Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures

ISSN: 1537-6494 (Print) 1537-6532 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/umcm20

A stabilized piezolaminated nine-nodded

shell element formulation for analyzing smart
structures behaviors

S. A. Hosseini Kordkheili, H. Salmani & S. S. G. Afshari

To cite this article: S. A. Hosseini Kordkheili, H. Salmani & S. S. G. Afshari (2016) A

stabilized piezolaminated nine-nodded shell element formulation for analyzing smart
structures behaviors, Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures, 23:2, 187-194, DOI:
10.1080/15376494.2014.949925

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15376494.2014.949925

Accepted author version posted online: 08

Jun 2015.
Published online: 19 Oct 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 59

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 3 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=umcm20
MECHANICS OF ADVANCED MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES
, VOL. , NO. , –
http://dx.doi.org/./..

A stabilized piezolaminated nine-nodded shell element formulation for analyzing

smart structures behaviors
S. A. Hosseini Kordkheili, H. Salmani, and S. S. G. Afshari
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Center of Excellence in Aerospace Systems, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

An explicit hybrid stabilization method is utilized together with a reduced order integration scheme to sta- Received  January 
bilize spurious zero energy modes from the sub-integrated degenerated shell element. This stabilization is Accepted  October 
achieved after employing appropriate contravariant higher order stress modes. The relevant finite element KEYWORDS
formulation of the piezolaminated nine-nodded shell element is then derived to analyze smart structures explicit hybrid stabilization;
behaviors. To show the capabilities of the presented formulation, it has been implemented in a finite ele- piezoelectric; nine-nodded
ment code. The developed code is used to analyze some typical problems. The results are compared with shell element; dynamic
those obtained from other schemes in the literature and experiments. analysis

1. Introduction these problems, however, others employed an explicit hybrid-

stabilization method [13, 14]. The necessity of higher order
Smart materials have been widely applied by engineers in many
integration in the former method (i.e., MITC method) dictates
applications because of their structural vibration control capa-
more computational efforts. In opposition the second approach
bilities. Among smart materials, because of their strict bond with
still can be used together with a reduced 2 × 2 order integra-
structure surface, their ability for being implemented as either
tion scheme with lesser computational efforts. In addition, in
sensors or actuators, as well as their efficient performance in a
an explicit hybrid-stabilization approach, employing an explicit
wide range of frequencies, piezoelectric materials are the most
integration scheme to form the leverage matrices leads to a much
applicable ones. Therefore, piezoelectric materials play a daily
faster stabilization process in comparison with other types of
increasing role to active control of severe structural phenomena,
stabilization that need numerical integration or Gram-Schmidt
such as flutter, excessive noise, and unwanted vibrations.
orthogonalization process.
These broad applications of piezoelectric materials have
In this article, in order to avoid spurious zero energy modes
led researchers to develop different methods for modeling the
during dynamic analysis of piezo-laminated shell structures, an
electro-mechanical coupling of the smart structures. Finite ele-
explicit hybrid stabilization method is utilized together with a
ment method, as the most popular numerical technique to solve
reduced 2 × 2 order integration scheme. In this method, appro-
the structural problems, has been first practiced by Allik and
priate contravariant higher order stress modes are chosen to sta-
Hughes [1] to analyze smart structures. Thereafter, different
bilize the sub-integrated nine-nodded shell element. The elec-
types of elements, such as beam, plate, solid, and shell, have been
tromechanical coupling of the piezoelectric shell element is also
developed to extend finite element method’s territory to model
established by assuming a linear profile for electric potential
piezoelectric material facilitated structures as well.
variation through the shell thickness. The resulting finite ele-
The existence of a great demand on an efficient computa-
ment formulation is implemented in a finite element code using
tional tool to represent and predict the electromechanical cou-
a proper algorithm. This code is then used to carry out static
pling behavior of piezolaminated shell structures, has encour-
and dynamic analysis of some typical examples. In the case of
aged researchers to propose appropriate finite element formu-
static examples the results are compared with those from the lit-
lation based on Ahmad’s well known degenerated shell element
erature; however, an experiment is set up to verify results from
[2–10].
dynamic analysis.
Although the nine-nodded degenerated shell element is
accurate, it provides five communicable spurious zero energy
modes when a reduced 2 × 2 order guess-quadrature integra-
2. Piezolaminated nine-nodded shell element
tion scheme is applied to deal with shear and membrane locking
formulation
phenomena [11]. By employing a higher order quadrature inte-
gration scheme the spurious zero energy modes may vanish, but
2.1. Mechanical field
membrane and shear-locking phenomena emerge.
Some researchers have used a mixed interpolation of The finite element formulation of nine-nodded isoparametric
tensorial components (MITC) [5, 12] method to overcome degenerated shell of Figure 1 is utilized to model and analyze

