Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composite Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct

Buckling and post-buckling responses of smart doubly curved composite T

shallow shells embedded in SMA fiber under hygro-thermal loading
⁎
Mahsa Karimiasla, Farzad Ebrahimia, Bekir Akgözb,
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
b
Akdeniz University, Engineering Faculty, Civil Engineering Department, Division of Mechanics, Antalya, Turkey

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In this research, the post-buckling behaviors of doubly curved composite shells in hygro-thermal environment
Thermal loading are investigated by employing multiple scales perturbation method. Three-phase composites shells with
SMA polymer/Carbon nanotube/fiber and polymer/Graphene platelet/fiber (PGF) and Shape Memory Alloy (SMA)/
Composite shallow shell matrix according to Halpin-Tsai model are taken into consideration. The displacement-strain of laminated
Hygro-thermal loading
doubly curved shells via third-order shear deformation theory (TSDT) and using von-Kármán nonlinear shell
von-Kármán geometric nonlinearity
TSDT
theory is obtained. The governing equations of shallow shell are derived by implementing Hamilton's principle.
For investigating correctness and accuracy, this paper is validated with other previous researches. Finally, dif-
ferent parameters such as volume fraction of SMA, temperature rise, various distribution patterns, aspect and
curvature ratios are considered in this article. It is found that these parameters have significant effect on the
thermal buckling loading.

1. Introduction actuators. According to FSDT, thermally post-buckled plates are studied

Shape Memory Alloys (SMAs) have been used for varied smart ap-
plications and components of adaptive structures. One of the most
significant form of memory alloys is their application, employing fi-
brous sensors or actuators. The intelligence of the fibrous shape
memory alloys composites will make sense, weight savings, some
control over directionality in actuation and the resulting SMA effects. In
recent years, it has been found that nonlinear vibration of smart com-
posite structures has a lot of applications in differents industrial such as
automotive, robotics, civil structures, aircraft and spacecraft, etc. Based
on the corresponding points the mentioned nonlinear static and dy-
namic behaviors of composite structures investigated in significant
previous research that are presented some of them. The nonlinear vi-
bration of composite shells in hygro-thermal environments was in-
vestigated by Naidu et al. [1]. Heydari et al. [2] researched the non-
linear bending of functionally graded (FG)/carbon nanotube (CNT)
plates via first-order shear deformation theory (FSDT) subjected to
uniform pressure and embedded in elastomeric medium based on
generalized differential quadrature method (GDQM). The nonlinear
bending of hybrid plates including CNT-reinforced composite layers
embedded in elastic foundations where influence of matrix cracks by
Fan and Wang [3]. Shen [4] compared the buckling and post-buckling
responses of FG plates with piezoelectric fiber reinforced composite
by Lee and Lee [5]. Yang et al. [6] studied the nonlinear dynamic in-
stability behavior of FG/polymer/GPL nanocomposite by using Ti-
moshenko beam theory. Nonlinear static analysis of FGCNT-reinforced
doubly curved shell panel subjected to uniform thermal loading was
performed by Mehar and Panda [7]. The material properties of the
carbon nanotube and matrix were considered via four different dis-
tribution patterns. Yazdi [8] presented the nonlinear vibration behavior
of doubly curved cross-ply shell. The displacements-strains have been
obtained via by Donnell’s shell theory and von-Kármán type geometric
nonlinearity. Homotopy perturbation method has been utilized to solve
the resulting equations. Singh et al. [9] investigated nonlinear vibration
behavior of doubly curved composite shell panels based on higher-order
shear deformation theory (HSDT). Finally, the influences of aspect
ratio, curvature ratio, stacking sequence have been studied. Nonlinear
vibration of cylindrical shell in the framework of higher-order shear
deformation theory is presented by Amabili and Reddy [10]. They il-
lustrated nonlinear term has significant role to predict the nonlinear
response of composite shell. Alijani et al. [11] studied primary and
subharmonic responses of FGM shallow shell by multiple scales analy-
tical method. Based on Donnell’s type nonlinear strain–displacement
relationships have been obtained. They found that two-to-one internal
resonance may be taken measure in doubly curved FGM shells by kind
of the volume fraction exponent. Continued from previous work, large

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: bekirakgoz@akdeniz.edu.tr (B. Akgöz).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.110988
Received 21 December 2018; Received in revised form 7 May 2019; Accepted 14 May 2019
Available online 16 May 2019
0263-8223/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Karimiasl, et al. Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988

amplitude forced vibrations of rectangular plates via higher-order shear nanoshell. Recently, large amplitude vibration of graphene-reinforced
deformation theory have been investigated by Alijani et al. [12]. From composite cylindrical shell subjected to thermal environment is in-
the experimental and analytical methods, they presented that nonlinear vestigated by Shen et al. [87]. In the framework of Reddy’s third-order
frequency result in important effect in nonlinear to linear response of shear deformation theory and von-Kármán assumption, the linear and
plates. In order to, fundemental frequency of FG doubly curved shallow nonlinear relationship equations of displacement-strain are obtained.
shell was studied by Chorfi and Houmat [13]. They investigated the The equations of motion are solved by perturbation method. Two end
influences of thicknes ratio, volume fraction versus nolinear to linear conditions movable and unmovable are considered. They carried out
vibration by finite element method (FEM). The fundamental frequency the effect of several parameters such as temperature rising, different
of FGM doubly curved shell embedded in elastic foundation is pre- distribution patterns, end conditions, stacking sequence.
sented by Shen et al. [14]. In the framework of shear deformation Avcar and Mohammed [88] investigated the vibration analysis of
theory and von-Kármán nonlinear assumption, the trains-displacements functionally graded beams resting on Winkler- Pasternak foundations.
have been obtained. The influences of volume fraction index, Pasternak They discussed the effects of functionally graded material properties
foundation, curvature ratio and other parameters have been in- and Winkler-Pasternak type elastic foundation and on natural fre-
vestigated. Park et al. [15] presented the thermally buckled of non- quency of beams. The large amplitude bending analysis of porous
linear vibration of the composite plate with SMA fibers based on first functionally graded curved nanotubes has been investigated by She
shear deformable theory. It is represented that by using SMA fibers the et al. [89]. They presented that the nonlinear bending behavior of the
thermal large deflection and the critical temperature are decreased. curved nanotubes is influenced by the power law index, porosity dis-
Nonlinear large amplitude of thermally post-buckled laminated com- tribution, size effects, physical dimension boundary conditions and
posite shell panel with shape SMA fibers is investigated by Panda et al. temperature variation. However, thermal buckling of composite doubly
[16]. They represented the influence of several parameters such as curved shell embedded with SMA fiber has not been reported until now.
support conditions, amplitude ratios, curvature ratios, lamination In the present study, thermal buckling and post-buckling behaviors of
schemes thickness ratios, aspect ratios and volume fractions of SMA. the smart doubly curved composite shells embedded in SMA fiber are
The stability of a generic three-layered truncated conical shell con- investigated. In addition, the influences of aspect ratio, curvature ratio,
taining a functionally graded (FG) layer subjected has been investigated moisture-temperature variation, SMA volume fraction and various
by Sofiyev et al. [17]. They indicated that the results show that the pattern distributions on thermal buckling loading are studied in detail.
critical parameters are affected by the configurations of the constituent
materials, the variations of the thickness of the FG layer and the var- 2. Theory and formulation
iation of the shell geometry.
Rapid progress in technology lead to use of miniaturized structural A composite doubly curved shallow shell with length of l, thickness
elements to design micro- and nano-electro mechanical systems (MEMS of h and shell curvatures of R1, R2 is illustrated in Fig. 1. The shell is
and NEMS) such as sensors [18–20], switches [21,22], actuators [23], embedded in a distributed hygro-thermal load, which is considered in
and resonators [24]. Sensitive characterization of the mechanical the symmetry plane of the shell cross section, i.e. in the x-y plane. It is
properties of typical small-sized structural elements is crucial in optimal assumed that first layer consists of PCF, second layer is including PGF,
design of aforementioned devices. Therefore, experimental methods, and third layer consists of SMA/matrix. The effective constituent of the
atomistic and continuum modeling have been utilized. Molecular dy- multi-layer PCF and PGF composite can be presented via Halpin-Tsai
namics simulation is a time-consuming and computationally expensive model [90] and micromechanics approaches of scheme have been ex-
method [25,26]. It can be thought that the continuous models may be pressed by Shen et al. [4]. The properties of the PCF and PGF shell are
useful to analyze the mechanical characteristics of such structures. concentrated to be orthotropic can be presented as [4]:
Unfortunately, classical continuum mechanics fails to predict the small
scale effect of micro- and nano-sized structures in the absence of any E11 = Vf E11F + Vmcn mgpl Emcn mgpl (1)
material length scale parameters. Hence, several non-classical (higher-
1
order) elasticity theories have been developed to determine the me-
E22
chanical characteristics of small-sized structures, such as couple stress
1 Vmcn mgpl
theory [27–29], nonlocal elasticity theory [30,31], strain gradient = + − Vf
theories [32–35], surface elasticity [36,37] and nonlocal strain gradient E11F Emcn mgpl
V 2f Emcn mgpl 2
Vmcn mgpl Emcn mgpl
theory [38]. Avcar [39] studied the free vibration response of imperfect + − 2Vf Vmcn
F mgpl
functionally graded beams with porosities. Sofiyev et al. [40] presented E22 Emcn mgpl
Vmnc mgpl − F
the stability behavior of functionally graded material cylindrical and Vf E22 + Vmcn mgpl Emcn mgpl (2)
conical shells embedded in elastic foundations. They discussed the ef-
1 Vf Vmcn mgpl
fects of several parameters such as the elastic foundation, the variation = F +
of shell characteristics; boundary conditions and material composition G12 G11 Gmcn mgpl (3)
on the values of critical combined loads. The separate and combined
ρ = Vf ρf + Vmcn mgpl ρmcn mgpl (4)
effects of shear, material non-homogeneity deformation and rotary in-
ertia on natural frequencies of the beam have been presented by Avcar
ϑ12 = Vf vf + Vmcn mgpl vmcn mgpl (5)
et al. [41]. She et al. [42] studied the size-dependent thermal buckling
and post-buckling analysis of functionally graded materials of nano- where E11F
and F
are Young’s modules of CNT/GPL, G12 is shear mod-
E22
tubes based on a refined beam theory. They presented the effects of ulus and ρ is mass density, ϑ12 is Poisson's ratio of fibers. The corre-
several parameters such as porosity volume fraction, boundary condi- sponding properties of the isotropic matrices of CNT/GPL composite are
tions, small-scale parameter and the volume fraction index on thermal presented with Emcn mgpl, Gmcn mgpl, ρmcn mgpl and Vmcn mgpl and also vo-
buckling and post-buckling of FGM nanotubes. lume fractions of the fiber are represented by Vf . Via Halpin–Tsai
Until this time, a number of studies have been performed based on model, composites tensile modulus has been expressed [91]:
the aforementioned non-classical elasticity theories to investigate the
static and dynamic responses of small-sized structures such as rods
[43–51], beams [52–63], plates [64–73], and shells [74–85]. Based on Emcn =
⎡
EM ⎢ ⎛ 1 + 2βdd Vcn gpl ⎞
⎛ 1 + 2 lcn gpl β Vcn
⎜
dcn gpl
ll
( ) gpl ⎞
⎟⎥
⎤
mgpl ⎢5 ⎜ ⎟ + 3 ⎥
the nonlocal strain gradient theory Sahmani et al. [86] investigated the 8 ⎢ ⎝ 1 − βdd Vcn gpl ⎠ ⎜ 1 − βll Vcn gpl ⎟⎥
⎜ ⎟
buckling and post-buckling of multilayer graphene platelet-reinforced ⎣ ⎝ ⎠⎦ (6)

2
M. Karimiasl, et al. Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988

Fig. 1. Geometry of doubly curved composite shell in hygro-thermal environment.

cn gpl ρmnc = Vcn gpl ρcn gpl + vm ρm (11)

βll =
E11
EM
−( dcn gpl
4t cn gpl ) mgpl

cn gpl Emnc mgpl

+( )
E11 lcn gpl
Gmnc mgpl =
EM 2hcn gpl (7) 2(1 + vmcn mgpl ) (12)
cn gpl Vmcn = Vm (13)
βdd =
E11
EM
−( dcn gpl
4hcn gpl ) mgpl

where vm and vmcn mgpl are Poisson’s ratios of the matrix, CNT, and GPL.
cn gpl
+( )
E11 dcn gpl
EM 2hcn gpl (8) Also, α11 and α22 refer to the thermal expansion coefficients of long-
itudinal and lateral directions, respectively [4]. So α11f is the thermal
cn gpl
where E11 refers to the Young’s modulus, expansion coefficient of longitudinal fiber and α 22f denotes in transverse
hcn gpl , dcn gpl , lcn gpl presented thickness, outer diameter, length and directions of the fiber. αmcn mgpl can be expressed as [94]:
Vcn gpl are the volumes fraction of Carbon Nanotubes and Graphene
Platelet, respectively, and Vmcn gpl and Emcn mgpl are the volumes fraction Vf E11f α11f + Vmcn mgpl Emcn mgpl αmcn mgpl
α11 =
of the matrixes and Young’s modulus, respectively. For the different Vf E11f + Vmcn mgpl Emcn mgpl (14)
distribution composite shallow shell, the weight fraction of CNT and
GPL changes layerwise in accordance with the according distribution α22 = (1 + Vf ) Vf α 22f + (1 + Vmnc mgpl ) Vmcn mgpl αmcn mgpl − v12 α11 (15)
pattern such as U, X, A and O are studied. CNT and GPL volume fraction
of n-th layer corresponding to each distribution pattern can be pre-
1 ⎧ ⎛ Vgpl E gpl α gpl + vm Em αm ⎞ ⎫
cn cn cn

sented as [92]: αmcn =

2⎨ ⎜ v cn E cn + vm Em
mcn
( )
⎟ ⎬ 1 − vmgpl +(1 + vm) αm
U: n
Vcn = Vcn ⎩⎝ gpl gpl ⎠⎭
gpl gpl (9a)
Vm + (1 + vcn mgpl ) α cn mgpl Vcn mgpl (16)
|2n − nt − 1| ⎞
X: n
Vcn gpl = 2Vcn gpl ⎛ ⎜ ⎟ where αmcn mgpl and βmcn mgpl are the thermal expansion and moisture
⎝ nt ⎠ (9b) coefficients of the epoxy resin CNT and GPL matrix and α cn gpl are the
thermal expansion coefficients of the CNT and GPL, respectively.
n
O: Vcn = 2Vcn ⎛ − |2n − nt − 1| ⎞
gpl ⎜1 ⎟
gpl
⎝ nt ⎠ (9c) Vf E11f + Vmcn mgpl Emcn mgpl βm
β11 =
Vf E11f + Vmcn mgpl Emcn mgpl (17)
|2n − 1| ⎞
A: V ncn = V cn ⎛ ⎜ ⎟

gpl gpl
⎝ nt ⎠ (9d) β22 = (1 + Vmcn mgpl ) Vmcn mgpl βm − v12 β11 (18)
where the total number of layers can be expressed by nt and the total
volumes fraction of CNT GPL can be presented by [93]: 2.1. Properties of SMA in matrix of composite
wcn gpl
Vcn gpl = ρcn gpl ρcn gpl The properties of SMA are expressed by Park et al. [15]. In this
wcn + ( ρm ) ( − ρm )w
cn
(10) present research it is considered that the SMA fibers have uniformly
distributed. The elastic properties of composite doubly curved shell
where ρcn gpl and ρm are the mass densities of the CNT/GPL and the with SMA fibers can be expressed by:
epoxy resin matrix, respectively and wcn gpl is the mass fraction of the
m
CNT and GPL. The mass densities of CNT and GPL can be presented as: E11 = Vm E11 + Vs Es (19)

