static analysis

© All Rights Reserved

0 views

static analysis

© All Rights Reserved

- LECTURE 5 to 7 - Axial Loads
- crane-1
- MECHANICS OF SOLIDS
- Punching Shear in Pad Foundations on Rock
- Axial-Shear-Flexure Interaction Approach for Displacement-Based Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Elements
- 3 Dr Mohsen Samira EJER4309
- finalreport-170308170043
- Chap 05
- Cracks & Crack Control in Concrete Structures-2
- ME 2254 — STRENGTH OF MATERIALS april.may 2011
- Casing burst strength after casing wear.pdf
- Fillet Weld Strength Calculation Example for Welded Connection Subjected to Bending.pdf
- Shear Key
- Side Girt Design-rwph
- A Review of Low-Velocity Impact on Sandwich Structures
- n 59018491
- Eurocode 2 Part 1,6 - DDENV 1992-1-6-1994.pdf
- White Paper UHX.PDF
- MEE 251 S14 Assignment Sheet
- Weld Stress Calculations

You are on page 1of 43

0(0) 1–43

Stress analysis in ! The Author(s) 2018

Article reuse guidelines:

transverse loading sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/1099636218816107

of soft core sandwich journals.sagepub.com/home/jsm

boundary conditions

Isa Ahmadi

Abstract

In this paper, the transverse loading of sandwich plate is formulated to study the

three-dimensional stress field in the sandwich plates for various edge conditions. The

formulation is based on the weak formulation approach. A complete three-dimensional

displacement field is considered and the weak formulation approach is employed to

obtain the governing equations of the plate using the three dimensional equilibrium

equations of elasticity. An analytical solution is presented for governing equations when

two opposite edges of plate are simply supported. A one-step stress recovery scheme

is used to compute the out-of-plane stresses in the sandwich plates. A comparison is

made with the predictions of exact elasticity solutions in the open literature and very

good agreements are achieved. The distribution of stresses is investigated for various

boundary conditions and the log-linear procedure is employed to study the order of

stress singularity at free and clamped edge of the plate. It is seen that the present

approach accurately predicts the distribution of out-of-plane stresses and local con-

centration of stresses in the vicinity of free and clamped edges of sandwich structures.

Keywords

Three-dimensional stresses, sandwich plate, transverse loading, boundary conditions,

stress singularity

Advanced Materials and Computational Mechanics Lab., Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of

Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran

Corresponding author:

Isa Ahmadi, Advanced Materials and Computational Mechanics Lab., Department of Mechanical Engineering,

University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran.

Email: i_ahmadi@znu.ac.ir

2 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

Introduction

The application of sandwich structures with laminated composite face sheets is

increasing especially in aerospace industries which require strong, stiff and light-

weight structural components. In the sandwich structures with laminated compos-

ite face sheets, the transverse strength and moduli of the faces are very low

compared to the in-plane strength and moduli. The poor transverse strength of

core, face and core–face interface makes the sandwich structures risky for delam-

ination. Delamination of sandwich and composite structures is due to the existence

of out-of-plane normal and shear stresses, and often occurs at loading level much

lower than the predictions of the classical laminate theories and two-dimensional

finite element analysis. It is due to the fact that in the sandwich and composite

structures, the out-of-plane stresses increase sharply in the vicinity of the edges at

the interface of layers with different mechanical properties. The equivalent single

layer theories and two-dimensional finite elements analysis are not able to correctly

predict the concentration of transverse stresses in the edges. Due to poor interfacial

strength, the out-of-plane stresses which sharply increase near the edges may cause

edge delamination in the sandwich and composite structures. The sharp gradient

and possible singularity of stress field near the free edges of sandwich structures

make it a challenging problem, and various approximate analytical and semi-

analytical models and numerical methods are presented to overcome this issue.

Pipes and Pagano [1] used the finite difference method and the quasi-

three-dimensional formulation and developed the first numerical work for analysis

of the interlaminar stresses in laminated plates which are subjected to uniform

axial strain. Pagano [2] presented a three-dimensional elasticity solution for

simply supported rectangular cross-ply-laminated plates which are subjected to

transverse loading conditions. Altus et al. [3] used the finite difference method

and studied the stresses near the free edge of angle-ply laminate subjected to uni-

axial load. By employing the Lekhnitskii’s stress functions, Wang and Choi [4, 5]

developed an exact elasticity solution and studied the boundary layer stresses and

stress singularity at the free edges of multi-layered composite plates. Kassapoglou

and Lagace [6] used the principle of minimum complementary energy and assumed

stress functions for the analysis of the interlaminar stresses in the symmetric lam-

inate subjected to uniaxial loading.

Lee and Liu [7] presented a theory for laminated composite plates which sat-

isfies the continuity of interlaminar normal and shear stresses at the interfaces.

Roubins and Reddy [8] proposed a two-dimensional layerwise finite element model

for laminated composite plates which is capable of the prediction of interlaminar

stresses and other localized stresses. Kim and Atluri [9] introduced an approximate

solution to investigate the free edges stress response of composite beam under

bending and out-of-plane shear. Zhu and Lam [10] employed a layerwise

method and Rayleigh–Ritz formulation to study the local free-edge stresses in

bending of composite laminates. Mistou et al. [11] employed the discrete layer

theory and developed a composite beam model which automatically satisfies the

Ahmadi 3

continuity of transverse shear stresses. Vel and Batra [12] presented an analytical

solution for laminated composite plate with cross-ply layer stacking which is

subjected to doubly sinusoidal transverse loading. Mittelstedt and Becker [13]

presented a closed-form solution for analysis of the stress field in the vicinity of

free corners of cross-ply and angle-ply composite laminate. Mistou and Karama

[14] investigated the edge effect in the sandwich plate with experimental, analytical

and finite element method. Mittelstedt and Becker [15] presented a literature survey

on three-dimensional stress singularity at the free edges from 1967 to 2007 includ-

ing approximate closed-form analyses, as well as numerical investigations.

Duong and Hung [16] studied the interlaminar stresses and delamination of

plies in the laminated composite which is subjected to bending and extension.

Zenkour [17] used the three-dimensional elasticity equations and presented an

elasticity solution for analysis of simply-supported cross-ply laminated plate sub-

jected to transverse loading conditions used the variation principle and the finite

difference method to study the interlaminar stresses and nonlinear dynamic

response in laminated plate with interfacial damage and simply supported edges.

Kant et al. [18] developed a semi-analytical model to accurate the estimation of

stresses and displacements in cross-ply composite and sandwich laminates.

Kashtalyan and Menshykova [19] proposed a three-dimensional elasticity solution

for sandwich panels with a functionally graded core subjected to transverse load-

ing. Miri and Nosier [20] studied the boundary-layer effect in long and thin cross-

ply-laminated cylindrical panel subjected to uniform axial extension using the

layerwise theory and theory of elasticity. Tahani and Andakhshideh [21] employed

the three-dimensional multi-term extended Kantorovich method (3DMTEKM)

and the principle of minimum total potential energy to study the interlaminar

stresses in thick rectangular-laminated plates subjected to transverse loading.

Rao et al. [22] used the variational asymptotic method to study the interlaminar

stresses in composite honeycomb sandwich plates subjected to mechanical loading

conditions. Sarvestani and Sarvestani [23] studied the free edge stresses in general

composite laminate subjected to combine mechanical loading includes extension,

torsion and bending.

Viyand et al. [24] presented an analytical method to study the interlaminar

stresses in the long symmetric-laminated plate subjected to shearing load. Thai

et al. [25] investigated the bending behavior of laminated composites using layer-

wise C continuous eight-node finite element method. Khandelwal et al. [26] used a

refined higher order shear deformation theory (RHSDT) and derived a

displacement-based C continuous 2D finite element model to evaluate the

through-the-thickness distribution of transverse stresses in soft-core sandwich lam-

inates. Alibeigloo [27] studied a simply supported sandwich panel with functionally

graded material (FGM) core subjected to thermo-mechanical load based on theory

of elasticity. Kang et al. [28] studied the interlaminar stresses in laminated com-

posite shell with two simply supported ends which is subjected to electric, thermal

and mechanical loads. Ahmadi [29] presented a layerwise formulation and studied

4 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

the interlaminar and free edge stresses in thick-laminated composite panel which is

subjected to pure extension load.

Huang et al. [30] studied the free edge stresses in symmetric composite plate

subjected to uniform axial tension using the extended Kantorovich method. Their

predictions satisfy the traction-free surface and free edge stress boundary condi-

tions. Dhanesh et al. [31] employed the mixed-field multi-term extended

Kantorovich method and evaluated the free edge stresses field in composite lam-

inate subjected to thermo-mechanical loading. Antretter et al. [32] studied the local

stress field very close to the free edges of bilayered compounds with special empha-

sis on the fulfillment of the boundary conditions. Ahmadi [33] studied the inter-

laminar free edge stresses in thick-laminated composite cylinder subjected to non-

uniform axi-symmetric radial pressure. Atashipour et al. [34] employed the com-

bined Fourier-differential quadrature approach to develop an exact solution for

the symmetric laminated cross-ply plates. Goodsell and Pipes [35] developed a

family of unified analytical solutions for the analysis of free edge stresses in

cross-ply and angle-ply long laminate subjected to uniaxial extension, uniform

temperature change and anticlastic bending.

Shah and Batra [36] used the stress recovery scheme and third-order shear and

normal deformable plate/shell theory to predict the stress singularities near the

edges of doubly curved composite–laminated shells subjected to tangential and

normal tractions on the shell surfaces. Ahmadi [37] studied the edge stresses in

thick sandwich cylinder subjected to distributed hygro-thermal loading by layer-

wise formulation. Wang and Yuan [38] presented an accurate stress analysis of

sandwich beam using the three-layer model in which the differential quadrature

method is used for the analysis of core. Hajikazemi and Van Paepegem [39] pre-

sented a variational solution to exactly predict the free edge stress and displace-

ment fields in symmetric composite laminate strips subjected to thermo-mechanical

loading. Recently, Ahmadi [40] studied the free edge stresses in thick-laminated

cylindrical shell panel with general layer stacking subjected to pure bend-

ing moment.

In this paper, a new three-dimensional formulation is presented to study the

three-dimensional and edge stresses in the soft core sandwich plates with finite

length which are subjected to transverse loading conditions. A general three-

dimensional displacement field is considered for the plate and the layerwise dis-

cretization approach, three-dimensional equilibrium equation of elasticity and the

weak formulation method is employed to obtain the governing equations of the

plate. The governing equations are obtained as a set of two-dimensional partial

differential equations in terms of the displacements, and an analytical method is

presented to solve the governing equations of the plate for various edge boundary

conditions when two apposite edges are simply supported. The three-dimensional

displacement and stresses are obtained and the accuracy of predictions is validated

by the available results in the open literature. In the numerical results, the distri-

bution of stresses in sandwich plates is studied for various layer stacking and edge

Ahmadi 5

conditions, and the singularity of stresses at the core–face interface in the free and

clamped edge is investigated.

