions (Eq. 8.9) into the usual eigenvalue equation (Eq. ˆ ci ( i = 1 to N) the elements of c with the order rearranged by a position matrix P of ˆ N × N with elements value 0 or 1 satisfying the relation c = Pc .6) can be rearranged as ˆ ˆ ⎧ c1 ⎫ ⎧ c n p +1 ⎫ ⎪c ⎪ ⎪ ⎪c ˆ ˆ [S]⎪ :2 ⎪ = [R ]⎪ n p + 2 ⎪ = Rc ⎨ ⎬ ⎬ ⎨ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ : ⎪ ⎪c n p ⎪ ⎪ cN ⎪ ˆ ⎩ ˆ ⎭ ⎩ ⎭ (8. 3.

The augmented total energy functional becomes Π = U + Q +V (8. which needs to be sufficiently large number in order to simulate rigid point support.η k )] k =1 2 (8.13) The minimization with respect to the Ritz coefficients yields ⎧c ⎫ ([K ] + [G ])⎪d⎪ = 0 ⎨ ⎬ ⎪e ⎪ ⎩ ⎭ (8.Plates with Complicating Effects ⎧c ⎫ [K ][B ]⎪d⎪ = 0 ⎨ ⎬ ⎪e ⎪ ⎩ ⎭ (8.11) (3) Using elastic spring supports The rigid point supports can be simulated by elastic springs with a sufficiently large spring constant. The strain energy due to these springs is given by np 1 2 Q = ∑ S k [w(ξ k .12) where S k is the spring constant of the kth point support.14) where the matrix [G ] is contributed by the strain energy due to the springs and is given by 188 .10) where ⎡B 0 0 ⎤ [B ] = ⎢ 0 I 0⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢0 0 I⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (8.

2. It is to be remarked that the difficulty of implementing the simple support (hard type) for oblique line and curved edges in rectangular coordinates system may be overcome by using the combination of soft type simple support (S*) and point constraints on the tangential rotation φt on the concerned edges as in Wang et al. the uniaxially loaded square plate supported by four symmetrically placed internal point supports as shown in Fig. The last approach is the simplest and easy to implement...2.. (1995).. (1989). So far the treatment for point supports in the direction of transverse deflection is presented and the treatments for the point supports of normal and tangential rotation can also be done in the same way. Poisson’s ratio ν = 0.η k ) i = 1. In order to compare with the elastic buckling results of Venugopal et al.16) where I is the identity matrix of order N. Note that the first approach increases the dimensions of the eigen matrix that results in the increase of computational time whereas the second approach reduces the dimensions of the matrix but it needs more effort in forming the matrix [B ] . N j = 1...3 is adopted. 8.Plates with Complicating Effects ⎡G cc [G ] = ⎢ 0 ⎢ ⎢ 0 ⎣ where np 0 0⎤ ⎥ I 0⎥ 0 I⎥ ⎦ (8.η k )φ jw (ξ k . N k =1 [ ] (8.15) G cc = ∑ S k φiw (ξ k . The convergence and comparison studies are 189 . For sample buckling results.5 is considered. Note that the mixed boundary conditions can also be simulated by using suitable point restraints such as simple point supports and clamped point supports along the boundary as in Liew and Wang (1992).

9152 0. η point supports point supports a ξ α Fig.Plates with Complicating Effects shown in Table 8.7350 0.9217 0.7350 0.9217 0.5 Four point supported square plate Table 8. This is due to the less restrained boundary condtion.001 τ = 0.7391 0.5 10 Venugopal (1989) 190 .7349 __ α p Uniaxial loading 0.9157 0.05 .7351 0.9152 0. It can be seen that the plastic buckling stress parameters obtained by IT agree well with their DT counterparts for τ = 0.2 for squares plate resting on four internal point supports.9221 0.7351 0.9217 Biaxial loading 0.9151 __ Biaxial loading IT 0. 8.7390 0. It is found that the converged results agree well with existing solutions.7349 __ DT 0.9151 __ DT 0.7390 6 8 0.05 Uniaxial loading IT 0.9157 0.2 Convergence and comparison study of plastic buckling stress parameter λ for four points supported square plate τ = 0.7390 0.

S kx : spring stiffness kth plate edge for the rotational elastic support about y-axis and S ky : spring stiffness kth plate edge for the rotational elastic support about x-axis. Note that the arbitrary boundary conditions can be expressed by the combination of free edges and aforementioned spring supports. The potential energy stored in the elastic supports can be derived as 1 ne 2 2 ∑ ∫ S kw w2 + Skx (φx ) + Sky (φ y ) dΓk 2 k =1 Γk Q= { } (8. the clamped boundary can be expressed by the combination of the free edge and the springs supports with the very large values of S kw . For example. The augmented total potential energy becomes Π = U + Q +V (8.4 Elastically restrained edges and mixed boundary conditions The elastically restrained edge support can be modeled by combining three different spring models whose stiffness are given by S kw : spring stiffness of kth plate edge for the transverse elastic support.17) where ne is the number of edge and Γk refers to kth the plate boundary.Plates with Complicating Effects 8.18) The minimization of the energy functional yields the following augmented eigenvalue equation ⎧c ⎫ ([K ] + [Q])⎪d⎪ = 0 ⎨ ⎬ ⎪e ⎪ ⎩ ⎭ (8.19) 191 . S kx and S ky .

232a-f) in which the basic functions are chosen by assuming that all edges are free edges.η )φ jy (ξ .21a) Q dd = ∑ ∫ S kx φix (ξ .η ) dΓk i = 1... N and j = 1.η ) ]} η = −1 dξ (8.. N and j = 1.17) into several parts according to the numbers of boundary types along the edge of the plate.2.2.6 is given by Q = cc 1 −1 ∫ {S [φ 1 w 11 1 x 11 w i (ξ .. 8. N k =1 Γk ne { [ ]} (8..η ) dΓk i = 1.η )φ jx (ξ .22b) ee Q1 = 1− ∫α {S [φ y i (ξ ..22c) 192 .22a) dd Q1 = −1 ∫ {S [φ 1 y 12 x i (ξ .2..2.η )φ jw (ξ .. N cc k =1 Γk { [ ]} (8. N and j = 1.21b) Q ee = ∑ ∫ S ky φiy (ξ .21c) Note that the elements of the matrix [K ] are the same as those given by Eqs.2.6 by separating the boundary integral Eq.. 8..... For example.. 1) of case 1 in Fig.η ) ]} η =−1 dξ (8. (8.η ) ]} η = −1 dξ (8.2.η )φ jx (ξ .20) Q = ∑ ∫ S kw φiw (ξ .... The aforementioned procedure can also handle mixed boundary conditions such as those shown in Fig..(3.η ) dΓk i = 1.η )φ jw (ξ .η )φ jy (ξ . N k =1 Γk ne { [ ]} (8.Plates with Complicating Effects where ⎡Q cc [Q] = ⎢ 0 ⎢ ⎢ 0 ⎣ in which ne 0 Q dd 0 0 ⎤ ⎥ 0 ⎥ Q ee ⎥ ⎦ (8. the energy stored in the elastic support for the plate edge η = −1 (denoted as edge no.

(8. the mixed boundary condition can also be achieved by combining simply supported edges and rotational spring about x-axis along the portion of the edge that are clamped. for example.8.3 for three cases shown in Fig. 8. η a a a ξ α Case 1 α Case 2 α Case 3 Fig. It is to be remarked that. 1. The present results are slightly higher than those of Mizusawa and Leonard (1990) when the value of α is somewhere between 0 and 2. since most of the edges are simply supported for cases shown in Fig. S12 refers to the rotational spring constant of second segment of the edge no. Note that τ = 0.Plates with Complicating Effects Note that the first subscript of spring constant S refers to the edge number while the y second subscript refers to the segment number along the edge.6 Square plates with mixed boundary conditions under uniaxial compression In order to verify the correctness of the method. This may be due to the fact that the boundary conditions are imposed by using the boundary integral in the present 193 .3 are adopted in the analysis in order to compare with the existing elastic buckling results.001 and ν = 0. comparison studies are shown in Table 8.6).6.

209 5.740 4.7401 4. 1999.3573 5.Plates with Complicating Effects treatment while in spline element method (Mizusawa and Leonard.000 4.7059 5. (3.5 Elastic foundations The elastic buckling of plates resting on elastic foundations has been studied by many researchers (Naidu et al. 1990) the boundary condition are imposed only at the nodes. 1990.000 5.732 5.0000 4.5240 5.684 5.198 5.740 4..3 Comparison studies of buckling stress parameter λ for square plates with mixed boundary conditions Mizusawa and Leonard (1990) (Spline element method) 4.0000 5.524 7.6911 Case 2 Case 3 8.690 α Case 1 0 1/3 1 4/3 2 0 1/3 1 4/3 2 0 1/3 1 4/3 2 Present (Ritz method) 4.6837 7.9) with U F 194 .265 5.9300 7. Wang. 2005).7401 4.7388 5. This elastic foundation effect can be taken into account in the proposed Ritz plastic buckling analysis by augmenting strain energy given in Eq.628 5.430 7. Table 8.4654 5.000 6.0000 6. Shen.640 7.6217 7.7252 5.

Plates with Complicating Effects UF = 1 2 ∫∫ S k w dA 2 A (8. it is assumed that foundation reacts in compression as well as in tension. For example.24) where the elements of K cc are given by F cc k Fij = ∫∫ S k φiwφ jw dξdη A [ ] (8.23) where S k is the modulus of subgrade reaction for the foundation. The resulting eigenvalue equation is given by: ⎡ K cc + K cc K cd F ⎢ K dd ⎢ ⎢ symmetric ⎣ K ce ⎤ ⎧ c ⎫ ⎥⎪ ⎪ K de ⎥ ⎨d ⎬ = 0 K ee ⎥ ⎪ e ⎪ ⎦⎩ ⎭ (8. in many practical applications. The buckling problem of these unilateral constrained plates is complicated because the location and extent of the contact region are not known at the outset. In order to demonstrate the ability of the Ritz plastic buckling analysis. Other applications of the tensionless foundation are found in the delamination of laminated plates and retrofitting metal plates which are attached to concrete or steel plates in composite structures. the foundations can be assumed as rigid foundation and the buckling problem of plates in such cases is also known as unilateral buckling.25) Note that. In these cases. the foundation cannot provide tensile reaction. in above formulations. One of the ways of incorporating a unilateral constraint condition in the buckling analysis is to model the foundation as a bed of springs that exhibits a deformation 195 . unilateral buckling problems of rectangular plates are considered in this study. in the case of plates resting on soils that lacking both adhesive and cohesive properties. However.

25) become Np k cc Fij = ∑ XS k φiwφ jw k =1 (8. a grid spacing of 30 × 30 and the foundation stiffness of 104 are adopted. and the contact condition is assessed at the grid locations. (8. In this study.Plates with Complicating Effects sign-dependent relationship. Sufficiently large spring stiffness is adopted to simulate a rigid surface. then stop and adopt the last eigenvalue as solution. Step (1) Solve the eigenvalue equation by assuming that there is no contact between plate and foundation. the plate area is discretized into a series of grids. the following iterative procedure is adopted. The nature of solution procedure is iterative since the final contact region between the plate and the foundation surface is unknown before the solution is sought. If the convergence is satisfactory.26b) X =1 (contact) In applying contact condition. Such behaviour of foundation can be modeled by introducing a contact function X that is defined by X = 0 (separation) (8. The elastic foundation is activated or deactivated by using the contact function X and then solve the eigenvalue equation.26a) (8. If not. Step (2) Check the contact status at the grid points. The matrix elements of K cc given in F Eq. Step (3) Compare the eigenvalue with the previous iteration. In order to define the contact region and sole the problem. go to Step 2 and repeat. 196 .27) where N is the number of grid points.

This is because.21 Influence of unilateral buckling (%) 0.242 12.7 for the clamped rectangular plate.4 Comparison study of unilateral buckling stress parameter λ for rectangular plates under shear Aspect ratio a/b 1 SSSS 2 3 1 CCCC 2 3 Bilateral Buckling 9. The increase in the buckling stress parameter due to the presence of rigid restraint is also shown in the percentage of λbil .248 9.001 ) and the existing elastic unilateral buckling solutions.720 6.10 17.269 Smith et al. It is found that the difference between λbil and λuni increases as the aspect ratio increases. 8.32 2.325 6.43 4.642 10.03 12. 197 .546 5.64 14. It can be seen that the results agree well. (1999) 9.355 6.535 Unilateral Buckling Present Method 9.5 and 8.6 show the plastic buckling stress parameters for simply supported and clamped rectangular plates under pure shear. Typical buckling mode shapes for bilateral and unilateral buckling cases are presented in Fig. Table 8.67 BC Tables 8.355 6. at larger aspect ratios.34 28.025 12.840 14. the plate buckles in multiple half-wavelengths in bilateral buckling case and as a result the contact area between the plate and rigid foundation increases.683 15. Both bilateral and unilateral buckling stress parameters are presented and denoted as λbil and λuni respectively.4 shows the comparison study between the present results ( τ = 0.719 6.Plates with Complicating Effects Table 8.26 12.689 15.

043 5.787 5.177 8.025 τ = 0.192 2.00 0.251 6.07 3.943 λbil 2.78 SSSS 2 3 1 CCCC 2 3 198 .595 5.432 5.13 λbil 6.782 5.991 1.618 7.554 7.5 Unilateral plastic buckling stress parameters for rectangular plates under shear (IT) BC a/b 1 τ = 0.275 10.967 9.151 11.248 2.62 19.903 6.964 2.6 Unilateral plastic buckling stress parameters for rectangular plates under shear (DT) BC a/b 1 τ = 0.134 9.26 8.563 7.199 %diff 0.016 2.205 5.05 %diff 0.10 9.145 5.796 λbil 6.26 4.056 2.54 2.86 5.421 λuni 6.091 2.20 8.595 9.090 1.792 5.52 8.563 11.119 λuni 2.68 0.151 λuni 6.344 %diff 0.201 5.025 τ = 0.059 7.562 6.604 λuni 6.555 5.67 SSSS 2 3 1 CCCC 2 3 Table 8.77 30.78 3.Plates with Complicating Effects Table 8.236 2.83 λbil 6.00 3.594 4.139 4.91 19.06 28.591 10.582 9.06 2.05 1.05 %diff 0.138 2.53 3.90 30.189 6.151 7.

the plate is divided 199 . the domain decomposition method can be employed. In order to cater the slope discontinuity along the hinge line. In the domain decomposition method. 8.Plates with Complicating Effects Bilateral (a/b = 1) Unilateral (a/b = 1) Bilateral (a/b = 2) Unilateral (a/b = 2) Bilateral (a/b = 3) Unilateral (a/b = 3) Fig.7 Typical buckling mode shapes for bilateral and unilateral buckling of clamped rectangular plates 8.6 Internal line hinges The internal hinges may be used in the modeling of folding gates and hatches.

