Journal of Mechanics

http://journals.cambridge.org/JOM

Additional services for Journal of Mechanics:

Email alerts: Click here
Subscriptions: Click here
Commercial reprints: Click here
Terms of use : Click here

Effect of Stress Concentration on Laminated Plates
A. S. Sayyad and Y. M. Ghugal

Journal of Mechanics / Volume 29 / Issue 02 / June 2013, pp 241 ­ 252
DOI: 10.1017/jmech.2012.131, Published online: 19 December 2012

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S1727719112001311

How to cite this article:
A. S. Sayyad and Y. M. Ghugal (2013). Effect of Stress Concentration on Laminated Plates. Journal of Mechanics, 29, pp 
241­252 doi:10.1017/jmech.2012.131

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/JOM, IP address: 137.99.31.134 on 15 May 2013
 EFFECT OF STRESS CONCENTRATION ON LAMINATED PLATES

A. S. Sayyad *
Department of Civil Engineering
SRES’S College of Engineering
Kopargaon-423601, India

Y. M. Ghugal
Department of Applied Mechanics
Government Engineering College
Aurangabad-431005, India

ABSTRACT
This paper deals with the problem of stress distribution in orthotropic and laminated plates subjected to
central concentrated load. An equivalent single layer trigonometric shear deformation theory taking into
account transverse shear deformation effect as well as transverse normal strain effect is used to obtain in-
plane normal and transverse shear stresses through the thickness of plate. Governing equations and
boundary conditions of the theory are obtained using the principle of virtual work. A simply supported
plate with central concentrated load is considered for the numerical analysis. Anomalous behavior of
inplane normal and transverse shear stresses is observed due to effect of stress concentration compared to
classical plate theory and first order shear deformation theory.

Keywords: Transverse shear, Transverse normal strain, Static flexure, Laminated plates, Concen-
trated loads, Stress concentration.

1. INTRODUCTION ergy of shear deformation.

Advances in the technology of composite materials
has led to the use of composite plates as structural
components in various engineering applications due to
superior mechanical properties of these materials.
However, shear deformation effects become more pro-
nounced in such structures due to low transverse shear
moduli as compared to inplane tensile moduli, when
subjected to transverse loads. This necessitates the
accurate structural analysis of composite plates. The
effect of local stress concentration is more pronounced
in laminated composites due to built in boundary condi-
tions or concentrated loading conditions.
Since the transverse shear deformation is neglected
in classical plate theory [1,2], it can not be applied to
thick plate wherein shear deformation effects are more
significant. First order shear deformation theory is
considered as an improvement over classical plate the-
ory. Reissner [3,4] was the first to provide consistent
stress-based plate theory which incorporates the effect
of shear deformation whereas Mindlin [5] has devel-
oped displacement based first order shear deformation
theory. In these theories, the transverse shear strain
distribution is assumed to be constant through the plate
thickness and therefore problem dependent shear cor-
rection factor is required to account for the strain en-
The limitations of classical, first and second order
shear deformation theories stimulated the development
of higher order or equivalent shear deformation theories
to avoid the use of shear correction factors, to include
effect of cross sectional warping and to get the realistic
variation of the transverse shear strains and stresses
through the thickness of plate. It was observed that
most of the displacement models utilize some simplifi-
cation of the generalized displacement function given
by Lo et al. [6-8]. Reddy [9,10] used displacement
function which has same number of unknowns as that
of Mindlin type of displacement function, but the dis-
placement function satisfies transverse shear stress
condition at the top and bottom surfaces of the plate.
Kant [11] presented a third-order refined shear de-
formation theory for analysis of thick elastic plates
which gives rise to a twelfth order governing differen-
tial equation system. Savitri and Varadan [12] have
carried out analysis of laminated plate subjected to cen-
tral concentrated load but not assess the effect of local
stress concentration.
Comprehensive reviews of these theories have been
given by Noor and Burton [13]. A recent review paper
with future direction is presented by Ghugal and Shimpi
[14].
Levy [15] has developed a refined theory for thick

*
Corresponding author (attu_sayyad@yahoo.co.in)

Journal of Mechanics, Vol. 29, No. 2, June 2013 241

DOI : 10.1017/jmech.2012.131
Copyright © 2013 The Society of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, R.O.C.
isotropic plate for the first time using sinusoidal func- [6,7] type not only introduces additional unknown
tions interms of thickness coordinate in the displace- variables in those theories but these variables are also
ment field. Stein [16], Stein et al. [17,18], also pro- difficult to interpret physically [20]. Thus use of the
posed such theory and applied to isotropic plates in the sine term in the thickness coordinate enhances the
modified form. In this paper trigonometric shear de- richness of the theory, and also results in the reduction
formation theory is presented and applied to composite of the number of unknown variables as compared to
plates subjected to central concentrate load. The re- other theories [21,22] without loss of physics of the
sults for this loading case are rarely available in the problem in modeling. The theory gives the realistic
literature. The effect of local stress concentration due variation of transverse shear stress through the thick-
to concentrated load is effectively assess by present ness of plate which is governed by a cosine-law distri-
theory which was not been assessed by the other re- bution and satisfies the shear stress free boundary con-
searcher. The results obtained for stresses are com- ditions on the top and bottom surfaces of the plate.
pared with other refined theories to demonstrate the The theory obviates the need of a shear correction fac-
validity of the theory. tor due to the realistic variation of transverse shear
stress. Thus, the displacement field chosen is superior
1.1 Plate Under Consideration to those of others. The boundary value problem of the
theory is derived using principle of virtual work; hence
Consider a plate made up of orthotropic material of the present theory is variationally consistent.
length a, width b, and thickness h. The plate occupies Normal and shear strains are obtained using strain-
(in o– x – y – z right-handed Cartesian coordinate sys- displacement relationship as follows:
tem) a region: Normal Strains:
0 ≤ x ≤ a ; 0 ≤ y ≤ b ; −h/2 ≤ z ≤ h/2 (1)
∂u ∂u ∂2 w h πz ∂φ
εx = = 0 − z 2 + sin
1.2 The Displacement Field ∂x ∂x ∂x π h ∂x
∂v ∂v ∂ w h
2
πz ∂ψ
The displacement field of the present plate theory εy = = 0 − z 2 + sin
including mid-plane displacement components is writ- ∂y ∂y ∂y π h ∂y
ten as follows: ∂w πz
εz = = − ξ sin (3)
∂z h
∂w h πz
u ( x , y , z ) = u0 ( x , y ) − z+ sin φ( x, y )
∂x π h
∂w h πz Shear Strains:
v( x, y, z ) = v0 ( x, y ) − z + sin ψ ( x, y ) (2)
∂y π h
h πz ∂u ∂v ∂u ∂v ∂2 w
w( x, y, z ) = w( x, y ) + cos ξ( x, y ) γ xy = + = 0 + 0 − 2z
π h ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x∂y
where u and v are the inplane displacements in x- and y- h πz ⎛ ∂φ ∂ψ ⎞
directions respectively and w is transverse displacement + sin ⎜ + ⎟
π h ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠
in z- direction. u0 and v0 are the mid-plane displace-
ments and are the functions of x and y. The sinusoidal ∂u ∂w πz ⎛ h ∂ξ ⎞
γ xz = + = cos ⎜ + φ⎟
function is assigned according to the shear stress dis- ∂z ∂x h ⎝ π ∂x ⎠
tribution through the thickness of the plate. The func- ∂v ∂w πz ⎛ h ∂ξ ⎞
tions φ(x, y), ψ(x, y) and ξ(x, y) represent rotations of γ yz = + = cos ⎜ +ψ⎟ (4)
∂z ∂y h ⎝ π ∂y ⎠
the plate at neutral plane, which are unknown functions
to be determined.
The stress strain relationship for the plate of constant
1.3 Superiority of the Present Theory thickness h and composed of thin layers of orthotropic
materials given by Jones [23] can be written as:
The proposed theory is a displacement-based refined
equivalent single layer theory, and refined shear defor-
mation theories are known to be successful technique σkx = Q11k ε x + Q12k ε y + Q13k ε z
for improving the accuracy of displacement and stresses
[19]. The kinematics of the present theory is much σky = Q12k ε x + Q22
k
ε y + Q23
k
εz
richer than those of the higher order shear deformation
theories available in the literature, because if the trigo- σkz = Q13k ε x + Q23
k
ε y + Q33k ε z
nometric term interms of thickness coordinate is ex-
panded in power series, the kinematics of higher order τkxy = Q66k γ xy ; τkzx = Q55k γ zx ; τkyz = Q44
k
γ yz (5)
theories are implicitly taken into account to good deal
of extent. Also, it needs to be noted that every addi-
tional power of thickness coordinate in the displace- where Qijk are the reduced plate stiffnesses coeffi-
ment field of other higher-order theories of Lo et al. cients as below:

242 Journal of Mechanics, Vol. 29, No. 2, June 2013

 ⎛1 − μ12 μ 21 − μ 23 μ32 ⎞ ∂w
Δ = ⎜ ⎟ M x = 0 or is prescribed (16)
⎝ − μ31 μ13 − 2 μ 21 μ32 μ13 ⎠ ∂x
E1 (1 − μ 23 μ32 ) E (μ − μ31 μ 23 )
Q11 = ; Q12 = 1 21 ; ∂M x ∂M xy
Δ Δ +2 = 0 or w is prescribed (17)
∂x ∂y
E (μ − μ 21 μ32 ) E (1 − μ13 μ31 )
Q13 = 1 31 ; Q22 = 2 ;
Δ Δ M xs = 0 or φ is prescribed (18)
E (μ − μ12 μ31 ) E (1 − μ12 μ 21 )
Q23 = 2 32 ; Q33 = 3 ;
Δ Δ M xys = 0 or ψ is prescribed (19)
Q66 = G12 ; Q55 = G13 ; Q44 = G23 (6)
Vxzs = 0 or ξ is prescribed (20)

1.4 Governing Equations and Boundary Conditions

along y = 0 and y = b edges, the boundary conditions
Using Eqs. (3) through (6) and principle of virtual are as follows:
work, variationally consistent differential equations and
boundary conditions for the plate under consideration N xy = 0 or u0 is prescribed (21)
are obtained. The principle of virtual work can be
stated in analytical form for the plate as: N y = 0 or v0 is prescribed (22)

⎡ σ xk δε x + σ ky δ ε y + σ zk δ ε z + ⎤ ∂w
h/2 b a
⎢ ⎥ dx dy dz M y = 0 or is prescribed (23)
∫ −h / 2 ∫ ∫
0 0 ⎢ τ k δ γ + τk δ γ + τ k δ γ ⎥ ∂y
⎣ xy xy zy zy zx zx ⎦
∂M y ∂M xy
b a +2 = 0 or w is prescribed (24)
− ∫ ∫0 0
q ( x, y ) δw dx dy = 0 (7) ∂y ∂x

Integrating the Eq. (7) by parts and collecting the M ys = 0 or ψ is prescribed (25)
coefficients of δu0, δv0, δw, δφ, δψ and δξ, we obtain
the governing equations and the associated boundary M xys = 0 or φ is prescribed (26)
conditions of the plate in terms of stress resultants and
unknown variables appeared in the displacement field.
The governing differential equations in-terms of stress Vyzs = 0 or ξ is prescribed (27)
resultants are as follows:
At corners of the plate, boundary condition is:
∂N x ∂N xy
+ =0 (8) M xy = 0 or w is prescribed (28)
∂x ∂y
The force and moment results appeared in governing
∂N xy ∂N y equations [Eqs. (8) through (13)] and boundary condi-
+ =0 (9)
∂x ∂y tions [Eqs. (14) through (28)] are as follows:
h/2
∂2 M x
+ 2
∂ 2 M xy ∂ 2 M y
+ +q = 0 (10)
( N x , N y , N xy ) = ∫ −h / 2
(σ x , σ y , τ xy ) dz (29)
∂x 2 ∂x∂y ∂y 2
h/2

∂M ∂M s s
xy
( M x , M y , M xy ) = ∫ −h / 2
(σ x , σ y , τ xy ) z dz (30)
+ − Vxzs = 0
x
(11)
∂x ∂y h/2
( M xs , M ys , M xys ) = ∫ −h / 2
(σ x , σ y , τ xy ) f ( z ) dz (31)
∂M s
y ∂M s
xy
+ − Vyzs = 0 (12) h/2
∂y ∂x (Vxzs , Vyzs ) = ∫ −h / 2
(τ xz , τ yz ) f ′( z ) dz (32)

∂Vxzs ∂Vyz π s
s
h/2

∂x
+
∂y h
− Vzz = 0 (13) Vzzs = ∫ −h / 2
σ zz g ′( z ) dz (33)

The associated boundary conditions at x = 0 and x = where Nx, Ny, Nxy are the force resultants analogous to
a obtained are of the following form: classical plate theory, Mx, My, Mxy are the moment re-
sultants or the stress couples analogous to classical
N x = 0 or u0 is prescribed (14) plate theory, M xs , M ys , M xys are refined moments or
stress couples due to transverse shear deformation ef-
N xy = 0 or v0 is prescribed (15) fects and Vxzs , Vyzs , Vzzs are the transverse shear and

Journal of Mechanics, Vol. 29, No. 2, June 2013 243

transverse normal stress resultants and f ( z ) = ∂ 2 u0 ∂2v ∂2v
h / π sin πz / h , g ( z ) = h / π cos πz / h and the prime ( As12 + As66 ) + As66 20 + As22 20
∂x∂y ∂x ∂y
( )′ indicates the differentiation of function with re-
∂3 w ∂3 w
spect to z. The governing equations [Eqs. (8) through − Bs22 − ( Bs12 + 2 Bs66 ) 2
∂y 3
∂x ∂y
(13)] and associated boundary conditions [Eqs. (14)
through (28)] in-terms of unknown variables (u0, v0, w, ∂2φ ∂2ψ ∂2ψ
+( Ass12 + Ass66 ) + Ass66 2 + Ass22 2
φ, ψ and ξ) in the displacement field are as follows: ∂x∂y ∂x ∂y
⎛π h ⎞ ∂ξ
− Acc44 ψ − ⎜ Ass23 + Acc44 ⎟ =0 (38)
∂ u0
2
∂ u0 2
∂ v0 2 ⎝ h π ⎠ ∂y
A11 + A66 + ( A12 + A66 )
∂x 2 ∂y 2 ∂x∂y
π ∂u π ∂v π ∂2 w
∂3 w ∂3 w ∂2φ As13 0 + As23 0 − Bs13 2
− B11 3 − ( B12 + 2 B66 ) + As11
h ∂x h ∂y h ∂x
∂x ∂x∂y 2 ∂x 2
π ∂2 w ⎛ π h ⎞ ∂φ
∂ φ 2
∂ ψ 2 − Bs23 2 + ⎜ Ass13 + Acc55 ⎟
+ As66 + ( As12 + As66 ) h ∂y ⎝h π ⎠ ∂x
∂y 2
∂x∂y
⎛π ⎞ ∂ψ π
2
h
π ∂ξ + ⎜ Ass23 + Acc44 ⎟ − 2 Ass33 ξ
− As13 =0 (34) ⎝h π ⎠ ∂y h
h ∂x
h2 ∂ 2 ξ h2 ∂2ξ
+ Acc44 2 + 2 Acc55 2 = 0 (39)
π 2
∂y π ∂x
∂ 2 u0 ∂2v ∂2v
( A12 + A66 ) + A66 20 + A22 20 The associated boundary conditions are as follows:
∂x∂y ∂x ∂y
On edges x = 0 and x = a, the following conditions
∂3 w ∂3 w
− B22 3 − ( B12 + 2 B66 ) 2 hold:
∂y ∂x ∂y
∂2φ ∂2ψ ∂u0 ∂v ∂2 w ∂2 w
+( As12 + As66 ) + As66 2 A11 + A12 0 − B11 2 − B12 2
∂x∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y
∂2ψ π ∂ξ ∂φ ∂ψ π
+ As22 2 − As23 = 0 (35) + As11 + As12 − As13 ξ = 0
∂y h ∂y ∂x ∂y h
or u0 is prescribed (40)