3
M. Karimiasl, et al. Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988

m
Es E22 0 ∂w 0 ∂w 0
E22 = τyz ⎧ γyz ⎫ k1 ⎧ φy + ⎫ 4 ⎧ φy + ⎫
m
Vs E22 + Vm Es (20) { } 2 ⎧ yz ⎫
τxz = ⎨ γ 0 ⎬ + z ⎨ k 1 ⎬ = ⎨
⎩ xz ⎭ ⎩ xz ⎭ ⎩ φx +
∂y
∂w 0 ⎬
− 2 z3
h ⎨φ +
∂y
∂w 0 ⎬
(30b)
m
∂x ⎭ ⎩ x ∂x ⎭
G12 Gs
G12 = m
G12 Gs + Vm Gs (21) The constitutive relation of the composite doubly curved shell can
be expressed as:
m
G23 = G23 Vm + Vs Gs (22)
σ n n εxx − α11 (T (z ) − T0 ) ⎫
⎧ xx ⎫ ⎡ Q11 Q12 0 0 0 ⎤ ⎧
ϑ12 = m
Vm v12 + Vs vs (23) ⎪ ⎪ ⎢ Q12 Q22 0 0 0 ⎥ ⎪
σyy n n
⎪
εyy − α22 (T (z ) − T0 ) ⎪
⎪
τyz = ⎢ Q n 0 0 ⎥
γxz
m m ⎨τ ⎬ ⎢ 0 0 44
n 0 ⎥ ⎨ ⎬
α11 =
Vm E11 α11 + Vs Es αs ⎪ xy ⎪ ⎢ 0 0 0 Q55 n ⎥ ⎪ γxy ⎪
⎩ τxz ⎭ ⎢ Q ⎪
E11 (24) ⎣ 0 0 0 0 66 ⎥ ⎦⎩ γxz ⎪
⎭ (31)

α22 = m
Vm α 22 +Vs αs (25) If the fiber angle with the geometric x axis is expressed by θ, the
relation (31) can be transferred to the geometric coordinates as:
m m
Vm E11 β11 + Vs Es βs
β11 = −n −n
E11 (26) σ ⎡ Q11 Q12 0 0 0 ⎤ ⎧ εxx − α11 (T (z ) − T0 ) ⎫
⎧ xx ⎫ ⎢ − n − n 0 0 0 ⎥ ⎪ εyy − α22 (T (z ) − T0 ) ⎪
⎪ σyy ⎪ ⎢Q Q −n ⎥ ⎪ ⎪
s
β22 = Vs α 22 +Vm βm (27) τyz = ⎢ 12 22 Q44 −0 0 ⎥ γxz
⎨τ ⎬ ⎢ 0 0 n 0
⎥ ⎨ ⎬
⎪ xy ⎪ Q γxy
ρ = Vm ρm + Vs ρs τ ⎢ 0 0 0 55 − n ⎥ ⎪ ⎪
(28) ⎩ xz ⎭T 0 0 Q66 ⎪ γxz ⎪
⎣ 0 0 ⎦T ⎩ ⎭T (32)
m m
where E11and are the Young’s modules of matrix, G12 and G23 are
E22
The reduced stiffness modulus of composite doubly curved can be
the shear modules, ρ is mass density, ϑ12 is Poisson’s ratio. The corre-
expressed by:
sponding properties of the isotropic matrixes of SMA composite are
represented with Es , Gs, ρs and Vs and volume fractions and mass density E11 ν12 E22 E22
m m
Q11 = , Q12 = , Q22 = , Q44 = G23, Q55
of the matrix are denoted by Vm,and ρm ,respectively. Finally, α11 , α 22 , 1 − ν12 ν21 1 − ν12 ν21 1 − ν12 ν21
m m
and β11 , β22 are the thermal expansion and moisture coefficients of the = G13, Q66 = G12 (33)
matrix and αs and βs are the thermal expansion and moisture coefficients
of the SMA, respectively. Transformed shell principal coordinates are in expressed Appendix
A. Now via minimum total potential energy principle can be written as:
2.2. Kinematic relations δ (U − W ) = 0 (34)

In the framework third-order shear deformable theory, the dis- where U is the strain energy and V is the work done by external loads.
placement fields at an arbitrary point in the composite shell can be The strain energy is expressed as:
expressed as [95]: N
1 a b h
U= ∑ ∫0 ∫0 ∫h n [(σxx εxx + σyy εyy + τyz γyz + τxz γxz + τxy γxy )]
4 ∂w0 ⎞ 2 n=1
n−1
u = u 0 + zφx − 2 z 3 ⎛φx +
3h ⎝ ∂x ⎠ (29a) z ⎞⎛ z⎞
× ⎛1 +⎜ 1+ dc1 dc2 dz
⎟⎜ ⎟

⎝ R1 ⎠⎝ R2⎠ (35)
4 3⎛ ∂w0 ⎞
v = v0 + zφy − z φ +
The first variation of strain energy can be obtained as:
⎜ ⎟
3h2 ⎝ y ∂y ⎠ (29b)

w = w0 (29c) δU
N
a b 2
In these equations, u 0 , v0 , and w0 are the original displacements of = ∑ ∫0 ∫0 0
[(Nxx δεxx 0
+Mxx δk xx 2
+Pxx δk xx 0
+Nyy δε yy + Myy δk
yy
n=1
the shell in the x, y directions; the rotations of transverse normal at the
2 0 2 2
0 1
mid-plane in the x and y axes represented by φx and +Pyy δk yy +Nxy δε xy + Mxy δk +Pxy δk xy + Kyy δγyz + Ryy k yz + Kxx
xy
φy .u 0 , v0, w0, φx , φy are the functions of the five original variables which
z ⎞⎛ z⎞
describe the shell displacements. According to von Kármán type geo- 0
δγxz 1
+ Rxx k xz × ⎛1 + 1+ ⎜ dc1 dc2 ⎟⎜ ⎟

metric nonlinearity, the strain components εxx , εyy and γxy can be shown ⎝ R1 ⎠ ⎝ R2 ⎠ (36)
as: where, for convenience a shell by rectangular base in dimension a and b
0 0 2 in c1 and c2 directions, has been considered. q1, q2 are the Lame coeffi-
ε ⎧ εxx ⎫ ⎧ k xx ⎫ ⎧ k xx ⎫
⎧ xx ⎫ ⎪ 0 ⎪ cients of the shell can be expressed as
εyy = ε yy + z ⎪ k yy
0 ⎪ 3
⎪ 2⎪
+ z k yy
⎨γ ⎬ ⎨ 0 ⎬
⎩ xy ⎭ ⎪ γxy ⎪
⎨ 0⎬
⎪ k xy ⎪
⎨ 2⎬
⎪ k xy ⎪
q1 = c1 1 + ( Z
R1 ), q
2 2 ( Z
)
= c.2 1 + R .R1 and R2 are the principal radii of
⎩ ⎭ ⎩ ⎭ ⎩ ⎭ curvature in q1 and q1 directions, respectively
2 ∂φx The first variation of work can be expressed in the following form:
⎧ ∂u0 + w0 + 1 ∂w0 ⎫
⎪ ∂x R1 2 ∂x ( )
⎪
⎧
⎪ ∂∂φx
⎫
⎪
⎡qhyg ∂w0 ∂δw0 ⎤ dc1 dc2
⎪ ∂v ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ 2π L
2 y 4 ∫0 ∫0
=
⎨ ∂y
0
+
1 ∂w 0
2 ∂y ( ) +
w0
R2 ⎬
+z
⎨ ∂y ⎬
− 2 z3
3h
δW =
⎣ ∂x ∂x ⎦ (37)
⎪ ∂u0 ∂w ∂w ∂u0 ⎪ ⎪ ∂φx ∂φy ⎪
⎪ ∂y + ∂x ∂y + ∂x ⎪ ⎪ ∂y + ∂x ⎪ where qhyg can be defined by:
⎩ ⎭ ⎩ ⎭
qhyg = N Tn +N Hn (38a)
( ) ⎫⎪
∂φx ∂ w0 2
⎧ +
⎪ ∂x ∂x 2
⎪ ∂φy ⎪ N Tn andN Hn are applied forces due to variation of temperature and
⎨ ∂y
+ ( ) ⎬
∂2w 0
∂y 2 moisture are written as:
⎪ ∂φx ∂φy ⎪
⎪ ∂y + ∂x + 2 ∂x ∂y
⎩
( )⎪⎭
∂2w 0
(30a)
N Tn = ∫h
hn

n−1
[Q11 α11 + Q12 α12](T − T)
1 dz
(38b)

4
M. Karimiasl, et al. Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988

hn ∞ ∞
nπx
N Hn = ∫h n−1
[Q11 β11 + Q12 β12](H − H1) dz
(38c) v0 (x , y ) = ∑ ∑ Vmn sin ⎛ ⎞ cos(my )
n=1 m=1 ⎝ b ⎠ (47b)
and T − T1, H − H1are variations of temperature and moisture, T can be ∞ ∞
defined by sinusoidal temperature following as: nπx
w0 (x , y ) = ∑ ∑ Wmn sin ⎛ ⎞ sin(my )
n=1 m=1 ⎝ b ⎠ (47c)
π 1 z
T = T1 + ΔT ⎛1 − cos ⎛ + ⎞ ⎞ ∞ ∞
⎝ 2 ⎝2 2 ⎠⎠ (39) nπx
φx (x , y ) = ∑ ∑ φx mn cos ⎛ ⎞ sin(my )
By setting the coefficients of δu , δv , δw , δφx and δφy to zero and n=1 m=1 ⎝ b ⎠ (47d)
substituting Eqs. (36) and (37) into Eq. (34) may be stated as: ∞ ∞
nπx
∂Nx ∂Nxy φy (x , y ) = ∑ ∑ φymn sin ⎛ ⎞ cos(my )
+ =0 n=1 m=1 ⎝ b ⎠ (47e)
∂x ∂y (40a)
where Umn, Vmn, Wmn, φx mn and φy mn refer to the constant coeffi-
∂Nxy ∂Ny cients; n and m are the wave numbers in the x and y directions, re-
+ =0 nπx
∂x ∂y (40b) spectively. Here, b = l is assumed.
Substituting Eqs. (47a)–(47e) into Eqs. (40a)–(40e) and driving the
∂K x ∂K y ∂ ⎡ ⎛ ∂w0 u ∂w v Navier’s solution procedure yields the following expressions
+ + Nx − 0 ⎞ + Nxy ⎛ 0 − 0 ⎞ ⎤
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂x ∂y ∂x ⎢
⎣ ⎝ ∂x R1 ⎠ ⎝ ∂y R ⎥
2 ⎠⎦ L11 Umn + L12 Vmn + L13 Wmn + L14 φx mn = 0 (48a)
∂ ∂w u ∂w v
+ ⎡Nxy ⎛ 0 − 0 ⎞ + Ny ⎛ 0 − 0 ⎞ ⎤ + s
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ L21 Umn + L22 Vmn + L23 Wmn + L24 φx mn + L25 φy mn = 0 (48b)
∂y ⎢
⎣ ⎝ ∂x R1 ⎠ ⎝ ∂y R2 ⎠ ⎥
⎦ 1
2 2 2 3
⎛ ∂ Py + 2 ∂ Pxy + ∂ Py ⎟⎞ − Nx − Ny + qhyg = 0 L31 Umn + L32 Vmn + L33 Wmn + L34 Wmn + L35 φx mn + L36 φy mn = 0 (48c)
⎜
∂x 2 ∂x ∂y ∂y2 ⎠ R1 R2
⎝ (40c) L41 Umn + L42 Vmn + L43 Wmn + L44 φx mn + L45 φy mn = 0 (48d)
∂M x ∂M xy
+ − Kx = 0 L51 Umn + L52 Vmn + L53 Wmn + L54 φx mn + L55 φy mn = 0 (48e)
∂x ∂y (40d)
where the operators Lij are defined in Appendix B.
∂M xy ∂M y By substituting Eq. (47) into Eq. (48) to solve the unknown func-
+ − Ky = 0
∂x ∂y (40e) tions Umn (t ), Vmn (t ), φx mn (t ), φy mn (t ) in terms of Wmn (t ) the nonlinear
where differential equation of composite doubly curved shell can be driven as:

4 d 2Wmn (t )
Mi = Mi − s1 Pi (i = 1, 2, 6), s1 = , s2 = 3s1 + P1 Wmn (t )+P2 Wmn 2 (t ) + P3 Wmn3 (t ) = 0
3h2 (41a) dt 2 (49)
Where initial conditions are illustrated by:
Kj = Kj − s2 Rj (j = 1, 2) (41b)
−
Here, Nx , Ny , Nxy andMx , My , M xy are expressed the total in-plane W dWmn (t )
Wmn (0) = , =0
forces and moment resultants and Px , Py , Pxy and Rx , Ry are the third h dt t=0 (50)
−
order stresses resultants can be written as:
A*=W denotes the dimensionless deflections of composite shell.
h
h 2
Nx , Mx , Px = ∫−h 2 σx (1, z, z 3) dz The analytical approximation is an example of a generalized
(42) asymptotic series, as the coefficients are also functions of the asymp-
h 2 totic ordering parameter, which is e in this case. Such analytical ap-
Ny , My , Py = ∫−h 2 σy (1, z, z 3) dz (43) proximations can be constructed by using the method of multiple scales
or the method of averaging. This construction is illustrated here by
h 2
Px , Rx = ∫−h 2 τxz (1, z, z 3) dz (44)
using the method of multiple scales. Let [96]:

h 2
w = w0 (T0, T1, T2, ⋯) + εw1 (T0, T1, T2, ⋯) + ε 2w2 (T0, T1, T2, ⋯) (51)
Py , Ry = ∫−h 2 τyz (1, z, z 3) dz
(45) where σ is called the perturbation parameter and the fast timescale T0
and slow timescale T1 are given by
3. Solution procedure T0 = t (52a)
T1 = εt (52b)
The boundary conditions of the composite have been considered
simply-supported (S-S): After substituting Eq. (53) into Eq. (50) and noting Eq. (54), the
following hierarchy of equations can be obtained for O(1) and O(e),
u 0 (x , 0) = u 0 (x , b) = 0, v0 (0, y ) = v0 (x , b) = 0 (46a)
respectively.
w0 (x , 0) = w0 (x , b) = 0 (46b) d
= D0 + εD1
φy (0, y ) = φy (a, y ) = 0, φx (x , 0) = φx (x , b) = 0 dt (53a)
(46c)
d
Nx (x , 0) = Nx (x , b) = 0, Ny (0, y ) = Ny (a, y ) = 0 (46d) = D02 + 2εD0 D1 + ε 2 (D12 + 2D0 D1)
dt (53b)
Mx (x , 0) = Mx (x , b) = 0, My (0, y ) = My (a, y ) = 0 (46e) Substituting Eq. (53) into Eq. (49) and equating the coefficients of ε
to zero yield the following differential equations:
Furthermore, the displacements of the composite shell are driven to
obtain the boundary conditions as following: ε 0: D02 w0 + Ω2w0 = 0 (54)
∞ ∞
nπx ε1: D02 w1 + Ω2w1 = −2D0 D1 w0 − μD0 w0 − P3 w03 − kcos (ω0 T0 + σT1)
u (x , y ) = ∑ ∑ Umn cos ⎛ ⎞ sin(my )
n=1 m=1 ⎝ b ⎠ (47a) (55)

