JUNE 1968 INDENTATION OF ELASTIC-PERFECTLY PLASTIC MEMBRANES 1057
for loads lower than about 1.6 Ib, but for larger loads a signifi- would give better results, but it is much more complicated.
cant difference is observed. Possible reasons for this dis-
crepancy are summarized at the end of this section.
In Figs. 6 and 7, theoretical values of e,e and fa,fid are
shown as functions of indenter load P for the prestress ovo =
2510 psi. The values of e,e and pb,Pd are, at the most, only
weak functions of crr0. The curves for ovo = 850 and 1310
psi differ from these by less than 2% and hence are not
shown. The_upper bound value for the indenter load, corre-
sponding to Pu = 0.6599 [Eq. (34b) ], is Pu = 2.021 Ib. This
value of indenter load is found to be in good agreement with
the two values of experimental rupture load in Fig. 5.
The reasons for the small discrepancies between this
theory and the experiments of Ref. 3 are now summarized.
The first reason is that calculated values of <7r0 were assumed
to remain constant during indenter loading for a fixed platen
load, whereas crr0 actually varies slightly with /3(r = a) and
consequently with P. Furthermore, o>o was probably af-
fected by friction between the membrane and the outer
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA on April 22, 2013 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.4673
supports when /3(r = a) is nonzero. The second reason is
that the value of yield stress ay used in the theory is only
approximately the yield stress of Mylar. The third reason
is the use of Tresca's yield criterion and the associated flow
law of Tresca. Since directly under the indenter ar g^ ae =
ay, we are at a corner of the Tresca yield surface where there
is the largest discrepancy between the Tresca flow law and
the Mises flow law. It is possible that the Mises flow law
JUNE 1968 AIAA JOURNAL
A Curved, Cylindrical-Shell, Finite Element
GILLES CANTIN*
U.S. Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, Calif.
AND
RAY W. CLOUGH|
University of California, Berkeley, Calif.
The stiffness matrix and three consistent load vectors are developed for a rectangular finite
element of a cylindrical shell. The present element is compared with others reported in the
open literature. Three problems are analyzed with the present element and the results are
compared to known solutions to establish their integrity.
Nomenclature
E = modulus of elasticity
n — Poisson's ratio
t = thickness of the shell
|, T], f = curvilinear coordinates
u, v, w — displacements of the middle surface of the shell in the
directions of £, 17, and 'f, respectively
{u} — vector of shell displacement
[P] = matrix of displacement functions
{ai} = vector of coefficients in the displacement functions
Received August 9, 1967; revision received February 14,
1968.
* Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering,
f Professor of Civil Engineering.
Finally, for large loads, tangent rotation angle ft becomes
large (see Fig. 7), and thus the assumption of small strain
is violated [see Eqs. (17b) and (37)].
References
1
Bhatia, N. M. and Nachbar, W., "Finite Indentation of an
Elastic Membrane by a Spherical Indenter," International Journal
of Non-linear Mechanics (submitted for publication).
2
Jahsman, W. E., Field, F. A., and Holmes, A. M. C., "Finite
Deformations in a Prestressed, Centrally Loaded Circular
Elastic Membrane," Proceedings of the 4th U.S. National Congress
on Applied Mechanics, American Society of Mechanical Engi-
neers, 1962, pp. 585-594.
3
Nachbar, W., "Finite Deformation of a Prestressed, Elastic
Membrane/' SUDAER 141, 1962, Dept. of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Stanford Univ.
4
Prager, W., An Introduction to Plasticity, Addison-Wesley,
Boston, Mass., 1959.
5
Koiter, W. T., "Stress-Strain Relations, Uniqueness, and
Variational Theorems for Elastic-Plastic Materials with a
Singular Yield Surface," Quarterly Journal of Applied Mathe-
matics, Vol. 11, 1953, pp. 350-354.
6
Bhatia, N. M. and Nachbar, W., "Finite Indentation of
Elastic and Elastic-Plastic Membranes by a Spherical Indenter,"
SUDAER 203, 1965, Dept, of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Stanford Univ.
7
Jahsman, W. E., private communication.
VOL. 6, NO. 6
\m\ vector of nodal coordinates
[T] transformation matrix between m and az-
{N} vector of shell forces
vector of strains and curvatures
matrix of elastic constants
[D] = matrix of differential operators
Introduction
V ARIOUS attempts have been made in the past to con-
struct stiffness matrices for curved element. Gallagher,1
in his Ph.D. thesis, reports on a (24 X 24) stiffness matrix;
Bogner, Fox, and Schmit2 mention the same element and
report on a (48 X 48) stiffness matrix. For both of these
elements the stiffness matrix was constructed by the standard
"assumed displacement" method.
Referring to the coordinate system defined in Fig. 1, the
displacement functions used in deriving the (24 X 24) matrix
 1058 G. CANTIN AND R. W. CLOUGH AIAA JOURNAL