∂ 3 u0 ∂ 3 u0 ∂ 3v ⎛ ∂u ∂v ⎞ ∂2 w ⎛ ∂φ ∂ψ ⎞
− B11 − ( B12 + 2 B66 ) − B22 30 A66 ⎜ 0 + 0 ⎟ − 2 B66 + As66 ⎜ + ⎟=0
∂x 3
∂x∂y 2
∂y ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ ∂x∂y ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠
or v0 is prescribed (41)
∂ 3 v0 ∂4 w
−( B12 + 2 B66 ) + D11
∂x 2 ∂y ∂x 4
∂ 2 u0 ∂ 2 u0 ∂ 2 v0 ∂3 w
∂4 w ∂4 w ∂3φ B11 + 2 B66 + ( B12 + 2 B66 ) − D11
+2( D12 + 2 D66 ) 2 2 + D22 4 − Bs11 3 ∂x 2 ∂y 2 ∂x∂y ∂x3
∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x
∂3 w ∂ 2φ ∂2φ
∂3φ ∂ 3ψ −( D12 + 4 D66 ) + Bs11 2 + 2 Bs66 2
− ( Bs12 + 2 Bs66 ) − Bs22 3 ∂x∂y 2
∂x ∂y
∂x∂y 2
∂y
∂2ψ π ∂ξ
∂ψ 3 +( Bs12 + 2 Bs66 ) − Bs13 =0
−( Bs12 + 2 Bs66 ) ∂x∂y h ∂x
∂x 2 ∂y (42)
or w is prescribed
π⎛ ∂ ξ 2
∂ ξ⎞ 2
+ ⎜ Bs13 2 + Bs23 2 ⎟ = q (36)
h⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ∂u0 ∂v ∂2 w ∂2w
B11 + B12 0 − D11 2 − D12 2
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y
∂φ ∂ψ π
∂ 2 u0 ∂ 2 u0 ∂ 2 v0 + Bs11 + Bs12 − Bs13 ξ = 0
As11 + As66 + ( As12 + As66 ) ∂x ∂y h
∂x 2 ∂y 2 ∂x∂y
∂w (43)
∂3 w ∂3 w ∂ 2φ or is prescribed
− Bs11 3 − ( Bs12 + 2 Bs66 ) + Ass11 2 ∂x
∂x ∂x∂y 2
∂x
∂u0 ∂v ∂2 w ∂2 w
∂ 2φ ∂2ψ As11 + As12 0 − Bs11 2 − Bs12 2
+ Ass66 2 − Acc55 φ + ( Ass12 + Ass66 ) ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y
∂y ∂x∂y
∂φ ∂ψ π
⎛π h ⎞ ∂ξ (37) + Ass11 + Ass12 − Ass13 ξ = 0
− ⎜ Ass13 + Acc55 ⎟ =0 ∂x ∂y h
⎝h π ⎠ ∂x
or φ is prescribed (44)

244 Journal of Mechanics, Vol. 29, No. 2, June 2013

 ⎛ ∂u ∂v ⎞ ∂2 w h h2 ∂ξ
As66 ⎜ 0 + 0 ⎟ − 2 Bs66 Acc44 ψ + 2 Acc44 =0
⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ ∂x∂y π π ∂y
⎛ ∂φ ∂ψ ⎞ or ξ is prescribed (53)
+ Ass66 ⎜ + ⎟=0
⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ At corners (x = 0, y = 0), (x = 0, y = b), (x = a, y = 0)
or ψ is prescribed (45) and (x = a, y = b) the following condition hold:

h h2 ∂ξ ⎛ ∂u ∂v ⎞ ∂2 w ⎛ ∂φ ∂ψ ⎞
Acc55 φ + 2 Acc55 =0 B66 ⎜ 0 + 0 ⎟ − 2 D66 + Bs66 ⎜ + ⎟= 0
π π ∂x ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ ∂x∂y ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠
(46) or w is prescribed (54)
or ξ is prescribed

On edges y = 0 and y = b, the following conditions

hold: 2. ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES

⎛ ∂u ∂v ⎞ ∂2 w ⎛ ∂φ ∂ψ ⎞
A66 ⎜ 0 + 0 ⎟ − 2 B66 + As66 ⎜ + ⎟=0 In order to prove the efficacy of the present theory, a
⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ ∂x∂y ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ square laminated plate simply supported along all edges
or u0 is prescribed (47)
is considered. A plate is subjected to concentrated
load P on top (z = −h/2) of plate acting in z –direction as
shown in Fig. 1.
∂u0 ∂v ∂2w ∂2w
A12 + A22 0 − B12 2 − B22 2 The magnitude of transverse load is given as:
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y
∞ ∞
∂φ ∂ψ π
+ As12 + As22 − As23 ξ = 0 q( x, y ) = ∑∑ qmn sin αx sin βy (55)
∂x ∂y h m =1 n =1

or v0 is prescribed (48)
where α = mπ/a and β = nπ/b
The qmn is the coefficients of Fourier expansion of
∂ 2 u0 ∂ 2v ∂2v ∂3 w concentrated load which is given as:
( B12 + 2 B66 ) + 2 B66 20 + B22 20 − D22 3
∂x∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y
⎛ 4P ⎞
∂3 w ∂2φ qmn = ⎜ ⎟ sin αζ sin βη (56)
−( D12 + 4 D66 ) + ( Bs12 + 2 Bs66 ) ⎝ ab ⎠
∂x ∂y
2
∂x∂y
∂2ψ ∂2ψ π ∂ξ where ζ and η represent distance of concentrated load
+2 Bs66 + Bs 22 − Bs23 =0 from x and y axes respectively. In case of central
∂x 2
∂y 2
h ∂y
(49) concentrated load ζ = a/2 and η = b/2. The following
or w is prescribed solution form for u0, v0, w, φ, ψ and ξ satisfies the gov-
erning Eqs. (34) through (39) and the boundary condi-
∂u0 ∂v ∂2 w ∂2 w tions given by Eqs. (40) through (54) perfectly.
B12 + B22 0 − D12 2 − D22 2
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y m =∞ n =∞