Problem description

A thick rectangular sandwich or laminated plate with length L, width W and thick-

ness h is subjected to transverse load. The plate geometry, coordinate system and

loading conditions of the plate are shown in Figure 1. The x and y coordinate are in

the length and width direction of the plate and z is the thickness coordinate which is

located on the mid plane of the plate. The edges of the plate are located at x ¼ 0 and

x ¼ L, and y ¼ 0 and y ¼ W. The plate is subjected to distributed transverse load q(x,

y) which is applied on the top surface of the plate at z ¼ h/2.

A general three-dimensional deformation field as u ¼ u(x, y, z), v ¼ v(x, y, z), and

w ¼ w(x, y, z) is considered for the plate where u, v and w are the displacement

components in the x, y and z-direction for a material point initially is located at

(x, y, z). In order to formulate the problem, it is assumed that the plate thickness is

divided into arbitrary number, N, of imagined parallel layers, so that each imag-

ined layer in the sandwich plate is homogeneous. The imagined layers are so-called

numerical layers. The N1 interfaces of N numerical layers and the bottom and

top surfaces of the plate made (N þ 1) surfaces are called numerical surfaces. The

numerical layers and numerical surfaces are numbered from the bottom surface to

the top surface of the plate, so that the ith numerical surface are located at z ¼ zi,

(h/2 zi h/2, z1 ¼ h/2). The displacement components in the x-, y- and

z- direction of a material point which initially are located on the ith numerical

6 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

surface at (x, y, zi) are supposed to be Ui(x, y), Vi(x, y), and Wi(x, y), respectively.

Now, the displacements of a material point at point (x, y, z) can be interpolated as

X

Nþ1

uðx; y; zÞ ¼ Uk Uk ðx; yÞ ¼ fUðzÞgfUðx; yÞg

k¼1

X

Nþ1

vðx; y; zÞ ¼ Uk Vk ðx; yÞ ¼ fUðzÞgfVðx; yÞg (1)

k¼1

X

Nþ1

wðx; y; zÞ ¼ Uk Wk ðx; yÞ ¼ fUðzÞgfWðx; yÞg

k¼1

And, for example, {U(x, y)} is the displacement matrix of numerical layers as

fUðx; yÞg ¼ fU1 ðx; yÞ; U2 ðx; yÞ; . . . ; UNþ1 ðx; yÞgT (3)

The linear interpolation function for the kth numerical layer is defined as:

Uk(z) ¼ (zzk)/tk1 for zk1 z zk, and Uk(z) ¼ (zkþ1z)/tk for zk z zkþ1

where tk is the thickness of kth numerical layer. Uk(z) ¼ 0 for z zk1 or z zkþ1.

In the absence of body forces, the static equilibrium equations in the x-, y- and

z-directions in the terms of stresses can be considered as

rxy;x þ ry;y þ ryz;z ¼ 0 (4)

rxz;x þ ryz;y þ rz;z ¼ 0

obtain the weak form of equation (4), the equilibrium equations in equation (4) are

multiplied by Uk(z), k ¼ 1,2,. . ., N þ 1, and integrated over the plate thickness. The

integration by parts is applied to the terms that contain partial derivation with

respect to z-coordinate and the subsequent results are written in the matrix form as

Z h=2 Z h=2 h=2

fUg0 rxz dz þ ðfUgT rxz Þ

T T

ðfUg rx;x þ fUgTrxy;y Þdz ¼0

h=2 h=2 h=2

Z h=2 Z h=2 h=2

fUg0 ryz dz þ ðfUgTryz Þ

T

ðfUgT rxy;x þ fUgTry;y Þdz ¼0 (5)

h=2 h=2 h=2

Z h=2 Z h=2

h=2

fUg0 rz dz þ ðfUgT rz Þh=2 ¼ 0

T

ðfUgT rxz;x þ fUgTryz;y Þdz

h=2 h=2

Ahmadi 7

in which the superscript T denotes the transpose of matrix, and fUg0 is the deriv-

ative of fUg with respect to z-coordinate as

0 dU1 ðzÞ dU2 ðzÞ dUNþ1 ðzÞ

fUg ¼ ; ; . . .; (6)

dz dz dz

The last terms in equations (5) represent the effect of traction on the bottom and

top surfaces of the plate on the governing equations. The top surface of the plate is

subjected to transverse load q(x, y), and the bottom surface is considered to be

traction free, i.e. rz(z ¼ h/2) ¼ q(x, y), and rz(z ¼ h/2) ¼ rxz(z ¼ h/2) ¼ ryz(z ¼

h/2) ¼ 0. The interpolation matrix at z ¼ h/2 and z ¼ h/2 is {U(z ¼ h/

2)}T ¼ {0,0,0,. . .,1}T ¼ dNþ1, and {U(z ¼ h/2)}T¼{1,0,0,. . .,0}T ¼ d1.

Now, in order to simplify the governing equations, the stress resultants are

defined as

Z h=2

ðfMx g; fMy g; fMxy gÞ ¼ ðfUgT rx ; fUgT ry ; fUgT rxy Þdz

h=2

Z h=2

ðfRx g; fRy gÞ ¼ ðfUgT rxz ; fUgT ryz Þdz (7)

h=2

Z h=2

ðfUg0 rxz ; fUg0 ryz ; fUg0 rz Þdz

T T T

ðfQx g; fQy g; fNz gÞ ¼

h=2

Substituting equation (7) into equation (5) and considering the applied load on

the plate give the governing equations of the plate as

fMxy g; x þ fMy g; y fQy g ¼ f0g (8)

fRx g; x þ fRy g; y fNz g ¼ dNþ1 qðx; yÞ

where {0} denotes a (N þ 1) column matrix in which all components are zero. The

above equations totally include a set of 3(N þ 1) partial differential equations in x

and y-coordinates, and derivations of z-coordinate are eliminated from the gov-

erning equations.

The appropriate boundary conditions regarding to the free, simple and clamped

edges must be obtained. The natural boundary conditions in the plate edges must

be imposed in the weak form. Hence, the interpolation functions {U(z)}T are

multiplied to the strong form of the natural boundary conditions and integrated

over the plate thickness. For example, the boundary conditions at edges x ¼ 0 and

x ¼ L can be obtain by an appropriate combination of the following equations

Z h=2

fUgT rx dz ¼ fMx g ¼ f0g; or fUg ¼ f0g

h=2

8 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

Z h=2

fUgT rxz dz ¼ fRx g ¼ f0g; or fWg ¼ f0g at x ¼ 0 and x ¼ L

h=2

Z h=2 (9)

fUgT rxy dz ¼ fMxy g ¼ f0g; or fVg ¼ f0g

h=2

The boundary conditions at the edges that are parallel to x-axis, i.e. at y ¼ 0 and

y ¼ W can be obtained by the same procedure as

Z h=2

fUgT ry dz ¼ fMy g ¼ f0g; or fVg ¼ f0g

h=2

Z h=2

fUgT ryz dz ¼ fRy g ¼ f0g; or fWg ¼ f0g at y ¼ 0 and y ¼ W (10)

h=2

Z h=2

fUgT rxy dz ¼ fMxy g ¼ f0g; or fUg ¼ f0g

h=2

Displacement formulation

By considering the small displacement assumptions, the strain components of the

plate can be obtained by substituting the discrete form of the displacement field (1)

into the infinitesimal strain–displacement relations as

ey ¼ v;y ¼ fUðzÞgfVg;y cxz ¼ u;z þ wx ¼ fUðzÞgfUg þ fUðzÞgfWg;x (11)

ez ¼ w;z ¼ fUðzÞgfWg cyz ¼ v;z þ wy ¼ fUðzÞgfVg þ fUðzÞgfWg;y

where fUg0 is the derivative of {U} with respect to z-coordinate and is defined in

equation (6), and for example {U},x denotes the partial derivative of {U} as

fUg;x ¼ fU1;x ; U2;x ; . . . ; UNþ1;x gT (12)

It is supposed that the fibers of the fibrous layers in the sandwich faces are

oriented in the length (x-coordinate) or width (y-coordinate) directions. The

stress–strain relation for a fibrous layer in which its fibers are oriented in the x-

or y-directions can be considered as

> rx > C11 C12 C13 0 0 0 >

> e >

>

>

> >

> >

>

x >

>

>

> r >

> 6 C12 C22 C23 0 0 7

0 7 > > e >

>

>

<

y >

= 6 < e >

> y

=

rz 6 C13 C23 C33 0 0 0 77

¼6

z

6 0 7 (13)

> ryz >

> > 0 0 C44 0 0 7 > > c >

>

> >

>

6 > yz > >

> rxz >

> >

4 0 0 0 0 C55 0 5 > >

> c >

xz >

>

: ; >

: >

rxy 0 0 0 0 0 C66 cxy ;

Ahmadi 9

where superscript (k) refers to kth numerical layer. The stress–strain relations for

the isotropic core material are the same as equation (13). In isotropic material,

C11=C22=C33, C12=C13=C23, and C44=C55=C66. By considering the stress–

strain relation as equation (13), the strains component are substituted from equa-

tion (11) into equation (13), and the subsequent results for stresses are substituted

into equation (7), and the stress resultants are obtained in the terms of the dis-

placement components as

fMy g ¼ ½D12 fUg;x þ ½D22 fVg;y þ ½B23 fWg

fMxy g ¼ ½D66 ðfUg;y þ fVg;x Þ

fNz g ¼ ½B13 T fUg;x þ ½B23 T fVg;y þ ½A33 fWg

(14)

fQy g ¼ ½B44 T fWg;y þ ½A44 fVg

fQx g ¼ ½B55 T fWg;x þ ½A55 fUg

fRy g ¼ ½D44 fWg;y þ ½B44 fVg

fRx g ¼ ½D55 fWg;x þ ½B55 fUg

R h=2

½Apq T ¼ h=2 Cpq fUg T fUgdz

R h=2

½Bpq T ¼ h=2 Cpq fUgT fUgdz (15)

R h=2

½Dpq T ¼ h=2 Cpq fUgT fUgdz

Now, the stress resultants are substituted from equation (14) into equation (8)

and the governing equations of the plate are obtained as

(16a)

þ ð½B13 ½B55 T ÞfWg;x ¼ f0g

(16b)

þ ð½B23 ½B44 T ÞfWg;y Þ ¼ f0g

(16c)

½D55 fWg;xx þ ½D44 fWg;yy ½A33 fWg ¼ qðx; yÞdNþ1

10 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

The governing equations of the plate in equation (16) are a set of 3(N þ 1)

partial differential equations in the terms of displacement components of numer-

ical layers.

