International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 630–643

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Mechanical Sciences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmecsci

Stochastic buckling analysis of sandwich plates: The importance of higher

order modes
R.R. Kumar a,∗, T. Mukhopadhyay b,∗, K.M. Pandey a, S. Dey a
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Silchar, India
b
Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Keywords: The stochastic buckling behaviour of sandwich plates is presented considering uncertain system parameters (ma-
Sandwich plate terial and geometric uncertainty). The higher-order-zigzag theory (HOZT) coupled with stochastic finite element
Stochastic buckling analysis model is employed to evaluate the random first three buckling loads. A cubic in-plane displacement variation is
Artificial neural network
considered for both face sheets and core while quadratic transverse displacement is considered within the core
Higher order zigzag theory
and assumed constant in the faces beyond the core. The global stiffness matrix is stored in a single array by using
Higher order buckling modes
skyline technique and stochastic buckling equation is solved by simultaneous iteration technique. The individual
as well as compound stochastic effect of ply-orientation angle, core thickness, face sheets thickness and material
properties (both core and laminate) of sandwich plates are considered in this study. A significant level of com-
putational efficiency is achieved by using artificial neural network (ANN) based surrogate model coupled with
the finite element approach. Statistical analyses are carried out to illustrate the results of stochastic buckling
behaviour. Normally in case of various engineering applications, the critical buckling load with the least Eigen
value is deemed to be useful. However, the results presented in this paper demonstrate the importance of consid-
ering higher order buckling modes in case of a realistic stochastic analysis. Besides that, the probabilistic results
for global stability behaviour of sandwich structures show that a significant level of variation with respect to
the deterministic values could occur due to the presence of inevitable source-uncertainty in the input parameters
demonstrating the requirement of an inclusive design paradigm considering stochastic effects.

1. Introduction structural stability in the deterministic regime. Hoff and Mautner

Sandwich structures are exhaustively employed in civil, aerospace,
automobile and marine industries as depicted in Fig. 1. The need for
superior performance and magnificent properties such as lightweight,
high durability and stiffness are the key features of such structures. In
general, sandwich structures are constructed by two upper and lower
thin but high strength face sheets material and in between, there is
a low-density thick soft-core. Such structural configuration leads to
outstanding material properties like high specific stiffness and specific
strength. Due to its inherent material randomness and manufacturing
inaccuracies along with the involvement of a large number of input
parameters, sandwich structures are often subjected to stochastic
variability. These inherent source-uncertainties should be properly
accounted so that we can have safe, realistic and inclusive design which
is not possible in case of conventional deterministic analysis.
Researchers have concentrated on the buckling behaviour of
lightweight sandwich structures over the years to investigate the
[1] and Bauld Jr [2] considered a three layered sandwich beam and
studied the buckling problem. Researchers like Sheinman and Adan
[3] used geometrical nonlinear theory on laminated beams for study-
ing the post buckling behaviour. Somers et al. [4,5] studied analytical
buckling behaviour as well as post buckling nature of the sandwich com-
posite beam whereas Sherbourne and Kabir [6] studied lateral buckling
of thin walled fibres composite beam. Li et al. [7] used symplectic super-
position method for analytical buckling analysis of free rectangular thin
plates. Cheng et al. [8] predicted the buckling load for local delamina-
tion of sandwich beam face sheet. Buckling analysis of composite beam
having symmetric angle-ply is developed by Morey et al. [9] using sim-
ple beam theory. Galuppi and Royer-Carfagni [10] worked on three lay-
ered simply supported sandwich beams and presented buckling under
compression load with viscoelastic core. Emam and Nayfeh [11] studied
the post buckling behaviour by Euler-Bernoulli beam theory. Challamel
and Girhammar [12] used Timoshenko beam-column theory and Euler-
Bernoulli theory while Fu et al. [13] considered geometric nonlinearity