η 2 ) (8.η 2 ) q =0 i =0 (8.η1 ) = ∑∑ e1 φ m (ξ1 . In order to illustrate the treatment of internal line hinge in the Ritz method.η 2 ) q =0 i =0 p q (8.η1 ) q =0 i =0 p q (8.η1 ) = w2 (−1. the compatibility conditions for the transverse deflections are given by w1 (1.η 2 ) q =0 i =0 p q (8.28c) and the similar functions for subdomain 2 are given by p q 2 w w2 (ξ 2 .30) 200 . The adopted admissible pRitz functions for the deflection and rotations of the subdomain 1 are given by p q w w1 (ξ1 .η1 ) = ∑∑ c 1 φ m (ξ1 .29c) in which ξ1 .η 2 ) = ∑∑ c mφ m (ξ 2 .η1 ) m q =0 i =0 (8.η1 ) = ∑∑ d mφ m (ξ1 .Plates with Complicating Effects into several subdomains along the hinges depending on the number of hinges.29b) 2 y φ y 2 (ξ 2 .η 2 are the normalized coordinate systems.8. a rectangular plate with one internal hinge is considered as shown in Fig. which have the integration limits from -1 to 1. 8.28a) 1 x φ x1 (ξ1 .29a) 2 x φ x 2 (ξ 2 .η1 ) m q =0 i =0 p q (8. Along the internal hinge. for each subdomain.28b) y φ y1 (ξ1 .η 2 ) = ∑∑ emφ m (ξ 2 .η 2 ) = ∑∑ d mφ m (ξ 2 .η1 and ξ 2 .

η ) φbw (ξ 2 .Plates with Complicating Effects σ y = βσ x internal line hinge η1 ξ1 b η2 ξ2 σx αa (1 − α )a Fig.η 2 ) + (ξ 2 − 1) w2 (ξ 2 . (8.31) The energy functional for each domain can be expressed as in Eq. (3.e.11) by substituting corresponding displacement fields. 8. 1999): w2 (ξ 2 .η 2 ) (8. φ x1 . φ y1 and w2 .30).32) 201 . φ x 2 . w1 . i. φ y 2 . the Ritz approximate function for transverse deflection for subdomain 2 can be redefined as follows (Su and Xiang.η 2 ) = w1 (1.η 2 ) φbw (−1. The corresponding eigenvalue equation is given by ⎡ K cc K cd ⎢ K dd ⎢ ⎢ symmetric ⎣ in which K ce ⎤ ⎧ c ⎫ ⎥⎪ ⎪ K de ⎥ ⎨d ⎬ = 0 K ee ⎥ ⎪ e ⎪ ⎦⎩ ⎭ (8.8 A rectangular plate with an internal hinge under in-plane compressive stress In view of Eq.

(8.31) for subdomain 2. i.(8. a square plate with an internal hinge under uniaxial loading is considered.001 and 0. the thickness-to-width ratio τ and Poisson’s ratio ν are set to be 0. It can be seen that the results agree well with the existing solutions. K icd . Note that.33) 0⎤ + 0 K cd ⎥ 2 0⎦ 2 N ×2 N 0⎤ + 0 K ce ⎥ 2 0 ⎦ 2 N ×2 N ] 2 N ×2 N (8. 2) are the same as those in the usual formulation for rectangular plates which are given by Eqs.Plates with Complicating Effects ⎡K cc K cc = ⎢ 1 ⎣ 0 ⎡K cd K cd = ⎢ 1 ⎣ 0 K ce ce ⎡K 1 =⎢ ⎣ 0 dd ⎡K 1 =⎢ ⎣ 0 0⎤ + K cc ⎥ 2 0⎦ 2 N ×2 N [ ] [ 2 N ×2 N (8.37) (8.35) K dd 0 ⎤ dd ⎥ K 2 ⎦ 2 N ×2 N 0 ⎤ de ⎥ K 2 ⎦ 2 N ×2 N 0 ⎤ ⎥ K ee ⎦ 2 N ×2 N 2 (8. K idd and K iee (i = 1.38) Note that the expressions for K icc . in order to compare with existing elastic buckling results. 202 .23a-f). Eqs.29b-c) and Eq.36) ⎡K de K de = ⎢ 1 ⎣ 0 ⎡K ee K ee = ⎢ 1 ⎣ 0 (8.6 shows a comparison study against existing elastic buckling results. respectively. (3. except the fact that the corresponding Ritz functions need to be adopted accordingly.28a-c) for subdomain 1. Table 8.(8.e.34) [ ] 2 N ×2 N (8. K ice . For sample results.3. Eqs.

8969 4. The Ritz approximate functions for deflection and rotations can be adopted as usual for the whole plate.2330 4. G depend on the stress level.8857 0.4 2.5773 1.2 1.1853 6. The resulting eigenvalue equation is given by 203 . The first domain is to the left of the vertical line defined by x = α a (see Fig.7473 1. 8.0545 0.1 1.2306 8.6108 0.3432 4.0428 2.0035 4.0684 6.2366 4. 8. Note that a positive value of σ implies a compressive load while negative value implies a tensile uniaxial load.7474 6.0035 2. (2001) 4 6 CCCC 8 10 Wang et al.2727 0. the plate needs to be divided into two domains along the location of intermediate load in order to handle the different levels of stresses.8968 1.0429 4.2486 4.0556 6.7472 1.9073 7.6281 4.2790 4.2749 4.6843 4.7481 1. (2001b) 0.8.8969 1.5 2. β . γ .8868 7.7 Buckling stress parameter λ for square plate with an internal hinge under uniaxial loading α p 4 6 SSSS 8 Xiang et al.8976 1.5761 1.3519 4. Since all the parameters α .7 Intermediate in-plane loads Consider a Mindlin plate which is subjected to an end compressive stress σ 1 and an intermediate compressive stress σ 2 as shown in Fig.6166 4.3 1.0035 2.5764 1.5770 8.8) and the second domain is to the right of this line.3647 7.Plates with Complicating Effects Table 8.0582 6.8858 7.6125 4.0042 2.2919 4.0429 2.0436 2.

k = 0.39) where subscript 1 and 2 refer to the domain 1 and 2 respectively.7 for a rectangular plate of τ = 0. (2004) for comparison purpose.04 and for a given value of λ 2 = (σ 1 + σ 2 )hb 2 /(π 2 D) = −50 . This is due to the effect of transverse shear deformation which is neglected in Wang et al. c = 20 are adopted as in Wang et al. It can be seen that the present results are found to be slightly lower than existing results. σ 0 = 61. The same material properties E = 10700 ksi.3485. (2004). 8.4 ksi.9 Rectangular plate under edge and intermediate compressive stress The sample results of λ1 = σ 1hb 2 /(π 2 D) are shown in Table 8. 204 .Plates with Complicating Effects cc cd ⎛ ⎡ K1 K1 ⎜⎢ dd ⎜⎢ K1 ⎜⎢ ⎜ symmetric ⎝⎣ ce K 1 ⎤ ⎡ K cc K cd 2 2 ⎢ dd de ⎥ K1 ⎥ + ⎢ K2 ee ⎥ K 1 ⎦ ⎢ symmetric ⎣ K ce ⎤ ⎞⎧ c ⎫ 2 ⎟ de ⎥ ⎪ ⎪ K 2 ⎥ ⎟⎨d ⎬ = 0 ⎟ K ee ⎥ ⎟⎪ e ⎪ 2 ⎦ ⎠⎩ ⎭ (8. y σ1 b x σ2 σ1 + σ 2 (1 − α )a αa Fig.

802 2.0809 5.7361 3.3769 4. ( λ 2 = −50.6389 __ __ 3.2225 2.6628 3.7869 3.2333 2.6577 3.3092 2.1114 4.8374 3.9458 6.7744 3.2237 2.9141 3.266 a/b = 3 DT 3. elastic foundations.2146 2.289 a/b = 2 DT 3.878 2.3769 4.2467 2.7809 3.799 4.0946 4.3389 6.738 4.1438 2.2194 2.1872 __ __ 2.674 3.0777 4.1299 __ __ 2.3182 2.108 2.1166 4.2094 4.712 3.7954 3.4010 4.7609 __ 3.4568 4.7528 3.9486 3.0847 __ 4.3579 4. mixed boundary conditions. intermediate inplane loads when using the Ritz method for plastic buckling analysis.470 6.2028 2.214 2.9898 5.917 2.6566 __ __ 3.002 4. (2004) 8 10 CSCS 12 14 Wang et al.7939 3. It can be seen that the Ritz method is very 205 .289 IT 3.198 2.2105 2. elastically restrained edges.2454 2.8150 3.451 IT 3. (2004) 4.0434 3.Plates with Complicating Effects Table 8.04 ) BC p IT 8 10 SSSS 12 14 Wang et al.8 Convergence and comparison of plastic buckling stress parameters λ1 of rectangular plates under edge and intermediate loads.9021 __ __ 4.3641 2.0871 4. internal line hinges.8074 __ 3.7809 3.τ = 0. (2004) 8 10 FSFS 12 14 Wang et al.1995 __ __ 2.3322 2.9195 3.7361 3.8084 3.2133 2.8 Concluding Remarks This chapter demonstrates the treatments for the complicating effects such as the presence of internal line/point/curved/loop supports. The various treatments are demonstrated by solving sample problems and comparing the results with existing elastic buckling solutions.451 a/b = 1 DT 3.266 8.

206 .Plates with Complicating Effects versatile and powerful to handle all the aforementioned complicating effects for plastic buckling analysis of Mindlin plates.

1 Conclusions An automated Ritz method is presented for the plastic buckling analysis of Mindlin plates of various shapes. boundary and loading conditions. The software code BUCKRITZRE 207 . three versions of the Ritz software codes are given. As it is more convenient to handle certain plates in their natural coordinate systems. the assumed displacement functions were defined by the product of basic functions and mathematically complete two-dimensional polynomial functions whose degree may be increased until the desired accuracy is achieved. In the Ritz method. The basic functions are defined by the product of boundary equations raised to the appropriate power (either 0 or 1) that ensure automatic satisfaction of the geometric boundary conditions. The effect of transverse shear deformation was taken in to account by adopting the Mindlin plate theory.CHAPTER 9 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9.

various treatments were presented for the presence of complicating effects such as internal line/curved/point supports. triangular. Therefore it requires less memory and is easy to implement when compared with the finite element method. skew. is written based on the skew coordinate system and it is to compute the plastic buckling stress of skew plates. called BUCKRITZPOLAR. 208 . The last software code. Being an approximate continuum method. it can be easily done by setting the tangent modulus and secant modulus equal to Young’s modulus. elliptical. Another software code. Since the eigen problem needs to be solved in an incremental and iterative fashion in plastic buckling problems. One can calculate the elastic buckling stress parameter based on the classical thin plate theory by setting the thickness-to-width ratio to a small value. In all these situations. called BUCKRITZSKEW. If one wish to calculate the elastic buckling stress parameter based on Mindlin plate theory. It is worth noting that the presented Ritz program codes can be used to study not only the plastic buckling of plates but also the elastic buckling of plates. the computational superiority of the Ritz method is even more convincing. The capability of the Rayleigh-Ritz method was demonstrated by solving the plastic buckling problems of rectangular. it eliminates the need for mesh generation and thus large numbers of degrees of freedom.Conclusions and Recommendations is based on the Cartesian coordinate system and it can be used for determining the plastic buckling stress of plates of any shape whose edges are defined by polynomial functions. In addition to conventional loading and boundary conditions. it has been shown that Ritz method is simple and easy to formulate since it does not require mesh discretization of the plate. intermediate in-plane loads and elastic foundation. is to solve the plastic buckling problems of circular and annular plates and it is based on the polar coordinate system. circular and annular plates. internal line hinges.

These transformed governing equations were solved analytically and the exact plastic buckling solutions were obtained. Owing to the lack of analytical buckling solutions for asymmetric buckling problems of circular and annular Mindlin plates. So far. As expected. the plastic buckling parameters differ appreciably from their elastic counterparts. The validity of the results was confirmed by comparing with existing 209 . thickness-to-width ratios and boundary conditions. the reductions in the plastic buckling stress parameters based on IT are larger than their DT counterparts. The effect is more pronounced in the cases of thicker plates and plates with more constrained boundary conditions. circular and annular Mindlin plates were calculated for various aspect ratios. By following the procedure used by Mindlin (1951). It was found that the plastic buckling stress parameters approach their elastic counterparts when the plate is thin or the plate is supported by less restrained boundary conditions. triangular. Therefore. elliptical. skew. Generally. the plastic buckling results obtained by IT are larger than their DT counterparts and the difference increases with increasing thickness-towidth ratios. the governing equations of the plates were transformed into the standard forms of partial differential equations in terms of three potential functions.Conclusions and Recommendations The plastic buckling stress parameters for various shapes such as rectangular. But for plates with larger thickness-to-width ratios and more restrained boundary conditions. Generally. the effect of transverse deformation lowers the plastic buckling stress parameters. most of the plastic buckling solutions available focus mainly on the rectangular plates. the extensive plastic buckling data presented for various plate shapes will be useful as a useful reference source for designers and researchers who wish to verify their plastic buckling results. an analytical method was featured in this thesis for the first time.