5
M. Karimiasl, et al. Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988

Table 1
The properties of multiscale composite shell [86,98].
Carbon (fiber) Epoxy (matrix) Carbon nanotube Graphene platelet

E11f (GPa) = 223.05 vm = 0.34 E cn (Gpa) = 640(1 − 0.0005ΔT ) E gpl (Gpa) = (3.52 − 0.0034T )

E11f (GPa) = 23.1 ρm (kgm) = 1150 dcn (m) = 0.14 × 10−9 t gpl (m) = 0.034 × 10−9

G11f (GPa) = 8.96 Em (Gpa) = (3.52 − 0.0034T ) t cn (m) = 0.034 × 10−9 l gpl (m) = 0.25 × 10−9

υ f = 0.2 α (K−1) = 45(1 + 0.0005T ) × 10−6 l cn (m) = 0.25 × 10−9 ϑ12 = 0.33

α (K−1) 10−6 ϑ12 = 0.33 ρ gpl (kg m3) = 1062.5

ρf ( ) = 0.2
kg
m3
= 45(1 + 0.0005T ) ×

α11 (K−1) = −0.54 × 10−6 β = 2.68 × 10−3 wt%−1 ρcn (kg m3) = 1350 –

α22 (K−1) = 10.88 × 10−6 – – –

With this approach, it turns out to be convenient to write the so- Table 3
lution of Eq. (51) as: Comparison of initial deflection buckling loading for (0/90)5T cylindrical shells
(l 2 Rh = 500, R/h = 20).
w0 (T0, T1, T2, ⋯) = exp(iT0) + A exp (−iT0) (56)
T(K) W*/h
where A is an unknown complex function and A is the complex con-
jugate of A. The governing equations for A are obtained by requiring present [97] present [97] present [97]
w1to be periodic in T0 and extracting secular terms which are coeffi-
0.0 0.05 0.1
cients of e ±iω0 T0 the solvability equation will be determined as:
300 1.0 1.0 0.823 0.817 0.719 0.713
1
2iω0 (A'+μA) + 3P3 A2 A − qexp(−iσT1) = 0 400 1.0 1.0 0.834 0.829 0.731 0.725
2 (57) 500 1.0 1.0 0.849 0.842 0.745 0.738
Let A be in polar form:
1
A= aexp(iγ )
2 (58)

4. Numerical results and discussion

Numerical results of the post-buckling of doubly curved shell are

presented in this section. The properties of composite shell are estab-
lished in Tables 1 and 2, furthermore we assumed Elliptic paraboloid
shallow shell (R1 ≠ R2) . Carbon nanotube and graphene platelet with
effective thickness tcnt = 0.0348 nm and tgpl = 0.0348 nm are selected
as reinforcements and G13 = G23 = 0.5G12 considered.
Table 3 presents a comparison of initial deflection of cylindrical
shells for (0/90)5T, l 2 Rh = 500, R/h = 20) between the present results
and the results of Shen and Xiang [97]. As well as, it is brightly that the
results of this comparison are very similar. It is noticeable that for a Fig. 2. Variation of elastic modulus of SMA versus temperature.
composite shell without initial deflection, the buckling temperature can
be obtained from Eq. (53) by setting W*/h = 0 and W/h = 0.
Figs. 2 and 3 illustrate the Young’s modulus of SMA and the re-
covery stress versus temperature rise with high nonlinearity. The in-
fluence of the initial stresses and initial deflections is considered in the
incremental method.
The influence of volume fraction of SMA on the bifurcation and
thermal post-buckling load–deflection of doubly curved shallow shell
a b a a
with R = 0.1, R = 0.05, h = 2 mm, h = 10, b = 1, ΔH = 1, T = 300
1 2
and (m, n = 1,2) is plotted in Fig. 4. Stacking sequence is considered

Table 2
Material properties of SMA [15]
Composite matrix properties SMA

E11 = 155 GPa ES from Fig. 1 [15] Fig. 3. Alteration of the recovery stress of SMA with respect to temperature.
E22 = 8.07 GPa σr from Fig. 1(b) [15]
G12 = 4.55 GPa α11 (C −1) = 10.26 × 10−6
G23 = 3.25 GPa
cross ply [0 PCF /90 PGF 0 SMA ]S. It is brightly shown that the volume
ϑS = 0.33
ϑ12 = 0.22 fraction of SMA yields increasing the thermal post-buckling load–de-
α11 (C −1) = −0.07 × 10−6 flection curves and bifurcations magnitude. The stiffness of the struc-
α22 (C −1) = 30.1 × 10−6 ture or the slope of the load–deflection curve, decreases with increasing

6
M. Karimiasl, et al. Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988

Fig. 4. Influence of different volume fractions of SMA versus to thermal post- Fig. 6. Effect of curvature ratio with different volume fractions of SMA with
a b a
buckling load–deflection of doubly curved shell with R = 0.1m, R = 0.05m , respect to post-buckling-deflection of doubly curved shell with R = 0.1,
1 2 1
h = 2 mm, T = 300, H = 1 and (m, n = 1,2). h = 2 mm, T = 300, ΔH = 1 and (m, n = 1,1).

SMA. At the collapse load the load–deflection curve has zero slope and,
if the load is maintained as the structure deforms, failure of the struc-
ture is usually dramatic and almost instantaneous.
Fig. 5 depicts the effect of different aspect ratios and volume frac-
tions of SMA with U distribution pattern versus thermal post-buckling
a b a a
load–deflection with R = 0.1, R = 0.05, h = 2 mm, h = 10, b = 1,
1 2
T = 300 ΔH = 1 and stacking sequence [0 PCF /90 PGF 0 SMA ]S. It can be
found that aspect ratio rise leading up increasing nonlinear frequency
and by increasing volume fraction of SMA magnitude thermal post-
buckling load–deflection curve decrease. The snap-through phenom-
enon occurs when the shell is supported by a volume fraction of aspect
ratios.
Influence of curvature ratio
b
R2( ) under thermal post-buckling load-
PGF
deflection of cross ply PCF
[0 /90 0 SMA ]S doubly curved shell with
a
different volume fraction of SMA, R = 0.1, h = 2 mm, T = 300 and
1
ΔH = 1 is presented in Fig. 6. It is found that increasing both of cur- Fig. 7. Influence of different distribution patterns versus to thermal post-
a b
vature value and volume fractions of SMA lead to decrease the thermal buckling load–deflection of doubly curved shell with R = 0.1, R = 0.05,
1 2
post-buckling load-deflection. It is important to express that the effect h = 2 mm, ΔH = 1.
of curvature ratios has significant role in the numerical results. The
snap-through phenomenon occurs when the shell is supported by a of the X one is the lowest.
volume fraction of curvature ratio.
Fig. 7 reveals the effect of the different distribution patterns such 5. Conclusion
as X, A, U, O versus thermal post-buckling load-deflection with
a b a a
R
= 0.1, R = 0.05, h = 2 mm, h = 10, b = 1, T = 300, ΔH = 1 and the Numerical investigation of buckling and post-buckling of doubly
1 2
cross ply [0 PCF /90 PGF ]S. It is observed that thermal post-buckling curved composite shells embedded with SMA fiber in hygro-thermal
load–deflection of the O distribution is the highest while the frequency environment is studied via Halpin-Tsai model. The nonlinear model is
obtained by von Kármán-Donnell-type geometric nonlinearity in the
framework of third-order shear deformation theory. The governing
equations are derived by implementing minimum total potential energy
principle and the resulting equations are solved numerically by using
the multiple scales perturbation method. In order to demonstrate the
accuracy and correctness of the present analysis, the numerical results
are verified by the related results available in the literature. Finally,
influences of different parameters such as temperature rise, moisture
coefficient, various distribution patterns, volume fraction of SMA, as-
pect and curvature ratios are investigated in detail. It is found that these
parameters have significant effect on the thermal post-buckling load-
deflection curved. According to the significant numerical result of
present research can be expressed as:

• The thermal post-buckling load-deflection of composite doubly

curved shell increases with increase of aspect ratio parameter and
decrease by increasing curvature ratio.
•
Fig. 5. Influence of different aspect ratios and volume fractions of SMA against
to thermal post-buckling load–deflection of doubly curved shell Volume fraction of SMA has significant effect on thermal post-
a b
with R = 0.1, R = 0.05, h = 2 mm, T = 300, ΔH = 1 and (m, n = 1,2). buckling load-deflection of composite shell. Based on observation it
1 2

7
M. Karimiasl, et al. Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988

is found that increasing of SMA volume fraction yields increases of X and U distribution pattern.
thermal post-buckling load-deflection. • The snap-through phenomenon occurs when the shell is supported
• The variation in the importance of the temperature rise is similar for by a volume fraction of aspect ratios.

Appendix A

Transformed shell principle coordinate can be expressed by:

n n n n n
Q11 = Q11cos 4 θ + 2(Q12 + 2Q66 ) sin2 θcos 2 θ + Q22sin4 θ
n n n n n
Q12 = (Q11 + Q22 − 4Q66 ) sin2 θcos 2 θ + Q12 (sin4 θ + cos 4 θ)
n n n n n
Q22 = Q11sin4 θ + 2(Q12 + 2Q66 ) sin2 θcos 2 θ + Q22cos 4 θ
n n n n n n
Q66 = (Q11 + Q22 − 2Q12 − 2Q66 ) sin2 θcos 2 θ + Q66 (sin4 θ + cos 4 θ)
n n n
Q44 = Q44 cos 2 θ + Q55sin2 θ
n n n
Q55 = Q55cos 2 θ + Q44 sin2 θ (A.1)
where Qij (i, j = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) presented the transformed reduce stiffness modulus.
Motion equations of multiscale composite shell can be expressed in terms of u, v, w, φx , φy displacements are obtained by substituting Eq. (29) into
Eq. (43) as following

∂ 2u ∂w0 ∂2w0 ⎞ 2 2 2 2 2 2 ∂2φy ⎞

A11 ⎛ 20 +
⎜
1 ∂w0
+ + A 12
⎟
⎛ ∂ v0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + A16 ⎛ ∂ v0 + ∂ u 0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B11 ⎜⎛ ∂ φx ⎟⎞ + B12 ⎜⎛
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ + B16
⎝ ∂x R1 ∂x ∂x ∂y 2 ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y R2 ∂x ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y
2 ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠ 2
⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠
2 2 2
⎛ ∂ φx + ∂ φy ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂ φx + ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂ φy + ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂ φy + ∂ φx + 2 ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ + A
2 2 2
⎜ 2 ⎟ 1 11 ⎜
2 3 2
⎟ 1 12 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 1 16 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 16
⎝ ∂ y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂ y ∂ x R 1 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂ y ∂x ∂y R 2 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂ x ∂x ∂y ∂x 2∂y R2 ∂y 2 R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠
2 2 2 2
⎛ ∂ u 0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + A26 ⎛ ∂ v0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2 ∂y ∂y 2 ⎠
⎝ ∂x ∂y R1 ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y R2 ∂y (A.2)
2 2
∂2φx ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ + B ⎛ ∂ φy + ∂ φx ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂ φx + ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ − s E
2 2
∂ 2v 0 ∂ 2u 0 ∂w0 ∂2w0 ∂w0 ∂2w0 ⎞
+ A66 ⎛ ⎜ + 2
+ + ⎟
2
+ B16 ⎛⎜ ⎟ + B 26 ⎜
2 ⎟ 66 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 1 16 ⎜ ⎟ 1 26
⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x 2 R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠
2 2
⎛ ∂ φy + ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂ φy + ∂ φx + 2 ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ + 1 ⎡A
2
1 66 ⎜
 ⎛φ + ∂w0 − v0 ⎞ + A 55 ⎛φ + ∂w0 − u 0 ⎞ ⎤ ]
⎜ ⎟ 2 ⎟ ⎢ 45 y
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
x
⎝ ∂ y 2 ∂ x 3 R2 ∂y 2
⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂x 2 ∂y 2 ∂x R 2 ∂ x ∂ y R1 ∂ y ⎠ R1 ⎣ ⎝ ∂ y R 2 ⎠ ⎝ ∂x R1 ⎠ ⎥
⎦
s1 ∂ 2u 0 1 ∂w0 ∂w0 ∂2w0
+ [E11 ( 2 + + )+E
R1 ∂x R1 ∂x ∂x ∂x 2 12

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ∂2φy ⎞
⎛ ∂ v0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E11 ⎛ ∂ u 0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ) + E ⎛ ∂ v0 + ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + F11 ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ + F12 ⎛⎜
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ + F
⎜ 2 2 2 2 2
⎝ ∂x ∂y R1 ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠
⎝
∂x R1 ∂x ∂x ∂x 16 ⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ 16
2φ ∂ 2φ
⎛ ∂ x y ⎞
⎜ 2
+ ⎟
⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠

∂2φy ∂3w0 1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞
2 2
⎛ ∂ φy + ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 ⎞ − s H ⎛ ∂ φy + ∂ φx + 2 ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ + E
2
− s1 H11 ⎜⎛ 2 + 3
− 2 ⎟ − s1 H12 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 1 16 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 16
⎝ ∂x ∂x R1 ∂ x ⎠ ⎝ ∂ x ∂y ∂ x ∂y R2 ∂x ∂ y ⎠ ⎝ ∂ y ∂ x ∂y ∂y ∂x 2 R2 ∂x 2 R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
⎛ ∂ u 0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E26 ⎛ ∂ v0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E66 ⎛ ∂ v0 + ∂ u 0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + F16
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂x ∂y R ∂ y ∂x ∂ x ∂y ∂y 2 R ∂ y ∂y ∂ y 2 ∂ x ∂y ∂ y 2 R ∂ y ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y2 ⎠
⎝ 1 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2
2 ∂2φy ⎞ 2 2
⎛ ∂ φx + ∂ φy ⎞ − s H ⎛ ∂ φx + ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ − s H ⎛ ∂ φy + ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 ⎞ − s H
2 2
⎛ ∂ φx ⎟⎞ + F ⎛
⎜ 26 ⎜ 2 ⎟ + F66 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 1 16 ⎜ 2
⎟ 1 26 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 1 66
⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x 3 R2 ∂y 2 ⎠
2
⎛ ∂ φy + ∂ φx + 2 ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 − 1 ∂2u 0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ ] = 0
2
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y 2 ∂x ∂y 2 R2 ∂x ∂y R1 ∂x ∂y R1 ∂y 2 ⎠