∗
Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: ravi@rs.mech.student.nits.ac.in (R.R. Kumar), tanmoy.mukhopadhyay@eng.ox.ac.uk (T. Mukhopadhyay).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2018.12.016
Received 11 August 2018; Received in revised form 28 October 2018; Accepted 9 December 2018
Available online 20 December 2018
0020-7403/© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
R.R. Kumar, T. Mukhopadhyay and K.M. Pandey et al.
Fig. 1. Application portfolio of sandwich structures in various sectors.
and Timoshenko beam theory for the thermal buckling analysis. The
higher order shear deformation theories (HSDT) are used to portray the
buckling behaviour of sandwich beam by Khdeir and Reddy [14], Khdeir
[15] and Aydogdu [16,17]. Buckling analysis of axially stressed thick
elastic beam using normal deformation and higher order shear deforma-
tion is studied by Matsunaga [18,19]. Phan et al. [20] used high order
sandwich panel theory for the buckling analysis. The thermal buckling
behaviour of Timoshenko composite beam having two layers is studied
by Komijani et al. [21]. Giunta et al. [22] used Carrera’s Unified Formu-
lation to develop hierarchical theories for buckling behaviour of closed
and open cross section thin walled beams. A mathematical model is de-
veloped by Smyczynski and Blandzi [23] for the dynamic and stability
analysis of a sandwich beam having five layers. Zig-Zag theories are
used by Zhen and Wanji [24], Kapuria et al. [25] and Chakrabarti et al.
[26] to know the buckling behaviour of laminated composite sandwich
beams. First order shear deformation theory is used to develop 21°-of-
freedom element by Goyal and Kapania [27]. Timoshenko laminated
beams having thin-walled under variable forces are used by Kim and
Lee [28]. Vo et al. [29] developed FEM based sinusoidal shear deforma-
tion theory for studying the buckling behaviour in composite beams with
arbitrary lay-ups. A finite element formulation is developed by Pradeep
et al. [30] for buckling behaviour of sandwich composite beam under
thermal load. A first order shear deformation theory based isogeometric
finite element analysis is presented by Wang et al. [31] and Kahya [32].
631
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 630–643
Laminated composite struts are studied for buckling analysis by Dafedar
and Desai [33]. Hu et al. [34,35] developed a FE model by using higher
order shear deformation theory. Nonlinear generalized beam theory is
applied on cylindrical panels for buckling analysis by Silva et al. [36].
A Rayleigh-Ritz method based closed-form expression is proposed by
Gupta et al. [37] for predicting the post buckling behaviour. For an anti-
symmetrically organized laminated plate, an issues relating to buckling
under in-plane loading conditions is discussed by Leissa [38]. The four
variable shear deformation plate theory is employed by Sobhy [39] for
hygrothermal vibration and buckling analysis of FGM sandwich plates.
Higher order sandwich theory is employed for the creep buckling of
sandwich panels by Hamed and Frostig [40]. Galerkin’s method in ac-
cordance with multilayer plate theory is used for stability and vibration
analysis of sandwich plates by Dey et al. [41]. Vescovini et al. [42] stud-
ied thermal buckling considering pre buckling effect and neglecting as
well by using 2D refined model. Mantari and Monge [43] introduced
hyperbolic unified higher order shear deformation theory which is ca-
pable to model the thickness stretching effect. HSDT and Chebyshev
polynomials are used by Upadhyay and Shukla [44] for post buckling
analysis. Kolahchi [45] presented static response, natural frequencies
and buckling loads by using differential cubature (DC) method. Han
et al. [46] presented refined shear theory which is simple and accu-
rate to predict the thermal buckling response of the structure. Whereas
Samadpour et al. [47] studied vibration response of shape memory al-
R.R. Kumar, T. Mukhopadhyay and K.M. Pandey et al.
loy embedded sandwich plate which is buckled under thermal loading.
Many researchers [48–57] presented buckling, crushing and bending be-
haviour of sandwich plates and columns for different core and face-sheet
configuration. Few recent studies have specifically focused on charac-
terizing the mechanical properties of the honeycomb core [58–64] in a
sandwich panels.
A review of literature on the buckling analysis of sandwich struc-
tures reveals that most of the studies are conducted in the determinis-
tic regime. Moreover, the critical buckling load is considered predomi-
nantly citing that this leads the compromise in stability performance of
engineering structures. Some of the papers have mentioned about the
higher order buckling loads for the sake of completeness of the study.
In this paper, we aim to demonstrate the importance of considering the
higher order buckling modes in case of a realistic stochastic analysis
when the inevitable source-uncertainties are accounted. Besides that,
this paper would shed light on the effect of such source-uncertainties on
the global buckling behaviour of sandwich plates in general following a
coupled ANN based FE-MCS approach (ANN – artificial neural network;
FE – finite element; MCS – Monte Carlo Simulation).
Because of the inherent complexity, laminated composite and sand-
wich structures are difficult to manufacture accurately according to ex-
act design specifications, resulting in undesirable uncertainties. The ran-
dom uncertainties involve material properties of core and face sheets,
fiber parameters of the individual constituent laminae of the face sheets
and thickness of the plate. Because of the randomness in geometry
and material properties of sandwich structures, the structural matri-
ces become stochastic in nature. The composite materials are generally
made of fiber and matrix through an appropriate fabrication process in
manufacturing with three basic steps namely tape, layup and curing.
Since the mechanical properties of constituent material vary statisti-
cally, the source of uncertainties in composite material properties are
produced from inherent randomness in material properties as well as
from uncertainties in the fabrication parameters. The uncertainties in-
curred during the layup process are due to the misalignment of ply-
orientation. Typical uncertainties incurred from the curing process are
intralaminate voids, incomplete curing of resin, excess resin between
plies, excess matrix voids and porosity and variation in ply thickness
[65–69]. These variables are statistical in nature; therefore, the prop-
erties of composite materials should be quantified probabilistically. In
this article, the individual and compound effect of such probabilistic
variability in the input parameters are considered in terms of stochas-
ticity to quantify their global influence.
It is important to note that a finite element approach is suitable for
analyzing complex structures (such as sandwich structure with the face
sheets made of composite laminates), not analytical approaches – which
may not be possible at all in many cases. Following several decades of
deterministic studies related to the static, dynamic and stability of sand-
wich structures, the aspect of considering the effect of uncertainty in
material and structural attributes have recently started receiving due at-
tention from the scientific community. Both intrusive and non-intrusive
methods could be adopted to quantify uncertainty in a structure. The
major drawback in an intrusive method can be identified as the require-
ment of intensive analytical derivation and lack of the ability to obtain
complete probabilistic description of the response quantities for systems
with complex and compound probabilistic effects. Moreover, many of
these approaches are valid only for a low degree of stochasticity in the
input parameters. A non-intrusive method based on Monte Carlo simu-
⎛𝜎𝑥𝑥 (𝜛)⎞ ⎡𝑄11 (𝜛)
⎜ 𝜎𝑦𝑦 (𝜛) ⎟ ⎢𝑄21 (𝜛)
⎜ ⎟ ⎢
⎜ 𝜎𝑧𝑧 (𝜛) ⎟ = ⎢𝑄31 (𝜛)
⎜ 𝜏𝑥𝑦 (𝜛) ⎟ ⎢𝑄41 (𝜛)
⎜ 𝜏 (𝜛) ⎟ ⎢ 0
⎜ 𝑥𝑧 ⎟ ⎢
⎝ 𝜏𝑦𝑧 (𝜛) ⎠ ⎣ 0
632
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 630–643
lation (MCS), as adopted in this paper, can obtain comprehensive proba-
bilistic descriptions for the response quantities of the structure and it can
account for much higher degree of stochasticity in the input parameters
[70].
A MCS based non-intrusive method for uncertainty quantification
has the advantage of obtaining complete probabilistic description of
the global responses. However, MCS based approaches involving fi-
nite element simulations are computationally quite expensive as it re-
quires thousands of realizations to be carried out. To mitigate this la-
cuna and be benefitted from the capabilities of MCS simultaneously, we
would adopt a coupled simulation approach by utilizing ANN model as
a surrogate of the expensive finite element model [71–73]. Here (i.e.
in a surrogate based simulation approach [74–77]) we do not com-
pletely replace the finite element model of sandwich structures by ANN,
but the function of ANN is to complement the capability of finite ele-
ment model in a situation where thousands of simulations are required
to be carried out. The ANN model is first formed based on few fi-
nite element simulations corresponding to the optimally chosen design
points, thereby the constructed ANN model is used to carry out the
MCS. Thus the ANN based MCS approach is a practical and compu-
tationally viable method to obtain complete probabilistic description
of the buckling loads. A set of weighted coefficients and basis func-
tions in ANN leads to regression data and finally creates an efficient
input/output relation. Input space is partitioned into regions by using
regression equation, which makes ANN specifically suitable for prob-
lems of high dimensional spaces. Thus ANN fulfils the need of effi-
cient mapping tool required for the input and response of large num-
bered stochastic input parameter FE model. The eigenvalue problem
(random) for buckling analysis would be solved by using an improved
higher-order zigzag theory considering stochasticity due to the individ-
ual and compound effects of different random input parameters con-
cerning geometric and material attributes. This paper, hereafter is or-
ganized in different sections as follows: Section 2 describes the theo-
retical formulation for the probabilistic buckling analysis of sandwich
composite plates; Section 3 presents random input representation and
surrogate based uncertainty quantification; Section 4 presents numeri-
cal results for stochastic buckling loads; and finally Section 5 presents a
summary and perspective of this article along with the scope of future
research.
2. Theoretical formulation
2.1. Stochastic buckling analysis of sandwich plates
The Kirchhoff’s hypothesis is employed to analyze the behaviour
of thin plates undergoing small deformations. For sandwich plate
having face-sheets on both side of core, it is assumed that normal re-
main straight to the deformed reference plane. Consider ‘n’ number of
thin laminated soft core sandwich plate (Fig. 2). The stress–strain re-
lationship [78] for sandwich plate having an orthotropic lamina (say
kth layer) having some fiber orientation angle ‘𝜃’ with respect to struc-
tural axes system (X-Y-Z) can be expressed as {𝜎(ϖ)}={Qk (ϖ)}{𝜀(ϖ)},
where {𝜎(ϖ)}, {𝜀(ϖ)}, {Qk (ϖ)} are the stress vector, the strain vector
and the transformed rigidity matrix of kth lamina, respectively. Here
the symbol ϖ indicates the stochasticity of respective input parameters.
The core and face-sheet thickness is denoted by tc and tf respectively
and the total
𝑄12 (𝜛) 𝑄13 (𝜛) 𝑄14 (𝜛) 0 0 ⎤ ⎧𝜀𝑥𝑥 (𝜛)⎫
⎪ ⎪
𝑄22 (𝜛) 𝑄23 (𝜛) 𝑄24 (𝜛) 0 0 ⎥ ⎪ 𝜀𝑦𝑦 (𝜛) ⎪
⎥ ⎪ 𝜀𝑧𝑧 (𝜛) ⎪
𝑄32 (𝜛) 𝑄33 (𝜛) 𝑄34 (𝜛) 0 0 ⎥
⎨ 𝛾 (𝜛) ⎬ (1)
𝑄42 (𝜛) 𝑄43 (𝜛) 𝑄44 (𝜛) 0 0 ⎥ ⎪ 𝑥𝑦 ⎪
0 0 0 𝑄55 (𝜛) 𝑄56 (𝜛)⎥⎥ ⎪ 𝛾𝑥𝑧 (𝜛) ⎪
⎪ 𝛾 (𝜛) ⎪
0 0 0 𝑄65 (𝜛) 𝑄66 (𝜛)⎦ 𝐾 ⎩ 𝑦𝑧 ⎭
R.R. Kumar, T. Mukhopadhyay and K.M. Pandey et al. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 630–643

ment for core, upper layer facesheet and lower layer facesheet can be
expressed by Eqs. (4), (5), and (6) respectively as

𝑧(𝑧 + 𝑡𝑙 ) (𝑧 + 𝑡𝑙 )(𝑡𝑢 − 𝑧) 𝑧(𝑡𝑢 − 𝑧)