CONTACT S. A. Hosseini Kordkheili ali.hosseini@sharif.ir Department of Aerospace Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Azadi Avenue, P.O. Box: -,
Tehran , Iran
©  Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
188 S. A. HOSSEINI KORDKHEILI ET AL.

the piezolaminated shell panel. Any point in the global coordi- j j j

where Bm , Bb , and Bs are computed as the following simpler
nates (x1 , x2 , x3 ) can be interpolated using nodal coordinates form:
⎡ ⎤
∂hi ∂h j i ∂hi ∂h j i ∂hi ∂h j i
⎢ ∂r1 ∂r1 x1 x
∂r1 ∂r1 2
x
∂r1 ∂r1 3
0 0⎥
⎢ ⎥
  ⎢ ⎥
⎢ ∂hi ∂h j i ∂hi ∂h j i ∂hi ∂h j i ⎥
Bm = ⎢ 0 0⎥
j
⎢ ∂r ∂r x1 ∂r2 ∂r2
x2
∂r2 ∂r2
x3 ⎥,
⎢ 2 2 ⎥
⎢      ⎥
⎣ ∂hi ∂h j ∂h j ∂hi ∂hi ∂h j ∂h j ∂hi ∂hi ∂h j ∂h j ∂hi ⎦
+ x1i + i
x2 + i
x3 0 0
∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2

⎡ ⎤
∂hi ∂h j i ∂hi ∂h j i ∂hi ∂h j i ∂hi ∂h j  i j  ∂hi ∂h j  i j 
⎢ Vn1 Vn2 Vn3 − xmV2m xmV1m ⎥
⎢ ∂r1 ∂r1 ∂r1 ∂r1 ∂r1 ∂r1 ∂r1 ∂r1 ∂r1 ∂r1 ⎥
  ⎢     ⎥
t ⎢ ∂h ∂h ∂h ∂h ∂h ∂h ∂h ∂h ∂h ∂h ⎥
Bb = ⎢ ⎥
j i j i j i j i j j i j j
⎢ Vni1 Vni2 Vni3 − i
xm V2m i
xm V1m ⎥
2⎢ ∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r2 ⎥
⎢            ⎥
⎣ ∂hi ∂h j ∂h j ∂hi ∂hi ∂h j ∂h j ∂hi ∂hi ∂h j ∂h j ∂hi ∂hi ∂h j ∂h j ∂hi j ∂hi ∂h j ∂h j ∂hi j
⎦
+ i
Vn1 + i
Vn2 + Vn3 −
i
+ i
xmV2m + i
xmV1m
∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2

⎡ ⎤
∂h j i ∂h j i ∂h j i ∂h j  i j  ∂h j  i j 
h V h V h V −h x V h x V
  t ⎢ ⎥
i i i i i
⎢ ∂r1 ∂r1 2 ∂r1 3 ∂r1 ∂r1
n 1 n n m 2m m 1m
j ⎥
Bs = ⎢ ⎥, (6)
2 ⎣ ∂h j i ∂h j i ∂h j i ∂h j  i j  ∂h j  i j  ⎦
hi Vn1 hi Vn2 hi Vn3 −hi xmV2m hi xmV1m
∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r2

(x1k , x2k , x3k ) and isoparametric shape functions hk (r1 , r2 ) as while j is not a dummy index. The material properties are
follows: expressed in the local orthogonal coordinate system (x, y, z), in
which z direction is parallel to r3 . Therefore, the covariant strain
t
xi = hk (r1 , r2 ) xik + r3 hk (r1 , r2 ) Vnik , (1) tensors are transformed to local physical coordinate system by
2 the following equations:
⎧ ⎫ ⎧ ⎫
where Vnik are the components of unit vector Vn , which is normal ⎨ εxx ⎬ ⎨ ε11 ⎬      
to the shell mid-surface in the direction of r3 , and t is the shell ε = εyy = [Tε ] ε22 = [Tε ] Bm + r3 Bb
j j
qj
thickness. The displacement of the element is also interpolated ⎩ ⎭ ⎩ ⎭
γxy γ12
using the nodal DOFs {q j } = { u1j u2j u3j α j β j } as:      
j j
= BM + r3 BB qj ,
t      
ui = hk (r1 , r2 ) uki + r3 hk (r1 , r2 ) −V2ik αk + V1ik βk γxz   γ13    j    j  
2 γ = = Tγ = Tγ Bs q j = BS q j , (7)
    γyz γ23
= [H] q = ([HM ] + r3 [HB ]) q , (2)
 