where ft = b/2r. It is evident that individual terms of a

polynomial expansion cannot even approximate such
functions unless <f> is very small, in which case the element
becomes a flat-plate approximation.
To account for the rigid-body modes, the function in Eqs.
(2) and (3) must be included in the displacement field. If
the displacement functions are modified to read as
4 — a6r sin<£ —
a2oKcos</> — cos/3) (4a)
- a8r(l -
cos</> cos/5) — + a2s cos<£ — a24
(4b)
Fig. 1 Definition of geometrical symbols.

are
(la)
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA on April 22, 2013 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.4673

cos/5 + a6£ sin</> (4c)

or more compactly
{&} = [P]M (5)
2
+ ai8£?7 + + 020? + the displacement field includes six rigid-body modes exactly.
a
' 24 (Ic) Also, if 4> —* 0, the displacements of the flat plate are recovered.

The 6 degrees of freedom considered at each node (corner)

of the element are u,v,w,w,^w^w^. The (48 X 48) element
developed by Bogner, Fox, and Schmit uses for both u and
v the same polynomial displacement functions as used for
w in Eq. (1), and the nodal degrees of freedom include deriva-
tives of u and v corresponding to the derivatives of w in the
aforementioned degrees of freedom.
In their element stiffness analysis, Bogner, Fox, and
Schmit used Hermite interpolation formulas to obtain the
stiffness directly in terms of the nodal displacements. This
method of construction is equivalent to the one used in this
paper and leads to the same results for the (24 X 24) flat-
plate element. However, it will be shown that polynomial
displacement functions alone cannot account for all the rigid-
body displacement modes of the curved element. Therefore,
when a structure that is subject to substantial rigid-body
displacements in some of its parts is analyzed with elements
which do not include rigid-body modes, convergence to a
satisfactory solution is not always assured. If the rigid
modes are recovered as the mesh is refined, convergence to the
correct solution will usually be obtained but will be slow.
For such a fine mesh, a flat-plate idealization gives equally
good results.3
Element Stiffness Matrix
To simplify the derivation of the element stiffness matrix,
a more convenient set of nodal displacement coordinates than
those of the previously mentioned 6 degrees of freedom was
selected as follows:
(6)
where the new rotation coordinate 0»- is given by
0, = w^ - (v/r) (7)
Then the transformation matrix [T] was derived, which re-
lates the displacement functions {a{} and the nodal coordin-
ates \Ui\ :
= (T]{ai} (8)
This transformation matrix is listed in Table 1.
The strain displacement relationships used in the analysis
of this cylindrical shell element may be expressed as

Rigid-Body Modes
It is easy to show that, for a rigid-body translation of com-
ponents 5X, 8y, 82 in the system of reference (xyz), the dis-
placement field must take the following form (see Fig. 1) :
0 0 "to

cos</> —sin</> (2) (9)

COS0
or in compact form
Also, for a general small-amplitude rotation of components
6*, 0y, 9z, the displacement functions must be (9a)
Thus, combining Eqs. (9a) and (5), the strains may be ex-
pressed in terms of the displacement function amplitudes:
{«} = [D] lP]{ai} = [P*]{a,-} (9b)
O — r(cos<£ - cos/3)
— r(l — cos<£ cos/3) — | sin<£ When the displacements given by (2) and (3) are substituted
_r sin<£ cos/3 £ cos<£ into (9a) a null vector results, showing that (9) leads to strain
free states for rigid-body motions.
 JUNE 1968 A CURVED, CYLINDRICAL-SHELL, FINITE ELEMENT 1059

o o o oO O o o o o O O o o o ^ 6o o

Fig. 2 Simple shell

segment under gravity
oo^OooooOOooooOOOooo^Ooo load: r = 25.0ft; L =
I I
50ft; 0 = 40°; t = 0.25
ft; E = 432000.0 kips/
ft 2 ; /* = Oo3; gravity
load = 0.09 kips/ft2.