𝑊 (𝜛 ) = 𝑤 (𝜛 ) + 𝑤 0 (𝜛 ) + 𝑤 (𝜛 )
𝑡𝑢 (𝑡𝑢 + 𝑡𝑙 ) 𝑢 𝑡𝑙 𝑡𝑢 −𝑡𝑙 (𝑡𝑢 + 𝑡𝑙 ) 𝑙
(4)

𝑊 (𝜛 ) = 𝑤𝑢 (𝜛 ) (5)

𝑊 (𝜛 ) = 𝑤𝑙 (𝜛 ) (6)
Fig. 2. Soft core sandwich plate.
where, wu (ϖ), wo (ϖ), wl (ϖ) are transverse displacements at upper, mid-
dle and lower layer of the core. For finite element analysis, we are con-
sidering an isoparametric element having nine-nodes and eleven degree
thickness (t) is given by t = tc + 2tf . Fig. 3 represents the in-plane dis-
of freedom.
placement field where Φx is the rotation of facing in x-z plane and Ψx
For structural deformation strain-displacement relation can be ex-
is the rotation of core in x-z plane. The in-plane displacement fields are
pressed as
expressed as
[
𝑛𝑢 −1 𝜕𝑈 (𝜛) 𝜕𝑉 (𝜛) 𝜕𝑊 (𝜛) 𝜕𝑈 (𝜛) 𝜕𝑉 (𝜛) 𝜕𝑈 (𝜛)
∑( ) ( ) 𝑘 {𝜀̄ (𝜛)} = +
𝑈 𝑋 = 𝑢 0 + 𝑧 𝜃𝑥 + 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑘 (𝜛 )𝐻 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑢𝑘 𝛽𝑥𝑢
𝑢 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
]
𝑘=1 𝜕𝑊 (𝜛) 𝜕𝑉 (𝜛) 𝜕𝑊 (𝜛)
𝑛𝑙 −1 + + (7)
∑( ) ( ) 𝑚 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑧 𝜕𝑥
+ 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑙𝑚 𝐻 −𝑧 + 𝑧𝑙𝑚 𝛽𝑥𝑙 + 𝛼𝑥 𝑧 2 + 𝜓 𝑥 𝑧 3 (2)
𝑚=1 i.e. {𝜀̄ (𝜛)} = [𝐻(𝜛)]{𝜀(𝜛)}
where, [H] is unit step function. In present study nine noded
𝑛𝑢 −1
∑( ) ( ) 𝑘 isoparametric element with 11 field variables (uo , vo , wo , 𝜃 x , 𝜃 y , uu ,
𝑉 𝑋 = 𝑣 0 + 𝑧 𝜃𝑦 + 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑢𝑘 𝐻 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑢𝑘 𝛽𝑦𝑢 vu , wu , ul , vl and wl ) per node is considered. The generalized displace-
𝑘=1 ment vector {S(ϖ)} at any point can be expressed as
𝑛𝑙 −1
∑( ) ( ) 𝑚 𝑛
+ 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑙𝑚 𝐻 −𝑧 + 𝑧𝑙𝑚 𝛽𝑦𝑙 + 𝛼𝑦 𝑧 2 + 𝜓 𝑦 𝑧 3 (3) ∑
{𝑆(𝜛)} = 𝑁𝑖 (𝜛)𝑆𝑖 (𝜛) (8)
𝑚=1
𝑘=1
where, the in-plane displacement of a point in X and Y direction on
where, {S} = {uo vo wo 𝜃 x 𝜃 y uu vu wu ul vl wl }T by imposing the
mid-surface can be represented by (u0 , v0 ) respectively, and rotation
condition of transverse shear stress continuity at the interface between
of normal to mid-plane about Y and X axis are shown by (𝜃 x , 𝜃 y ) re-
layers and utilizing zero transverse shear stress condition at bottom and
spectively. (nu , nl ) are number of upper and lower layer, respectively
top surface along with u = ul , v = vl , at the bottom and u = uu , v = vu at
while (𝛼 x , 𝛼 y , 𝜓 x , 𝜓 y ) are the higher order unknown co-efficient and
𝑘 , 𝛽 𝑚 , 𝛽 𝑘 , 𝛽 𝑚 ) are slope of kth and mth layer corresponding to upper
the top of plate. The displacement vector corresponding to ith node is
(𝛽𝑥𝑢 𝑦𝑢 𝑥𝑙 𝑦𝑙 denoted by Si , shape function associated with ith node by Ni and number
and lower layer, respectively. 𝐻(𝑧 − 𝑧𝑢𝑘 ) and 𝐻(−𝑧 + 𝑧𝑙𝑚 ) are Heaviside of nodes per element by n. By using Eq. (8), the strain vector can be
step function. expressed as
Transverse displacement is varying quadrilaterally through the core
thickness and is constant over the face sheets. The transverse displace- {𝜀(𝜛)} = [𝐴(𝜛)]{𝑆(𝜛)} (9)

Fig. 3. Sandwich plate cross-sectional deformation.

633
R.R. Kumar, T. Mukhopadhyay and K.M. Pandey et al. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 630–643

where, [A] is Cartesian strain–displacement matrix. The expression for

elemental potential energy (PE) can be expressed as

𝑃 𝐸 = 𝑈𝑠 − 𝑈𝑒𝑥𝑡
1 𝑇
= {𝑆 }𝑇 [𝐴(𝜛 )] [𝐸 (𝜛 )] [𝐴(𝜛 )]{𝑆 }𝑑 𝑥𝑑 𝑦
2∬
1 𝑇
− {𝑆 }𝑇 [𝐴(𝜛 )] [𝐺(𝜛 )] [𝐴(𝜛 )]{𝑆 }𝑑 𝑥𝑑 𝑦
2∬
1 1 [ ]
= {𝑆 }𝑇 [𝐾𝑒 (𝜛)]{𝑆 } − 𝜆{𝑆 }𝑇 𝐾𝐺 (𝜛) {𝑆 } (10)
2 2

where Us and Uext are the strain energy and external in-plane
load energy, respectively. [Ke (ϖ)] = ∫ [A(ϖ)]T [E(ϖ)] [A(ϖ)] dx and
[KG (ϖ)] = ∫ [A(ϖ)]T [G(ϖ)] [A(ϖ)] dx. Random strain displacement
matrix is denoted by [A(ϖ)] while stochastic elastic stiffness matrix
and geometric stiffness matrix is denoted by [Ke (ϖ)] and [KG (ϖ)] ,
respectively. On minimizing PE equilibrium equation with respect
to {S}

[𝐾𝑒 (𝜛)] {𝑆} = 𝜆(𝜛)[𝐾𝐺 (𝜛)] {𝑆} (11)

where 𝜆(ϖ) is stochastic buckling load factor. Global stiffness matrix is

stored in a single array by using skyline technique and stochastic buck-
ling Eq. (11) is solved by simultaneous iteration technique.

2.2. Artificial neural network model

An Artificial neural network (ANN) is similar to a human brain struc-

ture and function based computational model. Neural network learns or
changes in a sense based on the input and output. The modeling of com-
plex relationship between input and output requires nonlinear statisti-
cal data modeling tool, which is best executed by ANN. The key steps
Fig. 4. Steps for ANN modeling.
[79] for calculations performed are as follows:

(a) In the input layer some data yi is input to the neurons.