∂ 2u 1 ∂w0 ∂w0 ∂2w0 ⎞ ∂ 2v 0 1 ∂w0 ∂w0 ∂2w0 ⎞ ∂ 2v ∂ 2u 0 ∂w0 ∂2w0 ∂w0 ∂2w0 ⎞ ∂ 2φ
A11 ⎛ 20 +
⎜ + 2
⎟ + A 26 ⎛
⎜ + + ⎟ + A66 ⎛ 20 +
⎜ + + 2
+ B16 ⎜⎛ 2x ⎟⎞ + B26
⎟

⎝ ∂x R1 ∂x ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y R2 ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠
∂ 2φ 2φ ∂ 2φ 2φ 3 2 ∂ 2φ 3 2
⎛ y ⎞ ⎛ ∂ x y ⎞ ⎛ ∂ x ∂ w0 1 ∂ u0 ⎞ ⎛ y ∂ w0 1 ∂ v0 ⎞
⎜ ⎟ + B66 ⎜ 2
+ ⎟ − s1 E16 ⎜ 2
+ − ⎟ − s1 E26 ⎜ + − ⎟ − s1 E66
⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x 3 R1 ∂x 2 ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y 2 R2 ∂x ∂y ⎠
2
⎛ ∂ φy + ∂ φx + 2 ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ + A ⎛ ∂2u 0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂2w0 ⎞ + A ⎛ ∂2v0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂2w0 ⎞
2
⎜ 2 ⎟ ⎜ 12 ⎟ 22
⎜ ⎟

⎝ ∂ x ∂x ∂y ∂x 2∂y R2 ∂x 2 R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y R1 ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x
2 R2 ∂y ∂y ∂y 2 ⎠ (A.3)

8
M. Karimiasl, et al. Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988

2 2
∂2φx ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ + B ⎛ ∂ φy + ∂ φx ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂ φx + ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ − s E
2 2
∂ 2v 0 ∂ 2u 0 ∂w0 ∂2w0 ∂w0 ∂2w0 ⎞
+ A26 ⎛ ⎜ + 2
+ + 2
⎟+ B12 ⎜⎛ ⎟ + B 22 ⎜
2 ⎟ 26 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 1 12 ⎜ ⎟ 1 22
⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x 2 R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠
2 2
⎛ ∂ φy + ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂ φy + ∂ φx + 2 ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ + 1 ⎡A
2
1 26 ⎜
 ⎛φ + ∂w0 − v0 ⎞ + A 55 ⎛φ + ∂w0 − u 0 ⎞ ⎤ + s1
⎜ ⎟ 2 ⎟ ⎢ 45 y
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
x
⎝ ∂ y 2 ∂x 3 R2 ∂y 2
⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂x 2 ∂y 2 ∂x R 2 ∂ x ∂ y R1 ∂y ⎠ R2 ⎣ ⎝ ∂ y R 2 ⎠ ⎝ ∂x R1 ⎠ ⎥
⎦ R1
2
∂ u0 1 ∂w0 ∂w0 ∂ w0 2
[E12 ( + + )+E
∂x ∂y R1 ∂y ∂x ∂x 2 12

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ∂2φy ⎞
⎛ ∂ v0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E22 ⎛ ∂ u 0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ) + E ⎛ ∂ v0 + ∂ u 0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + F12 ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ + F22 ⎛⎜ +F
2 ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 2 2 2
⎝ ∂x ∂y R1 ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠
⎝
∂x R1 ∂x ∂x ∂x ∂y 26 ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ 26
2φ ∂ 2φ
⎛ ∂ x y⎞
⎜ + ⎟
⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂∂y 2 ⎠

∂2φy ∂3w 1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞
2 2
⎛ ∂ φy + ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 ⎞ − s H ⎛ ∂ φy + ∂ φx + 2 ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ + E
2
− s1 H12 ⎜⎛ + 20 − ⎟ − s1 H22 ⎜ 2 3 2 ⎟ 1 26 ⎜ ⎟ 16
⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x R2 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y 2 ∂x ∂y 2 R2 ∂x ∂y R1 ∂y 2 ⎠
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
⎛ ∂ u 0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E26 ⎛ ∂ v0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E66 ⎛ ∂ v0 + ∂ u 0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + F16 ⎜⎛ ∂ φx ⎟⎞ + F26
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂ y 2 R ∂x ∂x ∂x 2 ∂ y 2 R ∂y ∂y ∂y 2 ∂ x ∂ y ∂ y 2 R ∂ y ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂ x ∂y ∂ 2
⎝ 1 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ x ⎠
2 2
⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ + F ⎛ ∂ φx + ∂ φy ⎞ − s H ⎛ ∂ φx + ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ − s H ⎛ ∂ φx + ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ − s H
2 2 2
⎜ ⎟ 66 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 1 16 ⎜ 2 2
⎟ 1 16 ⎜ 2
⎟ 1 66
⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x 3 R1 ∂x 2 ⎠
2
⎛ ∂ φy + ∂ φx + 2 ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ ] = 0
2
⎜ 2 ⎟
⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x 2 R2 ∂x ∂y R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠

∂2φy ∂ 2w 0 2 ∂2φy ∂ 2w 0 ∂ 2w 0
45 ⎛⎜
A + −
1 ∂v0 ⎞
⎟ + 
A ⎛ ∂φx + ∂ w0 − 1 ∂u 0 ⎞ + A
⎜
44 ⎜⎛
⎟ + −
1 ∂v0 ⎞  ⎛ ∂φx
⎟ + A 45 ⎜+ −
1 ∂u 0 ⎞
+ s1 [E11
⎟
2 55 2 2 2
⎝ ∂ x ∂ x ∂y R2 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂ x ∂ x R1 ∂ x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂ y R2 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂y R1 ∂y ⎠
3 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 3
⎛ ∂ u 0 + 1 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E12 ⎛ ∂ v0 + 1 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E16
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂ x 3 R ∂x 2 ∂x 2 ∂x 2 ∂x ∂ x 3 ∂y ∂ x 2 R ∂x 2 ∂x ∂ y ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x 2∂y
⎝ 1 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠
3 3 3 2 2 3 3
⎛ ∂ v0 + ∂ u 0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + F11 ∂ φx
⎜ ⎟
∂x 3 ∂x 2∂y ∂y ∂x 3 ∂x 2 ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x 2∂y ∂ x3
⎝ ⎠ (A.4)

∂3φy ∂3φy ∂3φx ⎞ 3 4 3 ∂3φy ∂ 4w0 1 ∂3v0 ⎞

+ + F16 ⎜⎛ 3 + ⎛ ∂ φx + ∂ w0 − 1 ∂ u 0 ⎟⎞ − s1 H12 ⎜⎛ 2
F12 2 ⎟ − s1 H11 ⎜ + − ⎟ − s1 H16
∂x ∂y ⎝ ∂x ∂x 2∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂ x 3 ∂ x 4 R ∂
1 x ⎠
3
⎝∂x ∂y ∂x 2∂y 2 R2 ∂y ∂x 2 ⎠
3
⎛ ∂ φy +
∂3φx ∂ 4w
+2 3 0 −
1 ∂3v0
−
1 ∂3u 0 ⎞ 3 2 2 2 3
⎛ ∂ u 0 + 1 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E22
⎜ 3 ⎟ + E12 ⎜ ⎟

⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y 2 ∂x ∂y R2 ∂x 3 R1 ∂x 2∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y 2 R1 ∂y 2 ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y 2 ∂x
⎠
3 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 ∂3φy
⎛ ∂ v0 + 1 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E26 ⎛ ∂ v0 + ∂ u 0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + F12 ∂ φx + F22
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
3 2 2 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 ∂y 3
⎝ ∂y R2 ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂y ⎠ ∂y ∂x

∂3φy ∂3φx ⎞ 3 4 3 ∂3φy ∂3φx ∂ 4w 1 ∂3v0 1 ∂3u 0 ⎞

+ F26 ⎜⎛ 2 + ⎛ ∂ φx + ∂ w0 − 1 ∂ v0 ⎟⎞ − s H ⎛ +2 3 0 −
3 ⎟ − s1 H12 ⎜ 2 2 2 2 1 26 ⎜ 2
+ 3 2
− 3 ⎟
+ 2E16
⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂ y R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂ y ∂y ∂ x R 2 ∂x ∂y R1 ∂y ⎠

3 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 3
⎛ ∂ u 0 + 1 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + 2E66 ⎛ ∂ v0 + ∂ u 0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + 2F16
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ∂x ∂y 2 ∂x ⎠
⎝ ∂y ∂x R1 ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y
3 ∂3φy ∂3φy ⎞ 3 4 3 ∂3φy ∂ 4w0 1 ∂3v0 ⎞
⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ + 2F ⎛ + − 2s H ⎛ ∂ φx + ∂ w0 − 1 ∂ u 0 ⎟⎞ − 2s H ⎛ + − − 2s1 H66
2∂y 66 ⎜ 2∂y 2 ∂x ⎟ 1 16 ⎜
2∂y 3∂y 2 1 26 ⎜ 2 ∂x 3 2⎟
⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x R1 ∂y ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂y R2 ∂x ∂y ⎠

3
⎛ ∂ φy + ∂ φx + 2 ∂ 4w0 − 1 ∂3v0 − 1 ∂3u 0 ⎞ ⎤
3

R1 ∂x ∂y 2 ⎠ ⎥
⎜ 2 ⎟
⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y 2 ∂y 2 ∂x 2 R2 ∂x ∂y 2
⎦
2
∂ ⎛ ∂w0 ⎧ ⎛ ∂u 0 w 1 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞2 ⎞ ⎛ ∂v0 + w + ⎛ 1 ∂w0 ⎞ ⎞ + A ⎛ ∂v0 + ∂u 0 + ∂w0 ∂w0 ⎞ + B ⎛ ∂φx ⎞ + B ⎛ ∂φy ⎞ + B ⎛ ∂φy + ∂φx ⎞
A11 ⎜ + + ⎟ + A12 ⎜ ⎟ 16 ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ 11 12 ⎜ ⎟ ⎟16 ⎜ ⎜ ⎟ ⎟
∂x ⎜ ∂x ⎨ ⎝ ∂x R2 2 ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ ∂y R2 ⎝ 2 ∂y ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠
⎝ ⎩
∂φ ∂ 2w 0 1 ∂u 0 ⎞ ∂φy ∂ 2w 0 1 ∂v0 ⎞ ⎛ ∂φy + ∂φx + 2 ∂ w0 − 1 ∂u 0 − 1 ∂u 0 ⎟⎞ ⎫
2
− s1 E16 ⎛ x +
⎜
2
− − s1 E26 ⎜⎛
⎟ + 2
− ⎟ − s1 E66 ⎜
⎝ ∂x ∂ x R1 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂ y R2 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y R2 ∂y R2 ∂y ⎠ ⎬
⎭
2
∂ ⎛ ∂w0 ⎧ ⎛ ∂u 0 w 1 ∂w 2 ∂v w 1 ∂w ∂v ∂u 0 ∂w0 ∂w0 ⎞ ∂φ ∂φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂φy + ∂φx ⎞⎟
+ ⎜ A16 ⎜ + + ⎛ 0 ⎞ ⎞⎟ + A26 ⎛⎜ 0 + + ⎛ 0 ⎞ ⎞⎟ + A66 ⎛ 0 +
⎜ ⎟ + + B16 ⎛ x ⎞ + B26 ⎜⎛
⎜ ⎟ + B66 ⎜
⎟ ⎜ ⎟

∂y ∂x ⎨ ⎝ ∂x R1 2 ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ ∂y R2 2 ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠
⎝ ⎩
∂φ ∂ 2w 0 1 ∂u 0 ⎞ ∂φy ∂ 2w 0 1 ∂v0 ⎞ ⎛ ∂φy + 2 ∂ w0 + ∂φx ⎟⎞ ⎫
2
− s1 E16 ⎛ x +
⎜
2
− − s1 E26 ⎜⎛
⎟ + 2
− ⎟ − s1 E66 ⎜
⎝ ∂x ∂ x R1 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂ y R2 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂y ⎠ ⎬
⎭

9
M. Karimiasl, et al. Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988

2
∂ ⎛ ∂w0 ⎧ ⎛ ∂u 0 w 1 ∂w 2 ⎛ ∂v w 1 ∂w ∂v ∂u 0 ∂w0 ∂w0 ⎞ ∂φ ∂φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂φy + ∂φx ⎟⎞ − s
⎜ A12 ⎜ + + ⎛ 0 ⎞ ⎞⎟ + A22 ⎜ 0 + + ⎛ 0 ⎞ ⎟⎞ + A26 ⎛ 0 + + ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟+ B12 ⎛ x ⎞ + B22 ⎜⎛
⎜ ⎟ ⎟ + B26 ⎜ 1
∂x ⎝ ∂y ⎨⎩ ⎝ ∂ x R1 2 ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ ∂ y R 2 2 ⎝ ∂y ⎠⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠
∂φ ∂ 2w 0 1 ∂u 0 ⎞ ∂φy ∂ 2w 0 1 ∂v0 ⎞ ⎛ ∂φy + ∂φx + 2 ∂ w0 −
2 1 ∂u 0 1 ∂u 0 ⎞ 1
E12 ⎛ x +
⎜ − − s1 E22 ⎜⎛ ⎟ + − ⎟ − s1 E16 ⎜ − ⎟ − {A
⎝ ∂x ∂ x 2 R 1 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂ y 2 R2 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y R2 ∂y R2 ∂y ⎠ R2 12
2 2
⎛⎜ ∂u 0 + w + 1 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞ ⎞⎟ + A ⎛ ∂v0 + w + 1 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞ ⎞
22 ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ ∂x R1 2 ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ ∂y R2 2 ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎠

∂v ∂u 0 ∂w0 ∂w0 ⎞ ∂φ ∂φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂φy + ∂φx ⎟⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂φx + ∂ w0 − 1 ∂u 0 ⎞ − s E ⎛⎜ ∂φy + ∂ w0 − 1 ∂v0 ⎞⎟ − s