∂φ ∂ψ π
u0 = ∑ ∑u mn cos αx sin β y ; (57)
+ Bs12 + Bs22 − Bs23 ξ = 0 m =1 n =1
∂x ∂y h
m =∞ n =∞

or
∂w
is prescribed (50) v0 = ∑ ∑v mn sin αx cos βy ; (58)
∂y m =1 n =1

⎛ ∂u ∂v ⎞ ∂2 w
As66 ⎜ 0 + 0 ⎟ − 2 Bs66
⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ ∂x∂y
⎛ ∂φ ∂ψ ⎞
+ Ass66 ⎜ + ⎟=0
⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠
or φ is prescribed (51)

∂u0 ∂v ∂2 w ∂2 w
As12 + As22 0 − Bs12 2 − Bs22 2
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y
∂φ ∂ψ π
+ Ass12 + Ass22 − Ass23 ξ = 0
∂x ∂y h
or ψ is prescribed (52) Fig. 1 Simply supported plate subjected to concen-
trated load

Journal of Mechanics, Vol. 29, No. 2, June 2013 245

 m =∞ n =∞
σkx = ⎣⎡ −Q11k α u + Q11k z α 2 w − Q11k f ( z ) α φ
w= ∑ ∑w
m =1 n =1
mn sin αx sin βy ; (59)
− Q12k β v + Q12k zβ2 w − Q12k f ( z ) β ψ
m =∞ n =∞
φ= ∑ ∑φ
m =1 n =1
mn cos αx sin βy ; (60) + Q13k g '( z ) ξ ⎤⎦ qmn sin αx sin β y (71)

m =∞ n =∞ σky = ⎣⎡ −Q12k α u + Q12k z α 2 w − Q12k f ( z ) α φ

ψ= ∑ ∑ψ
m =1 n =1
mn sin αx cos βy ; (61)
− Q22
k
β v + Q22
k
zβ2 w − Q22
k
f ( z) β ψ
m =∞ n =∞
ξ= ∑ ∑ξ
m =1 n =1
mn sin αx sin β y (62) + Q23
k
g '( z ) ξ ⎤⎦ qmn sin αx sin βy (72)

where umn, vmn, wmn, φmn, ψmn and ξmn are the unknown
2.2 Evaluation of Inplane shear Stress
coefficients of the respective Fourier expansions and m,
n are positive integers. Substituting this form of Using Eqs. (65) through (70) the inplane shear stress
solution and the load q(x, y) from Eq. (55) into the gov- is obtained from Eq. (5) as follows:
erning equations [Eqs. (34) through (39)] yields the six
algebraic simultaneous equations which are expressed τkxy = Q66k ⎣⎡β u + αv − 2 z α β w + f ( z ) βφ
in the following matrix form:
+ f ( z ) αψ ] qmn cos αx cos βy (73)
⎡ K11 K12 K13 K14 K15 K16 ⎤ ⎧umn ⎫ ⎡0 ⎤
⎢ K12 K 22 K 23 K 24 K 25 K 26 ⎥ ⎪vmn ⎪ ⎢0 ⎥
⎢K K 23 K 33 K 34 K 35 K36 ⎥ ⎪⎪ wmn ⎪⎪ ⎢ qmn ⎥ 2.3 Evaluation of Transverse Shear Stresses
⎢ 13 ⎥ = ⎢ ⎥ (63)
⎢ K14 K 24 K 34 K 44 K 45 K 46 ⎥ ⎨φmn ⎬ ⎢0 ⎥
⎪ ⎪ Transverse shear stresses can be calculated by using
⎢ K15 K 25 K 35 K 45 K 55 K 66 ⎥ ⎪ψ mn ⎪ ⎢0 ⎥
⎢⎣ K16 two approaches
K 26 K 36 K 46 K56 K 66 ⎥⎦ ⎪⎩ξmn ⎪⎭ ⎣⎢0 ⎦⎥ Using Constitutive Relations (CR Approach): Con-
stitutive relations are used in this approach. CR ap-
where, elements of stiffness matrix (Kij) are given in proach gives a discontinuity of stresses at interface in
Appendix. Solving above equations the unknowns umn, case of laminated plates; cause by mismatch in material
vmn, wmn, φmn, ψmn and ξmn can be readily determined as properties of adjacent layers and thus violates the equi-
given below: librium conditions. This is not acceptable from
umn = u qmn ; vmn = v qmn physical point of view.
Using Equilibrium Equation (EE Approach): In this
wmn = w qmn ; φmn = φ qmn (64) approach the transverse stresses are obtained by inte-
grating the equilibrium equation with respect to thick-
ψ mn = ψ qmn ; ξmn = ξ qmn ness direction. EE approach ascertains the continuity
of the stresses at interface.
where, values of u , v , w, φ, ψ and ξ are given in Ap- The expressions obtained for transverse shear
pendix. Substitution of these unknowns into Eqs. (57) stresses using constitutive relations [Eq. (5)] are given
through (62) leads to the following equations. in Eqs. (74) and (75).
u0 = u cos αx sin βy qmn (65) ⎡ ⎛h ⎞⎤
τkzx = Q55k ⎢ f '( z ) ⎜ α ξ + φ ⎟ ⎥ qmn cos αx sin βy (74)
⎣ ⎝ π ⎠ ⎦
v0 = v sin αx cos βy qmn (66)

w = w sin αx sin β y qmn (67) k ⎡ ⎛h ⎞⎤

τkyz = Q44 ⎢ f ''( z ) ⎜ π β ξ + ψ ⎟ ⎥ qmn sin αx cos βy (75)
⎣ ⎝ ⎠⎦
φ = φ cos αx sin β y qmn (68)
Transverse shear stresses are also obtained by inte-
ψ = ψ sin αx cos βy qmn (69) grating equations of equilibrium of theory of elasticity
as follows:
ξ = ξ sin αx sin βy qmn (70)
zk ⎛ ∂σ x ∂τ xy ⎞
τkzx = ∫ −h / 2
⎜
⎝ ∂x
+
∂y ⎠
⎟ dz (76)
2.1 Evaluation of Inplane Normal Stresses
Having obtained values of displacement variables zk ⎛ ∂σ y ∂τ xy ⎞
[Eqs. (65) through (70)], one can then calculate all the
displacement and stress components within the plate
τkyz = ∫ −h / 2
⎜
⎝ ∂y
+
∂x ⎠
⎟ dz (77)

using displacement field [Eq. (2)] and stress-strain rela-

tionships [Eq. (5)]. The expressions obtained for in- The following lamina material properties given by
plane normal stresses are given in Eqs. (71) and (72). Pagano [24] for plates in the above examples are used.

