Reissner-Mindlin plate theory

From The Right Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
File:Plaque mince deplacement element matiere.svg
Deformation of a plate highlighting the displacement, the mid-surface (red) and the normal to the mid-surface (blue)

The Reissner–Mindlin theory of plates is an extension of Kirchhoff–Love plate theory that takes into account shear deformations through-the-thickness of a plate. The theory was proposed in 1951 by Raymond Mindlin.[1] A similar, but not identical, theory in static setting, had been proposed earlier by Eric Reissner in 1945.[2] Both theories are intended for thick plates in which the normal to the mid-surface remains straight but not necessarily perpendicular to the mid-surface. The Reissner-Mindlin theory is used to calculate the deformations and stresses in a plate whose thickness is of the order of one tenth the planar dimensions while the Kirchhoff–Love theory is applicable to thinner plates. The form of Reissner-Mindlin plate theory that is most commonly used is actually due to Mindlin and is more properly called Mindlin plate theory.[3] The Reissner theory is slightly different. Both theories include in-plane shear strains and both are extensions of Kirchhoff–Love plate theory incorporating first-order shear effects. Mindlin's theory assumes that there is a linear variation of displacement across the plate thickness but that the plate thickness does not change during deformation. An additional assumption is that the normal stress through the thickness is ignored; an assumption which is also called the plane stress condition. On the other hand, Reissner's theory assumes that the bending stress is linear while the shear stress is quadratic through the thickness of the plate. This leads to a situation where the displacement through-the-thickness is not necessarily linear and where the plate thickness may change during deformation. Therefore, Reissner's static theory does not invoke the plane stress condition. The Reissner-Mindlin theory is often called the first-order shear deformation theory of plates. Since a first-order shear deformation theory implies a linear displacement variation through the thickness, it is incompatible with Reissner's plate theory.

Mindlin theory

Mindlin's theory was originally derived for isotropic plates using equilibrium considerations. A more general version of the theory based on energy considerations is discussed here.[4]

Assumed displacement field

The Mindlin hypothesis implies that the displacements in the plate have the form

uα(x)=uα0(x1,x2)x3φα;α=1,2u3(x)=w0(x1,x2)

where x1 and x2 are the Cartesian coordinates on the mid-surface of the undeformed plate and x3 is the coordinate for the thickness direction, uα0,α=1,2 are the in-plane displacements of the mid-surface, w0 is the displacement of the mid-surface in the x3 direction, φ1 and φ2 designate the angles which the normal to the mid-surface makes with the x3 axis. Unlike Kirchhoff–Love plate theory where φα are directly related to w0, Mindlin's theory does not require that φ1=w,10 and φ2=w,20.

File:Plaque mince deplacement rotation fibre neutre new.svg
Displacement of the mid-surface (left) and of a normal (right)

Strain-displacement relations

Depending on the amount of rotation of the plate normals two different approximations for the strains can be derived from the basic kinematic assumptions. For small strains and small rotations the strain–displacement relations for Mindlin–Reissner plates are

εαβ=12(uα,β0+uβ,α0)x32(φα,β+φβ,α)εα3=12(w,α0φα)ε33=0

The shear strain, and hence the shear stress, across the thickness of the plate is not neglected in this theory. However, the shear strain is constant across the thickness of the plate. This cannot be accurate since the shear stress is known to be parabolic even for simple plate geometries. To account for the inaccuracy in the shear strain, a shear correction factor (κ) is applied so that the correct amount of internal energy is predicted by the theory. Then

εα3=12κ(w,α0φα)

Equilibrium equations

The equilibrium equations of a Mindlin–Reissner plate for small strains and small rotations have the form

Nαβ,α=0Mαβ,βQα=0Qα,α+q=0

where q is an applied out-of-plane load, the in-plane stress resultants are defined as

Nαβ:=hhσαβdx3,

the moment resultants are defined as

Mαβ:=hhx3σαβdx3,

and the shear resultants are defined as

Qα:=κhhσα3dx3.
File:Plaque moment flechissant contrainte new.svg
Bending moments and normal stresses
File:Plaque moment torsion contrainte new.svg
Torques and shear stresses
File:Plaque effort tranchant contrainte new.svg
Shear resultant and shear stresses

Boundary conditions

The boundary conditions are indicated by the boundary terms in the principle of virtual work. If the only external force is a vertical force on the top surface of the plate, the boundary conditions are

nαNαβoruβ0nαMαβorφαnαQαorw0

Stress–strain relations

The stress–strain relations for a linear elastic Mindlin–Reissner plate are given by

σαβ=Cαβγθεγθσα3=Cα3γθεγθσ33=C33γθεγθ

Since σ33 does not appear in the equilibrium equations it is implicitly assumed that it does not have any effect on the momentum balance and is neglected. This assumption is also called the plane stress assumption. The remaining stress–strain relations for an orthotropic material, in matrix form, can be written as

[σ11σ22σ23σ31σ12]=[C11C12000C12C2200000C4400000C5500000C66][ε11ε22ε23ε31ε12]

Then

[N11N22N12]=hh[C11C120C12C22000C66][ε11ε22ε12]dx3={hh[C11C120C12C22000C66]dx3}[u1,10u2,2012(u1,20+u2,10)]

and

[M11M22M12]=hhx3[C11C120C12C22000C66][ε11ε22ε12]dx3={hhx32[C11C120C12C22000C66]dx3}[φ1,1φ2,212(φ1,2+φ2,1)]

For the shear terms

[Q1Q2]=κhh[C5500C44][ε31ε32]dx3=κ2{hh[C5500C44]dx3}[w,10φ1w,20φ2]

The extensional stiffnesses are the quantities

Aαβ:=hhCαβdx3

The bending stiffnesses are the quantities

Dαβ:=hhx32Cαβdx3.