It was found that the results agree well. this analytical method is not applicable for the cases of non-uniform stress distributions. 2005) and plates with holes (Uenoya and Redwood. The assumption of uniform stress distribution. it is hard to obtain the analytical expression for stress distribution.e. since the buckling problems of circular and annular plate under uniform compression are fundamental in structural analysis. no stress dissipation in the x-y plane. the general solutions of governing equations are not possible due to the complexity arising from the variations of stresses. The major set back in the Ritz method is that it requires prebuckling stress distribution. i. If the variations of stresses are considered.2 Recommendations There are some interesting directions for future works in the area of research presented in this thesis. the effect is more pronounced in the cases of plates under patch loading i. 1978).Conclusions and Recommendations analytical elastic buckling thin plate results (by setting the plate thickness to very small value) and with plastic buckling results obtained by the Ritz method. with the Ritz method being used for the bifurcation analysis and the finite element 210 . Uenoya and Redwood (1978) combined the Ritz method and the finite element method in their elasto-plastic bifurcation analysis of perforated plates. 9. Nonetheless. In the case of plastic buckling analysis. Although the effect of stress dissipation is very marginal in the cases of uniform loadings. However.e. was adopted in the present study. the developed analytical method will be useful for researchers who wish to check the validity and convergence of their numerical methods. locally distributed loading and point loading (Liu and Pavlovic. One of the interesting areas is to combine the finite element analysis with the Ritz method.

This study mainly focused on the plastic bifurcation analysis i. Another possible area for future work is the extension of presented Ritz method to postbuckling analysis and allowing for the effect of imperfections. the effect of initial imperfections cannot be taken into consideration in the present study. Therefore. Therefore. should be made in future. small deflection theory was adopted.e. the application of the Ritz method to the plastic postbuckling analysis of Mindlin plates. (2003). it is desirable to extend the Ritz plastic buckling analysis of Mindlin plate of various shapes and boundary conditions. a postbuckling analysis (with large deflection theory) needs to be carried out. However. In order to include the effect of imperfections. 211 . The applicability of the Ritz method to the postbuckling analysis was shown in Jane et al. with the consideration of effect of imperfections. In future. their study is confined to the classical thin plate theory (Kirchhoff) and the rectangular plates with simply supported or clamped boundary conditions.Conclusions and Recommendations being used for determining in-plane stress.

” Journal of Sound and Vibration.” International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering. “On the use of beam functions for problems of plates involving free edges.B. Zurich. and Chromium-Nickel Steel. ASME.” Trans. “Stability of clamped skew plates under combined loads. 17-80. Ashton. Washington. “Critical combinations of shear and direct stress for simply supported rectangular flat plates. 59. “Some contributions to the theory of elastic and plastic stability.. (2000). 139-140. S. “Charts giving critical compressive stress of continuous flat sheet divided into parallelogram-shaped panels. Batdorf. C. “Continua and dicontinua.M.” Forschung Im Ingenieurwesen. 273-278. (1947).. D. 42. 840. “Flexural vibration of polygonal plates using characteristics orthogonal polynomials in two variables.REFERENCES Aitchison. (1978). “Buckling and Vibration of in-plane loaded plates treated by a unified Ritz approach.H. 8. J. Washington. Bassily. J. Bijlaard. S. Washington. R.” Journal of Sound and Vibration. 65-71.” NACA Technical Note 1223. Argyris.” Journal of Sound and Vibration. Anderson. R. M.” Proceedings of the Conference on Matrix Methods in Structural Mechanics.. “Correlation of Crippling Strength of Plate Structures with Material Properties. J. Anderson. “Natural frequencies of rectangular plates using characteristic orthogonal polynomials in the Rayleigh-Ritz method. 114. 2392. Betten. “Tensile and Pack Compressive Tests of Some Sheets of Aluminum Alloy. 66-80.B.C. Bassily. 65 (9).B.” NACA Technical Note 3600.C. (1985).M. Shin. 114. 102. (1942). R. 858-864.S. 212 . R. (1956).A. (1965). M. Journal of Applied Mechanics. AFFDL-TR. S. D. (1987). (1947). “Elastic-plastic buckling analysis of rectangular plates subjected to biaxial loads. and Anderson.E. C.F.A. P. and Stein.P.S.C.F. S. D. Air Force Flight Dynamics Lab. Bhat. (1951)..” Journal of Applied Mechanics. S. 36(1).” NACA Technical Note No. 493-499.A. Miller. (1969).. Bhat. and Dickinson.H. and Dickinson. 1025 Carbon Steel.” NACA Technical Note No. J. (1975).

E. Durban. 363-366.References Bijlaard.F. “On the use of simply supported plate functions in the Rayleigh-Ritz method applied to the flexural vibration of rectangular plates. (1949). Tri-State Offset Co. S. 201-213.P. 31. “Local buckling of I-sections bent about the minor axis. “Effect of rotation of principal axes on effective shear modulus in elastic-plastic solids.. Cambridge.A. “Buckling of simply supported skew plates. Dubey.J. “Elastoplastic buckling of rectangular plates in biaxial compression/tension. (1995). C.” Computers and Structures. “Buckling of clamped skew plates.H. El-Ghazaly. and Phillips. and Sherbourne. (1982). R. 5. and Azhari. M. Applied Plasticity.N. M. “Theory and tests on the plastic stability of plates and shells. 17 (2). “Elasto-plastic buckling of stiffner plates in beam-to-column flange connections. M. Bryan. Analysis and Design of Flight Vehicle Structures. 178181. (1971). 80. M.. (1891).” International Journal of Mechanical Sciences. Ohio. and Li. Dubey.M. M. 41.” Engineering Structures. G. Cincinnati.” Proceedings of London Mathematical Society. (1999).N. S. 29. and Pindera. S. New York.” ASCE Journal of Engineering Mechanics. 30 (3). Durvasula.” Journal of Constructional Steel Reasearch. (1984). Z. 73-89.N. “On the stability of a plane plate with thrusts in its own plane with applications to the “buckling” of the sides of a ship. R. Chiang. W. 16 (9). (1978). D. (1995). (1994). 529-541. Bradford. 95-103. A. “An experimental study of plastic buckling of a simply supported plate under edge thrusts. Mathematical analysis in engineering: how to use basic tools. 213 .H. (1977). (1970). Dickinson.” AIAA Journal.A. Bradford. H. Dietrich...” Journal of Aeronautical Science. 22. 292-297. E. Kawahara. Bruhn. Zuckerman.” Journal of Sound and Vibration. 18 (2). A. Springer.” Acta Mechanica.. (2000). P.A. 751-765. 54-67. L. Chakrabarty. J. Durvasula. and Azhari.” Journal of Structural Mechanics.M. 77-85. 257-267. (1965). “Inelastic local buckling of plates and plate assemblies using bubble functions.K. 8(1). New York.

(1978). 182(3). 927. G. D.References EL-Ghazalay. Gerard. (1978). and Prager.P. H. “Plastic Buckling of Plates with Edge frictional Shear effects.K. 207-208.N. H. and Schmitt.” Computers and Structures. K. 76. Gerard. Washington. “Deformation theory for elasticplastic buckling analysis of plates under non-proportional planar loading. 89-95. 15 (1). W.C. Journal of Applied Mechanics. “On a numerical solution of the plastic buckling problem of structures. New York. Hencky. 131-149. “Critical shear stress of plates above the proportional limit. 214 . “Handbook of structural stability: part I – buckling of flat plates. “Compressive and shearing buckling load on a rhomboidal plate with all edges clamped. 174-181. M..” NACA Technical Note No. 25(151).C. 4.” Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik (Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics).J.. Washington. McGraw-Hill. H.S. Gerard. 3781.” NACA Technical Note No. A. (1995).” Journal of Applied Mechanics. Washington.” International for Numerical Methods in Engineering. C. G.” ASME. H. K.. G. 441-478.” Journal of Sound and Vibration. and Lin. (1944). 953-964. 7-12.C. “Asymmetric vibration and stability of circular plates. (1960). (1972). 113 (7).Z.S. Forray.A. “Determination of stress-strain relations from ‘Offset’ yield strength values.” NACA Technical Note No. (1987). (1948). Variational Calculus in Science and Engineering. Fried. (1957). D. D. “Theorie Plastischer Deformationen und der hierdurch im Material hervorgerufenen Nachspannungen. I. Han. L. 323-334. Hamada. (1948).” Transaction of Japan Society of Mechanical Engineering. Geannakakes. Gupta.H. G. Handelman. 9. Hill. Gjelsvik.” Journal of Engineering Mechanics. (1968).” Aeronautical Journal. 22 (2). 1530. “Natural frequencies of arbitrarily shaped plates using the Rayleigh-Ritz method together with natural co-ordinate regions and normalized characteristic orthogonal polynomials. 27. and Sherbourne. “Numerical results from the application of gradient iterative techniques to the finite element vibration and stability analysis of skew plates.” Computers & Structures.N. A. (1924). “The buckling and deflection of isosceles triangular plates. (1959). G. “Plastic buckling of rectangular plates under edge thrusts.N. Becker. 166-169. 12. 941-947. (1986). H.

Washington. and Takagi...C. 101-117. Huyton. B. K. G. and Bhat.” Journal of Aerospace Engineering. A.” Journal of Applied Mechanics.W. “Buckling of circular. Reine Angew. Laura. Thesis. J. Gutierrez. (1990). 36. P. London. Yamada.A. “The elastic plastic stability of plates..D. 98-105.A. Y. G.” Journal of Sound and Vibration.B. “Buckling of thick skew plates.M. Y. Math. J. “Buckling of skew plates with continuity or rotational edge restraint. (1974).A. 215 . Elvira. Xiang. (1982). (2000). Kosel. Leissa.W. National University of Singapore. Xiang. 961-978.W..M.W. “Uber das gleichgwich und die bewegung einer elastischen scheibe. “Plastic buckling. (1974). 257-293. A. R. 633-638. 14. The mathematical theory of plasticity. (1850). Leissa. Hutchinson.W.” Advances in Applied Mechanics. (1989)..H. (2001). Ph.” J.” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering. 92-101. P.. B. and Bremec. 42. F. Liew. Hou. “Elastoplastic buckling of circular annular plates under uniform in-plane loading. 1188... Irie. S. Kirchhoff. Hutchinson.” NACA Technical Memorandum No.. 31. 921-922. D. R. The Development of 2-D Orthogonal Polynomials for Vibration of Plates. (1973). 67-144.” Journal of Sound and Vibration. 49.M. Y. solid and annular plates with an intermediate circular support.. Gutiérrez. H. 40.” Ocean Engineering.” Thin-Walled Structures. R. Illyushin. “Natural Frequencies of Thick Annular Plates. York. P. (1993). Singapore. Wang.C. G. K.A.H. “Analytical and numerical study of the effects of initial imperfections on the inelastic buckling of a cruciform column. 62. “Transverse vibrations of a trapezoidal cantilever plate of variable thickness. 51-88. C.” AIAA Journal.References Hill.A. (1950).. 12991310. (2005). Sanzi.. (1946).” Proceedings of the IUTAM Symposium on Buckling of Structures. G. Liew. “DSC Ritz method for the free vibration analysis of Mindlin plates. R. 287. “The free vibration of rectangular plates. Vol. C. 14(3). T.. Oxford. A. “The historical bases of the Rayleigh and Ritz methods.B. K. Wei. Laura. (2005). and Budiansky. 27. (2004). 262-288.” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering. Kitipornchai. 749-755. 27.

689-707. (1994a).M. “pb-2 Rayleigh-Ritz method for general plate analysis. S. K. 55-60. Liew. 15(1).. and Wang. Liew. Topping. Mizusawa. and Kwak. M. Civil-Comp Press.. J. Mindlin.” Thin-Walled Structures. A. T.. C.” Journal of Sound and Vibration. Y. K. New York.K. 281-292. Meirovitch. and Wang. Plasticity: Theory and Application.” AIAA Journal. M.” Mechanics of Structures and Machines. Macmillan Company. Xiang. Oxford.” Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Civil. B. Kajita. Mendelson. (1971). T.K. (Editor). Stirling. Y. 575-584. S.M. and Pavlovic. 73(4). C.M. Elsevier.. 177 (5).M. reentrant corners and curved internal supports.” Engineering Structures.” Transaction of ASME. U. (1986).M. and Wang. R. “Vibration of Mindlin plates on point supports using constraint functions. 205-224.. Majumdar. (2004). “Natural frequencies of rectangular plates with free edges. and Wang. L. (1951). K.N. paper 131. K. K. (1993). Wang. Y. (1994).M. 31-38. 28 (8). (1995).N. Chen.M. K. “Buckling and vibration of annular Mindlin plates with internal concentric ring supports subject to in-plane radial pressure. 105. S. Liew. 1509-1516. “Vibration analysis of plates by pb-2 RayleighRitz method: mixed boundary conditions. (1998). Liew. Xiang. United Kingdom.V. 9 (9).” AIAA Journal.. Xiang. “Mesh-free radial basis function method for buckling analysis of non-uniformly loaded arbitrarily shaped shear deformable plates. and Lim. Kitipornchai. 18.H. “Elastic buckling of regular polygonal plates. “Buckling of a thin annular plate under uniform compression. Y.” Journal of Sound and Vibration. (1980).. “Influence of rotatory inertia and shear on flexural motions of isotropic. Kitipornchai.References Liew.M. 193. (1990). “Analysis of skew plate problems with various constraints. (1968).D. Vibration of Mindlin Plates: Programming the p-Version Ritz Method. 216 . 451-459.M. K. 163-173. Reddy. Liu. 20(3). X.M. 21. S. and Naruoka. C. “Elastic Stability Analysis of Simply Supported Rectangular Plates under Arbitrary Loads.. elastic plates.” Journal of Engineering Mechanics. 499-513. C.” Journal of Sound and Vibration.G.” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering. Liew. Mizusawa.M.M. 120 (3). (2005). T. (1992). Structural and Environmental Engineering Computing. Liew. Journal of Applied Mechanics. M. 1701-1707.L. and Kitipornchai..K. C. M. “Convergence of the classical Rayleigh-Ritz method and the finite element method...