246 Journal of Mechanics, Vol. 29, No. 2, June 2013

E1 E3 G12 G13 G 0.50 TSDT
= 25 , =1 , = = 0.5 , 23 = 0.2 ,
E2 E2 E2 E2 E2 HSDT
z/h 0.25
μ12 = μ13 = μ 23 = 0.25 (78) FSDT
CPT
0.00
-36 -24 -12 0 12 24 36
3. NUMERICAL RESULTS σx
-0.25

The results are obtained for different aspect ratios

-0.50
(S = a / h) of plate are presented in Tables 1 through 9.
Because of unavailability of exact solution for the
Fig. 2 Through thickness distribution of inplane
loading case considered, the results from classical plate
theory (CPT), first order shear deformation theory normal stress ( σ x ) in orthotropic plate for as-
(FSDT) and higher order shear deformation theory of pect ratio 4
Reddy (HSDT) are generated for the purpose of com-
parison of results obtained by present theory (TSDT).
0.5 TSDT
The results obtained for inplane normal and transverse
HSDT
shear stresses are presented in the following non-
dimensional form. 0.3 FSDT
CPT

z/h 0.0
0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4
4. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS τzx
-0.3
From the numerical results (Tables 1 through 9) and
stress distributions (Figs. 2 through 12) following ob- -0.5
servations are made.
1. Inplane Normal Stresses ( σ x and σ y ): Fig. 3 Through thickness distribution of transverse
shear stress ( τzx ) in orthotropic plate for as-
The inplane normal stresses ( σ x and σ y ) obtained pect ratio 4 using equations of equilibrium
by present theory are compared with those of other re-
fined shear deformation theories for orthotropic plate in
Table 1. It observed from these results that the maxi- 0.50 TSDT

mum inplane normal stresses at the top and bottom sur- HSDT
z/h
faces of the plate obtained by present theory (TSDT) 0.25 FSDT
and theory of Reddy (HSDT) are higher than the one CPT
given by classical plate theory (CPT) and first order 0.00

shear deformation theory (FSDT) due to effect of local -0.7 -0.4 0.0 0.4 0.7
τzy
stress concentration. Figure 2 shows the through -0.25

thickness distribution of inplane normal stress σ x in

orthotropic plate for aspect ratio 4. Stress distribution -0.50

shown in Fig. 2 by present theory and theory of Reddy

Fig. 4 Through thickness distribution of transverse
is non-linear through the thickness of plate and deviates
shear stress ( τzy ) of orthotropic plate for as-
considerably from the one given by classical plate the-
pect ratio 4 using equations of equilibrium
ory and first order shear deformation theory. This
indicates that present theory is capable of predicting the
effect of stress concentration and transverse shear de- 0.50 TSDT
formation. Comparison of inplane normal stresses for HSDT
two layered anti-symmetric (00/900) laminated plates is z/h 0.25 FSDT
presented in Table 4. Examination of Table 4 reveals
CPT
that the maximum values of inplane normal stresses 0.00
σ x and σ y obtained by present theory and other -40 -20 0 20
theories are identical for both aspect ratios. The in- σx
-0.25
plane normal stress σ x is maximum at top (00 layer)
and minimum at bottom (900 layer). Through thick-
-0.50
ness distribution of inplane normal stress σ x in
(00/900) laminated plate for aspect ratio 4 is shown in Fig. 5 Through thickness distribution of inplane
Fig. 5. From this distribution it is observed that the normal stress ( σ x ) in (00/900) laminated plate
inplane normal stress changes its sign in both layers due for aspect ratio 4

Journal of Mechanics, Vol. 29, No. 2, June 2013 247

 0.5 TSDT
TSDT
0.50 HSDT
HSDT
0.3 FSDT
FSDT 0.25
CPT

z/h 0.0
z/h 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
τzx τzx
-0.3 -0.25

-0.50
-0.5

Fig. 6 Through thickness distribution of transverse Fig. 10 Through thickness distribution of transverse
shear stress ( τzx ) of (00/900) laminated plate shear stress ( τzx ) of (00/900/00) laminated plate
for aspect ratio 4 using constitutive relations for aspect ratio 4 using equations of equilib-
riums
0.5 TSDT
0.50 TSDT
HSDT
HSDT
z/h 0.3 FSDT
0.25 FSDT
CPT

0.0
-1.5 0.0 1.5 3.0 z/h 0.00
τzx 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
-0.3
-0.25 τzy

-0.5
-0.50
Fig. 7 Through thickness distribution of transverse
shear stress ( τzx ) in (00/900) laminated plate Fig. 11 Through thickness distribution of transverse
for aspect ratio 4 using equations of equilib- shear stress ( τzy ) of (00/900/00) laminated plate
rium for aspect ratio 4 using constitutive relations

0.50 TSDT TSDT

0.50 HSDT
HSDT
z / h 0.25 FSDT
FSDT
z/h 0.25 CPT
CPT
0.00
-32 -16 0 16 32 0.00
σx -1.8 -1.2 -0.6 0.0 0.6 1.2
-0.25
τzy -0.25

-0.50
-0.50
Fig. 8 Through thickness distribution of inplane
normal stress ( σ x ) in (00/900/00) laminated Fig. 12 Through thickness distribution of transverse
plate for aspect ratio 4 shear stress ( τzy ) of (00/900/00) laminated plate
for aspect ratio 4 using equations of equilib-
0.50 TSDT rium
HSDT

0.25 FSDT
to heavy stress concentration. Through thickness dis-
tribution of inplane normal stress σ y is similar to
z/h 0.00
0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
distribution of σ x with maximum value at z = h/2 and
minimum value at z = −h/2. The maximum values of
-0.25 τzx
inplane normal stresses σ x and σ y for three layered
symmetric laminated plates are shown in Table 7 and
-0.50
distribution of σ x is shown in Fig. 8. The inplane
Fig. 9 Through thickness distribution of transverse normal stress σ x is maximum in 00 layers (z = −h/2 to
shear stress ( τzx ) in (00/900/00) laminated plate z = −h/6 and z = h/6 to z = h/2) and minimum in 900
for aspect ratio 4 using constitutive relations layer (z = −h/6 to z = h/6).

248 Journal of Mechanics, Vol. 29, No. 2, June 2013

Table 1 Comparison of maximum inplane normal Table 5 Comparison of maximum transverse shear
stresses σ x and σ y at (x = a / 2, y = b / 2, z stress τzx at (x = 0, y = b / 2, z) in square
= ± h / 2) in square orthotropic plate subjected (00/900) laminated plate subjected to central
to central concentrated load concentrated load

S Theory Model σx σy S Theory Model τzxCR τzxEE

Present TSDT 33.342 5.364 Present TSDT 0.7891 2.8245
Reddy [10] HSDT 29.800 4.115 Reddy [10] HSDT 0.7987 2.8615
4 4
Mindlin [5] FSDT 4.8622 1.231 Mindlin [5] FSDT 0.8994 1.2648
Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT 5.8047 0.826 Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT − 1.2438
Present TSDT 18.433 2.514 Present TSDT 0.7424 2.6929
Reddy [10] HSDT 15.911 1.975 Reddy [10] HSDT 0.8406 2.3644
10 10
Mindlin [5] FSDT 5.1953 1.076 Mindlin [5] FSDT 0.8351 1.1946
Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT 5.8047 0.826 Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT − 1.2438