2 2
+ A26 ⎛ 0 +
⎜ + + B12 ⎛ x ⎞ + B22 ⎜⎛
⎟ ⎜ ⎟ + B26 ⎜ ⎟
1 12 2 1 22 ⎜
1 ⎟

⎝ ∂ y ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x R1 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂y2 R2 ∂y ⎠
∂φy ∂φ ∂ 2w 0 1 ∂u 0 1 ∂u 0 ⎞ 2
E26 ⎛⎜ + x +2 − − hyg ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ = 0
⎟ }+q ⎜ ⎟
2
⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y R2 ∂y R2 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ∂2φx ⎞
11 ⎛ ∂ u 0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B
B ⎜
12 ⎛ ∂ v0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B
⎟ ⎜
16 ⎛ ∂ v0 + ∂ u 0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + D
⎟ ⎜
11 ⎛⎜ 
⎟ + D12 ⎟
2 2 2 2 2
⎝ ∂x R1 ∂x ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y R2 ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠
2 ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ∂2φy
⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ + B 16 ⎛⎜
∂2φx
+ − 26 ⎛⎜ +
∂3w0
−
1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞
− 16 ⎛⎜ +
∂3w0
−
1 ∂ 2v 0 ⎞ 
⎜ ⎟ 2 ⎟ s1 F 2 3 2 ⎟ s 1 F 2 ⎟ − s1 F66
⎝ ∂x ∂ y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂ x ∂ y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂y R 2 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂ x ∂y ∂y ∂x R 1 ∂x ∂y ⎠
2
⎛ ∂ φx + ∂ φy + 2 ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2u 0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ + B
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
⎜ ⎟
66 ⎛ ∂ v0 + ∂ u 0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B
⎜
26 ⎛ ∂ v0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞
⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂ y 2 ∂x ∂y ∂y 2 ∂x R ∂y 2 R ∂ x ∂y ∂ x ∂ y ∂ y 2 ∂y ∂ x ∂y ∂x ∂y 2 ∂y 2 R ∂y ∂y ∂ y2 ⎠
⎝ 1 2 ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ 2 (A.5)

∂2φy ∂2φy ∂2φy ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φx ∂3w0 1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞ ∂2φy ∂3w0 1 ∂ 2v 0 ⎞

16
+D 26
+D 66 ⎜⎛
+D +  ⎛
⎟ − s1 F16 ⎜ + −  ⎛
⎟ − s1 F26 ⎜ + − 
⎟ − s1 F66
∂x ∂y ∂y 2 ⎝ ∂x ∂y
2
∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x 2 R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y
2 ∂x 3 R2 ∂y 2 ⎠
2
⎛ ∂ φy + ∂ φx + 2 ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ − A
2
⎜
55 ⎛φ + ∂w0 − u 0 ⎞ = 0
45 ⎛φ + ∂w0 − v0 ⎞ − A
2 ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2 2 ∂x y x
⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y R2 ∂x ∂y R1 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y R2 ⎠ ⎝ ∂x R1 ⎠

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ∂2φx ⎞
16 ⎛ ∂ u 0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B
B ⎜
26 ⎛ ∂ v0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B
⎟ ⎜
66 ⎛ ∂ v0 + ∂ u 0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + D
⎟ ⎜
16 ⎜⎛ 
⎟ + D 26⎟
2 2 2 2 2
⎝ ∂x R1 ∂x ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y R2 ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠
2 ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ∂2φy
⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ + D 66 ⎛⎜
∂2φx
+ − 16 ⎛⎜ +
∂3w0
−
1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞
− 26 ⎛⎜ +
∂3w0
−
1 ∂ 2v 0 ⎞ 
⎜ ⎟ 2 ⎟ s1 F 2 3 2 ⎟ s1 F 2 ⎟ − s1 F66
⎝ ∂x ∂ y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂ x ∂ y ⎠ ⎝ ∂ x ∂x R 2 ∂ x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂ y ∂ x ∂y R 1 ∂x ∂y ⎠
2
⎛ ∂ φx + ∂ φy + 2 ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2u 0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ + B
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
⎜ ⎟
22 ⎛ ∂ u 0 + 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B
⎜
26 ⎛ ∂ v0 + ∂ u 0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞
⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂ x 2 ∂x ∂y ∂y 2 ∂x R ∂x 2 R ∂ x ∂y ∂ x ∂y R ∂ y ∂ x ∂x ∂y ∂ x ∂y ∂ y 2 ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y2 ⎠
⎝ 2 1 ⎠ ⎝ 1 ⎠ ⎝ (A.6)

∂2φy ∂2φy ∂2φy ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φx ∂3w0 1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞ ∂2φy ∂3w0 1 ∂ 2v 0 ⎞

12
+D 22
+D 26 ⎛⎜
+D +  ⎛
⎟ − s1 F12 ⎜ + −  ⎛
⎟ − s1 F22 ⎜ + − 
⎟ − s1 F26
∂x ∂y ∂y 2 ⎝ ∂x ∂y
2
∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x 2 R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y
2 ∂x 3 R2 ∂y 2 ⎠
2
⎛ ∂ φy + ∂ φx + 2 ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 − 1 ∂2u 0 ⎞ − A
2
⎜
45 ⎛φ + ∂w0 − u 0 ⎞ = 0
44 ⎛φ + ∂w0 − v0 ⎞ − A
2 ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2 2 ∂x y x
⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂ y ∂y R2 ∂x ∂y R1 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y R2 ⎠ ⎝ ∂x R1 ⎠

hk + 1
(Aij , Bij , Dij , Eij, Fij )= ∫h k
n
Qij (1, z , z 2, z 3, z 4 , z 6) dz , (i, j = 1, 2, 6)
(A.7)
where the cross-sectional rigidities can be expressed as follows:
ij = Aij − 3s1 Dij (i, j = 4, 5)
Aij = Aij − 3s1 Dij , Dij = Aij − 3s1 Fij , A (A.8)

ij = Bij − s1 Eij, F

B ij = Fij − s1 Hij , D
ij = Dij − s1 Fij (A.9)

Appendix B

∂ 2u n ∂2u0n ⎞ 1 ∂2u0n ⎞ 1 ∂2u0n ⎞ ∂2u0n ⎞ ∂ 2u n 1 ∂2u0n ⎞

L11 = A11 ⎛ 20 ⎞ + A16 ⎛
⎜ ⎟ ⎜− s1 E11 ⎛− ⎟
2
− s1 E16 ⎛−
⎜ ⎟ + A16 ⎛ ⎜ + A66 ⎛ 20 ⎞ − s1 E16 ⎛−
⎟ ⎜ − s1 E26
⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R1 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠
2 n
⎛ ∂ φy ∂3w0n 1 ∂2v0n ⎞ ⎛ 1 ∂ u0 ⎞
2 n
1 ⎡  ⎛ u0n ⎞ ⎤ s1 ⎡ ⎛ ∂2u0n ⎞ ⎤ 2 n
⎛ 1 ∂ u0 ⎞
2 n
⎛ 1 ∂ u0 ⎞
⎜ ∂y 2 + ∂x 3 − R ∂y 2 ⎟ − s1 E66 − R ∂y 2 + R ⎢A55 − R ⎥ + R ⎢E11 ∂x 2 ⎥ − s1 H11 − R ∂x 2 − s1 H16 − R ∂x ∂y + E16
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ 2
⎠ ⎝ 1 ⎠ 1⎣ ⎝ 1 ⎠⎦ 1⎣ ⎝ ⎠⎦ ⎝ 1 ⎠ ⎝ 1 ⎠
∂ 2u n ∂ 2u n ∂ 2u n ∂ 2u n ∂ 2u n
⎛ 0 ⎞ 1 1 1
⎜ + E66 ⎛+ 20 ⎞ − s1 H16 ⎛−
⎟ ⎜ ⎟
0 ⎞
− s1 H66 ⎛−
⎜ ⎟
0
− 0 ⎞
⎜ ⎟

⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R1 ∂x ∂y R1 ∂y 2 ⎠

10
M. Karimiasl, et al. Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988

∂2v0n ⎞ ∂ 2v n 1 ∂2v0n ⎞ 1 ∂2v0n ⎞ 2 n 2 n ∂2φyn ∂3w0n 1 ∂2v0n ⎞

L 12 = A 12 ⎛ + A16 ⎛ 20 ⎞ − s1 E12 ⎛− − s1 E16 ⎛− + ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ + A66 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ − s1 E26 ⎛
⎜
∂x ∂y
⎟
∂ y R
⎜
∂x ∂y
⎟
R ∂ y 2
A26⎜
∂ y 2 ∂x
⎟
∂y ⎜ ∂y 2 + ∂x 3 − R ∂y 2 ⎟ − s1
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ 2
⎠
1 ∂2v0n ⎞ 1 ⎡  ⎛ v0n ⎞ ⎤ ∂ 2v n 1 ∂2v0n ⎞ 1 ∂2v0n ⎞ ∂ 2v n ∂ 2v n 1 ∂2v0n ⎞
E66 ⎛−
⎜ + A 45 −
⎟ +F66 ⎛ 20 ⎞ − s1 H12 ⎛− ⎜ − s1 H16 ⎛−
⎟ ⎜ + E26 ⎛ 20 ⎞ + E66 ⎛ 0 ⎞ − s1 H26 ⎛−
⎟ ⎜ − s1 ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ R2 ∂x ∂y ⎠ R1 ⎢
⎣ ⎝ R2 ⎠ ⎥
⎦ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂x ∂y ⎠
2
⎝ R2 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠
2
⎝ R2 ∂y ⎠
1 ∂2v0n ⎞
H66 ⎛−
⎜ ⎟

⎝ R2 ∂x ∂y ⎠

1 ∂w0n ∂w0n ∂2w0n ⎞ 1 ∂w0n ∂w0n ∂2w0n ⎞ ∂w n ∂2w0n ⎞ ∂3w0n ⎞ ∂3w n 1 ∂w0n ∂w0n ∂2w0n ⎞
L13 = A11 ⎛ ⎜ + 2
+ A 12 ⎛ + ⎟ + A16 ⎛ 0 ⎜ − s1 E12 ⎛ 2
− s1 E16 ⎛2 2 0 ⎞ + A16 ⎛
⎟ +⎜ + A26 ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
R
⎝ 1 ∂x ∂ x ∂y ⎠ R
⎝ 2 ∂x ∂x ∂ x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ R
⎝ 1 ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠
n n 2 n n 2 n n 2 n 3 n ∂2φyn ∂3w0n 1 ∂2v0n ⎞
⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + A66 ⎛ ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 E16 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 E26 ⎛ + − − s1 E66
⎜
2
⎟
2
⎜
2 ⎜ 2 3 R2 ∂y 2 ⎟
⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ R2 ∂y ∂y ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ ⎝
∂y ∂x
⎠
3 n n n n n 2 n n n
⎛2 ∂ w0 ⎞ + 1 ⎡A 45 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞ + A55 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞ ⎤ + s1 ⎡E11 ⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 )] + E + 1 ⎡A 45 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞ + A 55 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞ ⎤ + s1 ⎡E11
⎜ ⎟
⎢
⎜
⎥
⎟
⎢ ⎜ R ∂x ⎜ ⎟

⎢ R1 ⎢
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎠⎥
∂y 2 ∂x R ∂y ∂x R ∂x ∂x 2 R ∂y ∂x
⎝ ⎠ 1⎣ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠⎦ 1
⎣ ⎝ 1
12 1⎣ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎦ ⎣
n n 2 n 2w n n 2 n n 2 n 3w n 3w n 3w n
⎛1 ∂ w ∂w ∂ w ∂ ∂w ∂ w ∂w ∂ w ∂ ∂ ∂
⎜
0
+ 0 0 ⎞
+ F66 ⎛ 0
⎟ + 0 0
+ ⎜
0 0 ⎞
− s1 H11 ⎛ 30 ⎞ − s1 H12 ⎛ 0 ⎞
− s1 H16 ⎛2 0 ⎞
+ E16
⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ R1 ∂x ∂x ∂x 2 ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x 2 ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠
2
⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠
2

n n 2 n n n 2 n n n 2 n n 2 n 3 n 3 n 3 n
⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E26 ⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E66 ⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 H16 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 H26 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 H66 ⎛+2 ∂ w0 ⎞
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2 2 2 3 2
⎝ R1 ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R2 y ∂y ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠
2 n
∂ 2φ n ∂ 2φ n ∂ 2φ n ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ ∂2φxn ⎞ 2 n 2 n 2 n
⎛ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ −s E ⎛⎜ ∂ φx − 1 ∂ u0 ⎞⎟ − s E
L14 = B11 ⎜⎛ 2x ⎟⎞ + B16 ⎛⎜ 2x ⎞⎟ − s1 E11 ⎛⎜ 2x ⎞⎟ − s1 E16 ⎜ 2 ⎟ + B16 ⎛⎜ ⎟ + B66 ⎜
2 1 16 1 66
⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝
∂x
⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠
2 n ∂2φxn ⎞ 2 n 2 n 2 n 2 n 2 n 2 n 2 n
⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ + 1 [A
55 (φn )]+F11 ⎛⎜ ⎛ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ − s H ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ + F ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ + F ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ + F ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ − s H ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ − s H ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟
⎟ − s1 H11 ⎜
2 x 2 2 1 12 2 16 66 2 1 16 1 66 2
⎝ ∂x ⎠ R1 ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ 16 ⎝
∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠
2 n 2 n 2 n 2 n 2 n 2 n 2 n
⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞
L15 = B12 ⎜ ⎟ + B16 ⎜ ⎟ − s1 E12 ⎜ ⎟ − s1 E16 ⎜ 2 ⎟ + B26 ⎜ 2 ⎟ + B66 ⎜ ⎟ − s1 E26 ⎜ 2 ⎟ − s1 E66
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠
2 n 2 n 2 n 2 n 2 n 2 n 2 n 2 n
⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ 1  ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞
n
⎜ ∂x ∂y ⎟ + [A 45 (φy )]+ F12 ⎜ ∂x ∂y ⎟ + F ⎜ ∂x ∂y ⎟ − s1 H11 ⎜ ∂x 2 ⎟ − s1 H12 ⎜ ∂x ∂y ⎟ + F66 ⎜ ∂x 2 ⎟ − s1 H26 ⎜ ∂y 2 ⎟ − s1 H66 ⎜ ∂x ∂y ⎟
R1
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ 16 ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠

∂ 2u ∂ 2u 0 ⎞ 1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞ 1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞ ∂ 2u 0 ⎞ ∂ 2u ∂ 2u 0 ⎞ 1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞
L21 = A11 ⎛ 20 ⎞ + A66 ⎛
⎜ ⎟ − s1 E16 ⎛−
⎜
2
⎟− s1 E66 ⎛− + A12 ⎛
⎜ + A11 ⎛ 20 ⎞ + A66 ⎛
⎟ ⎜ − s1 E16 ⎛− 2
⎟ − s1 ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R1 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R1 ∂x ⎠
1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞ ∂ 2u 0 ⎞ ∂ 2u 1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞ 1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞ 1 ⎡ ⎛ u0 ⎞ ⎤ 1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞ 1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞
E66 ⎛− + A12 ⎛ + A26 ⎛ 20 ⎞ − s1 E12 ⎛− − s1 E26 ⎛− + A − − s1 H12 ⎛− − s1 H26 ⎛−
⎢ 55 ⎝ R1 ⎠ ⎥
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ 2 ∂ ∂ 2
⎝ R1 x y ⎠ ⎝ x y ⎠ ⎝ y ⎠ ⎝ R1 x y ⎠ ⎝ R1 y ⎠ R2 ⎣ ⎦ ⎝ R1 x y ⎠ ⎝ 1 ∂y ⎠
R