Solution procedure

The governing equations of the plate are solved for various edge conditions. A four

letter notation as FF-SS is used to denote the plate edges boundary conditions in

which 1 to 4th letters shows the boundary conditions plate at x ¼ 0, x ¼ L, y ¼ 0

and y ¼ W, respectively, and clamped, simple and free edge are denote by C, S and

F, respectively. In ‘SS-SS boundary conditions’ section, a solution is presented for

fully simply supported boundary condition, and in ‘FF-SS and CC-SS boundary

conditions’ section, it is supposed that the edges at x ¼ 0 and x ¼ L are free or

clamped and the edges at y ¼ 0 and y ¼ W are simply supported.

The edges of the plate at x ¼ 0, x ¼ L, y ¼ 0 and y ¼ W are considered to be simply

supported. The simply supported boundary conditions are considered as

(17)

fWg ¼ fUg ¼ fMy g ¼ f0g at y ¼ 0; and y ¼ W

For the case of SS-SS boundary conditions, the displacement field of the plate is

considered as

mpx npy

Uðx; yÞ ¼ fUgmn cos sin

L W

mpx npy

Vðx; yÞ ¼ fVgmn sin cos m; n ¼ 1; 2; 3; ; . . . (18)

L W

mpx npy

Wðx; yÞ ¼ fWgmn sin sin

L W

where the dummy index means summation. {U}mn, {V}mn and {W}mn are the

column matrixes which include N þ 1 unknown constants and must be obtained

in the solution. The displacement field in equation (18) satisfies the simply sup-

ported boundary conditions of the plate in equation (17). Now, by substituting

equation (18) into equation (16), the governing equation of the plate is rewritten as

p2 m 2 p2 n2 p2 mn

L W LW

pm

þ ½B13 ½B55 T fWgmn ¼ f0g

L

Ahmadi 11

p2 mn

p2 m2 p2 n2

½D þ ½D66 fUgmn ½D66 þ 2 ½D22 þ ½A44 fVgmn

LW 12 L2 W

pn

þ ½B23 ½B44 T fWgmn ¼ f0g

W (19)

pm pn

½B55 ½B13 T fUgmn ½B44 ½B23 T fVgmn

L W

p2 m2 p2 n2

þ 2 ½D55 2 ½D44 ½A33 fWgmn ¼ qmn dNþ1

L W

where the transverse load q (x,y) is written in the form of Fourier series as

X1 X 1

mpx npy

qðx; yÞ ¼ qmn sin sin

m¼1 n¼1

L W

Z LZ W (20)

4 mpx npy

qmn ¼ qðx; yÞsin sin

LW 0 0 L W

Equations (19) are written in the matrix form as a set of algebraic equations as

2 38 9 8 9

½K11 ½K12 ½K13 > < fUgmn >

= > < f0g > =

6 7

4 ½K12 ½K22 ½K23 5 fVgmn ¼ f0g (21)

>

: >

; > : >

;

½K31 ½K32 ½K33 fWgmn fFq g

in which

p2 m 2 p2 n2

½K11 ¼ ½D 11 ½D ½A55 Þ

L2 W2 66

2

p mn

½K12 ¼ ð½D12 þ ½D66 Þ

LW

pm

½K13 ¼ ð½B ½B55 T ÞfWmn g

L 13

p2 mn

½K21 ¼ ð½D12 þ ½D66 Þ

LW

p2 m 2 p2 n2 (22)

½K22 ¼ 2 ½D66 2 ½D22 ½A44

L W

pn

½K23 ¼ ð½B23 ½B44 T Þ

W

pm

½K31 ¼ ð½B55 ½B13 T Þ

L

pn

½K32 ¼ ð½B44 ½B23 T Þ

W

p2 m 2 p2 n2

½K33 ¼ 2 ½D55 2 ½D44 Þ ½A33

L W

12 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

Equation (21) is a set of 3(N þ 1) algebraic equations and the unknown con-

stants {U}mn, {V}mn and {W}mn must be obtained by the solution of equation (21).

For the case in which the two opposite edges of the plate are simply supported (S),

and the two other edges are free (F) or clamped (C), the governing equations of the

plate (equation (16)) can be solved analytically. For FF-SS or CC-SS boundary

conditions, the displacement field and the applied transverse load are considered

as follows

fVðx; yÞg ¼ fVðxÞgn cosbn y n ¼ 1; 2; 3; . . . :

fWðx; yÞg ¼ fWðxÞgn sinbn y

(24)

qðx; yÞ ¼ qn ðxÞsinðbn yÞ

Z

2 W

qn ðxÞ ¼ qðx; yÞsinðbn yÞdy

W 0

where {U(x)}n, {V(x)}n and {W(x)}n are the matrix of unknown functions as

and bn¼np/W. By substituting equation (24) into equation (16), the governing

equations of the plate are obtained as

þ ð½B13 ½B55 T ÞfW0 gn Þsinbn y ¼ 0

ðbn ð½D12 þ ½D66 ÞfU0 gn þ ½D66 fV00 gn ðb2n ½D22 þ ½A44 ÞfVgn

(26)

þ ðbn ð½B23 ½B44 T ÞfWgn Þcosbn y ¼ 0

ð½B55 ½B13 T ÞfU0 gn bn ð½B44 ½B23 T ÞfVgn þ ½D55 fW00 gn

ðb2n ½D44 þ ½A33 ÞfWgn Þsinbn y ¼ qn ðxÞdNþ1 sinbn y

where the prime on {U(x)}n, {V(x)}n and {W(x)}n means the differentiation with

respect to x-coordinate. The simply supported boundary conditions at y ¼ 0 and

y ¼ W are satisfied by the chosen displacement field in equation (24), and for

Ahmadi 13

be obtained as

fMxy g ¼ ½D66 ðbn fUgn þ fVg n Þcosbn y ¼ f0g x ¼ 0; L (27)

fRx g ¼ ð½D55 fWg n þ ½B55 fUgÞsinbn y ¼ f0g

n oT

fXðxÞgn ¼ fUgTn fUg Tn fVgTn fVg Tn fWgTn fWg Tn (28)

By employing equation (28), the governing equations of the plate are written as

where [A]n is a 6(N þ 1)6(N þ 1) matrix, and {F} is a 6(N þ 1) column matrix as

2 3

½0 ½I ½0 ½0 ½0 ½0

6 7

6 a21 ½0 ½0 a24 ½0 a25 7

6 7

6 ½0 ½0 ½0 ½I ½0 ½0 7

6 7

½An ¼ 6 7

6 ½0 a42 a43 ½0 a44 ½0 7 (30)

6 7

6 ½0 ½0 ½0 ½0 ½I ½0 7

4 5

½0 a62 a63 ½0 a65 ½0

fFðxÞgTn ¼ ff0g ; f0g ; f0g ; f0gT ; f0gT ; fFq gg

T T T

where the coefficients which are used in equation (30) are defined as

a24 ¼ bn ½D11 1 ð½D12 þ ½D66 Þ

a24 ¼ ½D11 1 ð½B13 ½B55 T Þ

a42 ¼ bn ½D66 1 ð½D12 þ ½D66 Þ

a43 ¼ ½D66 1 ðb2n ½D22 þ ½A44 Þ (31)

1 T

a45 ¼ bn ½D66 ð½B23 ½B44 Þ

a62 ¼ ½D55 1 ð½B55 ½B13 T Þ

a63 ¼ bn ½D55 1 ð½B44 ½B23 T Þ

a65 ¼ ½D55 1 ðb2n ½D44 þ ½A33 Þ

14 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

equation (29) are changed to decoupled equations which are solved analytically,

and then the analytical solution for equation (29) is found as

Z

fXðxÞgn ¼ ½Qn ½expðKxÞfKgn þ ½Qn ½expðKxÞ ½expðKxÞ1 ½Qn 1 fFðxÞgn dx

(32)

where [Q]n and [K]n are the matrix of eigen-vectors and eigen-value of [A]n as

where k1 to k6(Nþ1) are the eigen-values and {K}n is the matrix of unknown con-

stants of integration and must be obtained by imposing the boundary conditions to

the solution. For the case in which the applied load is uniform in the length of the

plate, i.e. qn(x)¼qn, the solution of equation (32) is obtained as

the boundary conditions at x ¼ 0 and x ¼ L. For example, the free edge boundary

conditions of the plate can be written using equation (27) as

½D66 ðbn fUgn þ fVg n Þ ¼ f0g x ¼ 0; L (36)

½D55 fWg n þ ½B55 fUgn ¼ f0g

(37)

½PfXn ðx ¼ LÞg ¼ f0g

2 3

½0 ½D11 bn ½D12 ½0 ½B13 ½0

6 7

½P ¼ 4 bn ½D66 ½0 ½0 ½D66 ½0 5 (38)

½B55 ½0 ½0 ½0 ½0 ½D55

Ahmadi 15

By substituting {X}n from equation (32) into equation (39), a set of linear

algebraic equations will be obtained. The unknown parameters {K}n are obtained

by the solution of these algebraic equations and the solution for displacements is

completed by obtaining {K}n and

X

1

fXðx; yÞg ¼ fXðx; yÞgn (39)

n¼1

Calculation of stresses

In this study, the in-plane stresses are calculated by stress–strain relations (equa-

tion (13)). The out-of-plane strains which are obtained from strain–displacement

relations may be discontinuous at the numerical surfaces because the continuity of

derivatives of displacement components with respect to z-coordinate at the inter-

faces is not warranted. So the out-of-plane stresses which are obtained from the

stress–strain relation may be discontinue at the interfaces. In an alternative

method, the out-of-plane stresses are obtained in a one-step stress recovery

scheme by integrating the equilibrium equations. The in-plane stresses are

substituted from stress–strain relations in the equilibrium equations and the sub-

sequent results are integrated in the z direction to obtain the out-of-plane stresses

rz, rxz and ryz. More details can be found in Ahmadi [29]. For example, in order to

obtain the out-of-plane normal stress rz at z ¼ zn, (n ¼ 1,2,. . .,N þ 1), the third

equation of equation (4) is integrated as

R zn R zn

rðnÞ

z ¼ h=2 ðrxz;x þ ryz;y Þdz ¼ h=2 C55 ðfUgfWg;x þ fUgfUgÞ;x Þdz

R zn (40)

h=2 C44 ðfUgfWg;y þ fUgfVgÞ;y Þdz

where rz(n) represents the out-of-plane normal stress at the nth numerical surface.

By definition of the following matrices

Rz

fAnpq g ¼ z1n Cpq fUðzÞgdz

R z (41)

fBnpq g ¼ z1n Cpq fUðzÞgdz

rðnÞ

z ¼ ðfB55 gfWg;xx þ fB44 gfWg;yy þ fA55 gfUg;x þ fA44 gfVg;y Þ

n n n n

(42)

16 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

ðnÞ

rxz ¼ ðfBn11 gfUg;xx þ fBn12 gfVg;xy þ fAn13 gfWg;x þ fBn66 gðfUg;yy þ fVg;xy ÞÞ

ðnÞ

ryz ¼ ðfBn11 gfUg;xy þ fBn12 gfVg;yy þ fAn23 gfWg;y þ fBn66 gðfUg;xy þ fVg;xx ÞÞ

(43)

Numerical results show that the out-of-plane stresses which are obtained from

integration of equilibrium equations satisfy the traction conditions at the top and

bottom surfaces of the plate more exactly [29].