The constitutive relationship assumed in this development

is that used in Novoshilov's theory of cylindrical shells4:

! i
(10)
M,
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA on April 22, 2013 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.4673

II o
Ss K
where Ki = Et/(l - ^ 2 ); #2 = pKi] Ks = |(1 -
Di = Et3/I2(l - M 2 ); D2 = fiDi] D3 = i(l - /*)Z)i. The
strains and forces are all taken in the middle plane of the
shell. In more compact form, Eq. (10) will be written
o o o o O e o o o o ^> « o o
(10a)
The strain energy in the element is
I I
U = ^ff{N}T-(e} d^df] (11)
? ^ ^ -o vo O O ,0
•^^co e o o O f M c o e o o ^ 3 O O O <N <M e or substituting for {A^} and {e} from Eqs. (9b) and (lOa):
I I I I I I

Denoting the integral in Eq. (12) by the symbol [k], the strain
I I
energy becomes
M
U = ^^[^{a,} (13)
ooooOcoooooOcoooooOcooo
I Finally, solving for {di} from Eq. (8) and substituting into
Eq. (13) leads to the stiffness matrix
1 1 [K] = [T-*F[k][T-i] (14)
The matrix [k] is given explicitly in Table 2.
A computer program was developed to test the rigid-body
properties of this stiffness matrix. The eigenvalues of the
stiffness matrices of several examples were obtained; in all
-OOO cases six eigenvalues were zero. In addition, knowing the
OcOCOCT)
I I II .«
exact form of the displacement functions for rigid-body modes
it was made possible to construct nodal displacement vectors
corresponding to each of the six rigid-body modes. Multi-
plying [K] by these vectors gives the associated nodal forces:
for all six rigid-body modes the forces were zero. On the
basis of these results, it was concluded that this element stiff-
A ness matrix adequately accounted for all rigid-body effects.
03

OooOooOooOooOoo^ooOooOc
i I
OOooOrHOOOOOT-HOOOOOiHOOOOO
Consistent Loads
A finite element analysis requires that actual loads be
transformed into their consistent nodal load equivalents.
This analysis was carried out in the standard manner for
I I
this cylindrical element, and the results for a uniform gravity
load, a uniform pressure load, and a concentrated load are
given in Table 3.

oooooOoooooOoooooOooooo Numerical Results

A number of different cylindrical-shell problems were
analyzed with this finite element and some typical results for
oooooOoooooOoooooOooooo
I three different cases are presented here. Figure 2 illustrates
the geometry of problems 1 and 2, a uniform cylindrical shell
oooooOoooooOoooooOooooo with diaphragm end supports subjected to gravity load.
Figures 3-5 show some typical results for these two prob-
 1060 G. CANTIN AND R. W. CLOUGH AIAA JOURNAL

Table 2 Stiffness matrix [k] in terms of polynomial coefficients a;°

_

0 k2
0 0 ks
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 fc4
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 k7 0 0 1 0 k8
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 00 00 Ofcio symmetrical
0 0 0 0 kn 0 0 0 0 kiz
0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 ku 0 fas
0 0 0 0 foe 0 0 0 0 kn 0 ku
ki9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ho
0 £21 0 0 0 0 £22 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 £23
£24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 kzs 0 &26
0 £27 0 0 0 0 A;28 0 0 0 0 0 0 £29 0 &3o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A;32 0 £33 0 0 0 0 0 /bs4
0 0 0 0 /c35 0 0 0 0 fas 0 £37 0 0 0 0 0 /c38
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 &40 0 &4i 0 0 0 0 0 £42 0 &43
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA on April 22, 2013 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.4673