∂ 2v 0 ⎞ ∂ 2v 1 ∂ 2v 0 ⎞ 1 ∂ 2v 0 ⎞ ∂ 2v ∂ 2v 0 ⎞ ∂ 2v 1 ∂ 2v 0 ⎞
L22 = A 26 ⎛ ⎜ + A66 ⎛ 20 +⎞ − s1 E26 ⎛−
⎟ ⎜ −s1 E66 ⎛−
⎟
2
+ A22 ⎛ 20 ⎞ + + A 26 ⎛
⎜ ⎟ +A66 ⎛ 20 ⎞ − s1 E26 ⎛−
⎜ ⎟− s1 ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂x ∂y ⎠
1 ∂ 2v 0 ⎞ ∂ 2u 0 1 ∂w0 ∂w0 ∂2w0 ⎞ ∂ 2v ∂ 2v 0 ⎞ 1 ∂ 2v 0 ⎞ 1 ∂ 2v 0 ⎞ 1 ⎡  ⎛ v0 ⎞ ⎤ ∂w0
E66 ⎛−
⎜ A12 ⎛⎟ + ⎜ + + A22 ⎛ 20 ⎞ + A26 ⎛ − s1 E22 ⎛− ⎟ − s1 E26 ⎛−
⎜ ⎟ + A 45 −
⎜ + ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ R ∂x 2
⎠ ∂x ∂ y R ∂ y ∂ x ∂x ∂y ⎝ ∂ x ⎠ ∂x ∂ y R ∂y 2 R ∂x ∂y R ⎢ ⎝ R ⎥
⎠⎦ ∂x
2 ⎝ 1 ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ 2 ⎣ 2
2
∂ w0 2
1 ∂ v0 ⎞ 2
1 ∂ v0 ⎞
)−s1 H22 ⎛− ⎜
2
− s1 H26 ⎛ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂x ∂y ⎝ R2 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂x ∂y ⎠

1 ∂w0 ∂w0 ∂2w0 ⎞ 1 ∂w0 ⎞ ∂w ∂2w0 ∂w0 ∂2w0 ⎞ ∂3w ∂3w ∂w ∂2w0 ⎞
L23 = A11 ⎛ ⎜ + 2
+ A 26 ⎛ + A66 ⎛ 0⎟ + ⎜
2
− s1 E16 ⎛ 30 ⎞ − s1 E66 ⎛2 2 0 ⎞ + A12 ⎛ 0
⎟ ⎜ + A11 ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
R
⎝ 1 ∂x ∂x ∂x ⎠ R
⎝ 2 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂ x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠
2 2 2 2 3 3 3
⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞+ A 26 ⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ +A66 ⎛ ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 E16 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 E26 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 E66 ⎛2 ∂ w0 ⎞ +A12
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2 2 3 2 2
⎝ R1 ∂x ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠
2 2 2 2 2 2 3
⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + A22 ⎛+ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ +A26 ⎛ ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ +A26 ⎛ ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 E12 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 E22
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2 2 2 2
⎝ R1 ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂y ∂y ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠
3 3 2 2
⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 E26 ⎛2 ∂ w0 ⎞ + 1 ⎡A
⎜ ⎟ ⎜
45 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞ + A
55 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞ ⎤ + s1 ⎡+ 1 ∂w0 ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E12 ⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E22
⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ ∂x 3
⎠ ∂ y 2 ∂x R ⎢ ∂ y ⎝ ∂ x ⎥
⎠⎦ R ⎢ R ∂y ∂x ∂x 2 R ∂ x ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠
⎝ ⎠ 2⎣ ⎝ ⎠ 1⎣ 1 ⎠ ⎝ 1
2
∂ φy 2
2 2 2
⎛+ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E26 ⎛ ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 H12 ⎜⎛ ∂3w
+ 20 −
1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞ ⎛ ∂ φy + ∂3w0 − 1 ∂2v0 ⎞ − s H ⎛2 ∂3w0 ⎞
⎜ ⎟
2
⎜ ⎟ s1 H22 ⎜ ⎟
2 ⎟ 1 26 ⎜ ⎟

⎝ R1 ∂ x ∂ x ∂x ∂ y ⎠ ⎝ ∂ y ∂ x ∂y ∂x ∂ x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x 3 R2 ∂x 2 ⎠ 2
⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠

∂ 2φ ∂ 2φ ∂ 2φ ∂2φx ⎞ 2 2 2 2 2
⎛ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ + B ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ − s E ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ − s E ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎟⎞ + B ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎟⎞ + B
L24 = B16 ⎛⎜ 2x ⎞⎟ + B66 ⎛⎜ 2x ⎞⎟ − s1 E16 ⎛⎜ 2x ⎞⎟ − s1 E66 ⎛⎜ ⎟ + B16 ⎜
2 66 2 1 16 2 1 66 12 26
⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂ x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠
∂x
2 2 2 2 ∂2φy ∂3w 1 ∂ 2u 0 ⎞ 2
⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ − s E ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ − s E ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ + 1 [A 55 (φ )] + F12 ⎛⎜ ∂ φx ⎞⎟ − s1 H12 ⎛⎜ + 20 − ⎛ ∂ φx ⎟⎞
2 1 12 1 26 2 x ⎟ − s1 H26 ⎜ 2
⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ R2 ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠

11
M. Karimiasl, et al. Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988

∂2φy ⎞ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ + B ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ + B ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ + B ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ + B
2
L25 = B26 ⎛⎜ ⎟ + B66 ⎜+ ⎟ 1 26 ⎜ ⎟ 1 66 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 26 ⎜ ⎟ 66 ⎜ ⎟ 1 26 ⎜ ⎟ 1 66 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 22 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 26
⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠
2 2 2 ∂2φy ⎞ 2 2 2 2
⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ + 1 [A 45 (φ )] + F22 ⎛⎜ ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ − s H ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ − s H ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ − s H ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞
⎜ ⎟ 1 22 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 1 26 ⎜ ⎟ y 2 ⎟ + F66 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 1 12 ⎜ ⎟ 1 22 ⎜ 2 ⎟ 1 26 ⎜ ⎟
⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ R2 ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠

1 ∂u 0 ⎞  ⎛ 1 ∂u 0 ⎞ 1 ∂u 0 ⎞  ⎛ 1 ∂u 0 ⎞ ∂3u 0 ⎞ ∂3u ∂3u ∂3u

 55 ⎛−
L31 = + A ⎜ + A 45 − ⎟
+A  55 ⎛− + A 45 −
⎜ + E12 ⎛
⎟
2
⎜+ E26 ⎛ 30 ⎞ + s1 [E11 ⎛ 30 ⎞ +E16 ⎛ 2 0 ⎞ ]
⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ R 1 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R1 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R1 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R 1 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂ x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ x ∂y ⎠
∂
3
1 ∂ u0 ⎞ 3
1 ∂ u0 ⎞ 3
∂ u0 2
1 ∂ w0 2 2
∂ w0 ∂ w0 3
∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ 3
∂u ∂3u 0 ⎞
−s1 H11 ⎛− ⎜
3
− s1 H16 ⎛− ⎟
2∂y
+ 2E16 ⎛ 2
+⎜ + 2
⎟ + 2 ∂x
+ 2E66 ⎛ 2 0 ⎞ + 2E16 ⎛
⎜
2
+ 2E66 ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ 1R ∂ x ⎠ ⎝ 1R ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x R 1 ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ ⎝ y ∂x ⎠
∂
3 3
⎛ ∂ u 0 ⎞ − 2s1 H66 ⎛− 1 ∂ u 0 ⎞ + A16 ⎛ ∂u 0 ⎞ − s1 E16 ⎛− 1 ∂u 0 ⎞ − s1 E66 ⎛− 1 ∂u 0 − 1 ∂u 0 ⎞ ⎫
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2 2 R2 ∂y ⎠ ⎬
⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R1 ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R1 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂y ⎭
∂ ⎛ ∂w0 ⎧ ⎛ ∂u 0 ⎞ ∂u 1 ∂u 0 ⎞ 1 ∂u 0 1 ∂u 0 ⎞ 1 ∂u ∂v ∂u
+ ⎜ A12 + A26 ⎛ 0 ⎞ − s1 E12 ⎛− − s1 E16 ⎛−⎜ − ⎟ − {A ⎛ 0 ⎞ + A22 ⎛ 0 ⎞ ⎫ + A26 ⎛ 0 ⎞ − s1
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂x ⎝ ∂y ⎨⎩ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R1 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂y R2 ∂y ⎠ R2 12 ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎬
⎭ ⎝ ∂x ⎠
1 ∂u 0 ⎞ 1 ∂u 0 1 ∂u 0 ⎞
E12 ⎛−⎜ − s1 E26 ⎛− ⎟ − ⎜ ⎟

⎝ R1 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂y R2 ∂y ⎠

2 3 3 3 3 3
45 ⎛− 1 ∂v0 ⎞ + A
L32 = A ⎜
44 ⎛− 1 ∂v0 ⎞ + A
⎟
44 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ + E12 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ +E16 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ − s1 H12 ⎛− 1 ∂ v0 ⎞ − s1 H16 ⎛− 1 ∂ v0 ⎞ + E22 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ + E26
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2 2 3 2 3 3
⎝ R2 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂y ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠
3 3 3 3 4 3 3
⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ + 2E66 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ + 2E66 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ − 2s1 H16 ⎜⎛ ∂ φx + ∂ w0 − 1 ∂ u 0 ⎟⎞ − 2s1 H26 ⎛− 1 ∂ v0 ⎞ + A12 ⎛ ∂v0 ⎞ − s1 E26 ⎛− 1 ∂v0 ⎞ }
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂ ∂ 2 ∂ ∂ 2 ∂ ∂ 2 ∂ 2∂y ∂ 3∂y ∂ ∂ 2 ∂ ∂y 2 ⎠
⎝ x y ⎠ ⎝ y x ⎠ ⎝ y x ⎠ ⎝ x x R 1 y x ⎠ ⎝ R2 x ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂y ⎠
∂ ⎛ ∂w0 ⎧ ⎛ ∂v0 ⎞ ∂v 1 ∂v0 ⎞ ∂v ∂v
+ ⎜ A22 + A26 ⎛ 0 ⎞ − s1 E22 ⎛−
⎜ ⎟ + A22 ⎛ 0 ⎞ + A26 ⎛ 0 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂x ⎝ ∂y ⎨⎩ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠
2 ∂ 2w 2 2 ∂ 2w 2 2
45 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞+ A
L33 = A ⎜  55 ⎛ 20 ⎞ + A
⎟
44 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ + A
⎜
45 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ + A⎟  55 ⎛ 20 ⎞ + A
⎜
44 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ + A
⎟
45 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ + s1 [E ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2 2 11
⎝ ∂ x ∂ y ⎠ ⎝ ∂ x ⎠ ⎝ ∂ y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂ y ⎠ ⎝ ∂ x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠
∂x
2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 3
⎛ 1 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + E12 ⎛ 1 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ +E16 ⎛ ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ ]
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 ∂x ∂x 2∂y ⎠
⎝ R1 ∂x ∂x ∂x ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂x ∂y
∂ 4w ∂ 4w ∂ 4w 1 ∂ 2w 0 ∂ 2w 0 ∂ 2w 0 ∂w0 ∂3w0 ⎞ 1 ∂ 2w 0 ∂ 2w 0 ∂ 2w 0 ∂w0 ∂3w0 ⎞
−s1 H11 ⎛ 40 ⎞ − s1 H12 ⎛ 2 0 2 ⎞ − s1 H16 ⎛2 3 0 ⎞ + E12 ⎛
⎜ ⎟ ⎜
2
+ ⎟ + ⎜
2
+ E22 ⎛ ⎟
2
+ 2 2
⎜+ + E26 ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R1 ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂y 3 ⎠
2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3
⎛ ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + 2E66 ⎛ ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + 2E16 ⎛ 1 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + 2E66
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂x ∂y ∂y 2 ∂y ∂y 3 ∂y ∂y 2 ∂x ∂y 2 ∂x 2 ∂ x ∂ y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y 2 ∂x R ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y 2 ∂ y ∂y 2 ∂x
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ 1 ⎠
3 2 2 2 2 3
⎛ ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂ w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞
⎜ ⎟
2 2 2 ∂x ∂y 2 ∂x ⎠
⎝ ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y

2
∂ 4w ∂ 4w0 ⎞ ∂ 4w ∂ ⎛ ∂w0 ⎧ ⎛ ∂u 0 w 1 ∂w 2 ∂v w 1 ∂w0 ⎞ ⎞
− 2s1 H16 ⎛ 3 0 ⎞ − 2s1 H26 ⎛
⎜ ⎟
3
− 2s1 H66 ⎛2 2 0 2 ⎞ +
⎜ ⎜ A11 ⎜
⎟ + + ⎛ 0 ⎞ ⎞⎟ + A12 ⎛⎜ 0 +
⎜ +⎛ ⎟ + A12
⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ ⎨
∂x ⎝ ∂x ⎩ ⎝ ∂x R2 2 ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎠ ∂y R2 ⎝ 2 ∂y ⎠ ⎠
⎝
2
⎛ w + ⎛ 1 ∂w0 ⎞ + ⎛ ∂w0 ∂w0 ⎞ − ∂ 2w ∂ 2w ∂ 2w 0 ⎞ ⎫ ∂
⎜ ⎜ ) A16 ⎟ s1 E16 ⎛ 20 ⎞ − s1 E26 ⎛ 20 ⎞ − s1 E66 ⎛2
⎜ ⎟ + ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
R2 ⎝ 2 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂ x ⎠ ⎝ ∂ y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎬ ∂x
⎝ ⎭
2
⎛ ∂w0 ⎧ ⎛ w 1 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞2⎞ ⎛w 1 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞ ⎞ ⎛ ∂w0 ∂w0 ⎞
2
⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ ⎫
2
⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞
2
⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ 1 ⎛w 1 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞2⎞
⎜ ∂y ⎨A12 ⎜ R1 + 2 ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎟ + A22 ⎜ R2 + 2 ∂y ⎟ + A26 ∂x ∂y − s1 E12 ∂x 2 ⎬ − s1 E22 ∂y 2 − s1 E16 2 ∂x ∂y − R2 {A12 ⎜ R1 + 2 ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ ⎩ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎝ ⎠⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠⎭ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠
2
⎛w 1 ∂w ⎞ ∂w ∂w ∂ 2w ∂ 2w ∂ 2w 0 ⎞ ⎫ ∂ 2w
+ A22 ⎜ + ⎛ 0 ⎞ ⎟ + A26 ⎛ 0 0 ⎞ − s1 E12 ⎛ 20 ⎞ − s1 E22 ⎛ 20 ⎞ − s1 E26 ⎛2
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ + qhyg ⎛ 20 ⎞
⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ R2 2 ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎬ ⎭ ⎝ ∂x ⎠