In the numerical results, sandwich and composite plate with various layer-stacking

and boundary conditions which are subjected to transverse load is studied. Various

numerical results are presented for the distribution of out-of-plane and in-plane

stresses. The length of the plate is L, the width is W and the thickness of plate is h.

The core thickness is hc and the face thickness is hf, and h ¼ hc þ 2hf. The distrib-

uted transverse load q(x, y) is applied to the top surface of the plate and the bottom

surface is stress free.

Verification of results

In order to verify the accuracy of the method, the predictions of present method

are compared with the predictions of exact elasticity solution of Pagano [2], and

the solution of Vel and Batra [12] and Atashipour et al. [34]. Pagano [2] presented

an exact elasticity solution for the orthotropic-laminated plate in which all edges

are simply supported and subjected to transverse load. Vel and Batra [12] pre-

sented an analytical three-dimensional solution for the laminated plate subjected to

transverse load for various set of boundary conditions. Atashipour et al. [34]

developed an elasticity solution for static bending of symmetric-laminated ortho-

tropic plates.

For abbreviation, in this study the simply, clamped and free boundary condi-

tions are shown by S, C and F, respectively. As said previously, a four-letter

notation such as FF-SS is used to indicate the edge boundary conditions of the

plate in which 1 to 4th letter shows the edge boundary conditions at x ¼ 0, x ¼ L,

y ¼ 0 and y ¼ W, respectively.

In Table 1, the predictions of the present method for square [0/90/0] simply

supported- (SS-SS) laminated plate for various length to thickness ratios, L/h, are

compared with the predictions of Pagano [2] and Atashipour et al. [34]. The plate is

subjected to double sinusoidal distributed load q(x, y) ¼ q0sin(px/L)sin(py/W) on

the top surface at z ¼ h/2. Also, the prediction of classical laminate theory (CLT) [2] is

included in Table 1. The mechanical properties of lamina are chosen as [2, 13] and

[41]; E1 ¼ 25 106 psi, E2 ¼ E3 ¼ 106 psi, G12 ¼ G13 ¼ 0.5 106 psi, G23 ¼ 0.2 106 psi,

12 ¼ 13 ¼ 23 ¼ 0.25. The dimensionless stresses are defined as: (r*xz,r*yz) ¼

Ahmadi

Table 1. Comparison of the predictions of present method with the predictions of Pagano [2] and Atashipour et al. [34] for square [0/90/0]

simply supported plate.

L/h (L/2,W/2,h/2) (L/2,W/2,h/2) (0,W/2,0) (W/2,0,0) (0,0, h/2)

Atashipour [34] 1.4360/0.9374 0.6685/0.7424 0.164 0.2591 0.0859/þ0.0702

Present 1.4358/0.9372 0.6627/0.7370 0.1639 0.2591 0.0859/0.0702

4 Pagano [2] 0.801/0.755 0.534/0.556 0.256 0.2172 0.0511/þ0.0505

Atashipour [34] 0.8008/0.7548 0.5341/0.5563 0.2559 0.2172 0.0511/þ0.0505

Present 0.8009/0.7548 0.5332/0.5554 0.2559 0.2172 0.0511/þ0.0505

10 Pagano [2] 0.590 0.285/0.288 0.357 0.1228 þ0.0289

Atashipour [34] 0.5906/0.5898 0.2845/0.2882 0.3573 0.1228 0.0288/þ0.0290

Present 0.5906/0.5899 0.2845/0.2882 0.3573 0.1228 0.0288/þ0.0290

20 Pagano [2] 0.552 0.210 0.385 0.0938 þ0.0234

Atashipour [34] 0.5524/0.5525 0.2092/0.2101 0.3846 0.0938 þ0.0234

Present 0.5524/0.5525 0.2092/0.2102 0.3846 0.0938 0.0234/þ0.0234

50 Pagano [2] 0.541 0.185 0.393 0.0842 þ0.0216

Atashipour [34] 0.5409/0.5410 0.1845/0.1846 0.3934 0.0842 0.0216

Present 0.5410/0.5410 0.1845/0.1847 0.3934 0.0842 1

100 Pagano [2] 0.539 0.181 0.395 0.0828 þ0.0213

Atashipour [34] 0.5393 0.1808 0.3947 0.0828 þ0.0214

Present 0.5393/0.5393 0.1808/0.1809 0.3947 0.0828 1

CLT [2] 0.539 0.180 0.395 0.0823 þ0.0213

17

18 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

sinusoidal-distributed transverse load (W ¼ 3L).

Atashipour et al. [34] 8.1659 2.8211 0.9189 0.6095 0.5205 0.5077

Present, p¼10 8.15 2.8191 0.9187 0.9695 0.5205 0.5077

Present, p¼50 8.1652 2.821 0.9189 0.6095 0.5205 0.5077

Present, p¼80 8.1656 2.8211 0.9189 0.6095 0.5205 0.5077

Present, p¼100 8.1657 2.8211 0.9189 0.6095 0.5205 0.5077

displacement is defined as w*=100E2h3w/L4q0.

As seen in Table 1, there are very good agreements between the predictions of

present solution and the predictions of Pagano [2] and Atashipour et al. [34] for L/

h ¼ 2 to L/h ¼ 100. The prediction of CLT for the in-plane stresses for large length

to thickness ratio (L/h ¼ 100) is in good agreement with the prediction of present

solution and the predictions of Pagano [2] and Khdeir and Reddy [41].

The deflection of thick [0/90/0] simply supported plate (W ¼ 3L) at the plate

center w*(x ¼ L/2, y ¼ W/2, z ¼ 0) is presented in Table 2 and is compared with the

predictions of Pagano [2] and Atashipour et al. [34] for various L/h ratios. In

Table 2, p is the number of numerical layer in each physical layer of the [0/90/0]

plate, and the total number of the numerical layer is N ¼ 3p. By increasing the

number of numerical layers, p, the prediction of present solution for all L/h ratios

is equal to the predictions of Atashipour et al. [34] up to four decimal digits.

In Figure 2, the predictions of present solution for the distribution of out-of-

plane shear stresses r*xz(0,W/2, z) and r*yz(L/2,0, z) in simply supported [0/90/0]

plate are compared with the predictions of Pagano [2]. r*xz is presented in a square

plate with L ¼ W ¼ 4h, and r*yz is presented in a plate with L ¼ 4h and W ¼ 3L. As

seen, the predictions of present solution for interlaminar shear stresses are in good

agreement with the predictions of exact elasticity solution of Pagano [2].

The distribution of dimensionless deflection w*(L/2,y, 0) and shear stress

r*yz(L/2,y,0) along the y axis of [0/90/0] plate with SSSF boundary conditions

which is subjected to compressive transverse load as q ¼ q0sin(px/L) is presented

in Figure 3(a), and the distribution of interlaminar normal stress r*z(L/2,W/2, z) in

[0/90/0] plate with simply supported boundary conditions is presented in Figure 3

(b). Figure 3 compares the predictions of present solution with the predictions of

Atashipour et al. [34]. Very good agreement is seen between the predictions of

present method and predictions of Atashipour et al. [34].

The distribution of out-of-plane shear stresses in the vicinity of clamped edge,

free edge and simply supported edge in the plates with CCSS, SSSS and FFSS

boundary conditions which is subjected to doubly sinusoidal transverse load on the

top surface of the plate are presented in Figures 4 and 5, and are compared with

Ahmadi 19

0.5

Present

Pagano (1970)

0.1667

σyz σxz

z/h

-0.1667

-0.5

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25

σ*xz, σ*yz

Figure 2. Comparison of prediction of present method with predictions of Pagano [2] for rxz

(0, W/2, z) and ryz (L/2, 0, z).

verse shear stresses rxz(0.05L,0.5W, z) and ryz(0.05L, 0, z) in the vicinity of the

edge of [0/90] square plate, L ¼ W ¼ 5h, is presented in Figure 4(a) and (b), respec-

tively. Also the distribution of rxz(0.05L, 0.5W,z) through-the-thickness of [0/90/0]

square plate (L ¼ W ¼ 5h) in the vicinity of clamped, simple and free edges is

presented in Figure 5. The maximum of stresses is depicted in these Figures. The

predictions of present method for distribution of stresses in the vicinity of clamped,

simply and free edges are in very good agreement with the predictions of analytical

solution of Vel and Batra [12].

The normalized displacement and stresses in [0/90] and [0/90/0] plates with

various boundary conditions subjected to distributed sinusoidal load q(x, y)

=q0sin(px/L)sin(py/W) on upper surface are presented in Tables 3 and 4, respec-

tively. Same as Vel and Batra [12], the normalized displacement and stresses on the

specific points are defined as

100E2 h2 L L L L

½uðzÞ; vðzÞ ¼ u ; ; z ; v ; ; z

q0 L3 4 2 2 4

3

100E2 h L L

w ðzÞ ¼ w ; ;z

q0 L4 2 2

10E2 L L h L L h

e ¼ u3 ; ; u2 ; ;

q0 h 2 2 2 2 2 2

" #

10h2 L W L W L

x ðzÞ; r

r y ðzÞ; r

xy ðzÞ ¼ rx ; ; z ; ry ; ; z ; rxy ; 0; z

q0 L2 2 2 2 2 8

20 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

(a) 0.5

0

w*, Present

-0.5

w*, Atashipour et al.

σ* , Present

W*, σ*yz

yz

-1

*

σ , Atashipour et al.

yz

-1.5

-2

-2.5

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

y/W

(b) 0.5

Atashipour et al.

Pressent

z/h

-0.5

-1 -0.9 -0.8 -0.7 -0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0

*

σ*z

et al. [34] (a) w*(L/2,y,0) and r*yz(L/2,y,0) in [0/90/0] SSSF plate, (b) r*z (L/2,W/2, z) in [0/90/0]

SSSS plate (L ¼W ¼ 5h).

" #

10h L L W

r xz ðzÞ ¼

yz ðzÞ; r ryz ; 0; z ; rxz ; ;z

q0 L 2 8 2

(44)

1 L L

z ðz Þ ¼ r z

r ; ;z

q0 2 2

In Table 3 and 4, the predictions of present solution for stresses and displace-

ment are compared with the predictions of analytical solution (Vel and Batra [12])

and the predictions of higher order shear deformation theory (HSDT), first-order

Ahmadi 21

(a) 0.5

CC, (σxz)max=1.7968q0, Present

0.4

SS, (σxz)max=1.5903q0, Present

0.3 FF, (σxz)max=0.2160q0, Present

0.2 CC, (σxz)max=1.798q0, Vel & Batra (1999)

SS, (σxz)max=1.590q0, Vel & Batra (1999)

0.1

FF, (σxz)max=0.216q0, Vel & Batra (1999)

z/h

-0.1

-0.2

-0.3

-0.4

-0.5

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

σ (0.05L,0.5W,z)/(σ )

xz xz max

(b)

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

z/h

-0.2 SS, (σyz)max=0.2535q0, Present

SS, (σyz)max=0.0254q0, Vel & Batra (1999)

-0.4

-0.5

-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

σ (0.05L,0,z) /(σ )

yz yz max

inar shear stresses in the vicinity of edge of [0/90] plate, (L ¼W ¼ 5h), comparison of predictions

with the predictions of Vel and Batra [12], a) rxz(0.05L,0.5W, z), b) ryz(0.05L, 0, z).