in which, the transformation matrices [Tε ] and Tγ are given
in which V1ik , −V2ik are the components of the arbitrary vectors as: ⎡ ⎤
V1 , V2 , which make an orthogonal coordinate system by Vn . The ∂r1 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2
⎢ ∂x ∂x ∂x ∂x ∂x ∂x ⎥
covariant components of infinitesimal strain tensor are driven ⎢ ⎥
⎢ ∂r1 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2 ⎥
as follows: ⎢ ⎥
[Tε ] = ⎢ ⎥
  ⎢ ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂y ⎥
1 ∂um ∂xm ∂um ∂xm ⎢ ⎥
εi j = + . (3) ⎣ ∂r1 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r1 ∂r2 ∂r2 ∂r1 ⎦
2 ∂ri ∂r j ∂r j ∂ri 2 2 + (8)
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y
⎡ ∂r ∂r ⎤
Using Eqs. (1) and (2) in Eq. (3) and after neglecting the coef- 1 2
  ∂r3 ⎢ ∂x ∂x ⎥
ficients of the second order terms of r3 , the infinitesimal inplane Tγ = ⎣ ∂r1 ∂r2 ⎦ .
strain tensor can be decomposed to the membrane (εm ) and ∂z
∂y ∂y
bending (εb ) strains. The inplane strain tensor is:
⎧ ⎫
⎨ ε11 ⎬
{ε} = ε22 = {εm } + r3 {εb }
⎩ ⎭
γ12 ⎧ ⎫
⎪ . ⎪
⎨ .. ⎪
⎪ ⎬
   
= · · · Bmj · · · + r3 · · · Bbj · · · qj , (4)
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎩ .. ⎪
⎭
.

and the transverse shear strain tensor is:

⎧ ⎫
⎪ . ⎪
  ⎨ .. ⎪
⎪ ⎬
γ13  
{γ } = = · · · Bsj · · · qj , (5)
γ13 ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎩ .. ⎪
⎭
. Figure . Degenerated shell element configuration.
 MECHANICS OF ADVANCED MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES 189

2.2. Electrical field process:

Modeling of the electric potential in the piezoelectric layer is r3 = mk + nk r3k . (16)
crucial to simulate the electro-mechanical behavior of the piezo-
laminated shell. The electric potential of the piezoelectric layer Now the strain and kinetic energies can be rewritten for lam-
is assumed to vary linearly through the thickness and can be inated shell elements as follows:
expressed as follows: ⎧ ⎫T ⎡    T ⎤
  !NL  1  1  1 ⎨ ε ⎬ Cε 0 eε
ϕk = ϕ0 + r3 ϕς k , 1 ⎣ 0 Cγ
(9) U = γ eTγ ⎦
2 ⎩ ⎭  
k=1 −1 −1 −1 −E eε eγ []
where ϕ0 and ϕς are the electric potential and the gradient of ⎧ ⎫
the electric potential at the mid-surface of the piezoelectric layer, ⎨ ε ⎬ t
k
respectively. The electric potential within the piezoelectric layer × γ |J| dr1 dr2 dr3k , (17)
⎩ ⎭ t
can be interpolated using shape functions, hence, Eq. (9) can be −E
rewritten as follows:   
   1!
NL 1 1 1
tk
ϕk = h j (ϕ0 ) j + r3 h j ϕς j . (10) T= ρk u̇T u̇ |J| dr1 dr2 dr3k . (18)
k 2 −1 −1 −1 t
k=1
The electric field vector of the kth layer is calculated as:
The work done by external mechanical forces Fq and electric
⎡ ⎤⎧ ⎫ ⎧ ⎫
⎨ 0 ⎬ charges Fϕ is also written as:
00 0  ⎨ 0 ⎬
(E)k = −∇ϕk = ⎣ 0 0 0 ⎦ 0 = Bϕ k 0 .  T    
0 0 − t1k ⎩ ϕ ⎭k ⎩ ⎭
ϕ k W= q Fq + {ϕ}T Fϕ . (19)
(11)
Employing the Hamilton’s variational principle, i.e.,