∂φ ∂φ ∂φ 3 3 3 3 3 3
 55 ⎛ x ⎞+ A
L34 = A ⎜  55 ⎛ x ⎞+ A
⎟
45 ⎛ ∂φx ⎞ + F11 ∂ φx + F16 ⎜⎛ ∂ φx ⎟⎞ − s1 H11 ⎜⎛ ∂ φx ⎟⎞ + F12 ∂ φx + F16 ⎜⎛ ∂ φx ⎟⎞ − s1 H11 ⎜⎛ ∂ φx ⎟⎞ − s1
 55 ⎛ x ⎞ + A⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂x ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂ x 3 ∂x 2∂y ∂ x 3 ∂y 2 ∂x ∂x 2∂y ∂ 3
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ x ⎠
∂3φx ⎞ 3 3 3 3
⎛ ∂ φx ⎟⎞ − s H ⎜⎛ ∂ φx ⎟⎞ − 2s H ⎜⎛ ∂ φx ⎟⎞ − 2s H ⎜⎛ ∂ φx ⎟⎞ + ∂ ⎛ ∂w0 ⎧B ⎛ ∂φx ⎞ + B ⎛ ∂φx ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂φx ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂φx ⎞ ⎫
H16 ⎜⎛ ⎟ + F26 ⎜ 1 12 1 16 1 66
∂x ⎜ ∂x ⎨
2 3 2 2 2 11 16 1 16 1 66 ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ⎩ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎬
⎭
∂ ⎛ ∂w0 ⎧ ⎛ ∂φx ⎞ ∂φ ∂φ ∂φ ∂v ∂u 0 ∂w0 ∂w0 ⎞ ∂φ ∂φ
+ B12 + B26 ⎛ x ⎞ − s1 E12 ⎛ x ⎞ − s1 E16 ⎛ x ⎞ ⎫ + A26 ⎛ 0 + + + B12 ⎛ x ⎞ + B26 ⎛ x ⎞ − s1 E12
∂x ⎜ ∂y ⎨
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎩ ⎝ ∂ x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎬
⎠⎭ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠
⎝
⎛ ∂φx ⎞ − s1 E26 ⎛ ∂φx ⎞
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠

12
M. Karimiasl, et al. Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988

∂3φy ∂3φy ∂3φy ∂3φy ∂3φy ∂3φy ∂3φy ⎞ 3 3

⎛ ∂ φy + ∂ φy ⎞ − 2s H
L35 = +F12 + F16 ⎜⎛ 3 ⎟⎞ − s1 H12 ⎜⎛ 2 ⎟⎞ − s1 H16 ⎛⎜ 3 ⎞⎟ + F22 3 + F26 ⎛⎜ 2 ⎞⎟ − s1 H26 ⎛⎜ ⎟ + 2F66 ⎜ ⎟ 1 26
∂x 2∂y ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ∂y ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠
2
⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠
2
⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y 2 ∂x ⎠
3 3
⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ − 2s H ⎛ ∂ φy ⎞ + ∂ ⎛ ∂w0 ⎧B ⎛ ∂φy ⎞ + B ⎛ ∂φy ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂φy ⎞ − s E ⎛ ∂φy ⎞ ⎫ + ∂ ⎛ ∂w0 ⎧B ⎛ ∂φy ⎞ + B ⎛ ∂φy ⎞ ⎫ + B
⎜ ⎟ 1 66 ⎜ 2⎟ 12 ⎜ ⎟ 16 ⎜ ⎟ 1 26 ⎜ ⎟ 1 66 ⎜ ⎟ 22 ⎜ ⎟ 26 ⎜ ⎟ 22
2
⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ ∂x ⎜ ∂x ⎨ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎬ ∂x ⎜ ∂y ⎨ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎬
⎝ ⎩ ⎭ ⎝ ⎩ ⎭
⎛⎜ ∂φy ⎞⎟ + B ⎛⎜ ∂φy ⎞⎟ − s E ⎛⎜ ∂φy ⎞⎟ − s E ⎛⎜ ∂φy ⎞⎟
26 1 22 1 26
⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
11 ⎛ ∂ u 0 ⎞ + B
L41 = B ⎜
16 ⎛ ∂ u 0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟ ⎜ ⎟
26 ⎛− 1 ∂ u 0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎜
66 ⎛− 1 ∂ u 0 − 1 ∂ u 0 ⎞ + B
⎟ ⎜
66 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ + B
⎟
26 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎜
16 ⎛ ∂ u 0 ⎞ − s1
⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂ 2 ∂ ∂ ∂ 2 ∂ 2 ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ 2
⎝ x ⎠ ⎝ x y ⎠ ⎝ 2R y ⎠ ⎝ 1R y R2 x y ⎠ ⎝ x y ⎠ ⎝ y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠
∂x
2
66 ⎛− 1 ∂ u 0 ⎞ − A
F ⎜
55 ⎛− u 0 ⎞
⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2
⎝ R1 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R1 ⎠
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
12 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ + B
L42 = B ⎜
16 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟ ⎜
16 ⎛− 1 ∂ v0 ⎞ + B
⎟ ⎜
66 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ + B
⎟ ⎜
26 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟ ⎜
26 ⎛− 1 ∂ v0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟
66 ⎛− 1 ∂ v0 ⎞ − A
⎜
45 ⎛− v0 ⎞
⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

∂x ∂y ∂x 2 R ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y 2 R ∂y 2 R ∂x ∂y
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ 1 ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ R2 ⎠
2 2 2 2 3 3 3
11 ⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B
L43 = B ⎜
12 ⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B
⎟ ⎜
16 ⎛ ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟ ⎜
26 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 F
16 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟
66 ⎛2 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B
⎜ ⎟
66 ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2 2 3 2 2
⎝ R1 ∂x ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠
2 2 2 3 3 3
⎛ ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B
⎜
26 ⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟ ⎜
16 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟ ⎜ ⎟
66 ⎛2 ∂ w0 ⎞ − A
26 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 F ⎜
45 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞ − A
⎟
55 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ 2 ∂ ∂ ∂ 2 ∂ ∂ 2 ∂ 3 ∂ 2 ∂x ∂
⎝ y x y x y ⎠ ⎝ R2 y y y ⎠ ⎝ y x ⎠ ⎝ x ⎠ ⎝ y ⎠ ⎝ y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠

∂2φx ⎞ ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φx ⎞ ∂2φx ⎞ 

11 ⎛⎜
L44 = D  ⎛
⎟ + B16 ⎜
 ⎛
⎟ − s1 F26 ⎜
 ⎛
⎟ − s1 F16 ⎜
 ⎛
⎟ − s1 F66 ⎜
 ⎛
⎟ − s1 F16 ⎜
 ⎛
⎟ − s1 F66 ⎜ ⎟ − A55 (φ )
2 2 2 x
⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠

∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ∂2φy ∂2φy ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ⎞
L45 = D 12 ⎛⎜  ⎛
⎟ + B16 ⎜
 ⎛
⎟ − s1 F26 ⎜ ⎟ − s1
16 ⎛⎜
F ⎟ − s1
66 ⎛⎜
F ⎟ + 16
D + 26
D + 66 ⎛⎜
D + ⎟ − s1
26 ⎛⎜
F − s1
2 ∂y 2 ∂y 2 ⎠ 2 ⎟
⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ∂x ∂y ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎝ ∂y ⎠
∂2φy ⎞
66 ⎛⎜
F 
⎟ − A 45 (φy )
⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
16 ⎛ ∂ u 0 ⎞ + B
L51 = B ⎜
66 ⎛ ∂ u 0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟ ⎜ ⎟
16 ⎛− 1 ∂ u 0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎜
66 ⎛− 1 ∂ u 0 − 1 ∂ u 0 ⎞ + B
⎟ ⎜
22 ⎛ ∂ u 0 ⎞ + B
⎟
26 ⎛ ∂ u 0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎜
12 ⎛− 1 ∂ u 0 ⎞ − s1
⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂ 2 ∂ ∂ ∂ 2 ∂ 2 ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ 2
⎝ x ⎠ ⎝ x y ⎠ ⎝ 2R x ⎠ ⎝ 2R x R1 x y ⎠ ⎝ x y ⎠ ⎝ y ⎠ ⎝ 1 ∂y ⎠
R ∂x
2
26 ⎛− 1 ∂ u 0 ⎞ − A
F ⎜
45 ⎛− u 0 ⎞
⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2
⎝ R1 ∂y ⎠ ⎝ R1 ⎠
2 2 2 2 2 2
26 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ + B
L52 = B ⎜
66 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟ ⎜
26 ⎛− 1 ∂ v0 ⎞ + B
⎟ ⎜
26 ⎛ ∂ v0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟ ⎜
22 ⎛− 1 ∂ v0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟ ⎜
26 ⎛− 1 ∂ v0 ⎞ − A
⎟
44 ⎛− v0 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

∂x ∂y ∂x 2 R ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y R ∂y 2 R ∂x ∂y
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ 1 ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ R2 ⎠
2 2 2 2 3 3 3
16 ⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B
L53 = B ⎜
26 ⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B
⎟ ⎜
66 ⎛ ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟ ⎜
16 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 F
26 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟
66 ⎛2 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B
⎜ ⎟
22 ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
2 2 3 2 2
⎝ R1 ∂x ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ R2 ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂x ⎠
2 2 2 3 3 3
⎛ 1 ∂w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ + B
⎜
26 ⎛ ∂w0 ∂ w0 + ∂w0 ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟ ⎜
12 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 F
⎟ ⎜ ⎟
26 ⎛2 ∂ w0 ⎞ − A
22 ⎛ ∂ w0 ⎞ − s1 F ⎜
44 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞ − A
⎟
45 ⎛ ∂w0 ⎞
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ 2 ∂ ∂ 2 ∂ 3 ∂ 2 ∂x ∂
R
⎝ 1 y x x y ⎠ ⎝ y x y x y ⎠ ⎝ y x ⎠ ⎝ x ⎠ ⎝ y ⎠ ⎝ y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠

∂2φx ⎞ ∂2φx ⎞ ∂2φx ⎞ ∂2φx ⎞ ∂2φx ⎞  ⎛ ∂w0 u

16 ⎜⎛
L54 = D  ⎛
⎟ + D66 ⎜
 ⎛
⎟ − s1 F66 ⎜
 ⎛
⎟ − s1 F12 ⎜
 ⎛
⎟ − s1 F26 ⎜ ⎟ − A 45 φx + ⎜− 0⎞ ⎟

∂x 2 ∂x 2 ∂x 2 ∂x ∂y ∂ y 2 ∂x R1 ⎠
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝

∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ∂2φy ∂2φy ∂2φy ⎞ ∂2φy ⎞
L55 = +D26 ⎜⎛  ⎛
⎟ + D66 ⎜
 ⎛
⎟ − s1 F16 ⎜
 ⎛
⎟ − s1 F26 ⎜
 ⎛
⎟ − s1 F66 ⎜

⎟ + D12
22
+D 26 ⎜⎛
+D +  ⎛
⎟ − s1 F22 ⎜ − s1
2 2 2 2 ⎟
⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ∂x ∂y ∂y ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y ⎠
∂2φy ⎞ ∂w0 v
26 ⎛⎜
F  ⎛
⎟ − A 44 φy +⎜ − 0⎞ ⎟

⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂y R 2⎠

References piezoelectric fiber reinforced composite actuators. Compos Struct

[1] Naidu NS, Sinha PK. Nonlinear free vibration analysis of laminated composite shells
in hygrothermal environments. Compos Struct 2007;77(4):475–83.
[2] Heydari MM, Bidgoli AH, Golshani HR, Beygipoor G, Davoodi A. Nonlinear bending
analysis of functionally graded CNT-reinforced composite Mindlin polymeric tem-
perature-dependent plate resting on orthotropic elastomeric medium using GDQM.
Nonlinear Dyn 2015;79(2):1425–41.
[3] Fan Y, Wang H. Nonlinear low-velocity impact on damped and matrix-cracked
hybrid laminated beams containing carbon nanotube reinforced composite layers.
Nonlinear Dyn 2017;89(3):1863–76.
[4] Shen HS. A comparison of buckling and postbuckling behavior of FGM plates with
2009;91(3):375–84.
[5] Lee DM, Lee I. Vibration behaviors of thermally postbuckled anisotropic plates using
first-order shear deformable plate theory. Comput Struct 1997;63(3):371–8.
[6] Wu H, Yang J, Kitipornchai S. Dynamic instability of functionally graded multilayer
graphene nanocomposite beams in thermal environment. Compos Struct
2017;162:244–54.
[7] Mehar K, Panda SK. Numerical investigation of nonlinear thermomechanical de-
flection of functionally graded CNT reinforced doubly curved composite shell panel
under different mechanical loads. Compos Struct 2017;161:287–98.
[8] Yazdi AA. Applicability of homotopy perturbation method to study the nonlinear
vibration of doubly curved cross-ply shells. Compos Struct 2013;96:526–31.
[9] Singh VK, Panda SK. Nonlinear free vibration analysis of single/doubly curved