(b) From the concealed layer output is figured by utilizing the trans-
(g) Weights on the concealed layer are refreshed by using
fer equations
Eqs. (18) and (19)
∑
𝑥𝑖 = 𝑤𝑖𝑗 𝑦𝑖 + 𝜃 (12) 𝑤𝑛𝑒𝑤 𝑜𝑙𝑑
𝑖𝑗 = 𝑤𝑖𝑗 + Δ𝑤𝑖𝑗 (𝑝) (18)

𝐺𝑗 = 1∕[1 + exp(−𝛼𝑥𝑗 )] (13) Δ𝑤𝑖𝑗 (𝑝) = 𝜂𝛿𝑗 𝐺𝑖 + 𝜇Δ𝑤𝑖𝑗 (𝑝 − 1) (19)

where, wij is the weight connection between the neurons i and j,
𝜃 is the threshold or bias value for neuron j, Gj is the output of
neuron j and 𝛼 is the parameter expressing non-linearity of the
neuron’s operation.
(c) Find Ok , the output parameter which is required to be known at
the k (output neuron) by equation alike to Eqs. (12) and (13).
(d) By using Ok (the output value) and tk ( the target output), find
the error for each and every weights in the output layer
𝛿𝑘 (𝑡𝑘 − 𝑜𝑘 )𝑜𝑘 (1 − 𝑜𝑘 ) (14)
(e) The output layer weight is updated by Eqs. (15) and (16)
𝑤𝑛𝑒𝑤 𝑜𝑙𝑑
𝑗𝑘 = 𝑤𝑗𝑘 + Δ𝑤𝑗𝑘 (𝑝) (15)
(i) Return to the initial step and rehashing it with different example.
At the point when the error between the ascertained yield and the ob-
jective yield approaches the present error criteria, at that point the cycle
will stop. The steps for ANN modeling is furnished in Fig. 4 [80].
One of the key advantages of ANN is that it can actually learn from
data set observation, which makes it useful for random function approx-
imation tool. It takes sample data instead of entire data set to get the
solution, results in time and saves money. ANNs have three intercon-
nected layers as shown in Fig. 5. First layer consists of input neurons,
which receives information from input data and send it to second layer
or hidden layer with some weight (w) and bias (b). Now, hidden layer in
turn will send the data with some weight and bias to the output layer.

3. Random input representation

Δ𝑤𝑗𝑘 (𝑝) = 𝜂𝛿𝑘 𝐺𝑗 + 𝜇Δ𝑤𝑗𝑘 (𝑝 − 1) (16)
Random uniform distribution of input parameters such as thick-
where, the weight correction wjk is between hidden layer neu- ness (core and face-sheet both), material properties (core and face-sheet
ron j and output layer neuron k, p is current cycles of correc- both) and ply-orientation angle are considered within a range of un-
tion and p−1 represents previous cycles of correction. Here 𝜂 is certainty with respect to their deterministic values. First three critical
learning rate empirical parameter and 𝜇 is momentum empirical stochastic buckling loads are calculated for different ply orientation an-
parameters. gle, core thickness, number of laminate and material properties due to
∑ the individual and compound effects of stochasticity as outlined below.
𝛿𝑗 = 𝐺𝑗 (𝑖 − 𝐺𝑗 ) 𝛿𝑘 𝑤𝑗𝑘 (17)
Case a: Stochasticity in only ply-orientation angle [𝜃(ϖ)].
(f) Determine the hidden layer correction factor 𝛿 j
Case b: Stochasticity in only core thickness [tc (ϖ)].

634
R.R. Kumar, T. Mukhopadhyay and K.M. Pandey et al. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 630–643

Fig. 5. Division of ANN into layers.

Case c: Stochasticity in only face-sheet thickness [tf (ϖ)].

Case d: Stochasticity in only face-sheet material properties [Pf (ϖ)].
Case e: Stochasticity in only core material properties [Pc (ϖ)].
Case f: Combined stochasticity of ply-orientation angle, core thickness,
face sheet thickness, core material properties and face sheet ma-
terial properties C(ϖ) = [𝜃(ϖ), tc (ϖ), tf (ϖ), Pf (ϖ), Pc (ϖ) ].

It can be noted that the primary objective of this paper is not to

present uncertainty quantification in buckling loads – rather we want
to convey a generalized message for buckling loads in the stochastic
regime. Here we have established that it is important to consider higher
modes of buckling in a structure for a realistic stochastic analysis along
with the conventional practice of considering the first mode of buckling
only. We have systematically shown this by means of over-lapping ar-
eas of the probability density function plots considering various possible
scenarios of a sandwich structure and relative effect of different concern-
ing factors. Since we have presented the probability density function
plots for buckling loads based on thousands of samples of the MCS, it is
quite easy to calculate the mean and standard deviations for the stochas-
tic buckling loads. However, keeping the objective of this paper in mind,
we have focused on showing the over-lapping areas of the probability
density function plots instead of showing the statistical quantities like
mean and standard deviations.
It could also be noted that our point of interest in this particular
paper is to find out the overlapping region only (that can be shown
Fig. 6. Flow diagram of stochastic analysis using ANN Model.
directly by knowing the response bounds of each of the buckling loads)
instead of the entire probabilistic description. Even though the actual
nature of the probability density function would vary depending on the for the completeness of the study, other degrees of stochasticity are
considered probabilistic descriptions of the individual input parameters, also considered (such as Fig. 11). Different distributions corresponding
the response bounds are generally not dependent on the individual to different input parameters could be adopted in future when some
probabilistic description of each of the input parameters. In various experimental data are available to ascertain the statistical nature of
industries involving composite materials (such as aerospace), it is a the input parameters. But this is not expected to change the response
common practice to report the variability of different input parameters bounds (i.e. the range of variability of the buckling loads), which
in terms of percentage variations with respect to the nominal values are important for the primary objective of this paper to show the
instead of providing mean and standard deviation. In the present study overlapping regions for different buckling loads. Layer-wise random
the degree of stochasticity (Δ) is taken as ± 10° for ply-orientation variable approach is adopted here for surrogate based finite element
angle(𝜃), whereas ± 10% for core thickness (tc ), face sheet thickness iterations. A flow diagram of stochastic buckling analysis using ANN
(tf ), core material properties (Pc ) and face sheet material properties (Pf ) model of composite sandwich plate is presented in Fig. 6.
as with respect to the nominal values as per normal industry standards.
Knowing the bounds of each of the input parameters in this way, we 4. Results and discussion
have adopted a random uniform distribution to carry out the Monte
Carlo simulations. The level of stochasticity here is considered as per In this article, first three buckling loads (First buckling load (FBL),
common industry standards of various aircraft manufactures. However, Second buckling load (SBL) and Third buckling load (TBL)) of a sand-

635
R.R. Kumar, T. Mukhopadhyay and K.M. Pandey et al. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 630–643

Fig. 7. Percentage error in (a) Mean value (b) Standard deviation for different sample (N) sizes.

Fig. 8. Probability density functions for direct MCS and ANN Model considering combined variation for (a) First buckling load (FBL) (b) Second buckling load (SBL)
and (c) Third buckling load (TBL) having CCCC boundary condition.

Table 1 consisting of soft core (tc = 0.8cm) and face sheet (tf = 0.2cm) hav-
Convergence study on non-dimensional deterministic buckling load for simply ing eight (08) equal laminate (both side) of ply orientation angle
supported laminated composite [0°/90°/0°] plate (E11 /E22 = 40). (90°/0°/90°/0°/90°/0°/90°/0°) are considered, unless otherwise men-
Span thickness Present FEM Reddy Kant and tioned. For presenting the numerical results, material properties are con-
ratio [82] Manjunatha [83] sidered from literature [81] as:
4×4 8×8 12 × 12
(a) For core:
10 21.9064 21.8991 21.8988 22.1207 22.0671
50 35.2596 35.2083 35.2069 35.2293 35.2248 E1 = E2 = E3 = 0.5GPa, G12 = G13 = 0.4GPa, G23 = 0.2GPa,
100 36.0361 35.9185 35.9168 35.9211 35.9211
𝜐12 = 𝜐13 = 𝜐23 = 𝜐32 = 0.27, 𝜐21 = 𝜐31 = 0.006, ρ = 1000 kg∕m3

(b) For face-sheet:

wich plate having length (l) of 10 cm, width (b) of 10 cm and thick-
E1 = 38.6GPa, E2 = E3 = 8.27GPa, G12 = G13 = 4.14GPa,
ness (t) of 1 cm is analysed for four different boundary conditions.
Boundary conditions taken in the analysis are CCCC, CFCF, SCSC G23 = 1.656GPa, 𝜐12 = 𝜐13 = 𝜐23 = 𝜐32 = 0.26, 𝜐21 = 𝜐31 = 0.006,
and SSSS (C–Clamped, F-Free, S-Simply supported). Sandwich plate ρ = 2600 kg∕m3

636
R.R. Kumar, T. Mukhopadhyay and K.M. Pandey et al. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 630–643

Fig. 9. Scatter plot of original FE Model with ANN Model for CCCC sandwich plate (FBL) considering combined variation for sample size (a) 64 (b) 128 (c) 256 (d)
512.