2.3. Equations of motion δ (T − S + W ) = 0, (20)

Mathematically, the electromechanical coupling of piezoelectric gives the finite element formulation of equations of motion as:
material is defined by the constitutive equations as:          
⎧ ⎫ ⎡   T ⎤⎧ ⎫ [M] [0] q̈
+
[KM ] [KME ] q
=
Fq
,
⎨σ ⎬ Cε 0 eε ⎨ ε ⎬ [0] [0] 2×2 ϕ̈ [KME ]T [KE ] 2×2 ϕ Fϕ
τ = ⎣ 0 Cγ eγ ⎦ γ
T
, (12)
⎩ ⎭   ⎩ ⎭ (21)
D eε eγ [] −E where M, KM , KME , and KE are the element’s mass, mechani-
cal stiffness, electromechanical stiffness, and electrical stiffness
where the components of the elasticity tensor C, piezoelectric
matrices, respectively, in which:
tensor e, and permittivity (or dielectric) tensor  are the piezo-
electrics’ material properties, and σ , τ , and D are in-plane stress, NL 
! 1  1  
2
transverse shear stress, and electric displacement, respectively. [M]2×2 = ρk 2[HM ]T [HM ] + [HB ]T [HB ]
In order to find the finite element formulation of the piezolami- −1 −1 3
k=1
nated shell, it is necessary to form the strain energy as follows: tk
× |J| dr1 dr2 , (22)
⎧ ⎫ ⎡   T ⎤⎧ ⎫ t
 ⎨ ε ⎬T Cε 0 eε ⎨ ε ⎬ NL  1  1 
1 ⎣ 0 Cγ eTγ ⎦ γ ! 2
U= γ dv, (13) = 2[BM ]T [Cε ]k [BM ] + [BB ]T [Cε ]k [BB ]
2 ve ⎩ −E ⎭   ⎩ ⎭ [KM ]2×2
eε eγ [] −E k=1−1 −1 3
   tk
in which the integration is implemented on the element vol- + 2[BS ]T Cγ k [BS ] |J| dr1 dr2 , (23)
ume (v e ), and the element kinetic energy is expressed in the t
!
NL   1 
form: 1      
 [KME ]2×2 = 2[BB ]T [eε ]k Bϕ + 2[BS ]T eγ k Bϕ
1 −1 −1
T= ρ u̇T u̇dv. (14) k=1
2 ve tk
× |J| dr1 dr2 , (24)
In the element strain and kinetic energy relations, the inte- t
NL  1  1
!
grations are taken over the element volume. In laminated shell  T   tk
[KE ]2×2 =2 Bϕ []k Bϕ |J| dr1 dr2 . (25)
elements the material properties vary at different layers; there- −1 −1 t
k=1
fore, a local coordinate system normal to the each layer’s mid-
surface (r3k ) is defined, which varies from −1 to +1. Where: In Eqs. (22)–(25) the subscript 2 × 2 shows that the reduced
" order 2 × 2 guess-quadrature integration scheme is applied to
1   ! j
r3 = −1 + −tk 1 − r3k + 2 tl , (15) form the mass and stiffness matrices. The structural damping
t matrix that may be necessary during a solution process is also
l=1
calculated using the Rayleigh damping method as follows:
in which tk is the kth layer’s thickness. Equation (15) is then
decomposed as follows to help us with later explicit integration [CD ] = α [KM ] + β [M] . (26)
190 S. A. HOSSEINI KORDKHEILI ET AL.

"T "−1 "⎞

2.4. Stabilization RML WL 0 RML ⎠  
+ qe
The presented finite element formulation in previous sections RMH 0 WH RMH
normally accompanies with spurious zero energy modes dur- 1  T     
+ qe [GML ]T [HL ]−1 Gϕε + [RML ]T [WL ]−1 Gϕγ {ϕe }
ing numerical integration course. These spurious zero energy 2
1  T  T  
modes are suppressed by adopting a suitable stabilization pro- + {ϕe }T Gϕε [HL ]−1 [GML ] + Gϕγ [WL ]−1 [RML ] qe
cedure. In order to develop a stabilized finite element formula- 2
1  T    T    
tion, the following Hellinger-Reissner functional of the piezo- + {ϕe }T Gϕε [HL ]−1 Gϕε + Gϕγ [WL ]−1 Gϕγ − Hϕ
laminated degenerated shell element is employed [15]: 2
⎛ × {ϕe } ,
⎧ ⎫T ⎡    T ⎤ (33)
 ⎨ σ ⎬ Sε 0 −dε in which:
1 ⎜ 1 ⎣ T ⎦
πHR = − τ  −dγ
e
⎝  0 S γ  
2 ve 2 ⎩ −E ⎭
−dε −dγ [d ] GML = PLT Bdv, GMH = PHT Bdv,
⎧ ⎫ ⎞  ve  ve
⎨ σ ⎬
× τ + σ T ε + τ T γ ⎠ dv, (27) Gϕε = PLT dεT Bϕ dv, Gϕγ = QTL dγT Bϕ dv,
⎩ ⎭  ve  ve
−E
HL = PLT Sε PL dv, HH = PHT Sε PH dv, Hϕ
in which, using (12), S, d, and d are calculated by the following ve  ve (34)
equations: = BTϕ d Bϕ dv,
 ve 
Sε = Cε−1 , Sγ = Cγ−1 , dε = eεCε−1 , dγ = eγ Cγ−1 , WL = QL Sγ QL dv, WH =
T
QTH Sγ QH dv,
 ve  ve
d = eTε dε + eTγ dγ + . (28)
RML = QTL BS dv, RMH = QTH BS dv.
In Eq.(27), σ and τ are assumed stresses that can be decom- ve ve

posed to the lower (L) and higher order (H) modes. Thus, we Now the matrix form of the Hellinger-Reissner functional,
can write: i.e., (33), is as follows:
σ = σL + σH = PL βL + PH βH , (29)
 T   
q [KM ] [KME ]L q
τ = τL + τH = QL αL + QH αH , (30) πHR
e
= , (35)
ϕ [KME ]TL [KE ]L ϕ
where P and Q are the stress shape functions and α and β are
where KM is the summation of the lower and higher order stiff-
the vectors of coefficients. The assumed stresses are chosen in
ness matrices, i.e.,
the way that they satisfy the following conditions:
 