£44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 £45 0 /b46 0 0 0 0 0 &47

0 &48 0 0 0 0 &49 0 0 0 0 0 0 &5o 0 kn. 0 0 0 0 0 &52
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Q O O Q O O O O O O O O O

n -iTTt.
a 7 jKigfe3 . Ksasb 7 r, , 7 T, , , Kia3b . Ksab3 . Diasb . Dsab3 , ^. , 7 _^ . Diab , Kitfb"1 .
Where: fa = ——— + ——— ; kz = K\ab\ ks = Ksab; fa = ——— + ——— + ——— + ——; fa = Kzab; k& ~ Kiab + ———; fao = ————— +
12 12 12 12 12r2 3r2 r* 200704r2

+
448 800 448 1600 ' "= 960r ~ 24r ~ 40r ~~ 6r ' 12
~~ 35840r2 80 40 112 20 ' "~

Or2 +
35840r2 80
80 +
80
80 +
80 ' ' ^15"= 5376r2
80 5376r2+ ~4 4 +
20' ' " =
20 " 80r
80r~ 2r ' *" ~" 5376r2 + 4~ +
20 ' ^18 =

z3 - _ J.\.2U,"U" , _ J.\-1U"U"
3Z>ig 6; fag
\D\a b', kig = —-——: kzo = —-—— + —-— + ——— + ——-—— + —-—— ; ^21
fai = ———:
———; kzz = —-—— — —-— — —-—: kn = —-—— + —-— +
960r2'
960r2 35840r2 ^ 112
112 40 80
80 20 ' ' 21 ~ 144r
20 144r ' 22 ~ 144r
144r 144r " 6r 6r 6400r2 20
3
+^
18 +
20 +
9 ' ^ =
144r ' k* =
6400r2 + 20 +
12 3~' 26 26~ ~ 960r2
3~' 3 3 ' 2?
12r ' 28
12r

29
29 33 10
10 33
r ' ~ 960r2 3 3 ' ° ~ 80r2 '' 35840r2
35840r2 80
80 80 80 ' 6400r2 4 4 '
3
•———
—— + + ———
—-—— -f*
4- ———
—^- ;: A;36 =
fas = ————
——— — ————•
—-— —— ————;
—^—: fcse
fcse =
= ———
—-—— -K + ———
—-—— ++ ———
—-— + ————; k& = ———— 4- Z)2g &; fc3s = ————
5376r2
!7«^2 ^ 4 A 20
9H 144r
1AA» 6r
R* 3r
%*• 6400r2
Rdnn-r2 12
19. 20
9O 3 960r2 960r2

4 3 43 3 44
' ° "" 6400r2 4~~' " ~ 960r2 ° ' ^ ~ 960r2 ' ~ 144r2 ° ' ~ 80r ' ^ ~ 5376r2 20
)5
J- D 7)3- fr = ^ia^7 4. qn 7,3. fr = ^2Q^3. i. _ -^ia^3 _ 2Z>ig6 _ Kiazb5 . DzabJ D\a*b^ , __ Kia3bs , _ , _ .K:
20 5 47 10 5 48
~" 448r2 "^ ~ 12r ? 49 ~ 12r T"5 6° ~ 960r2 "^ ~3~ 3 ; " ~ 144r2 "*" 2
° 5 *62 ~ ~8i

Table 3 Load vectors0

Gravity Pressure Concentrated load at (£,??)