Ramberg. K. and Durban.A.C. 181-186.” Computers and Structures. G. E. 12.. and Leissa. 225-229. (1949). 417-424.R.K. 909-924. The Theory of Sound.W. R. “Elastoplastic buckling of annular plates in pure shear. G.. K. D.” Journal of Aeronautical Sciences.” Proceedings of the 1st International Congress on Applied Mechanics. A. 1. J. Langley Aeronautical Laboratory. 17 (7). (1925).W. C. Rayleigh. 42.” NACA Technical Note No.T. Delft. (1945). D. (1989). and Heimerl. Raju. Transaction of ASME. N. and Drucker. “Bifurcation criterion and plastic buckling of plates and columns. “Inelastic instability and incremental theories of plasticity. The Macmillan Company (reprinted 1945 by Dover Publications. 902. Raju. (1877). (1911). and Rao.” International Journal of Mechanical Sciences. “Stability of moderately thick annular plates subjected to a uniform radial compressive load at the outer edge.” Journal of Applied Mechanics.” Journal of Applied Mechanics. Y. Onat. 115-120.” Computers and Structures. K. 12. (1990). Pride. Peters. L. and Osgood. Rao. Ore. 43-54. T. E. Jr. 217 . Washington. L. Neale. “Buckling of long square tubes in combined compression and torsion and comparison with flat-plate buckling theories. New York). A69-A77.J. J.References Mizusawa. (1989). “The effect of transverse shear deformation on the bending of elastic plates. and Leonard. E. Rayleigh.V. (1990). “Effect of imperfections on the plastic buckling of rectangular plates. Prandtl. 285-290. “Spannungsverteilung in plastischen Koerpern.E.” Engineering Structures. 22.” Journal of the Aeronautical Science 20.” NACA Technical Note 3184. D.W.. Reissner. Technische Boekhandel en Druckerij. “Description of stress-strain curves by three parameters. W. (1954). 56. D. W. G. (1975). Waltman. (1953). Vol. “Post-buckling of a square plate resting on an elastic foundation under biaxial compression. “Vibration and buckling of plates with mixed boundary conditions. 644-651. (1950). “On the calculation of Chladni’s figures for a square plate. 37 (3). Naidu. “Buckling studies for simply supported symmetrically laminated rectangular plates. (1990). 1817.C. 343-345..W.” NACA Technical Note No.. Washington.” Philosophical Magazine Sixth Series. (1943).V. Narita.K.C.” Journal of Applied Mechanics. 477-482. “Plastic buckling of simply supported compressed plates. L. R. 32. 33 (2). Pearson.

Azhari... (1995). Shrivastava. “Beruecksichtigung der elastischen Formaenderungen in der Plastizitaetstheorie. W. Y. S.” Journal of Physics Society of Japan.” NACA Technical Note No. and Moler. Azhari.A. H.. Garbow. 135.A. Stowell..” International Journal of Solids and Structures. 15. E.T.” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering. “Postbuckling of Reissner-Mindlin plates under biaxial compression and lateral pressure and resting on elastic foundations. 164. 12.T. Shiaoka. and Bradford. 32. Springer-Verlag. and Oehlers. 3(4). 261-267. 1556. Bradford.C. Y. B. D. (1974). M.” International Journal of Solids and Structures.J. J. 14(5).S. (1930).A. New York. Saadatpour. S. “Inelastic column theory” Journal of Aeronautical Science.M.. 503-521. (1999). 21. 135-146. (2003). (1999). M. Sewell. Ikebe. R.” Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids. Smith. (1909). 297-306. F. Bradford.Z. Smith. S. E. 567-575. “Elastic buckling of unilaterally constrained rectangular plates in pure shear. (1947).61. Ritz. pp. M. “A general theory of elastic and inelastic plate failure-II.B. 54. (1979).. (1964).T. 1087-1102.J.” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering. M.A. Shen.M. “Inelastic buckling of rectangular sandwich plates.M. Shrivastava.” International Journal of Structural Stability and Dynamics. M. Matrix Eigensystem Routines-EISPAC Guide. 1930. 1099-1120. “Analysis of general quadrilateral orthotropic thick plates with arbitrary boundary conditions by the Rayleigh-Ritz method. “Inelastic buckling of rectangular steel plates using a Rayleigh-Ritz method. M. “Inelastic buckling of plates including shear effects.” Journal fuer die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik.C. 279-297. M. Boyle. 11(10) 1088-1091.C.” Engineering Structures. and Bradford.J. Smith. 1. Saadatpour. 10. and Oehlers. Washington.. S. (2002). D.C. 266-274. M. “Über eine neue Methode zur Lösung gewisser Variationsprobleme der mathematischen Physik.. C. M.” Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik (Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics). Shanley. (1948). “A unified theory of plastic buckling of columns and plates. 443-453. 218 . (1998).S. D. V. “On the buckling of an elliptical plate with clamped edge I.” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics Engineering.. “Buckling of arbitrary quadrilateral plates with internal supports using Galerkin method.References Reuss. 173. (1956). Klema. S.

” In Behaviour of thin-walled structures. 155-161. (1996). Thesis.. (1993b).” Journal of Structural Engineering. 119 (11). Surendran. 1-11. 119(3). Shastry.G.. Eng. 393-401. “Elastic buckling of rectangular plates with mixed boundary conditions.M. K. and Spence.A. C. ed. (1989). C. 33 (1). 3418-3425. 25 (3).. New York.” Thin-Walled Structures.” Journal of Structural Engineering. “Plastic buckling in the plastic range.M. W.. Y. P.” Journal of Engineering Mechanics. Elsevier. Venugopal. Wang.” Computers and Structures. “Elasto-plastic shear buckling of square plates with circular holes..M. J. 291-300. M. and Spearing.C. V. Liew.M. 1543-1565. Xiang. 375-397. S. 42.H. and Redwood. Timoshenko.M. K. and Rao. Tugcu. N. G. “A brief review of plate buckling research. B. “Effect of axial loading on plastic buckling of long strip under pure shear. (1993c). and Liew. Walker. Buckling of Rectangular Mindlin Plates via Ritz Method. Wang. 66.. Tugcu. and Gere. R. C. London.” International Journal of Mechanical Science. “Stability of skew Mindlin plates under isotropic inplane pressure. (1991). (1993a). A. Kitipornchai. (2004). by Rhodes. C. (1999)... 119(2). Thevendran. J. Mc-Graw-Hill. Wang.M. G. Y. “Buckling of elliptical plates under uniform pressure. (1984).V.” Computers and Structures. 651-662.” Thin-Walled Structures. 219 . S. C. “Axisymmetric buckling of circular Mindlin plates with ring supports.. J. S. Liew. (1989). S. Y.References Su.M. Su. and Wang. 782-793.” Proceedings of 16th Australasian Conference on the Mechanics of Structures and Materials. Liew. 231-246. “Nonlinear buckling of microfabricated thin annular plates. Sydney.P.. “Stability of square plates resting on four symmetrically placed point supports on diagonals. M. M. “Buckling of annular plates elastically restrained against rotation along edges. Theory of Elastic Stability. (2001).” Journal of Engineering Mechanics. (1992).. N. 8.M.M. K.. Uenoya. ASCE. 293-295. Kitipornchai. National University of Singapore. (1961). P.M. K. “Buckling of skew plates and corner condition for simply supported edges. Wang. Australia.M. 653-658.. Xiang. 118(4).” Computers and Structures. Y. (1996).H. P. 31 (2). Singapore. and Xiang. Alwis.

4(4). “The stability of a clamped elliptic plate under uniform compression. Wang.” Journal of Applied Mechanics. and Liew. (2005).. polygonal Mindlin plates. 119-127. and Chakrabarty. C. (1994a). “Buckling and vibration of plates with an internal line-hinge via Ritz method. “Buckling of oblique plates with clamped edges under uniform compression.” Thin-Walled Structures. 795-796. “Plastic buckling of simply supported. 8617-8640. Wang. C. “Vibration frequencies for elliptical and semi-elliptical Mindlin plates. (2004).M. (1995). C. “Buckling of circular plates with an internal ring support and elastically restrained edges.. and Wang. C.” Aeronautical Quarterly. 3 (1). C. 93-102. 39. Zhou. C. 301-314.H. (2004). 359-366. 4.” International Journal of Solids and Structures. S. “Elastic/plastic buckling of thick plates.” ThinWalled Structures. “Buckling solutions for Mindlin plates of various shapes. 39-51. Y. Xiang. “Buckling of a circular plate with internal elastic ring support. Chen. 117-122.” Mechanics Based Design of Structures and Machines. Wang. Woinovsky-Krieger... X.” Structural Engineering and Mechanics. 1663-1672. (1937). 151-163... “On the buckling of a circular plate on an elastic foundation. S. 171 (3). (1954).M. (2003).H. Wang.Y. “Buckling of oblique plates with clamped edges under uniform shear..” Journal of Engineering Mechanics.” Journal of Engineering Mechanics. Sydney. (1953). Xiang. M.” Journal of Sound and Vibration. 16 (2). “Buckling analyses of anisotropic plates and isotropic skew plates by the new version differential quadrature method. “Vibration and buckling of super elliptical plates. (1994b). “Plastic buckling of rectangular plates subjected to intermediate and end inplane loads. 131 (4).. Wittrick.M. Y. W. K.” Aeronautical Quarterly.M. 38.. and Wang. (2003). Xiang. Y. Y. Xiang. Tan. W. K.M. C. L. (2005). Xiang. Wang. 177-178.. J. and Liew. 41.M. C.M.” International Journal of Solids and Structures. Wang. 4279-4297.. “Buckling of circular Mindlin plates with an internal ring support and elastically restrained edge.M. Wang. 41.M.Y.” Proceedings of the First Asian-Pacific Congress on Computational Mechanics. (2001b). C.M. Y.” Engineering Structures. 35-48. 15-29.” Journal of Applied Mechanics. Y.M. Kitipornchai. Wang... C. and Kitipornchai. (2001). 31 (1). 220 . C. and Tun Myint Aung. 821-825. 72. (2001a).Y. Y. 130(1). C. S. Wang. 5. C.References Wang. Wittrick. Wang.Y. Wang. Wang.

267-273. “Buckling analysis of rectangular plates with internal hinge. Y. S... and Iwata. Yoshimura. C. S. and Wang. (2001). 56(4). “Buckling of a thin annular plate under uniform compression.M.” 4th ed. N. Y.” International Journal of Structural Stability and Dynamics. (1958). K. C.References Wolfram. 25. “Mathematica book. Y. Xiang. Y. C. 221 . Y.” ASME Journal of Applied Mechanics. Wang. “Exact solutions for buckling of multispan rectangular plates. 37(10).” Journal of Applied Mechanics.B. 181-187. Yamaki. Williams.M. 625-635. Xiang. New York. Xiang.. Cambridge University Press.. 1089-1101. 169-179.Y. Kitipornchai. S. Kitipornchai.M.” Computers and Structures. “Buckling analysis of skew plate assemblies: classical plate theory results incorporating lagrangian multipliers. C.” Journal of Engineering Mechanics. (2003). (1994). C. K. (1995).” Acta Mechanica. Wang.. “Buckling of simply supported oblique plates.M. 102.. ASME. (1963). and Liew.” International Journal of Mechanical Science. (1995).. “Buckling of triangular Mindlin plates under isotropic inplane compression. (1999). “Buckling of skew Mindlin plates subjected to in-plane shear loadings. York. 123-135. 129 (2).W.. F. 1 (2). Xiang. Wang. 30 (3). 363-366.

.1L Hh . In oder to explain the program code properly. † Firstly basic functions need to be defined and the sample basic functions for a SSSS rectangular plate are given by fw1 = Hx + 1L Hh + 1L Hx . fy1 = Hx + 1L Hh + 1L0 Hx ..*) or seperate cells..1L.1L0 .1L Hh .1 Ritz Program Code with Catesian Coordinate System à BUCKRITZRE This program is based on the Catesian coordinate formulations of Ritz method and is to solve the plastic buckling problems of Mindlin plates under any combinations of in-plane and shear stresses with various boundary conditions..1L. fx1 = Hx + 1L0 Hh + 1L Hx . comments on the code can be written in (*. 222 .Appendix A: Ritz Program Codes This Appendix is prepared in MATHEMATICA since it is more convenient to print the program code directly from MATHEMATICA than copying to word file.1L0 Hh . A. comments are written in seperate cells as a text. In MATHEMATICA.

Then a user defined integration function is written in such a way that the exponents of x and h in all the integrands are tested and use the coorsponding integrated values in inte.Appendix A † The mathematically complete polynomial functions are formed as a list. 223 . 8q. fx. It is more computationally efficient since the integration of polynomial are repeatedly involved in the calculation. φy = polyfunction@@#DD φy1 &. H∗ p is the degree of polynomial equation ∗L H# + 1L H# + 2L Nmax = &@pD. p<. Hence the displacement functions w. 8i. 2 polyfunction = Flatten@Reverse ê@ Table@ξi ηq−i . i 1 h j j j j x xh j j j † The integration of the matrix · j j j ª j ª j Aj j j N-1 N-1 x h kx hN-1 y z z z N-1 z z ∫ xh z z „ A are z z z z ∏ ª z z z N-1 hN-1 z ∫ x { ∫ carried out over the plate domain for one time only and store it in a variable named inte as an array. p = 6. 0. φx = polyfunction@@#DD φx1 &. fy are obtained by multiplying the corresponding basic function with polynomial terms. w = polyfunction@@#DD φw1 &. 0. q<DD.