(Khdeir and Reddy [41]).

Table 5 shows the dimensionless deflection w** ¼ 100wE1h3/q0L4 at the center of

square [0/90]s simply supported carbon/epoxy composite plate for various length

to thickness ratios and compares the predicted results with the predictions of CLT

and FSDT. The typical mechanical properties of carbon/epoxy lamina are chosen

as Table 6. The difference between the prediction of CLT, FSDT and present

method increases by decreasing the L/h ratio. For L/h ¼ 5, the difference in pre-

dictions of CLT and present method for deflection of plate center is about 100%,

22 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

0.5

0.4

0.3

CC, (σxz)max=1.8101q0, Present

0.2

SS, (σxz)max=1.4524q0, Present

0.1

FF, (σxz)max=0.2514q0, Present

z/h

-0.1 SS, (σxz)max=1.453q0, Vel & Batra (1999)

-0.2 FF, (σxz)max=0.252q0, Vel & Batra (1999)

-0.3

-0.4

-0.5

-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

σ (0.05L,0.5W,z)/(σ )

xz xz max

0] plate, (L ¼W ¼ 5h), comparison of predictions with Vel and Batra [12].

and the difference in predictions of FSDT and present method is about 3.8%. The

shear correction factor for FSDT is chosen as k ¼ 5/6.

It is seen that there are very good agreements between the predictions of present

formulation and the predictions of available exact solutions in the open literature.

In the next sections, numerical results are presented for the distribution of

stresses in the sandwich and composite plates for various boundary conditions

and layers stacking. The elastic properties of the face and core are chosen as

Table 6. At first, fully simply supported sandwich plate is studied.

The stress distribution in thick sandwich and composite plates in which all edges at

x ¼ 0, x ¼ L, y ¼ 0 and y ¼ W are simply-supported are studied in this section. The

applied transverse load is considered to be double sinusoidal distributed load as q

(x, y)=q0sin(px/L)sin(py/W) which is applied to the top surface of the plate.

Through-the-thickness distribution of dimensionless normal stresses r*x(L/2,

W/2, z), r*y(L/2, W/2, z) and r*z(L/2, W/2, z), and out-of-plane shear stresses

r*xz(L, W/2, z) and r*yz(L/2, 0, z) in [0/core/90] and [0/core/0] and [90/0/0/90]

plates (L ¼ W ¼ 5h) is presented in Figures 6 to 8, respectively.

The sequence of the layers in the bracket is written from the bottom surface to

the top surface of the plate. The core and face thickness in [0/core/90] and [0/core/

0] sandwich plate is considered to be hc=0.8h and hf=0.1h, and the thickness of

physical layers in [90/0/0/90] plate is considered to be 0.25h. As it is expected, the

out-of-plane shear stresses vanish at the bottom and top surfaces of the plates. The

out-of-plane normal stress rz vanishes at the bottom traction free surface of the

plates. At the center of the plate on the top surface (L/2, W/2, h/2), rz is exactly

Table 3. Displacement and stresses in [0/90] laminated plate (L ¼W ¼ 5h) subjected to sinusoidal transverse load on the top surface.

BC v ðh w

ð0Þ r

x ðh r r

z ð0Þ r

xy ðh r

yz ð0Þ r

xz ð0Þ e

Ahmadi

u ð2hÞ 2Þ 2Þ y ð2hÞ 2Þ

CC-SS Vel ans 1.047 1.341 1.217 4.630 5.723 0.579 0.313 0.875 1.550 2.267

Batra [12]

Present 1.047 1.341 1.127 4.630 5.722 0.579 0.313 0.875 1.550 5.268

(1.0465) (1.3407) (1.2170) (4.6297) (5.7224) (0.5790) (0.3131) (0.8746) (1.5501) (5.2676)

HSDT [41] – – 1.088 5.679 5.505 – – 2.095 – –

FSDT [41] – – 1.257 3.911 5.153 – – 1.958 – –

CLPT [41] – – 0.429 4.800 2.914 – – – –

FF-SS Vel & 0.565 3.291 2.753 2.660 12.877 0.359 0.108 1.541 0.416 6.233

Batra [12]

Present 0.565 3.209 2.753 2.661 12.876 0.358 0.108 1.5403 0.415 6.233

(0.5647) (3.2902) (2.7526) (2.6613) (12.8762) (0.3583) (0.1082) (1.5403) (0.4152) (6.2325)

HSDT [41] – – 2.624 3.171 13.551 – – 4.457 – –

FSDT [48] – – 2.777 2.469 11.0907 – – 3.901 – –

CLPT [41] – – 1.777 2.403 11.849 – – – –

SS-SS Vel and 1.870 1.899 1.712 7.671 7.894 0.495 0.527 1.211 1.216 4.733

Batra [12]

Present 1.867 1.898 1.712 7.671 7.894 0.495 0.527 1.211 1.216 4.733

(1.8670) (1.8982) (1.7115) (7.6711) (7.8940) (0.4954) (0.5270) (1.2110) (1.2157) (4.7330)

HSDT [41] – – 1.667 8.385 8.385 – – 3.155 – –

FSDT [41] – – 1.758 7.157 7.157 – – 2.729 – –

CLPT [41] – – 1.064 7.157 7.157 – – – –

Note: The table shows a comparison of the results for various boundary conditions (the predictions with four decimal digits are presented in parentheses).

23

24 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

sinusoidal transverse load on top surface.

CC SS FF

Batra [12] N ¼ 3 22 Batra [12] N ¼ 3 22 Batra [12] N ¼ 3 22

u ðh

2Þ 0.319 0.319 0.614 0.614 0.108 0.108

(0.3188) (0.6137) (0.1078)

u ð2hÞ 0.331 0.331 0.620 0.620 0.114 0.114

(0.3312) (0.6200) (0.1135)

v ðh

2Þ 1.053 1.052 1.353 1.353 5.015 5.014

(1.0523) (1.3532) (5.0141)

v ð2hÞ 1.044 1.043 1.346 1.346 5.007 5.006

(1.0431) (1.3455) (5.0063)

ð0Þ

w 1.180 1.180 1.525 1.525 5.307 5.306

(1.1793) (1.5251) (5.3064)

x ðh

r 2Þ 4.235 4.236 6.987 0.6987 2.043 2.046

(4.2357) (6.9866) (2.0462)

x ð2hÞ

r 4.504 4.504 7.180 7.180 2.232 2.236

(4.5043) (7.1804) (2.2358)

y ðh

r 6Þ 3.726 3.724 4.784 4.780 17.247 17.246

(3.7236) (4.7804) (17.2460)

y ð6hÞ

r 3.573 3.571 4.639 4.638 17.102 14.101

(3.5710) (4.6380) (17.1005)

z ðh

r 6Þ 0.495 0.495 0.496 0.492 0.496 0.496

(0.4949) (0.4962) (0.4962)

z ð6hÞ

r 0.701 0.701 0.726 0.726 0.790 0.790

(0.7013) (0.7264) (0.7900)

xy ðh

r 2Þ 0.256 0.256 0.404 0.404 0.059 0.059

(0.2562) (0.4037) (0.0591)

xy ð2hÞ

r 0.257 0.257 0.403 0.4.03 0.061 0.61

(0.2566) (0.4034) (0.0612)

yz ð0Þ

r 1.470 1.470 1.911 1.911 5.917 5.918

(1.4697) (1.9111) (5.9179)

xz ð0Þ

r 2.093 2.092 2.653 2.653 0.617 0.617

(2.0923) (2.6527) (0.6173)

e 4.694 4.694 4.715 4.715 4.715 4.715

(4.6937) (4.7146) (4.7150)

Note: The table shows the comparison of results for various boundary conditions (the predictions with four

decimal digits are presented in parentheses).

equal to the applied transverse load at this point, i.e. r*z(L/2, W/2, h/2) ¼ q(L/2,

L/2)/q0 ¼ 1.

It is seen that the predictions of present method for out-of-plane stresses exactly

satisfy the traction conditions on the top and bottom surfaces of the plate. The

Ahmadi 25

square [0/90]s simply supported plate for various L/h ratios (p ¼ 30).

L/h ¼ L/h ¼

1000 500 L/h ¼ 100 L/h ¼ 50 L/h ¼ 30 L/h ¼ 20 L/h ¼ 15 L/h ¼ 10 L/h ¼ 8 L/h ¼ 5

CLT 9.6689 9.6689 9.6689 9.6689 9.6689 9.6689 9.6689 9.6689 9.6689 9.6689

FSDT 9.6691 9.6697 9.6929 9.7651 9.9359 10.2678 10.7292 12.0281 13.3170 18.6735

Present 9.8287 9.7472 9.8239 9.8941 10.0596 10.3808 10.8265 12.0748 13.3038 18.2917

(p ¼ 30),

z ¼ 0.5h

Present 9.8287 9.7472 9.8239 9.8942 10.0604 10.3851 10.8400 12.1430 13.4703 19.3815

(p ¼ 30),

z ¼ 0.5h

Present 9.8287 9.7473 9.8245 9.8964 10.0662 10.3963 10.8552 12.1472 13.4294 18.7466

(p ¼ 30),

z¼0

Core 3 3 1.0714 1.0714 0.4 0.4

0.5

0.4

σ

x

σ

y

z/h

0

σ

z

σ

xz

σ

yz

-0.4

-0.5

-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

σ*

Figure 6. Distribution of stresses through the thickness in [0/core/90] sandwich plate

(L ¼W ¼ 5h, hc ¼ 0.8h, hf ¼ 0.1h).

26 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

0.5

0.4

σx

σy

z/h

0

σz

σxz

σyz

-0.4

-0.5

-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

*

σ

Figure 7. Distribution of stresses through the thickness in [0/core/0] sandwich plate

(L ¼W ¼ 5h, hc ¼ 0.8h, hf ¼ 0.1h).

0.5

0.25

σ

x

σ

y

z/h

0

σ

z

σ

xz

-0.25 σ

yz

-0.5

-0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

σ*

Figure 8. Distribution of stresses through the thickness in [90/0/0/90] composite

plate (L ¼W ¼ 5h).

equivalent single layer theories such as classical laminate theory and first-order

shear deformation theory are not able to predict the distribution of out-of-plane

stresses in the plate thickness and cannot satisfy the stress conditions at the top and

bottom surfaces. As seen in Figure 8, the distribution of in-plane normal stress ry

in 90-plies of [90/0/0/90] plate is not linear.