Table 2 Comparison of maximum transverse shear Table 6 Comparison of maximum transverse shear
stress τzx at (x = 0, y = b / 2, z) in square stress τzy at (x = a / 2, y = 0, z) in square
orthotropic plate subjected to central concen- (00/900) laminated plate subjected to central
trated load concentrated load
S Theory Model τzxCR τzxEE S Theory Model τzyCR τzyEE
Present TSDT 1.4395 1.8858 Present TSDT 0.7891 2.8245
Reddy [10] HSDT 1.4204 1.9827 Reddy [10] HSDT 0.7987 2.8615
4
Mindlin [5] FSDT 1.2082 1.8124 4
Mindlin [5] FSDT 0.8994 1.2648
Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT − 1.8144
Present TSDT 1.5057 2.0021
Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT − 1.2438
Present TSDT 0.7424 2.6929
Reddy [10] HSDT 1.5280 1.9025
10 Reddy [10] HSDT 0.8406 2.3644
Mindlin [5] FSDT 1.2393 1.8590
10
Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT − 1.8144 Mindlin [5] FSDT 0.8351 1.1946
Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT − 1.2438
Table 3 Comparison of maximum transverse shear
stress τzy at (x = 0, y = b / 2, z) in square Table 7 Comparison of maximum inplane normal
orthotropic plate subjected to central concen- stress σ x at (x = a / 2, y = b / 2, z = ± h / 2) in
trated load square (00/900/00) laminated plate subjected to
central concentrated load
S Theory Model τzyCR τzyEE
S Theory Model σx σy
Present TSDT 0.0599 0.6893
Present TSDT 30.367 4.971
Reddy [10] HSDT 0.0627 0.6024 Reddy [10] HSDT 28.381 3.895
4 4
Mindlin [5] FSDT 0.2024 0.3037 Mindlin [5] FSDT 4.0491 0.982
Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT 5.3352 0.581
Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT − 0.1338 Present TSDT 17.655 2.498
Present TSDT 0.0844 0.4558 Reddy [10] HSDT 15.715 1.859
10
Mindlin [5] FSDT 4.5169 0.823
Reddy [10] HSDT 0.0901 0.3134
10 Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT 5.3352 0.581
Mindlin [5] FSDT 0.1428 0.2142
Table 8 Comparison of maximum transverse shear
Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT − 0.1338
stress τzx at (x = 0, y = b / 2, z) in square
Table 4 Comparison of maximum inplane normal (00/900/00) laminated plate subjected to central
stress σ x and σ y at (x = a / 2, y = b / 2, z) concentrated load
in square (00/900) laminated plate subjected to S Theory Model τzxCR τzxEE
central concentrated load
Present TSDT 0.6821 1.7390
S Theory Model σx σy Reddy [10] HSDT 0.6539 1.8473
4
Present TSDT 35.905 35.905 Mindlin [5] FSDT 0.4967 1.4008
Reddy [10] HSDT 33.183 33.183
4
Mindlin [5] FSDT 7.7032 7.7032
Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT − 1.5072

Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT 7.2859 7.2859 Present TSDT 0.8027 1.8924

Present TSDT 21.048 21.048 Reddy [10] HSDT 0.7867 1.8212
Reddy [10] HSDT 18.479 18.479 10
10 Mindlin [5] FSDT 0.5378 1.5122
Mindlin [5] FSDT 7.5731 7.5731
Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT 7.2859 7.2859
Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT − 1.5072

Journal of Mechanics, Vol. 29, No. 2, June 2013 249

Table 9 Comparison of maximum transverse shear
stress τzy at (x = a / 2, y = 0, z) in square
(00/900/00) laminated plate subjected to center
concentrated load
S Theory Model τzyCR τzyEE
Present TSDT 0.2527 1.2756
Reddy [10] HSDT 0.2915 1.1628
4
Mindlin [5] FSDT 0.5140 0.7392
Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT − 0.2620
Present TSDT 0.1654 0.6871
Reddy [10] HSDT 0.1701 0.6312
10
Mindlin [5] FSDT 0.3140 0.4563
Kirchhoff [1,2] CPT − 0.2620
2. Transverse Shear Stresses ( τzx and τyz ):
The transverse shear stresses are obtained by using
constitutive relations and, alternatively, by integration
of equation of equilibrium of theory of elasticity and
are denoted by ( τzxCR , τzyCR ) and ( τzxEE , τzxEE ) respec-
tively. The transverse shear stresses satisfies the stress
free conditions on the top (z = −h/2) and bottom (z = h/2)
surfaces of the plate when these stresses are obtained by
both mentioned approaches. The comparison of
maximum non-dimensional transverse shear stresses for
orthotropic plate, obtained by present theory and other
refined theories is presented in Tables 2 and 3. The
results obtained by present theory and HSDT are in
close agreement with each other whereas FSDT and
CPT underestimates the same when obtained by using
constitutive relations as well as equation of equilibrium.
Figures 3 and 4 contains the through thickness distribu-
tion of transverse shear stresses τzx and τzy respec-
tively obtained by using equations of equilibrium. It
is observed that these distributions deviates more from
those given by FSDT and CPT. The point of maxi-
mum shear is no longer at the neutral plane but it is
moved towards extreme fibres. These distributions
change their sign across the thickness of plate. At the
neutral plane (z = 0) these gives maximum negative
value and at z = ± 0.34h these gives maximum positive
values. This anomalous behavior of these stresses is
due to heavy local stress concentration because of cen-
tral concentrated load.
The maximum values of transverse shear stresses
τzx and τzy for two layered anti-symmetric (00/900)
laminated plates are presented in Tables 5 and 6 are
identical. Since the effect of stress concentration can
not be assessed by constitutive relations, the results
obtained from constitutive relation and equilibrium
equations are quite different from each other in these
Tables. Through thickness distributions of transverse
shear stress τzx are shown in Figs. 6 and 7. The
stress variation shown in Fig. 6 is obtained by constitu-
tive relation which gives a discontinuity of stresses at
interface in case of laminated plates and also, these
relations cannot assess the effect of stress concentration.
The stress variation shown in Fig. 7 is obtained by
equations of equilibrium. This stress distribution is
positive throughout the thickness of plate when ob-
tained using FSDT and CPT whereas it changes its sign
in both the layers when obtained using present theory
and HSDT due effect of stress concentration. At the
neutral plane (z = 0) it gives maximum negative value
and at z = − 0.36h it gives maximum positive value.
Distribution of transverse shear stress τyz follows the
same trend with interchange in lamination configuration
(900/00). The maximum values of transverse shear
stresses for three layered symmetric laminated plates
are presented in Tables 8 and 9 and their distribution
through the thickness of plates are shown in Figs. 9
through 12.
CONCLUSIONS
In this paper effect of transverse shear deformation,
transverse normal strain and local stress concentration
on inplane normal and transverse shear stresses through
the thickness of simply supported orthotropic and
laminated plates is studied. Following conclusions are
drawn from this investigation.
1. The through thickness distribution of inplane normal
stresses is found to be non-linear and deviates con-
siderably from classical plate theory and first order
shear deformation theory.
2. The transverse shear stresses predicted by present
theory and theory of Reddy are in close agreement
when obtained using constitutive relations.
3. The distribution of transverse shear stresses is realis-
tic but changes its sign when obtained using integra-
tion of equations of equilibrium.
4. Present theory seems to be capable of predicting the
effect of heavy stress concentration more promi-
nently compared to other theories.
APPENDIX
The elements of stiffness matrix appeared in Eq. (63)
are as follows:
K11 = ( A11 α 2 + A66 β2 ) ;
K12 = ( A12 + A66 )α β ;
K13 = − B11 α 3 − ( B12 + 2 B66 ) α β2 ;
K14 = ( As11 α 2 + As66 β2 ) ;
K15 = ( As12 + As66 )α β ;
π
K16 = As13 α ;
h