Fig. 10. Stochastic buckling load (N) of (a) CCCC (b) SCSC (c) SSSS and (d) CFCF composite sandwich plates having variation in all input parameters.

4.1. Convergence study and validation
The present analysis involves two different forms of convergence
and validation studies involving the finite element model and the ANN
model. The convergence and validation study on non-dimensional de-
terministic buckling load 𝜆̄ = 𝜆 𝑙2 ∕ 𝑡2 𝐸𝑇 𝑓 [where, 𝜆, t, ETf are buckling
load factor, thickness and transverse modulus of elasticity for face-sheet,
respectively] for a simply supported laminated composite plate is pre-
sented in Table 1 along with the previous results of Reddy [82], Kant
and Manjunatha [83]. The results show a good agreement between the
present work and previous works. Here even though the numerical val-
ues of buckling load decrease from 8 × 8 to 12 × 12 mesh sizes, the dif-

637
R.R. Kumar, T. Mukhopadhyay and K.M. Pandey et al.
Fig. 11. Stochastic first, second and third buckling load (N) of (a) CCCC (b) CFCF (c) SCSC and (d) SSSS composite sandwich plates having different degree of
stochasticity (compound effect).
Fig. 12. Stochastic buckling load (N) of CCCC composite sandwich plates hav-
ing (a) 30° and (b) 60° ply orientation angle considering variation in ply orien-
tation angle only.
ference is negligible (∼ 0.001%). This means the present finite element
formulation converges well when a mesh size of is 8 × 8 considered. It
can also be noted that the difference in result of the deterministic buck-
638
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 630–643
ling loads obtained corresponding to the converged mesh size and the
reference literature is well within the acceptable limit (∼0.05 to 0.99%).
In this study, the ANN model is applied to get predictive and in-
dicative surrogate model for buckling analysis of soft core sandwich
plate corresponding to a number of stochastic input parameters. How-
ever, before using the ANN as a surrogate of the original finite element
model, its prediction capability needs to be validated. An error analy-
sis is conducted to select the optimal number of samples (drawn from
quasi-random Sobol sequence [84]) required for ANN surrogate model.
In the error analysis mean value and standard deviation value of stochas-
tic buckling load for CFCF sandwich plate are considered and it is ob-
served that error reduces drastically by increasing the sample size (refer
to Fig. 7). It can be noted that Fig. 7 shows the performance of the
surrogate model (ANN) in prediction corresponding to different sample
sizes (i.e. number of realizations used to construct the surrogate model).
Fig. 7(a) represents the absolute error in mean value with respect to di-
rect MCS results while Fig. 7(b) represents the absolute error in standard
deviation with respect to direct MCS results. These are calculated as
[| 𝐷𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑀 𝐶𝑆 𝐷𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡
𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑢𝑙𝑡−𝐴𝑁 𝑁 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑑𝑀 𝐶𝑆 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑢𝑙𝑡
𝑀𝐶𝑆 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑢𝑙𝑡
| × 100]. It can be found in Fig. 7(a)
that the percentage error in mean value decreases with the increase in
sample size for ANN model formation. Error of less 0.5% is noted for the
sample size of 512. In case of standard deviation, however, normally a
trend of decreasing error is not expected to be found as standard devi-
ation is a much more sensitive than the mean value to the randomness
of samples. The error in standard deviation is also expected to be much
more compared to the error in mean values since the numerical values
of standard deviation are much lesser compared to the respective mean
values. We find error in the value of standard deviation in the range of
3 to 4.8%, which is acceptable according to the standard practice.
Further, the result obtained from direct MCS and ANN based MCS
having 64, 128, 256 and 512 samples are plotted using probability den-
sity function (PDF) in Fig. 8 for comparative analysis considering the
CFCF boundary condition. The PDF plots shown in Fig. 8 indicate a neg-
ligible deviation of ANN model with respect to direct MCS model for
R.R. Kumar, T. Mukhopadhyay and K.M. Pandey et al.
Fig. 13. Stochastic buckling load (N) of composite sandwich plates with different core thickness and boundary conditions considering source-uncertainty in core
thickness only.
512 sample size. This confirms the validity and high level accuracy of
the surrogate model based on ANN approach. For lesser sample size,
the probability density function plots in Fig. 8 are expected to deviate
from the original MCS. However, as the sample size increases, the prob-
ability density function plots become more similar to the one obtained
from direct MCS. It can also be noted that we have presented raw data
in this manuscript in their original form instead of trying to (best-)fit
the probability distributions to the closest form of standard distribution
available (such as Gaussian or Weibull). Though this practice is followed
in some engineering fields for the sake of a straightforward interpreta-
tion, such idealization could lead to erroneous and misleading results
in many cases. As we consider complex compound effect of stochas-
ticity considering multiple stochastic input parameters simultaneously,
their compound effect on the global properties (such as buckling load)
are normally not expected to perfectly follow any standard probabilistic
distribution (unless the results are forcefully fitted to follow the clos-
est distribution). The scatter plots presented in Fig. 9 considering dif-
ferent sample sizes also agree with the converged sample size of 512
639
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 630–643
for accurate prediction. This indicates that the ANN model formed us-
ing 512 samples can effectively substitute the inefficient conventional
FE model involving 60 random input parameters for the subsequent
stochastic analyses, leading to a significant saving of computational time
and cost without compromising the prediction accuracy. It can be noted
that the proposed ANN based approach requires 512 number of orig-
inal finite element based simulations to be carried out in the present
analysis, but the ANN based MCS is carried out using 10,000 sam-
ples. Thus the computational savings is achieved in terms of expensive
FE simulations.
4.2. Numerical results for stochastic buckling analysis
After having the ANN based FE model validated for further predic-
tions in the preceding subsection, here we focus on presenting proba-
bilistic results for the first three buckling loads. Normally in case of var-
ious engineering applications, the critical buckling load with the least
Eigen value is deemed to be useful because after this point the structural
R.R. Kumar, T. Mukhopadhyay and K.M. Pandey et al.
Fig. 14. Stochastic buckling load (N) of (a) CCCC and (b) SCSC composite sand-
wich plates having 4 numbers of laminas considering variation in face-sheet
thickness only.
instability creeps in. Thus most of the research articles focus on the first
buckling mode in the deterministic regime. In case of stochastic stabil-
ity analysis, however, the buckling loads are found to have a response
bound with respect to the corresponding nominal values. Thus there
exists a possibility of overlap in the stochastic responses of the buck-
ling loads corresponding to different modes of buckling resulting in a
non-unique critical buckling mode with the minimum value of buckling
load. For this reason, it is essential to consider higher buckling modes in
case of source-uncertainty in the system parameters. The importance of
higher order buckling modes are further illustrated by numerical results
in the following paragraphs.
First three buckling loads for combined effect of stochastic varia-
tion of all input parameters are studied and the results are presented in
Fig. 10. It shows that there is a significant amount of overlapping for
first and second buckling load and partial overlapping of TBL in case