Ahmadi 27

(a) 3.5

z=-0.5h

3

z=-0.5hc

2.5

z=0

2 z=0.5hc

1.5 z=0.5h

1

σz

*

0.5

0

-0.5

-1

-1.5

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

x/L

(b) 4.5

4 z=-0.5h

3.5 z=-0.5hc

3 z=0

2.5 z=0.5hc

2 z=0.5h

σz

*

1.5

1

0.5

0

-0.5

-1

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

x/L

Figure 9. Out-of-plane normal stress rz distribution along the length of FFSS sandwich plate at

y ¼ W/2, (a) [0/core/0] sandwich plate, (b) [90/core/0] sandwich plate.

It is considered that the edges of the plate at x ¼ 0 and x ¼ L are free and the edges

at y ¼ 0 and y ¼ W are simply supported. A distributed transverse load is applied

on the top surface of the plate which is uniform in the length of the plate and is

sinusoidally distributed in the width of the plate as q(x, y)=q0sin(py/W). At first,

[0/core/0] and [90/core/0] sandwich plates in which the core thickness is hc=0.6h

and the face thickness is hf=0.2h are considered. The dimensions of the plate are

considered to be W ¼ 2L ¼ 6h.

In order to study the stresses in the vicinity of free edges at x ¼ 0 and x ¼ L, the

distribution of the out-of-plane normal stress along the length of [0/core/0] and

28 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

shows the distribution of rz at section y ¼ 0.5W along the length of the plate at the

core–face interfaces (z=0.5hc), at the mid plane (z ¼ 0) and at the top and

bottom surfaces (z=0.5h). As seen in Figure 9, the predicted normal stress rz

on the top surface of plate along the line y ¼ W/2 is exactly equal to the applied

transverse load, i.e. rz(x, y ¼ 0.5W, z ¼ 0.5h)=q(x, y ¼ 0.5W,)=q0, and rz vanishes

on the traction free bottom surface of the plate. As seen, rz increases in the vicinity

0.4

z=-0.5h

0.3 z=-0.5hc

0.2 z=0

z=0.5hc

0.1

σxz

0

*

-0.1

-0.2

-0.3

-0.4

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

x/L

Figure 10. Out-of-plane shear stress rxz distribution along the length of FFSS [0/core/0]

sandwich plate at y ¼ W/2.

0.5

0.3

x= 0.5L

x=0.94 L

x=0.98 L

z/h

0 x=0.99 L

x= L

x=L (Hooke law)

-0.3

-0.5

-2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5

*

σ

z

sandwich plate at y ¼ W/2.

Ahmadi 29

of free edges at the core–face interfaces and its maximum is at the free edges. In

Figure 9, on the free edge of the sandwich plates at the points (x ¼ 0, y ¼ 0.5W,

z ¼ 0.5hc) and (x ¼ L, y ¼ 0.5W, z ¼ 0.5hc), the out-of-plane normal stress r*z

increases sharply to about r*z=3 in [0/core/0] plate, and r*z=3.9 in [90/core/

0] plate.

The distribution of out-of-plane shear stress rxz along the length of [0/core/0]

plate at section y ¼ 0.5W is shown in Figure 10. The shear stress rxz vanishes far

from the free edges and increases in the vicinity of the free edges of the plate.

0.5

0.3

x= 0.5L

x=0.94 L

z/h

0 x=0.98 L

x=0.99 L

x= L

x=L (Hooke law)

-0.3

-0.5

-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

σ*

z

sandwich plate at y ¼ W/2.

0.5

x= 0.5L

x=0.94 L

0.3 x=0.98 L

x=0.99 L

x= L

x=L (Hooke law)

z/h

-0.3

-0.5

-3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2

σ*

z

sandwich plate at y ¼ W/2.

30 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

The distribution of the out-of-plane normal stress rz through the thickness of [0/

core/0], [90/core/0] and [0/core/90] sandwich plates is presented in Figures 11 to 13,

respectively. In these figures, rz is presented at section y ¼ 0.5W, through the plate

thickness along the lines (x ¼ 0.5L, y ¼ 0.5W, z), (x ¼ 0.94L, y ¼ 0.5W, z),

(x ¼ 0.98L, y ¼ 0.5W, z), (x ¼ 0.99L, y ¼ 0.5W, z) and (x ¼ L, y ¼ 0.5W, z).

In these figures, z=0.5hc=0.3h are the core–face interfaces of the sandwich

plates. As seen in Figures 11 to 13, in the predictions of present solution,

0.5

0.3

x= 0.5L

x=0.94 L

x=0.98 L

z/h

0 x=0.99 L

-0.3

-0.5

-0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

σ*

xz

Figure 14. Out-of-plane shear stress rxz distribution through-the-thickness in FFSS [0/core/0]

sandwich plate at y ¼ W/2.

0.5

0.3

x= 0.5L

x=0.94 L

x=0.98 L

z/h

0 x=0.99 L

-0.3

-0.5

-0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

*

σ

xz

sandwich plate at y ¼ W/2.

Ahmadi 31

0.5

0.3

[0/core/0]

[90/core/0]

[90/core/90]

z/h

0 [0/core/90]

-0.3

-0.5

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

σ*

yz

Figure 16. Distribution of ryz through-the-thickness of various sandwich plates at (x ¼ L/2, y ¼ 0).

(a) 0.5

0.3

z/h

0 [0/core/0]

[90/core/0]

[90/core/90]

[0/core/90]

-0.3

-0.5

-0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3

*

σ

x

(b) 0.5

[0/core/0]

0.3 [90/core/0]

[90/core/90]

[0/core/90]

z/h

-0.3

-0.5

-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8

*

σ

y

Figure 17. Distribution of in-plane stress rx(x ¼ L/2, y ¼ W/2, z) and ry(x ¼ L/2, y ¼ W/2, z)

through-the-thickness of various FFSS sandwich plates, a) rx, b) ry.

32 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

the traction boundary conditions at the bottom and top surfaces, i.e. rz(z=0.5h)

=0 and rz(z ¼ 0.5h)=q0 are satisfied. rz increased sharply in the vicinity of free

edges of the plate, especially near the core–face interfaces. In this study, the out-of-

plane stresses are obtained from the integration of equilibrium equations. In

Figures 11 to 13, the prediction of Hooke’s law for rz at the free edge of the

plates is depicted. There is a difference between the predictions of the integration

method and the prediction of Hooke’s law at the free edges. The maximum of out-

of-plane normal stress rz is at the top face of the plate in the vicinity of the core–

face interface. The maximum of r*z is tensile for [0/core/0] and [90/core/0] plates

and its maximum is compressive for [0/core/90] plate.

(a) 0.4

0.3 z=-0.5h

z=-0.5hc

0.2 z=0

z=0.5h

0.1 c

σxz

0

*

-0.1

-0.2

-0.3

-0.4

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

x/L

(b) 2

1.5 z=-0.5h

z=-0.25h

1 z=0

z=0.25h

0.5

σxz

0

*

-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

x/L

Figure 18. Out-of-plane shear stress rxz at the interface of layers in CCSS plate, (a) [0/core/0]

sandwich plate, (b) [90/0/0/90] composite plate, (y ¼ W/2).

Ahmadi 33

tion y ¼ 0.5W of [0/core/0] and [90/core/0] sandwich plates are shown in Figures 14

and 15, respectively. As seen in Figures 14 and 15, in the vicinity of free edge

(x ¼ 0.99L), the out-of-plane shear stress rxz increases at the core–face interface of

sandwich plate, especially at core/0-layer interface (z/h ¼ 0.3). Through-the-

thickness distribution of ryz at the simply supported edge (x ¼ L/2, y ¼ 0, z) is

presented in Figure 16 for various sandwich plates. The effect of stacking sequence

on the distribution of stress is seen in this figure. The distribution of the in-plane

normal stress, ry(x ¼ L/2, y ¼ W/2, z) and rx(x ¼ L/2, y ¼ W/2, z) in various sand-

wich plates is presented in Figure 17.

(a) 0.5

0.25

x= 0.5L

x=0.94 L

x=0.98 L

z/h

0

x=0.99 L

-0.25

-0.5

-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

σ*

z

(b) 0.5

0.3

x= 0.5L

x=0.75 L

x=0.90 L

z/h

0 x=0.95 L

x= 0.99L

-0.3

-0.5

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

*

σ

z

Figure 19. Out-of-plane normal stress distribution through-the-thickness of CC-SS plate, (a)

[90/0/0/0] composite plate, (b) [0/core/0] sandwich plate, y ¼ W/2, W ¼ 2L ¼ 6h.

34 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

The edges of the plate at x ¼ 0 and x ¼ L are clamped and the edges at y ¼ 0 and

y ¼ W are simply supported. This set of edge condition is shown by CC-SS. The

top surface of the plate is subjected to transverse load q=q0sin(py/W) and the

length and width of the plate are chosen as W ¼ 2L ¼ 6h.

0.5

0.3

x=0.75 L

x=0.90 L

x=0.95 L

z/h

0

x=0.99 L

x= 0.995L

-0.3

-0.5

-1.2 -1 -0.8 -0.6 * -0.4 -0.2 0

σ

xz

Figure 20. Out-of-plane shear stress distribution at vicinity of clamped edge of CCSS [0/core/0]

sandwich plate at y ¼ W/2, W ¼ 2L ¼ 6h.

0.5

0.3

x= 0.5L

x=0.75 L

z/h

0 x=0.90 L

x=0.95 L

x=L

-0.3

-0.5

-6 -4 -2 0 2 4

σ*

x

plate, (y ¼ 0.5W).

Ahmadi 35

The distributions of the out-of-plane shear stress rxz along the length of [0/core/

0] and [90/0/0/90] plates at the mid plane, the core–face interfaces and the top

surface of plate at section y ¼ 0.5W are shown in Figure 18. As seen, the maximum

of out-of-plane shear stress rxz is at the clamped edges (x ¼ 0, x ¼ L) of the plate.

Distributions of rz in [0/core/0] sandwich plate and [90/0/0/0] composite plate

with CC-SS boundary conditions are presented in Figure 19. This figure shows the

distribution of rz through the plate thickness along the lines (x ¼ 0.5L, y ¼ 0.5W,

z), (x ¼ 0.94L, y ¼ 0.5W, z), (x ¼ 0.98L, y ¼ 0.5W, z) and (x ¼ 0.99L, y ¼ 0.5W, z).

The pattern of distribution of rz in the vicinity of the clamped edge is completely

different than its distribution in the plate center. Also the distribution of out-of-

plane shear stress rxz through-the-thickness of [0/core/0] sandwich plate in the

vicinity of clamped edge is shown in Figure 20.

Through-the-thickness distribution of the in-plane stress rx in [0/core/0] plate is

shown in Figure 21. At the center of the plate, rx is tensile on the top surface and is

compressive on the bottom surface of the plate, and in the vicinity of clamped

edge, rx is compressive on the top surface and is tensile on the bottom surface of

the plate.