0 0 PI&I
0 0 Pi£
0 0 Pin
0 0 Pi
0 0 P^rj
0 0 PI% cos0 + P3£ sin</> — P\r sin0
2ap*r2 sina (sin/3 — j8 cos/3) 0 PW
2ap*r2 cosa (sin/3 — |8 coS|8) 0 — P2r(l — cos0 cosa) + P3r sin0 cosa
0 0 P£z~nz
0 0 P3£V
0 0 P&*T1
0 0 Ps^3
-^a3p*r4 cos«[(3/32 - 6) sinj8 - (/33 - 6/3) cos^] 0 P3^2>73
- 2) sin^ + 20 cos/8]
— j8 cos/3)
— ^a*p*r sina sin/3 pa*b/12 P3^2
0 0 P3^3
0 0 P3^2
0 0 P&n
0 0 —Pi r(cos0 — cosa) — P2^ shi(/j• + P2£ cos0
-2ap*r4 cosa[(3]S2 - 6) sin/3 - ((3* - 6/3) cos/3] 0 P3773

-2ap*r3 sina[(/32 - 2) sin/3 + 2/3 cos/3] pa63/12 P3773

— 2ap*r cosa(/3) 0 P2 cos0 + P3 sin0
— 2ap*r sina(/3) 2apr sin/3 — P2 sin0 + P3 cos0
a
Where: p* is the weight per unit area; p is the pressure; Pi, P2, P3 are the three components of the concentrated load acting along (£??f); a is the angle
between the horizontal and the centerline of the element; and the other symbols are defined in Fig. 1.
 JUNE 1968 A CURVED, CYLINDRICAL-SHELL, FINITE ELEMENT
w (ft)
center
-0.002
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA on April 22, 2013 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.4673
-O.OOOI
Fig. 3 Displacement along AB for problem 1; solid line =
Donnell-Jenkins theory; circles = finite element analysis
for a mesh of ( 8 X 8 ) .
lems. A second computer program based upon the classical
Donnell-Jenkins theory was used for comparison with these
two problems.5 Excellent agreement between the two
theories is observed.
In Fig. 6, the effect of the rigid-body modes on the rate of
convergence for problem 2 is shown. The results of various
analyses for the maximum displacement along the free edge
obtained with meshes of (10 X 15), (10 X 10), (8 X 8),
(5 X 10), (6 X 6), (5 X 5), and (4 X 5) are shown as circles
and the results obtained with a stiffness matrix constructed
without inclusion of rigid-body modes for meshes (10 X 10),
(8 X 8), (6 X 6), and (5 X 5) as small squares. Both
elements would eventually converge to the results given by
the Donnell-Jenkins theory. However, excluding the rigid-
body motions requires that the mesh be so fine that the ele-
wlft)
20*
-.2
u(ft)
end
.010
;005
20° 40
Fig. 4 Displacement w along AB and u along DC for
problem 2.
1061
2.0
1.0
2 0 ° 40°*
50.
40°*
Fig. 5 Moments and stresses along AB for problem 2.
ments would almost be flat. Including the rigid-body modes
on the other hand permits to obtain good results with
substantial curvature still present in the element. In Fig.
7, the effect of the curvature of the element is shown. Again
the maximum displacement on the free edge of problem 2 is
used as the measure of the solution quality. Results ob-
tained with this element (GC) are compared with those ob-
tained by two different investigators, Athol J. Carr6 (AJC)
and C. Philip Johnson3 (CPJ). Johnson used a flat triangular
element with constant membrane strain, and Carr used a
similar flat triangular element but with quadratically varying
membrane strain.
Results presented in Fig. 7 show that the cylindrical curved
element is superior to the flat triangular elements except for
coarse mesh systems. In such cases the refined membrane
behavior of the AJC element seems to be more significant
than the curvature of the GC element.
The last problem illustrated in Fig. 8 is a pinched cylinder
analyzed by Bogner, Fox, and Schmit2 with their (48 X 48)
element. The displacement under the concentrated load
given by Timoshenko7 is 0.1084 in.; results obtained with
the present element are listed in Table 4. The results with
•THEORETICAL SOLUTION
INCLUDING RIGID BODY MODES
.005
.02 .03 .04 05 -
N
N-number of elements
Fig. 6 Effect of rigid-body modes on the convergence of
the solution for problem 2.
 1062 G. CANTIN AND R. W. CLOUGH AIAA JOURNAL