of sandwich plates with CCCC boundary condition. Such overlapping
of the first (/lowest) buckling load with subsequently higher buckling
loads (second and third buckling loads) is a key concern in designing
the structures. For example, if someone follows the value of a particular
buckling load corresponding to the deterministic buckling mode assum-
ing it as the critical buckling load, there may be possibilities that actually
the Eigen value corresponding to the second or the third buckling load
is the most critical depending on the overlapping zone. Thus in case of
a stochastic analysis, there exists non-unique critical buckling modes.
The objective of this article is to make the scientific community and de-
sign engineers aware of this fact. From the Fig. 10, it can be observed
that the degree of overlapping depends on the boundary conditions; the
case of CCCC being most severe, where all the three buckling modes are
significant. The degree of overlapping among the first three buckling
loads significantly reduces for the SCSC boundary condition. In case of
the SSSS and CFCF boundary conditions, it can be noticed that there is
no overlapping with the FBL for a degree of stochasticity Δ = 10. Thus
for these two cases, it is sufficient to consider only the first buckling
mode. However, in case of higher degree of stochasticities, an overlap-
ping region with the FBL may appear for SSSS and CFCF boundary con-
ditions, while the degree of overlap may increase for the CCCC and SCSC
640
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 630–643
Fig. 15. Stochastic buckling load (N) of CCCC composite sandwich plates hav-
ing (a) 8 numbers of laminas (b) 12 numbers of laminas (a) 16 numbers of
laminas considering variation in face-sheet thickness only.
boundary conditions. This becomes more evident from the probabilistic
distributions presented in Fig. 11 considering three different degrees of
stochasticity (Δ). The effect of ply orientation angles of the face sheets
in a (𝜃 /0 /𝜃 /0 /𝜃 /0 /𝜃 /0) family of laminate is investigated consider-
ing 𝜃 = 30° and 60° in Fig. 12 considering the CCCC boundary condition
(since this boundary condition was found to result in the most severe
case of overlapping zone in case of 𝜃 = 90°; refer to Fig. 10). Though a
different overlapping pattern is noticed with respect to 𝜃 = 90° (refer to
Fig. 10), the overlapping between the first two buckling loads are found
to be critical for both 𝜃 = 30°, 60°.
In many cases, individual effects of stochasticity become predomi-
nant for structural analysis. Fig. 13 shows the effect of stochastic varia-
tion of core thickness only on the probabilistic descriptions of first three
buckling loads considering three different nominal values of core thick-
ness for CCCC and SCSC boundary conditions. It can be discerned from
the figures that the probabilistic descriptions and the overlapping pat-
tern among the buckling loads vary substantially depending on the core
thickness and boundary condition. Fig. 14 shows the effect of bound-
ary conditions on the probabilistic descriptions of first three buckling
loads due to stochasticity in face-sheet thickness only considering a 4-
layer laminate configuration. A remarkable difference can be noticed
in the overlapping pattern of the FBL with the higher order buckling
loads. While the CCCC boundary condition is very crucial in this case,
R.R. Kumar, T. Mukhopadhyay and K.M. Pandey et al.
Fig. 16. Stochastic buckling load (N) of (a) CCCC and (b) SCSC composite sand-
wich plates having variation in core material property only.
the SCSC boundary condition does not have any overlapping zone for the
first buckling load. Further results are presented in Fig. 15 for stochas-
ticity in the face-sheet thickness only considering different number of
layers in the face-sheet in case of the crucial CCCC boundary condition,
wherein a considerable difference can be noticed in the probabilistic
descriptions of first three buckling loads.
Fig. 16 shows the individual effect of stochasticity in the core ma-
terial property for two different boundary conditions. It can be noticed
from the figure that the CCCC boundary configuration shows a very cru-
cial overlapping pattern with overlapping zone between the first two
buckling modes as well as overlapping zone among the first three buck-
ling loads. Thus in this case all the first three modes of buckling are
important. The probabilistic description for SCSC boundary condition
shows that the first buckling load does not have any overlapping zone
with the higher buckling modes. Thus the higher buckling modes are
not significant in this case for the considered degree of stochasticity.
Fig. 17 shows the individual effect of stochasticity in face-sheet material
property considering E-glass and S-glass face-sheets. A significant over-
lapping can be noticed in both cases for the first two buckling modes
indicating the importance of considering at least the second mode of
buckling along with the first mode in this case.
A sensitivity analysis is carried out based on the measure of relative
coefficient of variation [85] for different input parameters considering
various boundary conditions. The results presented in Fig. 18 shows
that even though the sensitivity of different stochastic input parame-
ters are dependent on the boundary condition and the mode of buck-
ling, core thickness is found to be the most sensitive parameter in gen-
eral, followed by the core and face-sheet material properties and thick-
ness of face-sheet. The sensitivity analysis presented here could pro-
vide a clear idea about the degree of quality control needed for vari-
ous input parameters as well as the prospective degree of overlapping
among the buckling loads in case of individual effect dominant stochas-
tic systems and the relative contribution in the compound effect of
stochasticity.
In this paper, we do not aim to just present an uncertainty quan-
tification exercise for sandwich structures; rather the paper comprehen-
sively establishes a strong generalized message: it is important to con-
641
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 630–643
Fig. 17. Stochastic buckling load (N) of CCCC composite sandwich
plates having (a) E-Glass face sheet: E1 = 38.6 GPa, E2 = E3 = 8.27 GPa,
G12 = G13 = 4.14 GPa, G23 = 1.656 GPa, 𝜐21 = 𝜐31 = 0.006, 𝜐12 = 𝜐13 = 𝜐23 = 𝜐32 =
0.26, 𝜌 = 2600 kg/m3 and (b) S-Glass face sheet: E1 = 43 GPa, E2 = E3 = 8.9 GPa,
G12 = G13 = 4.5 GPa, G23 = 1.8 GPa, 𝜐21 = 𝜐31 = 0.006, 𝜐12 = 𝜐13 = 𝜐23 = 𝜐32 = 0.27,
𝜌 = 2490 kg/m3 .
sider higher modes of buckling in a structure for a realistic stochastic
analysis. We have systematically shown this by means of overlapping
areas of the probability density functions considering various possible
scenarios of a sandwich structure and relative effect of different con-
cerning factors. Here we consider a complex structural system of sand-
wich structures with the face sheets made of composite laminates to
demonstrate the concepts in depth using an efficient ANN based MCS
approach. The message of the paper is generalized in nature (i.e. ap-
plicable to other structures) and the non-unique critical buckling load
would have important implications in the subsequent design. In short,
the paper has both a strong message to the engineering community (i.e.
non-unique critical buckling load) and development of an ANN based
FE formulation for efficient stochastic analysis. Both of these aspects
are applicable to other structural forms.
5. Conclusions and outlook
A bottom-up Monte Carlo simulation based non-intrusive uncertainty
quantification for buckling analysis of laminated soft core sandwich
plates is presented in this article. Complete probabilistic descriptions of
the first three buckling loads for various crucial factors related to bound-
ary conditions, ply orientation angle and material properties are shown
for individual and compound effect of source-uncertainties based on an
efficient surrogate based approach (coupled ANN based FE-MCS), which
demonstrates a significant level of computation time and cost saving.
Further, a sensitivity analysis is carried out to investigate the relative
importance of different parameters in buckling behaviour of soft core