[KM ] = [KM ]L + [KM ]H . (36)
PL Sε PH dv = 0 ,
T
PHT Sε PL dv = 0,
ve ve
  The stiffness matrices of Eq. (35) are computed as follows:
QL Sγ QH dv = 0 ,
T
QTH Sγ QL dv = 0,
 ve
 ve
(31) [KM ]L = [GML ]T [HL ]−1 [GML ] + [RML ]T [WL ]−1 [RML ] , (37)
Edε PH dv = 0, Edγ QH dv = 0,
[KM ]H = [GMH ]T [HH ]−1 [GMH ] + [RMH ]T [WH ]−1 [RMH ] ,
 v  v
e e

(38)
PHT dε Edv = 0, QTH dγ Edv = 0.
ve ve    
[KME ]L = [GML ]T [HL ]−1 Gϕε + [RML ]T [WL ]−1 Gϕγ ,
Substituting Eqs. (29) and (30) into (27) and then using (31) (39)
in the outcome relation, yields:
  T    T    
1  T T    [KE ]L = Gϕε [HL ]−1 Gϕε + Gϕγ [WL ]−1 Gϕγ − Hϕ .
πHR
e
=− βL PL Sε PL βL + βHT PHT Sε PH βH (40)
2 ve
    Choosing suitable lower order assumed stress modes will
+ ϕ T BTϕ dε PL βL . + αLT QTL Sγ QL αL
lead to equivalence of the lower order stiffness matrices and
   
+ αHT QTH Sγ QH αH + ϕ T BTϕ dγ QL αL the reduced order 2 × 2 guess-quadrature integrated stiffness
      matrices. Appropriate choices of the lower order assumed stress
+ βLT PLT B q + βHT PHT B q + αLT QTL BS q modes are [13]:
     
+ αHT QTH BS q + βLT PLT dεT ϕ + αLT QTL dγT Bϕ ϕ σL = PL βL = [[I3 ]r1 [I3 ]r2 [I3 ]r1 r2 [I3 ]r3 [I3 ]r3 r1 [I3 ]
 ×r3 r2 [I3 ]r1 r2 r3 [I3 ]] βL
+ ϕ T BTϕ d Bϕ ϕ dv.  
(32) τL = QL αL = [I2 ] r1 [I2 ] r2 [I2 ] r1 r2 [I2 ] αL , (41)
Condensing α and β from (32) will results in:
⎛ "T "−1 "
which results in:
1  T ⎝ GML HL 0 GML    
πHR
e
= qe [KM ] [KME ] [KM ] [KME ]
2 GMH 0 HH GMH = . (42)
[KME ]T [KE ] L [KME ]T [KE ] 2×2
 MECHANICS OF ADVANCED MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES 191

Therefore, [KM ]H is a stabilizing matrix for the reduced order Table . Material properties.
2 × 2 guess-quadrature integrated stiffness matrix of the nine- Material properties PZT G piezoceramic T/ graphite/epoxy
nodded degenerated shell element. Five communicable spurious
zero energy modes of the [KM ]2×2 are stabilized by the following Elastic properties
E11 (GPa)  
assumed higher order contravariant stress modes [13]: E22 (GPa)  
⎡  2 1 ⎤ ν12 . .
r1 r2 − 3  0  G12 (GPa)  . .
1
σH = [Tε ]−1 ⎣ 0 r2 r12 − 13 ⎦ {βm } ρ Kg/m3  
J 0 0 Piezoelectric properties
 
⎡  2 1 ⎤ d31 10−10 m/V  . 
r1 r2 − 3  0  d  10−10 m/V  . 
r3 32
+ [Tε ]−1 ⎣ 0 r2 r12 − 13 ⎦ {βb } ∈33 10−9 F/m .
J 0 0  1  1
1   r   j
RMH = 2
= [Tε ]−1 P̃H {βm } + [Tε ]−1 P̃H {βb } ,
3
(43) −1 −1
J J ⎡     ⎤T
 2 1" 2− 1 h
∂h j i 1 ∂h j i
1  −1 1 2 3r r − 1  −1   ⎢ r 1 r2
3
i
∂r1
Vn1 + r2 r1
2
−
3
h i
∂r2
Vn1 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
τH = Tγ  2 1  {αm } = Tγ Q̃H {αm } . ⎢
⎢
    ⎥
⎥
J r2 r1 − 3 J 1 ∂h 1 ∂h
⎢ r1 r2 −2 hi
j i
Vn2 + r2 r1 − 2
hi
j i
Vn2 ⎥
⎢ 3 ∂r 3 ∂r ⎥
(44) ⎢ 1 2 ⎥
⎢     ⎥
Substituting Eqs. (43) and (44) into (34) gives: ⎢ 1 ∂h j i 1 ∂h j i ⎥
×⎢ ⎢ r1 r2 −2 hi Vn3 + r2 r1 − 2
hi Vn3 ⎥ dr1 dr2 .
∂r ∂r ⎥
 1  1  1 ⎢
⎢
3 1 3 2 ⎥
⎥
1   T   ⎢