8q. Table@∂ξ w@iD ∂η w@jD. %. 82<D.Appendix A Table@ξi ηq . %. Nmax<. %. Expand ê@ %. kcc4 = Map@intefunction. Map@preintefunct. 1. 1. Nmax<. Nmax<D. 82<D. %. η. %. 8j. 8j. Nmax<D. 0. 8j. %. kcc2 = Map@intefunction. preintefunct@#DD &. 1. 82<D. Nmax<. Nmax<. 82<D. intefunction = If@TrueQ@Head@#D PlusD. 1. Nmax<D. Expand ê@ %. Nmax<. Expand ê@ %. 2 p + 5<. 8i. Exponent@#. Expand ê@ %. 1. 1. Nmax<D. kdd1 = Map@intefunction. kce1 = Map@intefunction. 0. (3. %. ηD + 1DD &. 8i. 8i. kcd1 = Map@intefunction. 8j. Table@∂η w@iD ∂ξ w@jD. Nmax<. kcc1 = Map@intefunction. ξDD. Nmax<. 8i. kcc3 = Map@intefunction. 1. 1. Exponent@#. Table@∂η w@iD ∂η w@jD. ξD + 1. 1. ηDD &. 8j. #D. 8i. ξ. Nmax<D. 2 p + 5<D. Exponent@#. 1. Exponent@#. 8i. Table@∂ξ φx@iD ∂ξ φx@jD. co@#D Part@inte. 8j. 1 1 −1 −1 Table@∂η w@iD φy@jD. Expand ê@ %. inte = ‡ ‡ # ξ η & ê@ %. 8i. 1. 1. 1. 82<D. Expand ê@ %. 82<D. 8i. co = Coefficient@Coefficient@#. Expand ê@ %. H∗co is the function to get coefficient of the polynomial function∗L preintefunct = If@TrueQ@# 0D. † The matrix elements are formed according to the Eqs. Table@∂ξ w@iD φx@jD. Nmax<D. 1.23a-f) Table@∂ξ w@iD ∂ξ w@jD. 8j. Nmax<D. 0. 82<D. 224 .

Nmax<D. Table@∂η φy@iD ∂η φy@jD. 82<D. 8i. 82<D. %. Table@∂ξ φy@iD ∂ξ φy@jD. kee1 = Map@intefunction. 1. Nmax<. Nmax<. 1. 8j. 8j. 1. 1. 82<D. Nmax<D. 82<D. Nmax<D. 8j. kde1 = Map@intefunction. Nmax<. kee2 = Map@intefunction. kdd3 = Map@intefunction. Table@ ∂ξ φx@iD ∂η φy@jD. Nmax<. Expand ê@ %. 8i. 82<D. Expand ê@ %. 1. Nmax<. 1. kde3 = Map@intefunction. Table@∂η φx@iD ∂ξ φx@jD. 82<D. kdd5 = Map@intefunction. Expand ê@ %. kdd2 = Map@intefunction. 8j. Expand ê@ %. %. Nmax<D. kde4 = Map@intefunction. Table@ ∂η φx@iD ∂ξ φy@jD. Nmax<D. Expand ê@ %. Nmax<. 8i. 82<D.Appendix A Table@ ∂η φx@iD ∂η φx@jD. Expand ê@ %. %. Table@ ∂η φx@iD ∂η φy@jD. 1. 82<D. %. 1. 1. 1. 8i. Nmax<. 1. 8i. Nmax<. Nmax<. 1. 8j. %. 1. 8j. 1. Expand ê@ %. 8i. %. %. %. Nmax<D. 8i. 1. Expand ê@ %. %. Expand ê@ %. Nmax<. Nmax<D. 1. 225 . 1. Table@φx@iD φx@jD. 8j. Table@∂ξ φx@iD ∂η φx@jD. kdd4 = Map@intefunction. 1. 8i. 1. Expand ê@ %. 8j. Table@ ∂ξ φx@iD ∂ξ φy@jD. 82<D. 1. Nmax<D. %. kde2 = Map@intefunction. 8j. 8j. Nmax<D. 82<D. Nmax<D. 8i. 8i.

Nmax<. 1. 8i. 82<D. Table@∂η φy@iD ∂ξ φy@jD. c22. %. 1. Expand ê@ %. λy_. j z j + c22 = 1 − 3 H1 − t ê sL j z 2 2 4 λe λe { k 3 i 2 λy − λx y λxy z c23 = H1 − t ê sL j . The algorithm shown here is for the deformation theory of plasticity. 82<D. j z 2 λe k { λe λxy2 y i λx2 z. z j c11 = 1 − 3 H1 − t ê sL j + j z 2 2 λe { k 4 λe 1 c12 = − 2 2 i j1 − H1 − 2 νL t − 3 H1 − t ê sL i λx λy + λxy j j j j j 2 λe2 k k 2 λe 3 i 2 λx − λy y λxy z c13 = H1 − t ê sL j . ly and lxy. kee4 = Map@intefunction. Nmax<D. 8j. t = 1 ì j1 + c k j z z j j z { { k 12 H1 − ν2 L k c−1 2 i y y j z z. kee5 = Map@intefunction. c12. 8j. 1. τ = h ê ly. ζ = lx ê ly. Nmax<D. Expand ê@ %. c13.Appendix A Table@∂ξ φy@iD ∂η φy@jD. 1. Nmax<D. "################################ ################### # # λe = λx2 − λx λy + λy2 + 3 λxy2 . s. j z 2 λe k { λe yy zz. c33. c11. 8i. 1. zz zz {{ 226 . ly = 1. %. kee3 = Map@intefunction. 8i. %. Nmax<. 82<D. c44<. λxy_D := ModuleA 8t. j j1 + k i λe e τ z z j z s=1ì j j j z 2L z 12 H1 − ν { z k k { λxy2 y i λy2 z. c23. Nmax<. 8j. † The stiffness matrix can be obtained as a function of lx. Expand ê@ %. Table@φy@iD φy@jD. 1. << LinearAlgebra`MatrixManipulation` stiffness@λx_. c−1 1 i y y i j Hλe e τ2 Lz z.

kee3 + kee4 + 12 ρ 12 ρ 4 c44 τ2 rowc = AppendRows@kcc. ρ = 1 ê t Det@88c11. matkm = BlockMatrix@88gcc. kdeD. 2 c44 h2 α 1 δ kdd = kdd1 + ζ kdd2 + 12 ρ ζ 12 ρ t χ χ ζ kdd3 + kdd4 + kdd5. 82<D. c12. χ = c12 c23 − c13 c22. zeromat. 8zeromat. Transpose@kdeD. zeromat<. zeromat<. 8zeromat. 12 ρ 12 ρ ζ γ δ 1 kee = ζ kee1 + kee2 + 12 ρ 12 ρ ζ µ µ t ζ kee5. zeromat. λ λ { kcc = kc. H3 t ê s − H1 − 2 νL tL. Return@mat − λ matkmD. AppendColumns@ rowc. 227 . zeromat. 4 c44 τ2 12 ρ 12 ρ β δ kde = kde1 + kde2 + 12 ρ 12 ρ 1 µ χ ζ kde3 + kde4. c13<. 8c13. c44 = 1 c33 = 3 t ê s − H1 − 2 νL t + 9 H1 − t ê sL k { λxy2 λe2 . c22. δ = c11 c22 − c122 . t i1 y j kcc1 + ζ kcc2z. γ = c11 c33 − c132 . kcd. kc = j z c44 h2 k ζ { 1 i 1 λx j gcc = kcc1 + j 12 H1 − ν2 L ly2 k ζ λ λy λxy y z ζ kcc2 + Hkcc3 + kcc4Lz. mat = Map@Chop. rowe = AppendRows@ Transpose@kceD. zeromat<<D. roweD. rowd = AppendRows@Transpose@kcdD.Appendix A E. c23<. rowd. 8c12. ly t kcd = kcd1. 2 c44 h2 ly t kce = ζ kce1. µ = c12 c13 − c11 c23. kceD. c33<<D. κ α = c22 c33 − c232 . kdd. c23. zeromat = ZeroMatrix@NmaxD. β = c13 c23 − c12 c33. keeD.

50< D. geometrical properties and loading conditions need to be defined here (sample input data are for AL 7075 T6 aluminum alloy). 10< D. κ = 5 ê 6. the analysis can be perform for another material properties or aspect ratio without having to recalculate stiffness matrix. Abort@D 228 . λx := λ. num. W. BucklingLoadFinder@λ0_D := Module@8n. If@num < 1. num = Length@Select@n. W1. λ = λ0. lx = 1. the stiffness matrix was formed without having input data. λy := 0. d<.05. λ = λ + d. e = 150.33. Do@ Do@ n = Eigenvalues@ Chop@stiffness@λx. If@num > 1. Wmid. 8i. If@num > 0. λ = λ − d. λ = λ + d D. Since. λxyD êê NDD. Print@"Initial Value of λ is too small"D. d = 5. Break@D. Print@num. d = d ê 2. 8a. λy.2.Appendix A † The input data for material properties. Break@D D. λxy := 0. Sign@#D −1 &DD. H∗e means Eêσ0∗L k = 3 ê 7. h = 0. c = 9. λ êê ND. Then an angorithm (the detailed procedure was discussed in Chapter 3) is written in oder to determine the plastic buckling stress parameter l. Print@λD. ν = 0. " buckling load is less than ".

Do@d = d ê 2. Print@"h=". λxyDD. " ". " ". λxyDD. h. " ". Break@D D. W1. "Wmid=". If@Sign@W1D Sign@W2D. λy. Print@"λ=". SetPrecision@λmid. WmidD. λmid = λ + d. "λ=". Print@"Limit is not OK"D. λy. " ". 8i. 8D. Abort@D. λmid ê Pi2 D D. If@d < 0. H∗λ0 is the initial value of λ∗L H∗The following command will load the algorithm and determine λ∗L BucklingLoadFinder@1. Wmid = Det@stiffness@λx. λ = λmid. "W1=". W1 = Det@stiffness@λx.00005. λxyDD.0D 229 . c. 40< D. "c=". " ". If@Sign@W1D ≠ Sign@WmidD.Appendix A D. λ = λmid − dD. Print@"Limit is OK"D D. λ = λ − d. λy. W2 = Det@stiffness@λx. " ".

8η. eigenew = If@# ≤ 0. v = Eigenvectors@ 8Chop@mat êê ND. eigen = Eigenvalues@ 8Chop@mat êê ND. † Firstly basic functions need to be defined and the sample basic functions for a SSSS skew plate are given by 230 . Print@"λ=". 8ξ. #D & ê@ eigen.Appendix A † The buckling mode shape can be ploted as follow: Clear@λD. 1. ∞. List → Plus. Axes → False. 1D. Plot3D@defl. −1.2 Ritz Program Code with Skew Coordinate System à BUCKRITZSKEW This program is based on the skew coordinate formulations of Ritz method and is to solve the plastic buckling problems of skew Mindlin plates under any combinations of in-plane and shear stresses with various boundary conditions. 8i. Co = v@@po@@1DDDD. λ = λmid. po = Ordering@eigenew. BoxRatios −> 8lx. −1. Chop@matkm êê ND<D.3<. Chop@matkm êê ND<D. Nmax<DL ê. eigenew@@po@@1DDDDD. PlotRange → AllD Clear@"Global`∗"D A. 0. The choice of basic functions and the use of integration function are similar to those in BUCKRITZRE. defl = HTable@Co@@iDD polyfunction@@iDD φw1. 1<. 1<.

1L0 .1L. p<. H∗ p is the degree of polynomial equation ∗L H# + 1L H# + 2L Nmax = &@pD. 0.1L. Hence the displacement functions w. fy are obtained by multiplying the corresponding basic function with polynomial terms. q<DD.1L Hh . φy = polyfunction@@#DD φy1 &.Appendix A † The mathematically complete polynomial functions are formed as a list. carried out over the plate domain for one time only. fy1 = Hx + 1L Hh + 1L0 Hx .1L Hh . fx1 = Hx + 1L0 Hh + 1L Hx . 8i. p = 6. 8q. fx. It is more computationally efficient since the integration of polynomial are repeatedly involved in the calculation. 231 . φx = polyfunction@@#DD φx1 &. 2 polyfunction = Flatten@Reverse ê@ Table@ξi ηq−i . Then an integration function is written in such a way that the exponents of x and h in all the integrands are tested and use the coorsponding integrated values. w = polyfunction@@#DD φw1 &. i 1 h j j j j x xh j j j † The integration of the matrix · j j j ª j ª j Aj j N-1 N-1 j x h kx hN-1 y z z N-1 z z z ∫ xh z z „ A are z z z z ∏ ª z z z N-1 hN-1 z ∫ x { ∫ fw1 = Hx + 1L Hh + 1L Hx . 0.1L0 Hh .

1. Expand ê@ %. H∗intefunction is the function to integrate the polynomial by using known value inte∗L Table@ ∂ξ w@iD ∂ξ w@jD. k5 = Map@intefunction. 8i. k6 = Map@intefunction. co@#D Part@inte. k3 = Map@intefunction. 82<D. 1. Nmax<D. 8q. 8j. Exponent@#. 82<D. Table@ ∂η w@iD φx@jD. k2 = Map@intefunction. Exponent@#. 8i. Nmax<. 1. Expand ê@ %. Nmax<. Expand ê@ %.34a-f) H∗Elements for kcc∗L co = Coefficient@Coefficient@#. 8j.Appendix A Table@ξi ηq . 8j. 82<D. Expand ê@ %. 1. 2 p + 5<. k4 = Map@intefunction. 1. %. Map@preintefunct. Nmax<D. intefunction = If@TrueQ@Head@#D PlusD. 2 p + 5<D. %. Nmax<. 1. Nmax<. 1. Nmax<D. Expand ê@ %. H∗Elements for kcd∗L Table@ ∂η w@iD ∂η w@jD. k1 = Map@intefunction. 8i. 232 . H∗co is the function to get coefficient of the polynomial function∗L preintefunct = If@TrueQ@# 0D. 8j. 1. 8i. 8i. 8j. Nmax<. Nmax<D. Table@∂ξ w@iD ∂η w@jD. ξD + 1. %. ξDD. 82<D. 8i. 1 1 −1 −1 † The matrix elements are formed according to the Eqs. Nmax<. 1. 1. ηD + 1DD &. 82<D. 0.(3. 0. inte = ‡ ‡ # ξ η & ê@ %. ηDD &. 1. 0. Expand ê@ %. #D. %. 8i. 8j. Nmax<D. 1. Table@∂η w@iD ∂ξ w@jD. preintefunct@#DD &. η. %. ξ. Exponent@#. Nmax<D. Table@∂ξ w@iD φx@jD. %. Exponent@#. 82<D.