composite sandwich plates.
An intriguing outcome of the probabilistic results for buckling loads
presented in this paper is the realization of the importance of higher
order buckling modes due to the existence of overlapping zones among
the different Eigen values. In a deterministic analysis, normally a sin-
gle critical buckling load is considered corresponding to the minimum
Eigen value. However, we have shown that there exists a non-unique
R.R. Kumar, T. Mukhopadhyay and K.M. Pandey et al.
Fig. 18. Sensitivity of input parameters (Ply-orientation angle (𝜃), core thickness (tc ), face-sheet thickness (tf ), core material properties (Pc ), face-sheet material
properties (Pf )), for the first three buckling loads considering different boundary conditions.
critical buckling mode in case of stochastic analyses when the inevitable
source-uncertainties are accounted. It is shown that the existence of such
overlapping zone and the area of overlapping depend on the degree of
uncertainty in the input parameters, boundary conditions and structural
and material details. Even though we have presented the numerical re-
sults for the first three modes of buckling, certain problems with high
level of source-uncertainty may require analyzing even higher modes.
Future research could be carried out to quantify the probability and sub-
sequent reliability analysis for the possibility of the occurrence of such
overlapping zones based on the respective overlapping area involved.
This article makes the design engineers and the scientific community
aware of the importance of considering higher order buckling modes in
a stochastic analysis. Various other buckling-sensitive lightweight struc-
tures can be investigated in future concerning the higher order buckling
modes following the efficient surrogate based approach presented here.
Acknowledgement
The first author would like to acknowledge the financial support re-
ceived from Ministry of Human Resource and Development (MHRD),
Govt. of India during the period of this research work.
References
[1] Hoff NJ, Mautner SE. Bending and buckling of sandwich beams. J Aeronaut Sci
1948;15(12):707–20.
[2] Bauld NR Jr. Dynamic stability of sandwich columns under pulsating axial loads.
AIAA J 1967;5(8):1514–16.
[3] Sheinman I, Adan M. The effect of shear deformation on post-buckling behavior of
laminated beams. J Appl Mech 1987;54(3):558–62.
[4] Somers M, Weller T, Abramovich H. Influence of predetermined delaminations on
buckling and postbuckling behavior of composite sandwich beams. Compos Struct
1991;17(4):295–329.
642
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 630–643
[5] Somers M, Weller T, Abramovich H. Buckling and postbuckling behavior of delami-
nated sandwich beams. Compos Struct 1992;21(4):211–32.
[6] Sherbourne AN, Kabir MZ. Shear strains effects in lateral stability of thinwalled fi-
brous composite beams. ASCE J Eng Mech 1995;121(5):640–7.
[7] Li R, Zheng X, Wang H, Xiong S, Yan K, Li P. New analytic buckling solutions of
rectangular thin plates with all edges free. Int J Mech Sci 2018;144:67–73.
[8] Cheng SH, Lin CC, Wang JTS. Local buckling of delaminated sandwich beams using
continuous analysis. Int J Solids Struct 1997;34(2):275–88.
[9] Morey TA, Johnson E, Shield CK. A simple beam theory for the buckling of symmet-
ric composite beams including interaction of inplane stresses. Compos Sci Technol
1998;58(8):1321–33.
[10] Galuppi L, Royer-Carfagni G. Buckling of three-layered composite beams with vis-
coelastic interaction. Compos Struct 2014;107:512–21.
[11] Emam SA, Nayfeh AH. Postbuckling and free vibrations of composite beams. Compos
Struct 2009;88(4):636–42.
[12] Challamel N, Girhammar UA. Variationally-based theories for buckling of par-
tial composite beam-columns including shear and axial effects. Eng Struct
2011;33(8):2297–319.
[13] Fu Y, Wang J, Hu S. Analytical solutions of thermal buckling and postbuckling of
symmetric laminated composite beams with various boundary conditions. Acta Mech
2014;225(1):13–29.
[14] Khdeir AA, Reddy JN. Buckling of cross-ply laminated beams with arbitrary bound-
ary conditions. Compos Struct 1997;37(1):1–3.
[15] Khdeir AA. Thermal buckling of cross-ply laminated composite beams. Acta Mech
2001;149(1-4):201–13.
[16] Aydogdu M. Buckling analysis of cross-ply laminated beams with general boundary
conditions by Ritz method. Compos Sci Technol 2006;66:1248–55.
[17] Aydogdu M. Thermal buckling analysis of cross-ply laminated composite beams with
general boundary conditions. Compos Sci Technol 2007;67:1096–104.
[18] Matsunaga H. Free vibration and stability of thin elastic beams subjected to axial
forces. J Sound Vibr 1996;191(5):917–33.
[19] Matsunaga H. Buckling instabilities of thick elastic beams subjected to axial stresses.
Comput Struct 1996;59(5):859–68.
[20] Phan CN, Kardomateas GA, Frostig Y. Global buckling of sandwich beams based on
the extended high-order theory. AIAA J 2012;50(8):1707–16.
[21] Komijani M, Reddy JN, Eslami MR, Bateni M. An analytical approach for ther-
mal stability analysis of two-layer Timoshenko beams. Int J Struct Stabil Dyn
2013;13(8):1–14.
[22] Giunta G, Belouettar S, Biscani F, Carrera E. Hierarchical theories for a linearised
stability analysis of thin-walled beams with open and closed cross section. Adv Aircr
Spacecr Sci 2014;1(3):253–71.
R.R. Kumar, T. Mukhopadhyay and K.M. Pandey et al.
[23] Smyczynski MJ, Blandzi EM. Static and dynamic stability of an axially compressed
five-layer sandwich beam. Thin-Walled Struct 2015;90:23–30.
[24] Zhen W, Wanji C. An assessment of several displacement-based theories for the vi-
bration and stability analysis of laminated composite and sandwich beams. Compos
Struct 2008;84(4):337–49.
[25] Kapuria S, Ahmed A, Dumir PC. Static and dynamic thermo-electromechanical anal-
ysis of angle-ply hybrid piezoelectric beams using an efficient coupled zigzag theory.
Compos Sci Technol 2004;64(16):2463–75.
[26] Chakrabarti A, Chalak HD, Iqbal MA, Sheikh AH. Buckling analysis of laminated
sandwich beam with soft core. Latin Am J Solids Struct 2012;9(3):1–15.
[27] Goyal VK, Kapania RK. A shear-deformable beam element for the analysis of lami-
nated composites. Fin Elem Anal Des 2007;43(6,7):463–77.
[28] Kim N, Lee J. Exact solutions for stability and free vibration of thin-walled
Timoshenko laminated beams under variable forces. Arch Appl Mech
2014;84(12):1785–809.
[29] Vo TP, Thai HT, Inam F. Axial- flexural coupled vibration and buckling of
composite beams using sinusoidal shear deformation theory. Arch Appl Mech
2013;83(4):605–22.
[30] Pradeep V, Ganesan N, Bhaskar K. Vibration and thermal buckling of composite
sandwich beams with viscoelastic core. Compos Struct 2007;81(1):60–9.
[31] Wang X, Zhu X, Hu P. Isogeometric finite element method for buckling analysis
of generally laminated composite beams with different boundary conditions. Int J
Mech Sci 2015;104:190–9.
[32] Kahya V. Buckling analysis of laminated composite and sandwich beams by the finite
element method. Compos Part B Eng 2016;91:126–34.
[33] Dafedar JB, Desai YM. Stability of composite and sandwich struts by mixed formu-
lation. ASCE J Eng Mech 2004;130(7):762–70.
[34] Hu H, Belouettar S, Ferry MP, Makradi A. A novel finite element for global and local
buckling analysis of sandwich beams. Compos Struct 2009;90(3):270–8.
[35] Hu H, Belouettar S, Ferry MP, Makradi A, Koutsawa Y. Assessment of vari-
ous kinematic models for instability analysis of sandwich beams. Eng Struct
2011;33(2):572–9.
[36] Silva NMF, Camotim D, Silvestre N. On the use of generalized beam theory to assess
the buckling and post-buckling behavior of laminated CFRP cylindrical stiffened
panels. Int J Struct Stabil Dyn 2010;10(4):737–60.
[37] Gupta RK, Gunda JB, Janardhan GR, Rao GV. Post-buckling analysis of com-
posite beams: Simple and accurate closed-form expressions. Compos Struct
2010;92(8):1947–56.
[38] Leissa AW. Conditions for laminated plates to remain flat under inplane loading.
Compos Struct 1986;6(4):261–70.
[39] Sobhy M. An accurate shear deformation theory for vibration and buckling of FGM
sandwich plates in hygrothermal environment. Int J Mech Sci 2016;110:62–77.