1

∂hi  i j 

1

∂hi  i j  ⎥
HH = P̃ r3 P̃ S̃ε P̃ r3 P̃ dr dr dr
1 2 3 , ⎢
⎢ −r1 r2 − 2 hj xmV2m − r2 r1 − 2
hj xmV2m ⎥ ⎥
 −1 −1 J ⎢ 3 ∂r1 3 ∂r2 ⎥
1  1  1
−1
⎢     ⎥
1 T ⎣ 1 ∂hi  i j  1 ∂hi  i j  ⎦
WH = Q̃ S̃γ Q̃dr1 dr2 dr3 , r1 r2 −2 hj xmV1m − r2 r1 − 2
hj xmV1m
−1 −1 −1 J 3 ∂r1 3 ∂r2
(45) (50)
while S̃ε and S̃γ are calculated as:

S̃ε = Tε−T S−1 −1 −T −1 −1

ε Tε , S̃γ = Tγ Sγ Tγ . (46) Dependency of the leverage matrices components only to
r1 and r2 enable us to calculate these components explicitly
Layer by layer changing of S̃ε and S̃γ values requires imposing through the solution algorithm.
Eq. (16) into (45). This imposition together with a through the
thickness explicit integration of the shell element gives:
⎡ 8 8 ⎤
S̃kε11 0 mk S̃kε11 0
⎢ 135 135 ⎥
⎢ 8 k 8 ⎥
⎢ 0 S̃ 0 m S̃k ⎥ 
! tk ⎢
NL
135 ε22
  135
k ε22 ⎥ 1 1
1
HH = ⎢ 8 ⎥ dr1 dr2 .
⎢
t ⎢ mk S̃kε11
8
m2k +
8
n2k S̃kε11 ⎥ J
0 0 ⎥ −1 −1
k=1 ⎢ 135 135 135 × 3   ⎥
⎣ 8 8 2 8 ⎦
0 k
mk S̃ε22 0 mk + 2
nk S̃kε22
135 135 135 × 3
(47)

!
NL
8  k t  1  1
1
3. Result verification
k
WH = S̃ + S̃γ 22
k
dr1 dr2 . (48)
135 γ 11 t −1 −1 J 3.1. Example 1
k=1