Table 4 Displacement under the load P for the pinched cylinder

Bogner et al. (48 X 48) Cantin and Clough (24 X 24) (24 X 24) without rigid-body modes
Mesh No. of Eq. Displacement, in. Mesh No. of Eq. Disp., in. Mesh No. of Eq. Disp., in
1 X1 48 -0.0025 1 X3 48 -0.0297 1X 3 48 -0.00099
1 X2 72 -0.0802 1X5 72 -0.0769 1X 5 72 -0.00213
2 X 2 108 -0.0808 2X5 108 -0.0780 2 X 5 108 -0.00266
1 X3 96 -0.1026 1 X7 96 -0.0987 1X 7 96 -0.00352
2 X 3 144 -0.1036 2X7 144 -0.1002 2 X 7 144 -0.00420
1 X4 120 -0.1087 1X9 120 -0.1057 1X 9 120 -0.00513
2 X 4 180 -0.1098 2X9 180 -0.1073 2X 9 180 -0.00590
3 X 49 1200 -0.1128 3X 49 1200 -0.05583
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA on April 22, 2013 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.4673

the element containing rigid-body modes are compared to significant discrepancy in the physical behavior of the system
those obtained with the same element without rigid-body unless a very fine element mesh is used. However, the de-
modes; the importance of these rigid-body terms is evident. velopment of an effective stiffness matrix for the curved ele-
A comparison with the (48 X 48) element of Bogner, Fox, ment is greatly complicated by the problem of adequately
and Schmit shows that the present (24 X 24) element gives accounting for rigid-body displacement components. The
results that are slightly lower for the pinched cylinder prob- procedure which is presented herein for including such rigid-
lem for the same computational effort. body terms in the displacement functions is both simple and
effective, and makes the curved finite element a practical
u(ft) ———— THEORETICAL SOLUTI ON
computational device.
.0127 / Results obtained in the analysis of cylindrical shells with
edge fr <5 -————0 this element show that the solutions are well behaved; coarse
^ mesh solutions provide good approximations to the exact
.OIO -
0 GC (24x24) CURVED RECTAN( LE
results, and monotonic convergence toward the exact results
O AJC (27x27) FLAT TRIANGLE
is obtained with mesh refinement. Comparisons of two sets
0 CPJ (15x15) FLAT TRIANGLE
of results obtained with this element, including and excluding
.005 - the rigid-body displacement terms, demonstrate that the
inclusion of these terms leads to significantly better answers
for coarse mesh systems. Similarly, comparisons of curved-
and flat-plate elements tend to indicate a useful improvement
resulting from the curvature. On the basis of these studies,
1000 2000 Neq it may be concluded that this cylindrically curved element
Neq - number of equations provides a practical tool for the analysis of arbitrary cylindri-
cal-shell systems.
Fig. 7 Effect of the curvature of the element on the
solution for problem 2.
References
Conclusions 1
Gallagher, R. H., 'The Development and Evaluation of
The advantage offered by a cylindrically curved element Matrix Methods for Thin Shells Structural Analysis," Ph.D.
for the analysis of an arbitrary cylindrical-shell system is thesis, 1966, State University of New York, Buffalo, N.Y.
2
obvious; a flat-plate element idealization must lead to a Bogner, F. K, Fox, R. L., and Schmit, L. A., "A Cylindrical
Shell Discrete Element," AIAA Journal, Vol. 5, No. 4, April
1967, pp. 745-750.
3
Johnson, C. P., "A Finite Element Approximation for the
Analysis of Thin Shells," Ph.D. thesis, 1967, University of Cali-
fornia, Berkeley, Calif.
4
Novozhilov, V. V., The Theory of Thin Shells, Noordhoff,
Fig. 8 Pinched cylinder: Groninger, The Netherlands, pp. 19-38.
5
P = 100 Ib, r = 4.953 in.; Scordelis, A. C., "Computer Program for the Analysis of
L = 10.35 in.; E = 10.5 X 106 Multiple Cylindrical Shells," computer program, Dept. of Civil
psi; t = 0.094 in.; /* = 0.3125. Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.
6
Carr, A. J., "A Refined Finite Element Analysis of Thin Shell
Structures Including Dynamic Loading," Ph.D. thesis, 1967,
University of California, Berkeley, Calif.
7
Timoshenko, S. and Woinowsky-Krieger, S., Theory of Plates
and Shells, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1959, pp. 501-506.