[40] Hamed E, Frostig Y. Influence of creep on the geometrically nonlinear behavior of
soft core sandwich panels. Int J Mech Sci 2016;105:398–407.
[41] Dey T, Kumar R, Panda SK. Postbuckling and postbuckled vibration analysis of
sandwich plates under non-uniform mechanical edge loadings. Int J Mech Sci
2016;115,116:226–37.
[42] Vescovini R, D’Ottavio M, Dozio L, Polit O. Thermal buckling response of laminated
and sandwich plates using refined 2-D models. Compos Struct 2017;176:313–28.
[43] Mantari JL, Monge JC. Buckling, free vibration and bending analysis of functionally
graded sandwich plates based on an optimized hyperbolic unified formulation. Int
J Mech Sci 2016;119:170–86.
[44] Upadhyay AK, Shukla KK. Post-buckling behavior of composite and sandwich skew
plates. Int J Non-Linear Mech 2013;55:120–7.
[45] Kolahchi R. A comparative study on the bending, vibration and buckling of viscoelas-
tic sandwich nano-plates based on different nonlocal theories using DC, HDQ and
DQ methods. Aerosp Sci Technol 2017;66:235–48.
[46] Han B, Qin KK, Zhang QC, Zhang Q, Lu TJ, Lu BH. Free vibration and buckling of
foam-filled composite corrugated sandwich plates under thermal loading. Compos
Struct 2017;172:173–89.
[47] Samadpour M. Vibration analysis of thermally buckled SMA hybrid composite sand-
wich plate. Compos Struct 2015;119:251–63.
[48] Jalali SK, Heshmati M. Buckling analysis of circular sandwich plates with tapered
cores and functionally graded carbon nanotubes-reinforced composite face sheets.
Thin-Walled Struct 2016;100:14–24.
[49] Moita JS, Araújo AL, Correia VMF, Soares CMM, Soares CAM. Buckling and geomet-
rically nonlinear analysis of sandwich structures. Int J Mech Sci 2015;92:154–61.
[50] Do VD, Grognec PL. Buckling analysis of a reinforced sandwich column using the
Bloch wave theory. Thin-Walled Struct 2017;115:323–35.
[51] Grognec PL, Saoud KS. Elastoplastic buckling and post-buckling analysis of sandwich
columns. Int J Non-Linear Mech 2015;72:67–79.
[52] Aylikci F, Akbarov SD, Yahnioglu N. Buckling delamination of a PZT/Metal/PZT
sandwich rectangular thick plate containing interface inner band cracks. Compos
Struct 2018;202:9–16.
[53] Song Q, Liu Z, Shi J, Wan Y. Parametric study of dynamic response of sandwich plate
under moving loads. Thin-Walled Struct 2018;123:82–99.
[54] Li D, Deng Z, Xiao H, Jin P. Bending analysis of sandwich plates with differ-
ent face sheet materials and functionally graded soft core. Thin-Walled Struct
2018;122:8–16.
643
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 630–643
[55] Pydah A, Batra RC. Analytical solution for cylindrical bending of two-layered corru-
gated and webcore sandwich panels. Thin-Walled Struct 2018;123:509–19.
[56] Sebaey TA, Mahdi E. Crushing behavior of a unit cell of CFRP lattice core for sand-
wich structures’ application. Thin-Walled Struct 2017;116:91–5.
[57] Magnucka-Blandzi E, Walczak Z, Jasion P, Wittenbeck L. Buckling and vibrations of
metal sandwich beams with trapezoidal corrugated cores–the lengthwise corrugated
main core. Thin-Walled Struct 2017;112:78–82.
[58] Mukhopadhyay T, Adhikari S. Equivalent in-plane elastic properties of irregular hon-
eycombs: An analytical approach. Int J Solids Struct 2016;91:169–84.
[59] Mukhopadhyay T, Adhikari S. Free vibration analysis of sandwich panels with ran-
domly irregular honeycomb core. J Eng Mech 2016;142(11):06016008.
[60] Mukhopadhyay T, Adhikari S. Effective in-plane elastic properties of auxetic honey-
combs with spatial irregularity. Mech Mater 2016;95:204–22.
[61] Mukhopadhyay T, Adhikari S. Effective in-plane elastic moduli of quasi-random spa-
tially irregular hexagonal lattices. Int J Eng Sci 2017;119:142–79.
[62] Mukhopadhyay T, Adhikari S. Stochastic mechanics of metamaterials. Compos Struct
2017;162:85–97.
[63] Mukhopadhyay T, Adhikari S, Alu A. Probing the frequency-dependent elastic mod-
uli of lattice materials. Acta Mater 2019 doi. doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2018.11.012.
[64] Mukhopadhyay T, Adhikari S, Batou A. Frequency domain homogenization for the
viscoelastic properties of spatially correlated quasi-periodic lattices, Int J Mech Sci,
doi:10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.09.004.
[65] Karsh PK, Mukhopadhyay T, Dey S. Spatial vulnerability analysis for the first ply
failure strength of composite laminates including effect of delamination. Compos
Struct 2018;184:554–67.
[66] Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Sahu SK, Adhikari S. Stochastic dynamic stability analysis
of composite curved panels subjected to non-uniform partial edge loading. Eur J
Mech A Solids 2018;67:108–22.
[67] Naskar S, Mukhopadhyay T, Sriramula S, Adhikari S. Stochastic natural frequency
analysis of damaged thin-walled laminated composite beams with uncertainty in
micromechanical properties. Compos Struct 2017;160:312–34.
[68] Mukhopadhyay T, Naskar S, Dey S, Adhikari S. On quantifying the effect of noise
in surrogate based stochastic free vibration analysis of laminated composite shallow
shells. Compos Struct 2016;140:798–805.
[69] Naskar S, Mukhopadhyay T, Sriramula S. Spatially varying fuzzy multi-scale un-
certainty propagation in unidirectional fibre reinforced composites. Compos Struct
2019;209:940–67.
[70] Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Adhikari S. Uncertainty quantification in laminated com-
posites: a meta-model based approach. CRC Press; 2018. ISBN 9781498784450.
[71] Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Spickenheuer A, Gohs U, Adhikari S. Uncertainty quantifi-
cation in natural frequency of composite plates – an artificial neural network based
approach. Adv Compos Lett 2016;25(2):43–8.
[72] Karsh PK, Mukhopadhyay T, Dey S. Stochastic dynamic analysis of twisted function-
ally graded plates. Compos Part B Eng 2018;147:259–78.
[73] Karsh PK, Mukhopadhyay T, Dey S. Stochastic low-velocity impact on functionally
graded plates: probabilistic and non-probabilistic uncertainty quantification. Com-
pos Part B Eng 2019;159:461–80.
[74] Mukhopadhyay T, Chowdhury R, Chakrabarti A. Structural damage identification: a
random sampling-high dimensional model representation approach. Adv Struct Eng
2016;19(6):908–27.
[75] Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Khodaparast HH, Adhikari S. A response surface modelling
approach for resonance driven reliability based optimization of composite shells.
Period Polytech Civil Eng 2016;60(1):103–11.
[76] Dey TK, Mukhopadhyay T, Chakrabarti A, Sharma UK. Efficient lightweight design
of FRP bridge deck. Proc Inst Civil Eng Struct Build 2015;168(10):697–707.
[77] Maharshi K, Mukhopadhyay T, Roy B, Roy L, Dey S. Stochastic dynamic behaviour
of hydrodynamic journal bearings including the effect of surface roughness. Int J
Mech Sci 2018;142,143:370–83.
[78] Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Naskar S, Dey TK, Chalak HD, Adhikari S. Probabilistic
characterisation for dynamics and stability of laminated soft core sandwich plates.
J Sandw Struct Mater 2017:01–32.
[79] Guo D, Wang Y, Xia J, Nan C, Li L. Investigation of BaTiO3 formulation: an artificial
neural network (ANN) method. J Eur Ceram Soc 2002;22(11):1867–72.
[80] Soundararajan R, Ramesh A, Sivasankaran S, Sathishkumar A. Modeling and analy-
sis of mechanical properties of aluminium alloy (A413) processed through squeeze
casting route using artificial neural network model and statistical technique. Adv
Mater Sci Eng 2015;2015:714762. doi:10.1155/2015/714762.
[81] Kollar LP, Springer GS. Mechanics of composite structures; 2003. Cambridge.
[82] Reddy JN. A simple higher-order shear deformation theory for laminated composite
plates. J Appl Mech 1984;51(4):745–52.
[83] Kant T, Manjunatha BS. An unsymmetric FRC laminated finite element model with
12 degree of freedom per node. Eng Comput 1998;5(4):300–8.
[84] Mukhopadhyay T. A multivariate adaptive regression splines based damage identi-
fication methodology for web core composite bridges including the effect of noise.
J Sandw Struct Mater 2017 doi:. doi:10.1177/1099636216682533.
[85] Naskar S, Mukhopadhyay T, Sriramula S. Probabilistic micromechanical spa-
tial variability quantification in laminated composites. Compos Part B Eng
2018;151:291–325.