During mathematical manipulation to achieve HH and WH , A simply supported square composite plate (10 × 10 in.2 ) with
  2
the two terms r1 r22 − 13 and (r2 (r21 − 13 ))2 have been taken the stacking sequence of [P/0/90/0]S is imposed to mechanical
out of the integral and substituted by an approximated value 135 4
. and electrical loading simultaneously. The plate is made up of
Also, so-called leverage matrices GMH and RMH , are formed by graphite epoxy and bonded to PZT G1195 at the top and bottom
substituting Eqs. (43) and (44) into Eq. (34) as: (the material properties are shown in Table 1). The thickness of
⎡       ⎤
1 ∂hi ∂h j i 1 ∂hi ∂h j i 1 ∂hi ∂h j i
⎢ 2r1 r2 − 3 ∂r1 ∂r1 x1 2r1 r22 − 2r1 r22 −
2
x x 0 0 ⎥
⎢ 3 ∂r1 ∂r1 2 3 ∂r1 ∂r1 3 ⎥
⎢       ⎥
⎢ 1 ∂hi ∂h j i 1 ∂hi ∂h j i 1 ∂hi ∂h j i ⎥
⎢ ⎥
 1  1 ⎢ 2r2 r1 − 3 ∂r ∂r x1 2r2 r12 − 2r2 r12 −
2
x x 0 0 ⎥
⎢ 2 2 3 ∂r2 ∂r2 2 3 ∂r2 ∂r2 3 ⎥
j
GMH = ⎢         ⎥dr1 dr2 ,
⎢  2 1  ∂hi ∂h j i   2  ⎥
−1 −1 ⎢ 2 2 1 ∂hi ∂h j i 2 1 ∂hi ∂h j i 2 1 ∂hi ∂h j j 1 ∂h i ∂h j j ⎥
⎢ 3 r2 r2 − 3 V r2 r22 − V r2 r22 − V − r1 r22 − i
xm V2m r1 r22 − i
xm V1m ⎥
⎢ ∂r1 ∂r1 n1 3 3 ∂r1 ∂r1 n2 3 3 ∂r1 ∂r1 n3 3 3 ∂r1 ∂r1 3 3 ∂r1 ∂r1 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢           2     ⎥
⎣2 1 ∂hi ∂h j i 2 1 ∂hi ∂h j i 2 1 ∂hi ∂h j i 2 1 ∂hi ∂h j j 1 ∂hi ∂h j i j ⎦
r2 r12 − V r2 r12 − V r2 r12 − V − r2 r12 − i
xmV2m r2 r1 −
2
xmV1m
3 3 ∂r2 ∂r2 n1 3 3 ∂r2 ∂r2 n2 3 3 ∂r2 ∂r2 n3 3 3 ∂r2 ∂r2 3 3 ∂r2 ∂r2
(49)
192 S. A. HOSSEINI KORDKHEILI ET AL.
Figure . Center line deflection: electromechanical loading.
the graphite epoxy and piezoelectric layers are 0.138 and
0.254 mm, respectively. An 8 × 8 element mesh is implemented
to compare the results from the present formulation with results
from Ritz [16] and assumed strain [3] methods.
A 200 Pa pressure is applied on the plate and the voltage of
the piezoelectric actuator is increased to diminish the normal-
ized deflection of the plate. The Ritz method results demonstrate
that the normal deflection of the plate center line is eliminated
at 27 V. The present study shows that a bit deviation from the
Ritz method results at the same voltage, but the deflection is well
matched with the assumed strain solution proposed by Lee et al.
[3] (Figure 2).
3.2. Example 2
A cantilevered piezolaminated curved shell (10 × 10 in.2 ) of
Figure 3 with stacking sequence of [P/302 /0]S is imposed by elec-
tric potential. Tip bending and twisting of this shell are com-
puted in order to be compared with the results of other in the
literature. The composite layers material is graphite epoxy, while
Figure . Bending and twisting of cantilevered curved shell.
Figure . (a) Experimental model dimension. (b) FEM model.
they are embraced by PZT G1195 piezoelectric layers. A 100 V
electric potential is applied to both piezoelectric layers, so that
they are polarized in opposite directions. Figure 3 demonstrates
the shell tip bending (Wm /b) and twisting ((W2 − W1 ) /b) for
different radius of curvature (R/b). Because of unbalanced
stacking sequence, the bending deflection of the piezoelectric
actuators causes the whole structure to be twisted. Although in
deep shell models, the tip twisting of the stabilized element is
digressed from the results of shallow shell theory [16], but it
complies with the assumed strain shell element’s [3] results in
either bending or twisting.
3.3. Example 3
In order to verify the proposed piezolaminated stabilized ele-
ment efficiency to solve dynamic problems, a cantilevered alu-
minum beam (E = 70 GPa, ν = 0.3, ρ = 2700 Kg/m3 ) is consid-
ered. Two similar PZT G1195 piezoceramic patches are attached
on both sides of the beam with the purpose of actuating the
beam and sensing of displacement. The aluminum and piezo-
electric patches thicknesses are 0.5 and 0.6 mm, respectively,
other dimensions are also given in Figure 4a. Figure 4b shows
the finite element discretized model of the test case, in which
Figure . Applied voltage on piezoactuator (only for first . s).
 MECHANICS OF ADVANCED MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES 193

Figure . (a) Experiment schematic. (b) Experiment setup at Mechanics of Smart Materials Lab.

a biased mesh is utilized to reduce the computational effort.