Figure 22 shows the through-the-thickness distribution of the out-of-plane

shear stress rxz in the vicinity of clamped edge, x ¼ 0.99L, of sandwich and com-

posite plates for various layer stackings.

In order to study the effect of boundary conditions on the distribution of out-

of-plane stresses, the distribution of rz and rxz along the length of [90/core/0]

sandwich plate for FF-SS, SS-SS, CC-SS and CF-SS edge conditions is presented

in Figures 23 and 24, respectively.

0.5

0.3 [0/core/0]

[90/core/0]

[90/core/90]

[0/core/90]

z/h

0 [90/0/0/90]

[0/90/90/0]

-0.3

-0.5

-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0

σ*

xz

Figure 22. Distribution of rxz at the vicinity of clamped edge (x ¼ 0.99L) in CCSS plates with

various layer stackings (y ¼ 0.5W).

36 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

(a) 4

z=0.5hc,FF-SS

3 z=0.5hc,SS-SS

z=0.5hc,CC-SS

z=0.5hc,CF-SS

2

σz

*

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

x/L

(b) 1

0.5

z=0, FF-SS

0

σz

*

z=0, SS-SS

z=0, CC-SS

z=0, CF-SS

-0.5

-1

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

x/L

Figure 23. Effect of boundary conditions on the distribution of out-of-plane normal stress rz in

[90/core/0] sandwich plate, (a) rz at z ¼ 0.5hc, (b) rz at z ¼ 0.

Singularity of stresses

Some researchers reported the singularity of stresses at the points that the inter-

faces of layers with dissimilar mechanical properties intersect at the laminate edges.

These points are named interface-corner points [42]. In the previous sections, it is

seen that the out-of-plane stresses increase sharply at the interface-corner points.

Hence, the possible singularity of predictions for out-of-plane stresses at these

points is investigated in this section.

The distribution of stress along the radial distance r from a singularity can be

expressed as [36] and [42]

Ahmadi 37

(a)

0.8 z=0.5hc,FF-SS

z=0.5hc,SS-SS

0.6

z=0.5hc,CC-SS

0.4 z=0.5hc,CF-SS

0.2

σz

*

-0.2

-0.4

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

x/L

(b) 1

z=-0.5hc,FF-SS

z=-0.5hc,SS-SS

0.5 z=-0.5hc,CC-SS

z=-0.5hc,CF-SS

σxz

*

-0.5

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

x/L

Figure 24. Effect of boundary conditions on the distribution of out-of-plane shear stress rxz in

[90/core/0] plate, (a) rxz at z ¼ 0.5hc, (b) rxz at z ¼ 0.5hc.

0.3

Calculated

0.2

Fitted

0.1

0

*

log σz

-0.1

-0.2

-0.3

logσ*=- 0.7375logx- 1.87

z

-0.4

-0.5

-3 -2.8 -2.6 -2.4 -2.2 -2 -1.8

log x

Figure 25. logr*z-logx plot at the vicinity of free edge (x ¼ 0, y ¼ W/2, z ¼ hc/2) of [0/core/0]

sandwich plate (W ¼ 2L ¼ 6h).

38 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

where A and k are constants and o(r-kþ1) represents the terms of order –kþ1 and

higher terms. k shows the order of singularity of stress. It is clear that in very small

distance to singularity, the singular terms is dominant and r can be approximat-

ed as

r ¼ Ark

(46)

logr ¼ logA klogr

-0.22 Calculated

Fitted

-0.24

log σxz

* -0.26

-0.28

logσ* =- 0.092logx- 0.5154

xz

-0.3

-0.32

-3.4 -3.2 -3 -2.8 -2.6 -2.4 -2.2 -2

log x

Figure 26. logr*xz-logx plot at the vicinity of clamped edge (x ¼ 0, y ¼ W/2, z¼hc/2) of [0/core/

0] sandwich plate (W ¼ 2L ¼ 6h).

0.2

Calculated, z=-hc/2

0.1 Fitted, z=-hc/2

log σ* =- 0.1246 log x- 0.3661 Calculated, z=hc/2

xz

0 Fitted, z=hc/2

log σ*xz

-0.1

-0.2

xz

-0.4

-3.1 -3 -2.9 -2.8 -2.7 -2.6 -2.5 -2.4 -2.3 -2.2 -2.1

log x

Figure 27. Log r*xz-logx plot at the vicinity of clamped edge (x ¼ 0, y ¼ W/2, z¼hc/2) of [0/

core/90] sandwich plate (W ¼ 3L ¼ 6h).

Ahmadi 39

Hence, in the vicinity of the singularity, logr versus logr plot can be considered

by a line with slope –k. Therefore, the logr–logr plot near the singular point must

be fitted by a line as equation (46). If the linear distribution with negative slope

fitted with the computed stress well, the stress may be singular [42]. This procedure

is named log-linear procedure [42], in which unknown k and A can be obtained

from the fitted line.

As seen in Figure 9, rz increases sharply at the free edge in core–face interface

z=hc/2 of [0/core/0] sandwich plate. Hence, the log-linear procedure is employed

in Figure 25 to study the singularity of stress at point (x ¼ 0, y ¼ W/2, z=hc/2) of

(a) 6.2

5.8

5.6

z

5.4

5.2

5

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

x

(b) 11.8

11.6

11.4

11.2

z

11

10.8

10.6

10.4

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

x

Figure 28. Exaggerated deformed xz cross-section of the sandwich plate (y ¼ W/2), a) [90/core/

0], b) [0/core/0], h ¼ 1 mm, b ¼ 2a ¼ 6h, q0¼1 MPa, Exaggeration factor ¼500.

40 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

axis at the core–face interface. It is seen in Figure 25 that the logr*z-log x plot is

linear in the vicinity of the free edge along the core–face interface, z=hc/2. In

Figure 25, the slope of fitted line to the logr*z vs. log x plot is 0.7375.

Therefore, a singularity of order k=0.7375 can be estimated for this point.

The singularity of rxz at the same point, i.e. (x ¼ 0, y ¼ W/2, z=hc/2) in the

clamped edge of [0/core/0] sandwich plate with the same dimension and CF-SS

boundary condition is investigated in Figure 26. The slope of the fitted line to log

r*xz-log x plot is 0.092, so the order of singularity of rxz at this point is estimated

to be k=0.092.

The logr*xz-logx plot for [0/core/90] sandwich plate (W ¼ 2L ¼ 6h) with CF-SS

boundary conditions in the vicinity of the clamped edge at z=hc/2 and z=hc/2 is

presented in Figure 27. As seen in Figure 27, the slope of the fitted line for 0/core

interface (z=-hc/2) is k=0.1183 and the slope of fitted line for core/90 interface

(z=hc/2) is k=0.1246.

Deformed shape

The exaggerated deformed shape of xz cross-section of [90/core/0] and [0/core/0]

sandwich plates (W ¼ 2L ¼ 6h) with FF-SS boundary conditions in section y ¼ W/2

is shown in Figure 28. The deformation of the plate is exaggerated as 500 times.

Figure 28 shows the effect of the stacking sequence on the deformation of the free

edges of the plates.

Conclusions

A new formulation is presented for the analysis of three-dimensional and edge

stresses in sandwich plates which are subjected to distributed transverse loading

conditions. Employing the weak formulation, the equilibrium equations of elastic-

ity are discretized in terms of the displacements. An analytical solution is presented

for the governing equations for the plate that two opposite edges are simply

supported and other edges are free, simply or clamped. In order to increase the

accuracy in prediction of stresses, a one-step stress recovery scheme is used to

compute the out-of-plane stresses. The predictions of present method for stresses

and displacements are examined by the available predictions of exact elasticity

solutions in the literature and very good agreements are achieved. The results

are focused on the prediction of boundary layer stresses in the vicinity of free

and clamped edges of sandwich plates. It is seen that the presented formulation

can predict the concentration of stresses at the interface of layers in the vicinity of

edges. The log-linear procedure is employed to study the order of singularity of

stress at free and clamped edge of the plate.

Ahmadi 41

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, author-

ship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication

of this article.

ORCID iD

Isa Ahmadi http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3327-1504

References

1. Pipes RB and Pagano NJ. Interlaminar stresses in composite materials under uniform

axial extension. J Compos Mater 1970; 4: 538–548.

2. Pagano NJ. Exact solutions for rectangular bidirectional composites and sandwich

plates. J Compos Mater 1970; 4: 20–34.

3. Altus E, Rotem A and Shmueli M. Free edge effect in angle ply laminates – a new three-

dimensional finite difference solution. J Compos Mater 1980; 14: 21–30.

4. Wang SS and Choi I. Boundary-layer effects in composite laminates. Part I: free-edge

stress singularities. J Appl Mech 1982; 49: 541–548.

5. Wang SS and Choi I. Boundary layer effects in composite laminates. Part II: free-edge

stress solutions and basic characteristic. J Appl Mech 1982; 49: 549–560.

6. Kassapoglou C and Lagace PA. An efficient method for the calculation of interlaminar

stresses in composite materials. J Appl Mech1986; 53: 744–750.

7. Lee CY and Liu D. Interlaminar stress continuity theory for laminated composite anal-

ysis. AIAA J 1991; 29: 2010–2012.

8. Roubins DH and Reddy JN. Modelling of thick composites using a layerwise laminate

theory. Int J Numer Meth Eng 1993; 36: 655–677.

9. Kim T and Atluri SN. Interlaminar stresses in composite laminates under out-of-plane

shear/bending. AIAA J 1994; 32: 1700–1708.

10. Zhu C and Lam YC. A Rayleigh-Ritz solution for local stresses in composite laminates.

Compos Sci Technol 1998; 58: 447–461.

11. Mistou S, Karama M, Lorrain B and Faye JP. Analysis of sandwich composite beams

with a new transverse shear stress continuity model. J Sandwich Struct Mater 1999;

1: 96–110.

12. Vel SS and Batra RC. Analytical solution for rectangular thick laminated plates sub-

jected to arbitrary boundary conditions. AIAA J 1999; 37: 1464–1473.

13. Mittelstedt C and Becker W. Three-dimensional closed-form analysis of the stress field

at rectangular corners of layered plates. Arch Appl Mech 2003; 73: 63–74.

14. MistoU S And Karama M. Edge effects on sandwich composite by analytical, finite

element, and experimental approach. J Sandwich Struct Mater 2004; 6: 343–355.

15. Mittelstedt C and Becker W. Free-edge effects in composite laminates. Appl Mech Rev

2007; 60: 217–245.

16. Duong NT and Hung ND. Interlaminar stresses and delamination of composite lami-

nates under extension and bending. Struct Eng Mech 2007; 25: 733–751.

42 Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 0(0)

17. Zenkour AM. Three-dimensional elasticity solution for uniformly loaded cross-ply lam-

inates and sandwich plates. J Sandwich Struct Mater 2007; 9: 213–238.

18. Kant T, Gupta AB, Pendhari SS, et al. Elasticity solution for cross-ply composite and

sandwich laminates. Compos Struct 2008; 83: 13–24.