250 Journal of Mechanics, Vol. 29, No. 2, June 2013

K 22 = ( A66 α 2 + A22 β2 ) ; where

K 23 = − B22 β3 − ( B12 + 2 B66 )α 2 β ; ⎛ K K ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞

x1 = ⎜ K 22 − 12 12 ⎟ ; x2 = ⎜ K 23 − 12 13 ⎟ ;
K 24 = ( As12 + As66 ) α β ; ⎝ K 11 ⎠ ⎝ K11 ⎠
K 25 = ( As66 α 2 + As22 β2 ) ; ⎛ K K ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞
x3 = ⎜ K 24 − 12 14 ⎟ ; x4 = ⎜ K 25 − 12 15 ⎟ ;
π ⎝ K11 ⎠ ⎝ K11 ⎠
K 26 = As23 β ;
h ⎛ K K ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞
x5 = ⎜ K 26 − 12 16 ⎟ ; x6 = ⎜ K 23 − 13 12 ⎟ ;
K 33 = D11α 4 + 2( D12 + 2 D66 ) α 2β2 + D22β4 ; ⎝ K11 ⎠ ⎝ K11 ⎠
K 34 = − Bs11 α3 − ( Bs12 + 2 Bs66 ) α β2 ; ⎛ K K ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞
x7 = ⎜ K33 − 13 13 ⎟ ; x8 = ⎜ K 34 − 13 14 ⎟ ;
K 35 = − Bs22 β − ( Bs12 + 2 Bs66 ) α β ;
3 2
⎝ K 11 ⎠ ⎝ K11 ⎠
π ⎛ K K ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞
K 36 = ( Bs13 α 2 + Bs23 β2 ) ; x9 = ⎜ K35 − 13 15 ⎟ ; x10 = ⎜ K36 − 13 16 ⎟ ;
h ⎝ K 11 ⎠ ⎝ K11 ⎠
K 44 = ( Ass11 α 2 + Ass66 β2 + Acc55 ) ; ⎛ K K ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞
x11 = ⎜ K 24 − 14 12 ⎟ ; x12 = ⎜ K 34 − 14 13 ⎟ ;
⎝ K11 ⎠ ⎝ K11 ⎠
K 45 = ( Ass12 + Ass66 ) α β ;
⎛π h ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞
K 46 = ⎜ Ass13 + Acc55 ⎟ α ; x13 = ⎜ K 44 − 14 14 ⎟ ; x14 = ⎜ K 45 − 14 15 ⎟ ;
π ⎝ K11 ⎠ ⎝ K11 ⎠
⎝h ⎠
⎛ K K ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞
K 55 = ( Ass66 α 2 + Ass22 β 2 + Acc44 ) ; x15 = ⎜ K 46 − 14 16 ⎟ ; x16 = ⎜ K 25 − 15 12 ⎟ ;
⎝ K 11 ⎠ ⎝ K11 ⎠
⎛π h ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞
K 56 = ⎜ Ass23 + Acc44 ⎟ β ; x17 = ⎜ K 35 − 15 13 ⎟ ; x18 = ⎜ K 45 − 15 14 ⎟ ;
⎝h π ⎠ ⎝ K 11 ⎠ ⎝ K11 ⎠
⎛ h2 h2 π2 ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞
K 66 = ⎜ 2 Acc55 α 2 + 2 Acc44 β 2 + 2 Ass33 ⎟ . x19 = ⎜ K55 − 15 15 ⎟ ; x20 = ⎜ K 56 − 15 16 ⎟ ;
⎝π π h ⎠ ⎝ K11 ⎠ ⎝ K11 ⎠
⎛ K K ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞
where, constants Aij, Bij, Dij, Asij, Bsij, Assij and Accij are x21 = ⎜ K 26 − 16 12 ⎟ ; x22 = ⎜ K36 − 16 13 ⎟ ;
defined as follows: ⎝ K 11 ⎠ ⎝ K11 ⎠
⎛ K K ⎞ ⎛ K K ⎞
⎡ Aij ⎤ ⎡1 ⎤ x23 = ⎜ K 46 − 16 14 ⎟ ; x24 = ⎜ K 56 − 16 15 ⎟ ;
⎢ ⎥ h/2 ⎢ ⎥ ⎝ K11 ⎠ ⎝ K11 ⎠
⎢ Bij ⎥ = Qij ∫ − h / 2 ⎢ z ⎥ dz (i, j =1, 2, 6) ,
k

⎢D ⎥ ⎢ z2 ⎥ ⎛ K K ⎞
⎣ ij ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ x25 = ⎜ K 66 − 16 16 ⎟ ;
⎝ K11 ⎠
⎡ Asij ⎤ ⎡ f ( z) ⎤
⎢ ⎥ h /2 ⎢ ⎥ ⎛ x x ⎞ ⎛ x x ⎞
y1 = ⎜ x7 − 6 2 ⎟ ; y2 = ⎜ x8 − 6 3 ⎟ ;
⎢ Bsij ⎥ = Qij ∫ − h / 2 ⎢ z f ( z ) ⎥ dz (i, j =1, 2, 6) ,
k

⎢ ⎝ x1 ⎠ ⎝ x1 ⎠
⎢ Ass ⎥ 2⎥
⎣ ij ⎦ ⎣⎢ [ f ( z )] ⎦⎥ ⎛ x x ⎞ ⎛ x x ⎞
h/2 y3 = ⎜ x9 − 6 4 ⎟ ; y4 = ⎜ x10 − 6 5 ⎟ ;
Accij = Q k
ij ∫ −h / 2
[ f '( z )]
2
dz (i, j = 4, 5) ⎝ x1 ⎠ ⎝ x1 ⎠
⎛ x x ⎞ ⎛ x x ⎞
The constants u , v , w, φ, ψ and ξ appeared in Eq. y5 = ⎜ x12 − 11 2 ⎟ ; y6 = ⎜ x13 − 11 2 ⎟ ;
⎝ x1 ⎠ ⎝ x1 ⎠
(64) are given below:
⎛ x x ⎞ ⎛ x x ⎞
⎛K K K K K ⎞ y7 = ⎜ x14 − 11 2 ⎟ ; y8 = ⎜ x15 − 11 2 ⎟ ;
u = − ⎜ 12 v + 13 w + 14 φ + 15 ψ + 16 ξ ⎟ ; ⎝ x1 ⎠ ⎝ x1 ⎠
⎝ K11 K11 K11 K11 K11 ⎠
⎛ x16 x2 ⎞ ⎛ x16 x2 ⎞
⎛x x x x ⎞ y9 = ⎜ x17 − ⎟ ; y10 = ⎜ x18 − ⎟ ;
v = −⎜ 2 w + 3 φ + 4 ψ + 5 ξ ⎟ ; ⎝ x1 ⎠ ⎝ x1 ⎠
⎝ x1 x1 x1 x1 ⎠
⎛1 y y y ⎞ ⎛ x x ⎞ ⎛ x x ⎞
w = ⎜ − 2 φ + 3 ψ + 4 ξ⎟ ; y11 = ⎜ x19 − 16 2 ⎟ ; y12 = ⎜ x20 − 16 2 ⎟ ;
⎝ y1 y1 y1 y1 ⎠ ⎝ x1 ⎠ ⎝ x1 ⎠
⎛R R R ⎞ ⎛ x x ⎞ ⎛ x x ⎞
φ = −⎜ 1 + 3 ψ + 4 ξ ⎟ ; y13 = ⎜ x22 − 21 2 ⎟ ; y14 = ⎜ x23 − 21 2 ⎟ ;
⎝ R2 R2 R2 ⎠ ⎝ x1 ⎠ ⎝ x1 ⎠
⎛P z P⎞ ⎛ z ⎞ ⎛ x x ⎞ ⎛ x x ⎞
ψ = ⎜ 3 1 − 1 ⎟ and ξ = ⎜ − 1 ⎟ y15 = ⎜ x24 − 21 2 ⎟ ; y16 = ⎜ x25 − 21 2 ⎟ ;
⎝ P2 z2 P2 ⎠ ⎝ z2 ⎠ ⎝ x1 ⎠ ⎝ x1 ⎠