According to this figure, 21 elements are used in finite element
model in which one element is piezolaminated with 3 layers and
the other 20 elements are single layered.
An experiment with the same cantilevered beam is also set up
to confirm the capabilities of the presented finite element for-
mulation to predict dynamic behavior of piezolaminated shell
structures. The experimental model dimensions and piezoelec-
tric patches location on the aluminum beam are also exhibited
in Figure 4a.
The piezoactuator is excited using a square wave voltage in
which frequency varies from 0.5 to 40 Hz, and its amplitude
is 150 V (Figure 5). The generated voltage is amplified using
a Piezo System Inc. 20× amplifier, and an Advantech USB-
4716 data acquisition device plays as analog/digital convertor
role. Figure 6 shows a schematic of the experiment and the
experimental setup.
For finite element solution the dynamic equations of motion
are solved using the Newmark integration method, while α =
0.000461 and β = 0.000230 in the Rayleigh damping matrix.
From both experimental and presented stabilized finite ele-
ment methods, the frequency response function (FRF) of the Figure . FRF of the aluminum beam.
aluminum cantilever beam is obtained and depicted in Figure 7. Table . Aluminum beam natural frequencies.
The natural frequencies of the beam are also calculated using
Stabilized
both methods and compared in Table 2. It is seen that the piezolaminated
value of natural frequencies obtained from the proposed sta- element natural Experiment natural
bilized piezolaminated shell element is well in agreement with Mode No. frequency (Hz) frequency (Hz) Error (%)
the experimental results. It is noted that, due to the piezosensor st mode . . .
configuration, only bending modes of the beam can be captured nd mode . . .
using this experiment. rd mode . . .
194 S. A. HOSSEINI KORDKHEILI ET AL.
4. Conclusions
In this article a finite element formulation was presented in
order to analyze the piezolaminated shell structures using a
nine-nodded degenerated shell element. An explicit hybrid sta-
bilization procedure has been adopted to stabilize spurious
zero energy modes that normally appeared during implemen-
tation of reduced 2 × 2 order integration scheme in degener-
ated shell elements. A stabilization procedure was performed
using appropriate higher and lower assumed stresses into the
Hellinger-Reissner functional. Two examples of piezolaminated
shells were solved and the results have been compared with those
available in the literature. However, in order to verify the result
from the third example, an experimental setup has also been
developed to achieve dynamic characteristics of piezolaminated
shells. The results render that the developed stabilized finite ele-
ment formulation predicts the static and dynamic behavior of
piezolaminated shell structures correctly.
Acknowledgment
The experiments were conducted at Mechanics of Smart Materials (MSM)
Lab, Aerospace Engineering Dept., Sharif University of Technology.
References
[1] H. Allik and J.R. Hughes, Finite element method for piezoelectric
vibrations, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., vol. 2, pp. 151–157, 1970.
[2] S. Ahmad, B.M. Irons, and O.C. Zienkiewicz, Analysis of thick and
thin shell structures by curved finite elements, Int. J. Numer. Methods
Eng., vol. 2, pp. 419–451, 1970.
[3] S. Lee, N.S. Goo, H.C. Park, K.J. Yoon, and C. Cho, A nine-node
assumed strain shell element for analysis of a coupled electro-
mechanical system, Smart Mater. Struct., vol. 12, pp. 355–362, 2003.
[4] A. Sudhakar, K. Kamal, and M. Bajoria, Finite element modeling
of smart plates/shells using higher order shear deformation theory,
Compos. Struct., vol. 62, pp. 41–50, 2003.
[5] M. Kogl and M.L. Bucalem, Analysis of smart laminates using piezo-
electric MITC plate and shell elements, Comput. Struct., vol. 83, pp.
1153–1163, 2005.
[6] S. Jayasankar, S. Mahesh, S. Narayanan, and C. Padmanabhan,
Dynamic analysis of layered composite shells using nine node
degenerate shell elements, J. Sound Vib., vol. 299, pp. 1–11,
2007.
[7] D. Marinkovic, H. Koppe, and U. Gabbert, Degenerated shell ele-
ment for geometrically nonlinear analysis of thin-walled piezoelectric
active structures, Smart Mater. Struct., art. 17015030 (10 pp.), vol. 17,
2008.
[8] V. Balamurugan and S. Narayanan, A piezolaminated composite
degenerated shell finite element for active control of structures with
distributed piezosensors and actuators, Smart Mater. Struct., art.
17035031 (18 pp.), vol. 17, 2008.
[9] D. Marinkovic, H. Koppe, and U. Gabbert, Numerically efficient finite
element formulation for modeling active composite laminates, Mech.
Adv. Mater. Struct., vol. 13, pp. 379–392, 2006.
[10] T. Roy and D. Chakraborty, Genetic algorithm based optimal design
for vibration control of composite shell structures using piezoelec-
tric sensors and actuators, Int. J. Mech. Mater. Des., vol. 5, pp. 45–60,
2009.
[11] T. Belytschko, B.L. Wong, and H. Stolarski, Assumed strain stabiliza-
tion procedure for the 9-node Lagrange shell element, Int. J. Numer.
Methods Eng., vol. 28, pp. 385–414, 1989.
[12] K.J. Bathe and E.N. Dvorkin, A formulation of general shell elements
the use of mixed interpolation of tensorial components, Int. J. Numer.
Methods Eng., vol. 22, pp. 697–722, 1986.
[13] K.Y. Sze, An explicit hybrid-stabilized 9-node Lagrangian shell ele-
ment, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., vol. 117, pp. 361–379,
1994.
[14] L.Q. Yao and L. Lu, Hybrid-stabilized solid-shell models of laminated
composite piezoelectric structures under non-linear distribution of
electric potential through thickness, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., vol.
58, pp. 1499–1522, 2003.
[15] K.Y. Sze and Y.S. Pan, Hybrid finite element models for piezoelectric
materials, J. Sound Vib., vol. 226, pp. 519–547, 1999.
[16] H. Kioua and S. Mirza, Piezoelectric induced bending and twisting of
laminated composite shallow shells, Smart Mater. Struct., vol. 9, pp.
476–484, 2000.