13
M. Karimiasl, et al.
composite shallow shell panels. Thin-Walled Struct 2014;85:341–9.
[10] Amabili M, Reddy JN. A new non-linear higher-order shear deformation theory for
large-amplitude vibrations of laminated doubly curved shells. Int J Non-Linear
Mech 2010;45(4):409–18.
[11] Alijani F, Amabili M, Karagiozis K, Bakhtiari-Nejad F. Nonlinear vibrations of
functionally graded doubly curved shallow shells. J Sound Vib
2011;330(7):1432–54.
[12] Alijani F, Amabili M. Theory and experiments for nonlinear vibrations of imperfect
rectangular plates with free edges. J Sound Vib 2013;332(14):3564–88.
[13] Chorfi SM, Houmat A. Non-linear free vibration of a functionally graded doubly-
curved shallow shell of elliptical plan-form. Compos Struct 2010;92(10):2573–81.
[14] Shen HS, Chen X, Guo L, Wu L, Huang XL. Nonlinear vibration of FGM doubly
curved panels resting on elastic foundations in thermal environments. Aerosp Sci
Technol 2015;47:434–46.
[15] Park JS, Kim JH, Moon SH. Vibration of thermally post-buckled composite plates
embedded with shape memory alloy fibers. Compos Struct 2004;63(2):179–88.
[16] Panda SK, Singh BN. Nonlinear finite element analysis of thermal post-buckling
vibration of laminated composite shell panel embedded with SMA fibre. Aerosp Sci
Technol 2013;29(1):47–57.
[17] Sofiyev A, Aksogan O, Schnack E, Avcar M. The stability of a three-layered com-
posite conical shell containing a FGM layer subjected to external pressure. Mech
Adv Mater Struct 2008;15(6–7):461–6.
[18] Wang HR, Sun Q, Yao YQ, Li YX, Wang JX, Chen L. A micro sensor based on TiO2
nanorod arrays for the detection of oxygen at room temperature. Ceram Int
2016;42(7):8565–71.
[19] Araujo AL, Carvalho VS, Soares CMM, Belinha J, Ferreira AJM. Vibration analysis of
laminated soft core sandwich plates with piezoelectric sensors and actuators.
Compos Struct 2016;151:91–8.
[20] Rajabi K, Hosseini-Hashemi S. On the application of viscoelastic orthotropic double-
nanoplates systems as nanoscale mass-sensors via the generalized Hooke's law for
viscoelastic materials and Eringen's nonlocal elasticity theory. Compos Struct
2017;180:105–15.
[21] Bahrami MN, Yousefi-Koma A, Raeisifard H. Modeling and nonlinear analysis of a
micro-switch under electrostatic and piezoelectric excitations with curvature and
piezoelectric nonlinearities. J Mech Sci Technol 2014;28(1):263–72.
[22] Raeisifard H, Bahrami MN, Yousefi-Koma A. Mechanical characterization and
nonlinear analysis of a piezoelectric laminated micro-switch under electrostatic
actuation. P I Mech Eng L-J Mat 2015;229(4):299–308.
[23] Peng JS, Yang L, Yang J. Size effect on the dynamic analysis of electrostatically
actuated micro-actuators. Microsyst Technol 2017;23(5):1247–54.
[24] Chorsi MT, Azizi S, Bakhtiari-Nejad F. Nonlinear dynamics of a functionally graded
piezoelectric micro-resonator in the vicinity of the primary resonance. J Vib Control
2017;23(3):400–13.
[25] Chen YF, Ding DQ, Zhu CH, Zhao JH, Rabczuk T. Size- and edge-effect cohesive
energy and shear strength between graphene, carbon nanotubes and nanofibers:
Continuum modeling and molecular dynamics simulations. Compos Struct
2019;208:150–67.
[26] Cong Z, Lee S. Study of mechanical behavior of BNNT-reinforced aluminum com-
posites using molecular dynamics simulations. Compos Struct 2018;194:80–6.
[27] Koiter WT. Couple stresses in the theory of elasticity. I and II. Proc K Ned Akad Wet
B 1964;67:17–44.
[28] Mindlin RD, Tiersten HF. Effects of couple-stresses in linear elasticity. Arch Ration
Mech Anal 1962;11:415–48.
[29] Toupin RA. Theory of elasticity with couple stresses. Arch Ration Mech Anal
1964;1964(17):85–112.
[30] Eringen AC. Nonlocal polar elastic continua. Int J Eng Sci 1972;10:1–16.
[31] Eringen AC. On differential equations of nonlocal elasticity and solutions of screw
dislocation and surface waves. J Appl Phys 1983;54:4703–10.
[32] Aifantis EC. Gradient deformation models at nano, micro, and macro scales. J Eng
Mater Technol 1999;121:189–202.
[33] Fleck NA, Hutchinson JW. A phenomenological theory for strain gradient effects in
plasticity. J Mech Phys Solids 1993;41:1825–57.
[34] Fleck NA, Hutchinson JW. A reformulation of strain gradient plasticity. J Mech Phys
Solids 2001;49:2245–71.
[35] Lam DCC, Yang F, Chong ACM, Wang J, Tong P. Experiments and theory in strain
gradient elasticity. J Mech Phys Solids 2003;51:1477–508.
[36] Gurtin ME, Murdoch AI. A continuum theory of elastic material surfaces. Arch
Rational Mech Anal 1975;57(4):291–323.
[37] Gurtin ME, Murdoch AI. Surface stress in solids. Int J Solids Struct
1978;14(6):431–40.
[38] Lim CW, Zhang G, Reddy JN. A higher-order nonlocal elasticity and strain gradient
theory and its applications in wave propagation. J Mech Phys Solids
2015;78:298–313.
[39] Avcar M. Free vibration of imperfect sigmoid and power law functionally graded
beams. Steel Compos Struct 2019;30:603–15.
[40] Sofiyev AH, Alizada AN, Akin Ö, Valiyev A, Avcar M, Adiguzel S. On the stability of
FGM shells subjected to combined loads with different edge conditions and resting
on elastic foundations. Acta Mech 2012;223:189–204.
[41] Avcar M. Effects of rotary inertia shear deformation and non-homogeneity on fre-
quencies of beam. Struct Eng Mech 2015;55:871–84.
[42] She GL, Yuan FG, Ren YR, Xiao WS. On buckling and postbuckling behavior of
nanotubes. Int J Eng Sci 2017;2017(121):130–42.
[43] El-Borgi S, Rajendran P, Friswell MI, Trabelssi M, Reddy JN. Torsional vibration of
size-dependent viscoelastic rods using nonlocal strain and velocity gradient theory.
Compos Struct 2018;186:274–92.
[44] Li L, Hu YJ, Li XB. Longitudinal vibration of size-dependent rods via nonlocal strain
14
Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988
gradient theory. Int J Mech Sci 2016;115:135–44.
[45] Aydogdu M. Axial vibration of the nanorods with the nonlocal continuum rod
model. Physica E 2009;41:861–4.
[46] Aydogdu M, Arda M, Filiz S. Vibration of axially functionally graded nano rods and
beams with a variable nonlocal parameter. Adv Nano Res 2018;6:257–78.
[47] Lembo M. On nonlinear deformations of nonlocal elastic rods. Int J Solids Struct
2016;90:215–27.
[48] Xu XJ, Zheng ML, Wang XC. On vibrations of nonlocal rods: Boundary conditions,
exact solutions and their asymptotics. Int J Eng Sci 2017;119:217–31.
[49] Gul U, Aydogdu M, Gaygusuzoglu G. Axial dynamics of a nanorod embedded in an
elastic medium using doublet mechanics. Compos Struct 2017;160:1268–78.
[50] Numanoglu HM, Akgoz B, Civalek O. On dynamic analysis of nanorods. Int J Eng Sci
2018;130:33–50.
[51] Akgoz B, Civalek O. Longitudinal vibration analysis for microbars based on strain
gradient elasticity theory. J Vib Control 2014;20:606–16.
[52] Yang WL, He D, Chen WJ. A size-dependent zigzag model for composite laminated
micro beams based on a modified couple stress theory. Compos Struct
2017;179:646–54.
[53] Shafiei N, Kazemi M. Nonlinear buckling of functionally graded nano-/micro-scaled
porous beams. Compos Struct 2017;178:483–92.
[54] Sahmani S, Aghdam MM, Rabczuk T. Nonlinear bending of functionally graded
porous micro/nano-beams reinforced with graphene platelets based upon nonlocal
strain gradient theory. Compos Struct 2018;186:68–78.
[55] Jia XL, Ke LL, Zhong XL, Sun Y, Yang J, Kitipornchai S. Thermal-mechanical-elec-
trical buckling behavior of functionally graded micro-beams based on modified
couple stress theory. Compos Struct 2018;202:625–34.
[56] Shafiei N, Mousavi A, Ghadiri M. Vibration behavior of a rotating non-uniform FG
microbeam based on the modified couple stress theory and GDQEM. Compos Struct
2016;149:157–69.
[57] Dehrouyeh-Semnani AM, Mostafaei H, Dehrouyeh M, Nikkhah-Bahrami M. Thermal
pre- and post-snap-through buckling of a geometrically imperfect doubly-clamped
microbeam made of temperature-dependent functionally graded materials. Compos
Struct 2017;170:122–34.
[58] Arefi M, Zenkour AM. Vibration and bending analysis of a sandwich microbeam
with two integrated piezo-magnetic face-sheets. Compos Struct 2017;159:479–90.
[59] Moory-Shirbani M, Sedighi HM, Ouakad HM, Najar F. Experimental and mathe-
matical analysis of a piezoelectrically actuated multilayered imperfect microbeam
subjected to applied electric potential. Compos Struct 2018;184:950–60.
[60] Qi L, Zhou SJ, Li AQ. Size-dependent bending of an electro-elastic bilayer nanobeam
due to flexoelectricity and strain gradient elastic effect. Compos Struct
2016;135:167–75.
[61] Barati MR, Zenkour A. A general bi-Helmholtz nonlocal strain-gradient elasticity for
wave propagation in nanoporous graded double-nanobeam systems on elastic
substrate. Compos Struct 2017;168:885–92.
[62] Li YD, Bao RH, Chen WQ. Buckling of a piezoelectric nanobeam with interfacial
imperfection and van der Waals force: Is nonlocal effect really always dominant?
Compos Struct 2018;194:357–64.
[63] Akgoz B, Civalek O. A size-dependent beam model for stability of axially loaded
carbon nanotubes surrounded by Pasternak elastic foundation. Compos Struct
2017;176:1028–38.
[64] Lou J, He LW, Du JK, Wu HP. Nonlinear analyses of functionally graded microplates
based on a general four-variable refined plate model and the modified couple stress
theory. Compos Struct 2016;152:516–27.
[65] Liu S, Yu TT, Bui TQ, Xia SF. Size-dependent analysis of homogeneous and func-
tionally graded microplates using IGA and a non-classical Kirchhoff plate theory.
Compos Struct 2017;172:34–44.
[66] Ghayesh MH, Farokhi H, Gholipour A, Tavallaeinejad M. Dynamic characterisation
of functionally graded imperfect Kirchhoff microplates. Compos Struct
2017;179:720–31.
[67] Thai CH, Ferreira AJM, Nguyen-Xuan H. Isogeometric analysis of size-dependent
isotropic and sandwich functionally graded microplates based on modified strain
gradient elasticity theory. Compos Struct 2018;192:274–88.
[68] Ebrahimi F, Dabbagh A. On flexural wave propagation responses of smart FG
magneto-electroelastic nanoplates via nonlocal strain gradient theory. Compos
Struct 2017;162:281–93.
[69] Zenkour AM. A novel mixed nonlocal elasticity theory for thermoelastic vibration of
nanoplates. Compos Struct 2018;185:821–33.
[70] Thai S, Thai HT, Vo TP, Lee S. Postbuckling analysis of functionally graded nano-
plates based on nonlocal theory and isogeometric analysis. Compos Struct
2018;201:13–20.
[71] Gholami R, Ansari R. A unified nonlocal nonlinear higher-order shear deformable
plate model for postbuckling analysis of piezoelectric-piezomagnetic rectangular
nanoplates with various edge supports. Compos Struct 2017;166:202–18.
[72] Zeng S, Wang BL, Wang KF. Nonlinear vibration of piezoelectric sandwich nano-
plates with functionally graded porous core with consideration of flexoelectric ef-
fect. Compos Struct 2019;207:340–51.
[73] Zhu JJ, Lv Z, Liu H. Thermo-electro-mechanical vibration analysis of nonlocal
piezoelectric nanoplates involving material uncertainties. Compos Struct
2019;208:771–83.
[74] Farajpour A, Rastgoo A. Size-dependent static stability of magneto-electro-elastic
CNT/MT-based composite nanoshells under external electric and magnetic fields.
Microsyst Technol 2017;23:5815–32.
[75] Sahmani S, Aghdam MM. Nonlocal strain gradient shell model for axial buckling
and postbuckling analysis of magneto-electro-elastic composite nanoshells. Compos
Part B-Eng 2018;132:258–74.
[76] Sahmani S, Fattahi AM. Small scale effects on buckling and postbuckling behaviors
M. Karimiasl, et al.
of axially loaded FGM nanoshells based on nonlocal strain gradient elasticity
theory. Appl Math Mech 2018;39:561–80.
[77] Sun JB, Wang ZY, Zhou ZH, Xu XS, Lim CW. Surface effects on the buckling be-
haviors of piezoelectric cylindrical nanoshells using nonlocal continuum model.
Appl Math Model 2018;59:341–56.
[78] Karami B, Janghorban M, Tounsi A. Variational approach for wave dispersion in
anisotropic doubly-curved nanoshells based on a new nonlocal strain gradient
higher order shell theory. Thin-Wall Struct 2018;129:251–64.
[79] Faleh NM, Ahmed RA, Fenjan RM. On vibrations of porous FG nanoshells. Int J Eng
Sci 2018;133:1–14.
[80] Sahmani S, Aghdam MM. Size dependency in axial postbuckling behavior of hybrid
FGM exponential shear deformable nanoshells based on the nonlocal elasticity
theory. Compos Struct 2017;166:104–13.
[81] Sahmani S, Aghdam MM. A nonlocal strain gradient hyperbolic shear deformable
shell model for radial postbuckling analysis of functionally graded multilayer
GPLRC nanoshells. Compos Struct 2017;178:97–109.
[82] Farajpour A, Rastgoo A, Farajpour MR. Nonlinear buckling analysis of magneto-
electro-elastic CNT-MT hybrid nanoshells based on the nonlocal continuum me-
chanics. Compos Struct 2017;180:179–91.
[83] Ma LH, Ke LL, Reddy JN, Yang J, Kitipornchai S, Wang YS. Wave propagation
characteristics in magneto-electro-elastic nanoshells using nonlocal strain gradient
theory. Compos Struct 2018;199:10–23.
[84] Zhang B, He YM, Liu DB, Shen L, Lei JA. Free vibration analysis of four-unknown
shear deformable functionally graded cylindrical microshells based on the strain
gradient elasticity theory. Compos Struct 2015;119:578–97.
[85] Lou J, He LW, Wu HP, Du JK. Pre-buckling and buckling analyses of functionally
graded microshells under axial and radial loads based on the modified couple stress
theory. Compos Struct 2016;142:226–37.
[86] Sahmani S, Aghdam MM. Nonlinear instability of axially loaded functionally graded
multilayer graphene platelet-reinforced nanoshells based on nonlocal strain gra-
dient elasticity theory. Int J Mech Sci 2017;131:95–106.
15
Composite Structures 223 (2019) 110988
[87] Shen HS, Lin F, Xiang Y. Nonlinear vibration of functionally graded graphene-re-
inforced composite laminated beams resting on elastic foundations in thermal en-
vironments. Nonlinear Dyn 2017;90(2):899–914.
[88] Avcar M, Mohammed WKM. Free vibration of functionally graded beams resting on
Winkler-Pasternak foundation. Arabian J Geosci 2018;11:232.
[89] She GL, Yuan FG, Karami B, Ren YR, Xiao WS. On nonlinear bending behavior of FG
porous curved nanotubes. Int J Eng Sci 2019;135:58–74.
[90] Thostenson ET, Li WZ, Wang DZ, Ren ZF, Chou TW. Carbon nanotube/carbon fiber
hybrid composites. J Appl Phys 2002;91(9):6034–7.
[91] Kim M, Park YB, Okoli OI, Zhang C. Processing, characterization, and modeling of
carbon nanotube-reinforced composites. Compos Sci Technol
2009;69(3–4):335–42.
[92] Feng C, Kitipornchai S, Yang J. Nonlinear bending of polymer nanocomposite
beams reinforced with non-uniformly distributed graphene platelets (GPLs).
Compos Part B: Eng 2017;110:132–40.
[93] Rafiee M, Yang J, Kitipornchai S. Large amplitude vibration of carbon nanotube
reinforced functionally graded composite beams with piezoelectric layers. Compos
Struct 2013;96:716–25.
[94] Alamusi HN, Qiu JH, Li Y, Chang C, Atobe S, et al. Multi-scale numerical simula-
tions of thermal expansion properties of CNT-reinforced nanocomposites.
Nanoscale Res Lett 2013;8:15.
[95] Reddy JN. Mechanics of laminated composite plates and shells: theory and analysis.
CRC Press; 2004.
[96] He JH. Homotopy perturbation technique. Comput Method Appl Mech Eng
1999;178(3–4):257–62.
[97] Shen HS, Xiang Y. Postbuckling behavior of functionally graded graphene-re-
inforced composite laminated cylindrical shells under axial compression in thermal
environments. Comput Method Appl Mech Eng 2018;330:64–82.
[98] Shen HS, Yang DQ. Nonlinear vibration of functionally graded fiber-reinforced
composite laminated cylindrical shells in hygrothermal environments. Appl Math
Model 2015;39(5–6):1480–99.