Journal of Mechanics, Vol. 29, No. 2, June 2013 251

 ⎛y ⎞ ⎛ y y ⎞ ⎛ y y ⎞ with Transverse Shear Deformation,” Journal of Sol-
R1 = ⎜ 5 ⎟ ; R2 = ⎜ y6 − 5 2 ⎟ ; R3 = ⎜ y7 − 5 3 ⎟ ; ids and Structures, 20, pp. 881−896 (1984).
⎝ y1 ⎠ ⎝ y1 ⎠ ⎝ y1 ⎠
10. Reddy, J. N., “A Simple Higher Order Theory for
⎛ y y ⎞ ⎛y ⎞ ⎛ y y ⎞ Laminated Composite Plates,” Journal of Applied
R4 = ⎜ y8 − 5 4 ⎟ ; R5 = ⎜ 9 ⎟ ; R6 = ⎜ y10 − 9 2 ⎟ ;
⎝ y1 ⎠ ⎝ y1 ⎠ ⎝ y1 ⎠ Mechanics, ASME, 51, pp. 745−752 (1978).
⎛ y y ⎞ ⎛ y y ⎞ ⎛y ⎞ 11. Kant, T., “Numerical Analysis of Thick Plates,”
R7 = ⎜ y11 − 9 3 ⎟ ; R8 = ⎜ y12 − 9 4 ⎟ ; R9 = ⎜ 13 ⎟ ; Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engi-
⎝ y1 ⎠ ⎝ y1 ⎠ ⎝ y1 ⎠
neering, 31, pp. 1−18 (1978).
⎛ y y ⎞ ⎛ y y ⎞ 12. Savithri, S. and Varadan, T. K., “A Simple Higher
R10 = ⎜ y14 − 13 2 ⎟ ; R11 = ⎜ y15 − 13 3 ⎟ ;
⎝ y1 ⎠ ⎝ y1 ⎠ Order Theory for Homogenous Plates,” Mechanics
⎛ y y ⎞ Research Communications, 19, pp. 65−71 (1992).
R12 = ⎜ y16 − 13 4 ⎟ ; 13. Noor, A. K. and Burton, W. S., “Assessment of
⎝ y1 ⎠
Shear Deformation Theories for Multilayered Com-
⎛ R R ⎞ ⎛ R R ⎞ posite Plates,” Applied Mechanics Reviews, 42, pp.
P1 = ⎜ R5 − 6 1 ⎟ ; P2 = ⎜ R7 − 6 3 ⎟ ;
⎝ R2 ⎠ ⎝ R2 ⎠ 1−13 (1989).
14. Ghugal, Y. M. and Shimpi, R. P., “A Review of Re-
⎛ R R ⎞ ⎛ R R ⎞
P3 = ⎜ R8 − 6 4 ⎟ ; P4 = ⎜ R9 − 10 1 ⎟ ; fined Shear Deformation Theories for Isotropic and
⎝ R2 ⎠ ⎝ R2 ⎠ Anisotropic Laminated Plates,” Journal of Reinforced
⎛ R R ⎞ ⎛ R R ⎞ Plastics and Composites, 21, pp. 775−813 (2002).
P5 = ⎜ R11 − 10 3 ⎟ ; P6 = ⎜ R12 − 10 4 ⎟ ; 15. Levy, M., “Memoire Dur La Theorie Des Plaques
⎝ R2 ⎠ ⎝ R2 ⎠
Elastique Planes,” Journal of Des Mathematiques
⎛ PP⎞ ⎛ PP ⎞ Pures et Appliquees, 30, pp. 219−306 (1877).
z1 = ⎜ P4 − 5 1 ⎟ ; z2 = ⎜ P6 − 5 3 ⎟
⎝ P2 ⎠ ⎝ P2 ⎠ 16. Stein, M., “Nonlinear Theory for Plates and Shells
Including Effect of Shearing,” AIAA Journal, 24, pp.
REFERENCES 1537−1544 (1986).
17. Stein, M. and Bains, N. J. C., “Post Buckling Be-
1. Kirchhoff, G. R., “Uber Das Gleichgewicht Und Die havior of Longitudinally Compressed Orthotropic
Bewegung Einer Elastischen Scheibe,” Journal fur Plates with Transverse Shearing Flexibility,” AIAA
die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik (Crelle) Journal, 28, pp. 892−895 (1990).
[Journal for Pure and Applied Mathematics], 40, pp. 18. Stein, M. and Jegly, D. C., “Effect of Transverse
51−88 (1850). Shearing on Cylindrical Bending, Vibration and
2. Kirchhoff, G. R., “Uber Die Uchwingungen Einer Buckling of Laminate Plates,” AIAA Journal, 25, pp.
Kriesformigen Elastischen Scheibe,” Poggendorffs 123−129 (1987).
Annalen, 81, pp. 58−264 (1850). 19. Liu, D. and Li, X., “An Overall View of Laminate
3. Reissner, E., “On the Theory of Bending of Elastic Theories Based on Displacement Hypothesis,”
Plates,” Journal of Mathematics and Physics, 23, pp. Journal of Composite Materials, 30, pp. 1539−1561
184−191 (1944). (1996).
4. Reissner, E., “The Effect of Transverse Shear De- 20. Reddy, J. N. and Robbins, D. H. Jr., “Theories and
formation on the Bending of Elastic Plates,” Journal Computational Models for Composite Laminates,”
of Applied Mechanics, ASME, 12, pp. 69−77 (1945). Applied Mechanics Reviews, 47, pp. 147−169 (1994).
5. Mindlin, R. D., “Influence of Rotatory Inertia and 21. Manjunatha, B. S. and Kant, T., “Different Numerical
Shear on Flexural Motions of Isotropic, Elastic Techniques for the Estimation of Multiaxial Stresses
Plates,” Journal of Applied Mechanics, ASME, 18, in Symmetric/Unsymmetric Composite and Sandwich
pp. 31−38 (1951). Beams with Refined Theories,” Journal of Reinforced
6. Lo, K. H., Christensen, R. M. and Wu, E. M., “A Plastics and Composites, 12, pp. 2−37 (1993).
High-Order Theory of Plate Deformation, Part-1: 22. Vinayak, R. U., Prathap, G. and Naganarayana, B. P.,
Homogeneous Plates,” Journal of Applied Mechan- “Beam Elements Based on a Higher Order The-
ics, ASME, 44, pp. 663−668 (1977). ory — I: Formulation and Analysis of Performance,”
7. Lo, K. H., Christensen, R. M. and Wu, E. M., “A Computers and Structures, 58, pp. 775–789 (1996).
High-Order Theory of Plate Deformation, Part-2: 23. Jones, R. M., Mechanics of Composite Materials,
Laminated Plates,” Journal of Applied Mechanics, McGraw Hill Kogakusha, Ltd, Tokyo (1975).
ASME, 44, pp. 669−676 (1977). 24. Pagano, N. J., “Exact Solutions for Bidirectional
8. Lo, K. H., Christensen, R. M. and Wu, E. M., Composites and Sandwich Plates,” Journal of Com-
“Stress Solution Determination for Higher Order posite Materials, 4, pp. 20−34 (1970).
Plate Theory,” Journal of Solids and Structures, 14,
pp. 655−662 (1978).
(Manuscript received December 5, 2011,
9. Reddy, J. N., “A Refined Nonlinear Theory of Plates
accepted for publication July 30, 2012.)

252 Journal of Mechanics, Vol. 29, No. 2, June 2013