Nmax<D. 8i. Nmax<. Nmax<. k12 = Map@intefunction. Nmax<D. 8j. k7 = Map@intefunction. Expand ê@ %. Table@ ∂ξ φx@iD ∂η φy@jD. Table@∂ξ w@iD φy@jD. 8i. Table@∂η φx@iD ∂ξ φx@jD. 8i. %. 8i. Expand ê@ %. 1. 82<D. Expand ê@ %. 233 . 1. k8 = Map@intefunction. 82<D. 1. 82<D. 8j. Nmax<. k13 = Map@intefunction. Nmax<D. 8j. 1. 82<D. 1. 1. Nmax<. 1. Nmax<D. H∗Elements for kdd∗L H∗Elements for kce∗L Table@∂η φx@iD ∂η φx@jD. %. Table@∂ξ φx@iD ∂η φx@jD. 1. 8j. 8j. %. Expand ê@ %. Nmax<D. Nmax<. %. 8j. Expand ê@ %. Expand ê@ %. 1. 1. %. k9 = Map@intefunction. Table@∂ξ φx@iD ∂ξ φy@jD. 8j. 82<D. 82<D.Appendix A Table@ ∂η w@iD φy@jD. 1. 82<D. 8i. %. k15 = Map@intefunction. Expand ê@ %. Nmax<. Nmax<D. 1. 1. Table@ ∂ξ φx@iD ∂ξ φx@jD. %. Nmax<. Nmax<D. 1. H∗Elements for Kde∗L Table@ φx@iD φx@jD. Nmax<. 1. Nmax<D. 82<D. Nmax<D. k11 = Map@intefunction. 8i. Expand ê@ %. 8j. 1. Nmax<. 1. 8i. %. 8i. 82<D. k14 = Map@intefunction. 8j. k10 = Map@intefunction. 8i. Expand ê@ %. %. 1.

Expand ê@ %. Nmax<D. 1. k23 = Map@intefunction. 8j. 1. 8i. Expand ê@ %. 8i. %. 82<D. Expand ê@ %. Nmax<. 8i. 8i. 1. Expand ê@ %. Expand ê@ %. 1. 1. %. 1. k21 = Map@intefunction. 234 . %. Table@ ∂η φy@iD ∂η φy@jD. 1. Nmax<. Nmax<D. %.ly and lxy. 8i. k17 = Map@intefunction. 8j. 1. Nmax<D.The algorithm shown here is for the deformation theory of plasticity. Expand ê@ %. H∗Elements for kee∗L Table@ ∂η φx@iD ∂ξ φy@jD.Appendix A Table@∂η φx@iD ∂η φy@jD. Nmax<. 8j. 8j. 82<D. %. 8j. † The stiffness matrix can be obtained as a function of lx. %. k20 = Map@intefunction. 1. k22 = Map@intefunction. 8i. 82<D. Nmax<. 82<D. 8i. λy_. 8j. 1. Nmax<. k16 = Map@intefunction. Expand ê@ %. 82<D. 82<D. Nmax<D. 1. 1. Nmax<D. Table@ ∂ξ φy@iD ∂ξ φy@jD. 1. 8i. 1. %. Nmax<D. 82<D. 8j. Nmax<. Table@∂ξ φy@iD ∂η φy@jD. Nmax<. λxy_D := Table@ φy@iD φy@jD. k18 = Map@intefunction. 1. Expand ê@ %. %. 1. 82<D. 8j. Nmax<. Table@ φx@iD φy@jD. Nmax<D. Table@∂η φy@iD ∂ξ φy@jD. k19 = Map@intefunction. Nmax<D. << LinearAlgebra`MatrixManipulation` stiffness@λx_.

µ = c12 c13 − c11 c23. j z ζ k { 1 gcc = 12 H1 − ν2 L ly2 λx λy i 1 i j j k1 + Sec@ωD jζ Cos@ωD j k2 − λ λ kζ k t yy zz. c−1 2 i y y j j z z. c23<. c33<<D. γ = c11 c33 − c132 . j1 + k i λe e τ j z z z s=1 ì j j j z 2L z 12 H1 − ν { { k k λxy2 y i λy2 z. j z 2 λe k { λe λxy2 y i λx2 j z. c22. ρ. ζ = ly ê lx. c22. c12. c23. c11. κ α = c22 c33 − c232 . j1 + c k i λe e τ j z z t= 1 ì j j z z z j 12 H1 − ν2 L { { k k c−1 2 i y y j j z z. "################################ ################### # # λe = λx2 − λx λy + λy2 + 3 λxy2 . χ = c12 c23 − c13 c22. c23. c12. β = c13 c23 − c12 c33. β. 8c12. δ = c11 c22 − c122 . λe2 1 c44 = H3 t ê s − H1 − 2 νL tL. j z 2 λe k { λe λxy2 c33 = 3 t ê s − H1 − 2 νL t + 9 H1 − t ê sL .Appendix A ModuleA8t. c13<. j z c22 = 1 − 3 H1 − t ê sL j + z 2 2 4 λe λe { k 3 i 2 λy − λx y λxy z c23 = H1 − t ê sL j . ζ<. c13. c33. s. ρ = 1 ê t Det@88c11. ly = 1. γ. kcc1 = Sec@ωD c44 h2 1 i y j ζ k1 + k2 − Sin@ωD k3 − Sin@ωD k4z. α. 8c13. δ. zz zz {{ y Sin@ωD k3 − Sin@ωD k4 + Sin@ωD2 ζ k1z − z { 235 . τ = h ê ly. j z + c11 = 1 − 3 H1 − t ê sL j j z 2 2 λe { k 4 λe 1 c12 = − 2 2 i j1 − H1 − 2 νL t − 3 H1 − t ê sL i λx λy + λxy j j j j j 2 λe2 k k 2 λe 3 i 2 λx − λy y λxy z c13 = H1 − t ê sL j .

ζ{ β kde2 = Cos@ωD H− Sin@ωD k14 ζ + k15L. 4 c44 τ2 ζ kdd = kdd1 + kdd2 + kdd3 + kdd4 + kdd5 + kdd6 + kdd7. ζ{ χ kdd5 = Cos@ωD2 Hk11 + k12 − 4 Sin@ωD ζ k9L. 12 ρ δ kde3 = Cos@ωD H− 2 Sin@ωD k14 ζ + k16L. ζ { β kdd3 = Sin@ωD Cos@ωD 12 ρ H2 Sin@ωD k9 ζ − k11 − k12L. ζ { t 1 kde6 = − Sin@ωD Cos@ωD k18. k ζ { { i Tan@ωD Sin@ωD j jSin@ωD2 k9 ζ + 12 ρ k 1 y k10 − Sin@ωD k11 − Sin@ωD k12z z. i 1 y j k7 − Sin@ωD k8z j z. 4 c44 τ2 ζ kde1 = γ 12 ρ 236 .Appendix A y Hk3 + k4 − 2 Sin@ωD ζ k1Lz z. 12 ρ χ kde4 = Cos@ωD2 ζ k14. 2 c44 h2 k ζ{ λxy kce = t ly α 12 ρ γ 2 c44 h2 kdd1 = ζ Cos@ωD3 k9. 12 ρ µ i j Sin@ωD2 ζ k14 + kde5 = j3 12 ρ k 1 y k17 − 2 Sin@ωD Hk15 + k16Lz z. t ly i 1 j k5 − Sin@ωD k6 y z kcd = j z. δ i kdd4 = Cos@ωD j4 Sin@ωD2 k9 ζ − j 12 ρ k 1y z 2 Sin@ωD k11 − 2 Sin@ωD k12 + k10 z. { t 1 kdd7 = Cos@ωD k13. 12 ρ µ i 2 j kdd6 = Sin@ωD j− k10 + 12 ρ k ζ y z 3 Sin@ωD Hk11 + k12L − 4 Sin@ωD2 ζ k9z. λ { kcc = kcc1. kdd2 = i Tan@ωD j− Sin@ωD2 k14 ζ + j k 1y Sin@ωD k15 + Sin@ωD k16 − k17 z z.

Wmid. rowe = AppendRows@ Transpose@kceD. ω = −30 ∗ Pi ê 180. H∗skew angle in radian∗L λx = −2 λ Tan@ωD. † The input data or material properties and geometrical properties need to be defined here (sample input data are for AL 7075 T6 aluminum alloy and S shear loading). kcd. zeromat<. 1 i Sec@ωD j + jk19 12 ρ ζ k y Sin@ωD2 k20 ζ − Sin@ωD k21 − Sin@ωD k22z. 12 ρ µ kee3 = H−2 Sin@ωD ζ k20 + k21 + k22L. keeD. 4 c44 τ2 ζ kee = kee1 + kee2 + kee3 + kee4. d<. 82<D. rowd.The angorithm for the calculation of buckling stress parameter is the same as in BUCKRITZRE. z { δ kee2 = Cos@ωD k20 ζ. 8zeromat.Appendix A ζ kde = kde1 + kde2 + kde3 + kde4 + kde5 + kde6. W. kee1 = γ rowc = AppendRows@kcc. zeromat<. rowd = AppendRows@Transpose@kcdD. κ = 5 ê 6. E. 237 . kdeD. Transpose@kdeD. zeromat. d = 5. num. AppendColumns@ rowc. 8zeromat. λy = 0. matkm = BlockMatrix@88gcc. H∗e means Eêσ0∗L k = 3 ê 7. W1. zeromat. roweD. λxy = λ . λ = λ0. mat = Map@Chop. Return@mat − λ matkmD. 12 ρ t 1 kee4 = Cos@ωD k23. ν = 33 ê 100. e = 150. zeromat = ZeroMatrix@NmaxD. BucklingLoadFinder@λ0_D := Module@8n. kceD. kdd. zeromat. zeromat<<D.

00005. "W1=". λ êê ND. WmidD. Wmid = Det@stiffness@λx. Break@D. 8D. λxyDD. W2 = Det@stiffness@λx. num = Length@Select@n. Print@num. "Wmid=". " ". Do@d = d ê 2. " If@Sign@W1D ≠ Sign@WmidD. λmid = λ + d. Abort@D D. " ". Print@"h=". λy. λ = λ − d. Abort@D. λ = λ − d. " ". "λ=". Print@λD. c. If@Sign@W1D Sign@W2D. λ = λ + d. λy. If@d < 0. λxyDD. Break@D D. W1. λ = λmid. λmid ê Pi2 D D.0D 238 . "c=". 40< D. 10< D. Print@"Limit is OK"D D. W1 = Det@stiffness@λx. " ". d = d ê 2. Print@ "Initial Value of λ is too small"D. λxyD êê NDD. 8i. λ = λ + d D. λxyDD. H∗λ0 is the initial value of λ∗L H∗The following command will load the algorithm and determine λ∗L BucklingLoadFinder@1. λy. If@num < 1. " ". λ = λmid − dD. λy. Print@"λ=". Break@D D. If@num > 0. 50< D. h. 8i. ". 8a. If@num > 1. SetPrecision@λmid. Print@"Limit is not OK"D. Sign@#D −1 &DD.Appendix A Do@ Do@ n = Eigenvalues@ Chop@stiffness@λx. " buckling load is less than ".

eigenew@@po@@1DDDDD. 25<. #D & ê@ eigen.3 Ritz Program Code with Polar Coordinate System à BUCKRITZPOLAR This program is based on the polar coordinate formulations of Ritz method and is to solve the plastic buckling problems of circular and annular Mindlin plates under in-plane radial stress with various boundary conditions. 8i. Axes → FalseD Clear@"Global`∗"D A. λy. eigen = Eigenvalues@ 8Chop@mat êê ND. Needs@"DrawGraphics`DrawingMaster`"D IteratorSubstitution@8ξ. po = Ordering@eigenew. xD êê Simplify. 0. PlotPoints → 825. λxyD. eigenew = If@# ≤ 0. 1<. v = Eigenvectors@ 8Chop@mat êê ND.3<. Chop@matkm êê ND<D. defl<. 0.5773. 239 . 8η. function = %@@1DD. −3. Print@"λ=". ParametricPlot3D@function. 8ξ. 8x. BoxRatios → 81. −Cos@ωD. λ = λmid. 2<. PlotRange → All. defl = HTable@Co@@iDD polyfunction@@iDD φw1. Boxed → False. Cos@ωD<. ViewPoint → 80. 1D. η. stiffness@λx. −1 + η Tan@ωD.Appendix A † The buckling mode shape can be ploted as follow: Clear@λD. ∞. 1. List → Plus. Nmax<DL ê. Chop@matkm êê ND<D. Co = v@@po@@1DDDD. 1 + η Tan@ωD<.

i 1 y i 1 y z z j j j j z z j x z j x z z z j j z z j j H1+zL+H1-zL j z „ A. polyfunction = Table@ξi−1 .Appendix A † Firstly basic functions need to be defined and the sample basic functions for a simply supported annular plate are given by φw1 = Hξ + 1L Hξ − 1L . p = 10. H∗ p is the degree of polynomial equation ∗L ζ = 0. † The mathematically complete one dimensional polynomial functions are formed as a list.4. fy are obtained by multiplying the corresponding basic function with polynomial terms. φy = polyfunction@@#DD φy1 &. It is more computationally efficient since the integration of polynomial are repeatedly involved in the calculations. H∗ζ=bêR∗L Ω = 2 Pi. φx = polyfunction@@#DD φx1 &. w = polyfunction@@#DD φw1 &. Nmax = p. 8i. φy1 = Hξ + 1L Hξ − 1L. p<D. H∗SSSS∗L φx1 = Hξ + 1L0 Hξ − 1L0 . Hence the displacement functions w. fx. z z z j † The integration of the matrix · j ÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅ ÅÅÅÅxÅ j ÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅ Å j j ª z · 2 z z j j ª z „ A. 240 . Then an integration function is written in such a way that the exponents of x and h in all the integrands are tested and use the coorsponding integrated values. z z j j z z j j j A j 2 p+5 z A z z j j 2 p+5 z { { kx kx i 1 y j z j j x z z j z j z 2 z ÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅ ÅÅÅÅxÅ j ÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅ Å j z · H1+zL+H1-zL j ª z „ A are carried out over the plate domain for one j z j z j z j A j 2 p+5 z z kx { time only.