Mindlin theory for isotropic plates

For uniformly thick, homogeneous, and isotropic plates, the stress–strain relations in the plane of the plate are

[σ11σ22σ12]=E1ν2[1ν0ν10001ν2][ε11ε222ε12].

where E is the Young's modulus, ν is the Poisson's ratio, and εαβ are the in-plane strains. The through-the-thickness shear stresses and strains are related by

σ31=2Gε31andσ32=2Gε32

where G=E/(2(1+ν)) is the shear modulus.

Constitutive relations

The relations between the stress resultants and the generalized deformations are,

[N11N22N12]=2Eh1ν2[1ν0ν10001ν][u1,10u2,2012(u1,20+u2,10)],[M11M22M12]=2Eh33(1ν2)[1ν0ν10001ν][φ1,1φ2,212(φ1,2+φ2,1)],

and

[Q1Q2]=κG2h[w,10φ1w,20φ2].

In the above,

D=2Eh33(1ν2).

is referred to as the bending rigidity (or bending modulus). For a plate of thickness h~=2h, the bending rigidity has the form

D=Eh~312(1ν2).

from now on, in all the equations below, we will refer to h as the total thickness of the plate, and as not the semi-thickness (as in the above equations).

Governing equations

If we ignore the in-plane extension of the plate, the governing equations are

Mαβ,βQα=0Qα,α+q=0.

In terms of the generalized deformations, these equations can be written as

2(φ1x1+φ2x2)=qD2w0φ1x1φ2x2=qκGh2(φ1x2φ2x1)=2κGhD(1ν)(φ1x2φ2x1).

The boundary conditions along the edges of a rectangular plate are

simply supportedw0=0,M11=0(orM22=0),φ1=0( or φ2=0)clampedw0=0,φ1=0,φ2=0.

Relationship to Reissner's theory

The canonical constitutive relations for shear deformation theories of isotropic plates can be expressed as[5][6]

M11=D[𝒜(φ1x1+νφ2x2)(1𝒜)(2w0x12+ν2w0x22)]+q1νM22=D[𝒜(φ2x2+νφ1x1)(1𝒜)(2w0x22+ν2w0x12)]+q1νM12=D(1ν)2[𝒜(φ1x2+φ2x1)2(1𝒜)2w0x1x2]Q1=𝒜κGh(φ1+w0x1)Q2=𝒜κGh(φ2+w0x2).

Note that the plate thickness is h (and not 2h) in the above equations and D=Eh3/[12(1ν2)]. If we define a Marcus moment,

=D[𝒜(φ1x1+φ2x2)(1𝒜)2w0]+2q1ν2

we can express the shear resultants as

Q1=x1+D(1ν)2[𝒜x2(φ1x2φ2x1)]1+νqx1Q2=x2D(1ν)2[𝒜x1(φ1x2φ2x1)]1+νqx2.

These relations and the governing equations of equilibrium, when combined, lead to the following canonical equilibrium equations in terms of the generalized displacements.

2(1+νq)=qκGh(2w0+D)=(1c21+ν)q2(φ1x2φ2x1)=c2(φ1x2φ2x1)

where

c2=2κGhD(1ν).

In Mindlin's theory, w0 is the transverse displacement of the mid-surface of the plate and the quantities φ1 and φ2 are the rotations of the mid-surface normal about the x2 and x1-axes, respectively. The canonical parameters for this theory are 𝒜=1 and =0. The shear correction factor κ usually has the value 5/6. On the other hand, in Reissner's theory, w0 is the weighted average transverse deflection while φ1 and φ2 are equivalent rotations which are not identical to those in Mindlin's theory.

Relationship to Kirchhoff–Love theory

If we define the moment sum for Kirchhoff–Love theory as

K:=D2wK

we can show that [5]

=K+1+νq+D2Φ

where Φ is a biharmonic function such that 22Φ=0. We can also show that, if wK is the displacement predicted for a Kirchhoff–Love plate,

w0=wK+KκGh(1c22)Φ+Ψ

where Ψ is a function that satisfies the Laplace equation, 2Ψ=0. The rotations of the normal are related to the displacements of a Kirchhoff–Love plate by

φ1=wKx11κGh(11𝒜c22)Q1K+x1(DκGh𝒜2Φ+ΦΨ)+1c2Ωx2φ2=wKx21κGh(11𝒜c22)Q2K+x2(DκGh𝒜2Φ+ΦΨ)+1c2Ωx1

where

Q1K=Dx1(2wK),Q2K=Dx2(2wK),Ω:=φ1x2φ2x1.

References

  1. R. D. Mindlin, 1951, Influence of rotatory inertia and shear on flexural motions of isotropic, elastic plates, ASME Journal of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 18 pp. 31–38.
  2. E. Reissner, 1945, The effect of transverse shear deformation on the bending of elastic plates, ASME Journal of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 12, pp. A68–77.
  3. Wang, C. M., Lim, G. T., Reddy, J. N, Lee, K. H., 2001, Relationships between bending solutions of Reissner and Mindlin plate theories, Engineering Structures, vol. 23, pp. 838–849.
  4. Reddy, J. N., 1999, Theory and analysis of elastic plates, Taylor and Francis, Philadelphia.
  5. 5.0 5.1 Lim, G. T. and Reddy, J. N., 2003, On canonical bending relationships for plates, International Journal of Solids and Structures, vol. 40, pp. 3039–3067.
  6. These equations use a slightly different sign convention than the preceding discussion.

See also