19. Kashtalyan M and Menshykova M. Three-dimensional elasticity solution for sandwich

panels with a functionally graded core. Compos Struct 2009; 87: 36–43.

20. Miri AK and Nosier A. Out-of-plane stresses in composite shell panels: layerwise and

elasticity solutions. Acta Mech 2011; 220: 15–32.

21. Tahani M and Andakhshideh A. Interlaminar stresses in thick rectangular laminated

plates with arbitrary laminations and boundary conditions under transverse loads.

Compos Struct 2012; 94: 1793–1804.

22. Rao MP, Harursampath D and Renji K. Prediction of inter-laminar stresses in com-

posite honeycomb sandwich panels under mechanical loading using variational asymp-

totic method. Compos Struct 2012; 94: 2523–2537.

23. Sarvestani HY and Sarvestani MY. Free-edge stress analysis of general composite

laminates under extension, torsion and bending. Appl Math Modell 2012; 36: 1570–1588.

24. Viyand DM, Sarvestani HY and Nosier A. Stress analysis in symmetric composite

laminates subjected to shearing loads. Int J Mech Sci 2013; 75: 16–25.

25. Thai ND, D’Ottavio M and Caron JF. Bending analysis of laminated and sandwich

plates using a layer-wise stress model. Compos Struct 2013; 96: 135–142.

26. Khandelwal RP, Chakrabarti A and Bhargava P. Accurate calculation of transverse

shear stresses for soft-core sandwich laminates. Acta Mech 2014; 225: 2877–2891.

27. Alibeigloo A. Three-dimensional thermo-elasticity solution of sandwich cylindrical

panel with functionally graded core. Compos Struct 2014; 107: 458–468.

28. Kang WB, Li YD, Chen W, Wang X, et al. Interlaminar stresses in piezoelectric lam-

inated composite shells under electric, thermal and mechanical loads. Eur J Mech A/

Solids 2015; 54: 198–208.

29. Ahmadi I. Edge stresses analysis in thick composite panels subjected to axial loading

using layerwise formulation. Struct Eng Mech 2016; 57: 733–762.

30. Huang B, Wang J, Du J, et al. Extended Kantorovich method for local stresses in

composite laminates upon polynomial stress functions. Acta Mech Sin 2016;

32: 854–865.

31. Dhanesh N, Kapuria S and Achary GGS. Accurate prediction of three-dimensional free

edge stress field in composite laminates using mixed-field multiterm extended

Kantorovich method. Acta Mech 2016; 228: 2895–2919.

32. Antretter T, Fischer FD, Rammerstorfer FG and Zickler GA. Free edges at bilayered

compounds-a short analytical and numerical reconsideration. Arch Appl Mech 2016;

86: 2053–2061.

33. Ahmadi I. Interlaminar stress analysis in general thick composite cylinder subjected to

nonuniform distributed radial pressure. Mech Adv Mater Struct 2017; 24: 773–788.

34. Atashipour SR, Girhammar UA and Al-Emrani M. Exact Lévy-type solutions for

bending of thick laminated orthotropic plates based on 3-D elasticity and shear defor-

mation theories. Compos Struct 2017; 163: 129–151.

35. Goodsell J and Pipes RB. Free-edge interlaminar stresses in angle-ply laminates: a

family of analytic solutions. J Appl Mech 2016; 83: 051010

Ahmadi 43

36. Shah PH and Batra RC. Stress singularities and transverse stresses near edges of doubly

curved laminated shells using TSNDT and stress recovery scheme. Eur J Mech A/Solids

2017; 63: 68–83.

37. Ahmadi I. Edge stresses analysis in laminated thick sandwich cylinder subjected to

distributed hygrothermal loading. J Sandwich Struct Mater 2018; 20: 425–461.

38. Wang X and Yuan Z. Accurate stress analysis of sandwich panels by the differential

quadrature method. Appl Math Modell 2017; 43: 548–565.

39. Hajikazemi M and Van Paepegem W. A variational model for free-edge interlaminar

stress analysis in general symmetric and thin-ply composite laminates. Compos Struct

2018; 184: 443–451.

40. Ahmadi I. Free edge stress prediction in thick laminated cylindrical shell panel subjected

to bending moment. Appl Math Modell 2019; 65: 507–525.

41. Khdeir AA and Reddy JN. Analytical solutions of refined plate theories of cross-ply

composite laminates. J Pressure Vessel Technol 1991; 113: 570–578.

42. Raju IS and Crews JH. Jr., Interlaminar stress singularities at a straight free edge in

composite laminates. Comput Struct 1981; 14: 21–28.

- LECTURE 5 to 7 - Axial LoadsUploaded byHowell Tungol
- crane-1Uploaded byarunbe1988
- MECHANICS OF SOLIDSUploaded bySuket
- Punching Shear in Pad Foundations on RockUploaded byMohan Manickam
- Axial-Shear-Flexure Interaction Approach for Displacement-Based Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete ElementsUploaded byFransisca Wijaya
- 3 Dr Mohsen Samira EJER4309Uploaded bySaad Al Hely
- finalreport-170308170043Uploaded byChandan Vats
- Chap 05Uploaded byKhaled Abdelbaki
- Cracks & Crack Control in Concrete Structures-2Uploaded byKiran Dodderi
- ME 2254 — STRENGTH OF MATERIALS april.may 2011Uploaded byKarthi San
- Casing burst strength after casing wear.pdfUploaded byBezawit Temesgen Belete
- Fillet Weld Strength Calculation Example for Welded Connection Subjected to Bending.pdfUploaded bypipestress
- Shear KeyUploaded byVasanthakumar
- Side Girt Design-rwphUploaded byasvenk309
- A Review of Low-Velocity Impact on Sandwich StructuresUploaded byAshley Williams
- n 59018491Uploaded byozkanhasan
- Eurocode 2 Part 1,6 - DDENV 1992-1-6-1994.pdfUploaded bymarineugen
- White Paper UHX.PDFUploaded byMeravigliorso76
- MEE 251 S14 Assignment SheetUploaded byAbram Bartlett
- Weld Stress CalculationsUploaded byayush
- StrengthUploaded byMUHAMMAD NURNAJMI
- FFC Presentation Template FinalUploaded byazeezsadiq
- Design of Shear Connector for StringerUploaded bySujay Santra
- FrontUploaded byAlessandro Signori
- wu2005.pdfUploaded byChikh Yassine
- AC DesignUploaded byRauMuống
- Instrumentation and FE Analysis of a Large-Span Culvert Built under a Railway, in FinlandUploaded byTeo Peng Keat
- Fernandez 07 AUploaded byBatisxuta Michael
- Kalo Gia ShearUploaded byPavlos Eleftheriadis
- jl54-48Uploaded byRahil Qureshi

- B.Tech. Engineering Technology.pdfUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Seismic hazard estimation in Peninsular IndiaUploaded byNarayana Iyengar
- Review of all GMPEs.pdfUploaded byyasirkazmi856
- Cyclic Pushover Analysis Procedure to Estimate Seismic Demands for BuildingsUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Stability of Steel SheelUploaded byAJBAJB
- 1976-ccr-hillerborg-p773.pdfUploaded byNilay Gandhi
- Cyclic Pushover Analysis procedure to estimate seismic demands for buildings.pdfUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- ACI 350.3-06 Seismic Design of Liquid-Containing Concrete Structures and CommentaryUploaded byPaul Marion Demapelis
- Guidelines ChairUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Cheng Kiitipornchai 2000 Prestressed Composite LaminatesUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Wetherhold_1994_Piezoelectric PZTepoxy Composites for Controlling Torsional MotionUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Cho Kim 2000 Extension Bending Twisting ThermalUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Mannini-Gaudenzi-2004-Higher Order FE-piezo Actuated Free Edge StressesUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Zhang Etal_2006 Extension Thermal Ply CrackUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Yang-2006-Interlayer Stress in Laminate Beam of Piezoelectric and Elastic MaterialsUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Najafabdi-tahani-2007-Analytical Determination of Free Edge Stresses in CompositeUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Davi-Milazzo-2002 -Stress and Electric Fields in Piezoelectric Composite Laminates - EJBEUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Fco TerminiUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- FLorence HotelUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- ValiUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Complet system.pdfUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Full Page PhotoUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Thermal BucklingUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- cryogenic03-12Uploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- ts2016Uploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- F22.1 MaylandUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Modeling and Analysis of Discretely Supported Thin–Walled Silo Shells With Stringer Stiffeners at the SupportsUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- From Silo Phenomena to Load ModelsUploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW
- Automated Analysis and Design of Thin–Walled Metal Tank and Silo Structures#Gugg_silodesign_prag2003Uploaded byAnonymous wWOWz9UnW

- Bayesian-Statistics Final 20140416 3Uploaded bymuralidharan
- May2003 ExamPUploaded byebtrain
- MIT Exam1 s14 SolutionsUploaded byRoumen Guha
- 06-103r4 Implementation Specification for Geographic Information - Simple Feature Access - Part 1 Common Architecture v1.2.1Uploaded byrafaelmar
- Experimental DesignUploaded byMessy Uzunov
- daily lesson plan math february6to102017Uploaded byapi-302677510
- Solutions to Limit ProblemsUploaded byVince Cinco Parcon
- Harmonizing DiversityUploaded byMichael Fischer
- Mechanics L2 With SolutionUploaded byy shuang
- Assignment3 .U28.ausama.2012.Uploaded byOsama Hassan
- ToolboxUploaded byGemin Spacca
- Definite IntegralsUploaded byIodes
- BB-OCS design Manual.pdfUploaded byNazrul Aidil
- Olympiad Model Question Paper Class 1Uploaded byrajendra
- UW MATH STAT395 Continuous RrvUploaded byTerence Tay
- SolidWorks 2013 TechniquesUploaded byRaul Sigfrid
- Errata Cassell Variational Methods With Applications in Science and Engineering2Uploaded byMatheus Basílio
- proving -m9;p 424Uploaded byapi-279213523
- Calculus 08 Techniques of IntegrationUploaded byDeny Purwita Putra
- 2 d Collisions 2Uploaded bymohsin_shiraz
- Accuracy in Measurement - MathBitsNotebook(A1 - CCSS Math).pdfUploaded byDionel Rizo
- SAT Level 2 Practice Test 15Uploaded byLeonardo Florenzi
- FFT Basics and Case Study Using Multi-Instrument D1002Uploaded byPerti Man
- FormsUploaded byelankumarank
- So You Want to Go to Oxbridge Tell Me About a Banana 5th EditionUploaded byMariyah Qarinah Lia
- Pietriga Anna - Paraconsistent Logics, ConventionalismUploaded byKK-bookslover
- c LabmanualUploaded byChintha Venu
- Financial_Econometrics_2013-2014.pdfUploaded byGabo
- 3 5 working with sets notesUploaded byapi-295637237
- SBC URI EscolaDeInverno Workshop 10-08-2014Uploaded byMarcel Santana