0. 2 p + 5<D. co@#D Part@inte. 8i. Exponent@#. #D. #D. 241 . 8i. 1 −1 H1 + ζL + H1 − ζL ξ 2 preintefunct1 = If@TrueQ@# 0D. Map@preintefunct1. preintefunct1@#DD &. inte2 = ‡ # ξ & ê@ function2. #D. function2 = TableA inte1 = ‡ # ξ & ê@ function1. H∗co is the function to get coefficient of the polynomial function∗L preintefunct = If@TrueQ@# 0D. 2 p + 5<E. 2 ξi . co = Coefficient@#. 1 −1 function1 = H1 + ζL + H1 − ζL ξ i TableA ξ . ξDD &. ξD + 1DD &. intefunction2 = If@TrueQ@Head@#D PlusD. Exponent@#. 1 −1 intefunction = If@TrueQ@Head@#D PlusD. Map@preintefunct2. ξD + 1DD &. ξ.Appendix A function = Table@ξi . ξD + 1DD &. 0. co@#D Part@inte1. Exponent@#. intefunction1 = If@TrueQ@Head@#D PlusD. preintefunct@#DD &. 8i. preintefunct2 = If@TrueQ@# 0D. 0. inte = ‡ # ξ & ê@ function. 0. preintefunct2@#DD &. 2 p + 5<E. co@#D Part@inte2. Map@preintefunct. Exponent@#. −1. 0.

Table@φx@iD ∂ξ φx@jD. Expand ê@ %. 8i. 1. Expand ê@ %. 1. Nmax<. 1. 8i. Nmax<D. Nmax<. 1. 8i. 8i. Nmax<. Table@w@iD w@jD. 1. Nmax<D. %. 242 . 8j. 1. kde1 = Map@intefunction. Table@∂ξ φx@iD φx@jD. 1. 8j. kcd1 = Map@intefunction1. 8j. 8j. 82<D. Table@∂ξ w@iD φx@jD. 8i. 82<D. 82<D. Expand ê@ %. 1. Nmax<D. Nmax<. 8i.47a-f) Table@∂ξ w@iD ∂ξ w@jD. 1. Table@w@iD φy@jD. 1.(3. 8j. kcc2 = Map@intefunction2. kdd1 = Map@intefunction1. kdd5 = Map@intefunction. 8j. Nmax<. 82<D.Appendix A † The matrix elements are formed according to the Eqs. Nmax<. Nmax<D. 8j. kdd6 = Map@intefunction. Nmax<D. 82<D. Table@∂ξ φx@iD ∂ξ φx@jD. Expand ê@ %. Nmax<D. %. 1. Expand ê@ %. Nmax<D. Nmax<. 1. Nmax<. Nmax<D. kcc1 = Map@intefunction1. Expand ê@ %. 82<D. 82<D. Expand ê@ %. 82<D. Table@φx@iD φx@jD. Expand ê@ %. Nmax<. Nmax<. 1. %. %. 8i. %. 1. Nmax<D. 8i. 1. Expand ê@ %. %. 8j. %. 8j. Table@ φx@iD φx@jD. kdd2 = Map@intefunction2. kce1 = Map@intefunction. Table@φx@iD φx@jD. 1. 1. Table@ ∂ξ φx@iD φy@jD. Nmax<. Expand ê@ %. 1. 1. 82<D. 8j. 82<D. 82<D. %. kdd4 = Map@intefunction2. %. 8i. 1. 8i. %. Nmax<D. Nmax<D. 1. 1. %. 8j. kdd3 = Map@intefunction1. 8i. Expand ê@ %.

Table@φy@iD φy@jD. Nmax<. 82<D. 82<D. 8i. 1. Expand ê@ %. 8i. Expand ê@ %. %. 1. 1. Table@φy@iD φy@jD. %. Nmax<. 82<D. 8i. Expand ê@ %. 1. kee5 = Map@intefunction. 8j. 82<D. Table@ φx@iD φy@jD. kde3 = Map@intefunction2. 1. Nmax<. Nmax<D. Table@ φy@iD φy@jD. Table@∂ξ φy@iD ∂ξ φy@jD. 243 . 1. 8i. Nmax<. %. Expand ê@ %. 8j. kee6 = Map@intefunction1. 8i. Nmax<D. Nmax<D. kee3 = Map@intefunction2. 1. %. 82<D. Expand ê@ %. 8i. Expand ê@ %. Expand ê@ %. Expand ê@ %. 1. Expand ê@ %. kde4 = Map@intefunction2. 82<D. kee1 = Map@intefunction2. 8j. 8j. Nmax<D. Nmax<D. 1. %. 1. %. 8j. 1. %. Nmax<D. Nmax<. 8j. Table@ φx@iD φy@jD. 1. %. 8i. Nmax<. Nmax<D. 1. kee2 = Map@intefunction1.Appendix A Table@ φx@iD ∂ξ φy@jD. 1. 8j. 1. kee4 = Map@intefunction. 8j. Table@∂ξ φy@iD φy@jD. 1. 8j. 82<D. Nmax<D. Table@ φy@iD ∂ξ φy@jD . 82<D. Nmax<. 8i. %. kde2 = Map@intefunction. 82<D. Nmax<. 8i. Nmax<D. 1. 1. Nmax<.

notZeroDD. K de . K ee are zeros for n = 0. zz zz {{ 244 . j z 2 λe k { λe λxy2 y i λx2 z. c−1 1 y i j1 + c k i 2 y j z z.Appendix A † The stiffness matrix can be obtained as a function of lx. λy_. n > 0 ê. c11. n 0 ê. ly = 1. c44<. j z 2 λe k { λe yy zz. τ = h ê ly. c12. s. c22. n > 0 notZero@ro_ListD := Or @@ H# ≠ 0 &L ê@ ro dropZeroes@m_List ? MatrixQD := Transpose@Select@ Transpose@Select@m. c23. dropZeros[m_List?MatrixQ] is to drop the matrix comlumns and rows whose elements are zeros. j z c22 = 1 − 3 H1 − t ê sL j + j z 2 2 4 λe λe { k 3 i 2 λy − λx y λxy z c23 = H1 − t ê sL j . << LinearAlgebra`MatrixManipulation` S1 := 2 S1 := 1 S2 := 0 S2 := 1 ê. c13. j1 + k i λe e τ j z z s=1ì j j z z j z 12 H1 − ν2 L { { k k λxy2 y i λy2 j z. j z c11 = 1 − 3 H1 − t ê sL j + z 2 2 4 λe λe { k 1 c12 = − 2 λxy2 i i λx λy j j j1 − H1 − 2 νL t − 3 H1 − t ê sL j + j j 2 λe2 k k 2 λe 3 i 2 λx − λy y λxy z c13 = H1 − t ê sL j . z j t= 1ìj Hλe e τ Lz z j k 12 H1 − ν2 L { { k c−1 2 i y y j j z z. notZeroDD stiffness@λx_.The algorithm shown here is for the deformation theory of plasticity. λxy_D := ModuleA 8t. "################################ ################### # # λe = λx2 − λx λy + λy2 + 3 λxy2 . n 0 ê. c33.ly and lxy. This can be happen when n = 0 because all the elements of K ce .

c23<. kcd. 24 ρ 24 ρ βΩ δΩ γ kde = n S1 kde1 − n S2 kde2 + 2 12 ρ 2 12 ρ 12 ρ H1 − ζL Ω δ H1 − ζL Ω n S1 kde3 + n S2 kde4. κ α = c22 c33 − c232 . c33 = 3 t ê s − H1 − 2 νL t + 9 H1 − t ê sL k { λxy2 λe2 . 245 . kceD. δ = c11 c22 − c122 . λ 4 { kcc = kc. c22. 4 12 ρ 4 γ H1 − ζL Ω 2 kee = n S1 kee1 + 12 ρ 4 δ Ω δ H1 − ζL Ω S2 kee2 + S2 kee3 − 12 ρ H1 − ζL 12 ρ 4 δ Ω δ Ω S2 kee4 − S2 kee5 + 12 ρ 2 12 ρ 2 t H1 − ζL Ω S2 kee6. H∗This is for Deformation theory of plasticity∗L t Ω i j kc = S1 kcc1 + j c44 τ2 k H1 − ζL H1 − ζL Ω 2 y n S2 kcc2z z. 8c13. 4 { 1 Ω λx i j gcc = S1 kcc1 + j 12 H1 − ν2 L k H1 − ζL λ λy 2 H1 − ζL Ω y n S2 kcc2z z. c44 τ2 2 H1 − ζL Ω t kce = − n S2 kce1. c44 τ2 4 c44 = 1 rowc = AppendRows@kcc. c33<<D. β = c13 c23 − c12 c33. t Ω kcd = S1 kcd1. 8c12. c12. c23. ρ = 1 ê t Det@88c11. c44 τ2 4 kdd = α Ω δ H1 − ζL Ω 2 S1 kdd1 + n S2 kdd2 + 12 ρ H1 − ζL 12 ρ 4 H1 − ζL Ω γ Ω H1 − ζL t S1 kdd3 + 4 12 ρ 4 c44 τ2 βΩ βΩ S1 kdd4 + S1 kdd5 + S1 kdd6. χ = c12 c23 − c13 c22. γ = c11 c33 − c132 .Appendix A H3 t ê s − H1 − 2 νL tL. c13<. µ = c12 c13 − c11 c23.

8i. λ = λ0. 6 ν = 32 ê 100. H∗e means Eêσ0∗L k = 0.The angorithm for the calculation of buckling stress parameter is the same as in BUCKRITZRE. kdeD.3485. keeD. rowe = AppendRows@ Transpose@kceD. Break@D. d<. 50< 246 E. kdd. Return@mat − λ matkmD. 5 κ= . " buckling load is less than ". Clear@n. λD. If@num > 0. c = 20.05. the lowest buckling stress parameter and corresponding nodal number n are determined by an iteration fashion. roweD. λxyD êê NDD.Appendix A † The input data or material properties and geometrical properties need to be defined here (sample input data are for AL 2024 T6 aluminum alloy). λ = λ + d D. . Do@ Do@ n = Eigenvalues@ Chop@stiffness@λx. Note that asymetric buckling mode shape (n ∫0) is possible and the numbers of nodal diameter n is unknown.4. λy. Length@matD<D. e = 10700 ê 61. BucklingLoadFinder@λ0_D := Module@8n. W. Print@num. Sign@#D −1 &DD. λx := λ. W1. mat = AppendColumns@rowc. d = 5. rowd. So. 8Length@matD. num. num = Length@Select@n. Wmid. λy := λ. λxy = 0. rowd = AppendRows@Transpose@kcdD. h = 0. Transpose@kdeD. λ êê ND. matkm = PadRight@dropZeroes@gccD.

h. If@Sign@W1D ≠ Sign@WmidD. λxyDD. Print@"Limit is not OK"D. W2 = Det@stiffness@λx. If@Sign@W1D Sign@W2D. If@num < 1.00005. "λ = ". " ". λ = λ − d. 2 " ". 247 . Do@d = d ê 2. "λ=". " ". Print@"λ=". λ = λ + d. Break@D D. n = 1. Print@λD. 10< D. λn = BucklingLoadFinder@1D. 10DD. "Wmid=". W1 = Det@stiffness@λx. Print@"h=".Appendix A D. SetPrecision@λt ê Pi2 . λ = λmid − dD. λy. λt = BucklingLoadFinder@1D. λmid = λ + d. 8a. Return@λmidD. c. " ". λy. If@d < 0. λ = λ − d. Abort@D D. 40< D. W1. † The buckling mode shape can be ploted as follow: n = 0. Abort@D. λn = BucklingLoadFinder@1D. Print@ "Initial Value of λ is too small"D. λmid ê Pi êê ND. D. n = n + 1. Wmid = Det@stiffness@λx. λxyDD. Print@"n = ". " ". If@num > 1. While@λt ≥ λn. SetPrecision@λmid. D. d = d ê 2. n − 1. " ". 8i. Print@"Limit is OK"D D. "W1=". Break@D D. 8D. λ = λmid. λt = λn. WmidD. " ". λxyDD. λy. "c=".

matkm<D If@# ≤ 0. λt. Eigenvalues@8mat. 8ξ. Axes −> False. 1<. 60<D 248 . 1. List → Plus. 1D v = Eigenvectors@8mat. −1. 1<. Boxed −> False. Nmax<D. 0.25<. PlotPoints → 820. −1. pic = ParametricPlot3D@ 8H1 ê 2 HH1 + ζL + H1 − ζL ξLL ∗ Cos@1 ê 2 Ω ηD. 0D. H1 ê 2 HH1 + ζL + H1 − ζL ξLL ∗ Sin@1 ê 2 Ω ηD. 8i.Appendix A Clear@"Global`∗"D stiffness@λt. BoxRatios −> 81. matkm<D. ∞. H∗Eigenvectors@%D. #D & ê@ % po = Ordering@%.∗L Co = %@@po@@1DDDD Table@Co@@iDD polyfunction@@iDD φw1. 8η. defl Cos@n 1 ê 2 Ω ηD<. defl = % ê.

1) (B. (7.22) are same as the elements in corresponding rows for simply supported edge.22) are given by (i) for simply supported edge k11 = 1 (B.4) [ {( ) ] k 23 = n(α − β ){(n − 1)I n (δ 3 ) + δ 3 I n +1 (δ 3 )} k 31 = n ⎞ ⎛ λτ 2 E k 32 = ⎜1 − ⎟ ⎜ 12(1 − ν 2 )κ 2 G ⎟nJ n (δ 2 ) ⎠ ⎝ for n = 0 ⎧0 k 33 = ⎨ ⎩ − nI n (δ 3 ) − δ 3 I n +1 (δ 3 ) for n ≠ 0 (B. The non-zero elements in second row are for n = 0 ⎧0 k 21 = ⎨ ⎩− n for n ≠ 0 (B.6) (B.9) 249 . (7.5) (B.2) (B.3) k12 = J n (δ 2 ) k 21 = (1 − n)n(α − β ) k 22 = ⎞ λτ 2 E 1⎛ 2 2 2 ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ 12(1 − ν 2 )κ 2 G − 1⎟ αδ 2 J n − 2 (δ 2 ) + 2 βδ 2 J n −1 (δ 2 ) − 2 αδ 2 + 2n β J n (δ 2 ) 4⎝ ⎠ + βδ 2 J n+1 (δ 2 )}+ αδ 22 J n+2 (δ 2 ) (B.7) (B.Appendix B: Elements of Matrices B.8) (ii) for clamped edge The first row and third row of matrix elements of [K ]3×3 in Eq.1: Plastic buckling of circular plate under uniform in-plane compression The non-zero elements of the matrix [K ]3×3 in Eq.

2: Plastic buckling of annular plate under uniform in-plane compression In this appendix.19) 250 .17) (B.14) (B.18) (B. If the outer edge is (i).11) B. clamped edge k11 = 1 (B.12) (B.Appendix B ⎞ ⎛ λτ 2 E k 22 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ 12(1 − ν 2 )κ 2 G − 1⎟{nJ n (δ 2 ) − δ 2 J n + (δ 2 )} ⎠ ⎝ (B.10) k 23 = nI n (δ 3 ) (B.25) are presented.13) (B. The elements in the first three rows depend on the boundary condition of the outer edge while the elements in the next three rows depend on the inner edge condition.16) k12 = J n (δ 2 ) ⎧0 k14 = ⎨ ⎩1 k15 = Yn (δ 2 ) for n = 0 ⎧0 k 21 = ⎨ ⎩− n for n ≠ 0 for n = 0 for n ≠ 0 ⎛ σ ⎞ k 22 = ⎜ 2 − 1⎟{nJ n (δ 2 ) − δ 2 J n + (δ 2 )} ⎝κ G ⎠ k 23 = nI n (δ 3 ) ⎧− 1 k 24 = ⎨ ⎩n for n = 0 for n ≠ 0 (B. the non-zero elements of the matrix [K ]6×6 in Eq. (7.15) (B.

simply supported edge The first row and third row of matrix elements are same as the elements in corresponding rows for clamped edge (i.24) σ ⎞ ⎛ k 35 = ⎜1 − 2 ⎟nYn (δ 2 ) ⎝ κ G⎠ for n = 0 ⎧0 k 36 = ⎨ ⎩ − nK n (δ 3 ) + δ 3 K n +1 (δ 3 ) for n ≠ 0 (B. B.30) k 23 = n(α − β ){(n − 1)I n (δ 3 ) + δ 3 I n +1 (δ 3 )} ⎧α − β k 24 = ⎨ ⎩ − n(1 + n)(α − β ) k 25 = for n = 0 for n ≠ 0 1⎛ σ ⎞ 2 2 2 ⎜ 2 − 1⎟ αδ 2 Yn − 2 (δ 2 ) + 2βδ 2Yn −1 (δ 2 ) − 2 αδ 2 + 2n β Yn (δ 2 ) 4⎝κ G ⎠ [ {( ) βδ 2Yn+1 (δ 2 )} + αδ 22Yn+ 2 (δ 2 )] (B.Appendix B ⎛ σ ⎞ k 25 = ⎜ 2 − 1⎟{nYn (δ 2 ) − δ 2Yn + (δ 2 )} ⎝κ G ⎠ k 26 = nK n (δ 3 ) k 31 = k 34 = n (B.22) (B.27) k 22 = 1⎛ σ ⎞ 2 2 2 ⎜ 2 − 1⎟ αδ 2 J n −2 (δ 2 ) + 2βδ 2 J n −1 (δ 2 ) − 2 αδ 2 + 2n β J n (δ 2 ) 4⎝κ G ⎠ [ {( ) + βδ 2 J n +1 (δ 2 )} + αδ 22 J n + 2 (δ 2 ) ] (B. The non-zero elements in second row are k 21 = (1 − n)n(α − β ) (B.e.21) (B.23) σ ⎞ ⎛ k 32 = ⎜1 − 2 ⎟nJ n (δ 2 ) ⎝ κ G⎠ for n = 0 ⎧0 k 33 = ⎨ ⎩ − nI n (δ 3 ) − δ 3 I n +1 (δ 3 ) for n ≠ 0 (B.28) (B.20) (B.25) (B.12 to B.29) (B.31) 251 .26). Eqs.26) (ii).

33) (B.35) k16 = nK n (δ 3 ) k 31 = 2n(n − 1) ⎛ σ ⎞ k 32 = 2n⎜ 2 − 1⎟{(1 − n) J n (δ 2 ) + δ 2 J n +1 (δ 2 )} ⎝κ G ⎠ ⎧0 ⎪ = ⎨− 2n (δ 2 + 2n 2 − 2)I (δ ) − (2n(n − 1) + δ 2 )I (δ ) n +1 3 3 n+2 3 ⎪ δ3 3 ⎩ (B.40) (B.37) (B.34) for n = 0 for n ≠ 0 k13 = nI n (δ 3 ) ⎧ σ ⎪− 2 k14 = ⎨ κ G nσ ⎪ 2 ⎩κ G (B.38) for n = 0 for n ≠ 0 (B.36) (B. The remaining elements in the first and thirds rows are given by k11 = − nσ κ 2G (B.42) 252 .27-B. B.39) k 33 k 34 = −2n(n + 1) ⎛ σ ⎞ k 35 = 2n⎜ 2 − 1⎟{(1 − n)Yn (δ 2 ) + δ 2Yn +1 (δ 2 )} ⎝κ G ⎠ (B.32) iii. free edge The elements in the second row of the matrix are same as simply supported case (Eqs.Appendix B k 26 = n(α − β ){(n − 1)K n (δ 3 ) − δ 3 K n +1 (δ 3 )} (B.32).41) for n = 0 ⎧0 ⎪ k 36 = ⎨ 2n (δ 2 + 2n 2 − 2)K (δ ) − (2n(n − 1) + δ 2 )K (δ ) for n ≠ 0 n +1 3 3 n+2 3 ⎪δ 3 3 ⎩ (B.

43) (B.54) k 61 = nb n −1 σ ⎞n ⎛ k 62 = ⎜1 − 2 ⎟ J n (bδ 2 ) ⎝ κ G⎠b for n = 0 ⎧0 ⎪ k 63 = ⎨ δ 3 { } ⎪ − 2 I n +1 (bδ 3 ) + I n −1 (bδ 3 ) for n ≠ 0 ⎩ (B.56) (B.55) k 64 = nb − ( n +1) (B. clamped edge k 41 = b n k 42 = J n (δ 2 ) ⎧log(b) k 44 = ⎨ − n ⎩b k 45 = Yn (δ 2 ) k 51 = −nb n −1 k 52 = (B.52) (B.49) k 54 ⎧− b −1 = ⎨ −( n +1) ⎩ nb (B.47) (B.45) (B.48) δ2 ⎛ σ ⎞ ⎜ 2 − 1⎟{J n −1 (bδ 2 ) − J n +1 (bδ 2 )} 2 ⎝κ G ⎠ n I n (bδ 3 ) b for n = 0 for n ≠ 0 k 53 = (B.53) (B.57) σ ⎞n ⎛ k 65 = ⎜1 − 2 ⎟ Yn (bδ 2 ) ⎝ κ G⎠b 253 .51) k 56 = (B.44) for n = 0 for n ≠ 0 (B.50) k 55 = δ2 ⎛ σ ⎞ ⎜ 2 − 1⎟{Yn −1 (bδ 2 ) − Yn +1 (bδ 2 )} 2 ⎝κ G ⎠ n K n (bδ 3 ) b (B.Appendix B If the inner edge is i.46) (B.

Appendix B for n = 0 ⎧0 ⎪ k 66 = ⎨δ 3 ⎪ 2 {K n +1 (bδ 3 ) + K n −1 (bδ 3 )} for n ≠ 0 ⎩ (B. Eqs.59-B.63) (B.58) ii. The remaining elements in the fourth and sixth rows are given by 254 .62) k 55 = 1 4b 2 ⎛ σ ⎞ 2 2 2 2 2 ⎜ 2 − 1⎟ αb δ 2 Yn − 2 (bδ 2 ) + 2βbδ 2Yn −1 (bδ 2 ) − 2 αb δ 2 + 2n β Yn (bδ 2 ) κ G ⎠ ⎝ [ {( ) + β bδ 2Yn +1 (bδ 2 )} + αb 2δ 22Yn+ 2 (bδ 2 ) k 56 = ] (B.64) n (α − β ){(n − 1)K n (bδ 3 ) − bδ 3 K n +1 (bδ 3 )} b2 iii. B.58).61) n (α − β ){(n − 1)I n (bδ 3 ) + bδ 3 I n +1 (bδ 3 )} b2 k 54 ⎧ b −2 (α − β ) = ⎨ −( n + 2) n(1 + n)(α − β ⎩− b ) for n = 0 for n ≠ 0 (B.60) (B.59) 1 ⎛ σ ⎞ − 1⎟ αb 2δ 22 J n − 2 (bδ 2 ) + 2βbδ 2 J n −1 (bδ 2 ) − 2 αb 2δ 22 + 2n 2 β J n (bδ 2 ) 2 ⎜ 2 4b ⎝ κ G ⎠ [ {( ) + 2 βbδ 2 J n +1 (bδ 2 )} + αb 2δ 22 J n + 2 (bδ 2 ) k 53 = ] (B. free edge The elements in the fifth row of the matrix are same as simply supported case (Eqs. (B.e.64). The non-zero elements in fifth row are k 51 = b n − 2 (1 − n)n(α − β ) k 52 = (B.43-B. simply supported edge The fourth row and sixth row of matrix elements are same as the elements in corresponding rows for clamped edge (i.

66) n I n (bδ 3 ) b for n = 0 for n ≠ 0 k 44 σ ⎧ ⎪ − bκ 2 G =⎨ nσ ⎪ n +1 2 ⎩b κ G n K n (bδ 3 ) b (B.68) (B.74) ⎪ b 3δ 3 ⎝b ⎠ ⎩ ( ) 255 .73) 2n ⎛ σ ⎞ − 1⎟{(1 − n)Yn (bδ 2 ) + bδ 2Yn +1 (bδ 2 )} 2 ⎜ 2 b ⎝κ G ⎠ k 66 for n = 0 ⎧0 ⎪ 2n ⎛ 2n ⎞ =⎨ b 2δ 32 + 2n 2 − 2 K n +1 (bδ 3 ) − ⎜ 2 (n − 1) + δ 32 ⎟ K n + 2 (bδ 3 ) for n ≠ 0 (B.71) ⎜ 2 3 n +1 3 3 ⎟ n+2 3 ⎪ b 3δ 3 ⎝b ⎠ ⎩ ( ) k 64 = −2nb − ( n + 2) (n + 1) k 65 = (B.72) (B.67) k 46 = (B.Appendix B k 41 = − k 43 = b n −1 nσ κ 2G (B.69) (B.65) (B.70) k 61 = 2b n − 2 (n − 1)n k 62 = 2n ⎛ σ ⎞ − 1⎟{(1 − n) J n (bδ 2 ) + bδ 2 J n +1 (bδ 2 )} 2 ⎜ 2 b ⎝κ G ⎠ for n = 0 ⎧0 ⎪ k 63 = ⎨− 2n b 2δ 2 + 2n 2 − 2 I (bδ ) − ⎛ 2n (n − 1) + δ 2 ⎞ I (bδ ) for n ≠ 0 (B.

Vol.” Thin-Walled Structures. Wang. Taiwan. 256 .” Journal of Engineering Mechanics. Kaohsiung. “Plastic buckling analysis of thick plates using p-Ritz method. Tun Myint Aung. 337-357. Wang. C. J. C.Y.” Proceedings of the Eighteenth KKCNN Symposium on Civil Engineering.M. Vol. C. (2005). Wang. Tun Myint Aung and Wang. 1373-1376.” Journal of Engineering Mechanics. Wang. C. 359-366. submitted for possible publication. (2005). C. “Plastic buckling of moderately thick annular plates. 5. 471-476. 2. M.M. “Buckling of circular plates under intermediate and edge radial loads. (2005). C.” International Journal of Structural Stability and Dynamics.. 131 (4). 4. “Buckling of a weakened column. 43. “Plastic buckling skew plates via Ritz method.” International Journal of Solids and Structures. and Tun Myint Aung. Conferences Papers 1.M. M. 130 (11). (2004). and Tun Myint Aung. Vol. ASCE. and Chakrabarty. Wang. (2004). 5 (3). ASCE. 3.M. Tun Myint Aung and Wang.List of Author’s Publications Journal Papers 1.. C. “Buckling of circular Mindlin plates with an internal ring support and elastically restrained edge. and Tun Myint Aung. 19261933.

“Plastic buckling analysis of Mindlin plates using the Ritz method. C. M. Thailand. 367-372. Korea. (2005). K. and Tun Myint Aung. Wang. M. Kissimmee. Wang.. Ayutthaya. (2003). 257 . Wang.M. Structural and Environmental Engineering Computing. 4. “Buckling Of Circular Plates With An Internal Ring Support: Asymmetric Mode And Optimal Ring Support Radius. (2004).” Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Civil. Rome. USA. 3. “Plastic buckling of annular plates. M. Tun Myint Aung and Vo. Italy.” Third International Conference of Structural Stability and Dynamics. Tun Myint Aung and Wang.List of Author’s Publications 2.K.” Proceedings of the 16th KKCNN Symposium on Civil Engineering. C. “Ritz method for plastic buckling analysis of thick plates. Florida. (2005).” Proceedings of the 17th KKCNN Symposium on Civil Engineering. and Tun Myint Aung. C. Kyungju. 5. C.