Lecture - 6 - CH Quad4 Kirchoff Love Plate

Institute of Structural Engineering Page 1
Chapter 6
2D Elements
*slides are prepared in collaboration with Dr. S. Triantafyllou, Assistant

Professor at the University of Nottingham
Method of Finite Elements I

Today’s Lecture Contents

Extending to higher Dimensions
• Continuum Elements
– Plane Stress
– Plane Strain
• Structural Elements
– Plate Elements

30-Apr-10
FE Classification

30-Apr-10
2D vs. 3D Formulations
Three-dimensional elasticity problems are very difficult to solve. Thus we
will first develop governing equations for two-dimensional problems,
and will explore two basic theories:
- Plane Strain
- Plane Stress
Since all real elastic structures are three-dimensional, theories set forth
here will be approximate models. The nature and accuracy of the
approximation will depend on problem and loading geometry
The basic theories of plane strain and plane stress represent the fundamental
plane problem in elasticity. While these two theories apply to significantly
different types of two-dimensional bodies, their formulations yield very
similar field equations.

30-Apr-10
Plane Strain
Consider an infinitely long cylindrical (prismatic) body as shown. If the body
forces and tractions on lateral boundaries are independent of the z-coordinate
and have no z-component, then the deformation field can be taken in the
reduced form
R
z

30-Apr-10
Examples of Plane Strain

y
x
x
Long Cylinders Semi-Infinite Regions Under

Under Uniform Loading Uniform Loadings

30-Apr-10
Plane Strain Equations

Strains vs. Stresses Strain Displacement Relations
σ x = λ (ex + e y ) + 2µex , σ y = λ (ex + e y ) + 2µe y ∂u ∂v 1  ∂u ∂v 

ex = , ey = , exy =  + 
σ z = λ (ex + e y ) = ν (σ x + σ y ) ∂x ∂y 2  ∂y ∂x 
τ xy = 2 µexy , τ xz = τ yz = 0 ez = e yz = exz = 0
Equilibrium Equations Strain Compatibility
∂σ x ∂τ xy ∂ 2 ex ∂ e y
2
∂ 2 exy
+ + Fx = 0 + 2 =2
∂x ∂y ∂y 2 ∂x ∂x∂y
∂τ xy ∂σ y
+ + Fy = 0
∂x ∂y

30-Apr-10
Plane Stress
Consider a where one dimension, eg. along z, is small in comparison to the
other dimensions in the problem. Since the region is thin in the z-direction,
there can be little variation in the stress components
σ z , τ xz , τ yzthrough the thickness, and thus they will be approximately zero
throughout the entire domain. Finally, since the region is thin in the z-
direction it can be argued that the other non-zero stresses will have little
variation with z. Under these assumptions, the stress field can be taken as
y
σ x = σ x ( x, y ) 2h
σ y = σ y ( x, y )
τ xy = τ xy ( x, y )
σ z = τ xz = τ yz = 0
R
z
x

30-Apr-10
Examples of Plane Stress Problems
Thin Plate With

Central Hole
Circular Plate Under

Edge Loadings
30-Apr-10
Plane Stress Equations

Strains vs. Stresses Strain Displacement Relations
ex =
1 1
(σ x − νσ y ) , e y = (σ y − νσ x ) ∂u ∂v ∂w 1  ∂u ∂v 
E E ex = , ey = , ez = , exy =  + 
∂x ∂y ∂z 2  ∂y ∂x 
ν ν
e z = − (σ x + σ y ) = − (e x + e y ) 1  ∂v ∂w  1  ∂u ∂w 
E 1− ν e yz =  +  = 0 , exz =  + =0
2  ∂z ∂y  2  ∂z ∂x 
1+ ν
exy = τ xy , exz = e yz = 0
E
Equilibrium Equations Strain Compatibility
∂ 2 ex ∂ e y ∂ 2 e xy
2
∂σ x ∂τ xy + =2
+ + Fx = 0
∂x ∂y ∂y 2
∂x 2
∂x∂y
∂τ xy ∂σ y
+ + Fy = 0
∂x ∂y

30-Apr-10
Plane Stress/ Strain Elasticity

 Plane Strain
Stress Tensor
Strain Tensor
Constitutive Matrix
Premise 1:
Premise 2: Loads are applied only within the plane
Premise 3: The applied loads are independent of z
Premise 4: No load is applied on the boundary surfaces normal to the
Premise 5: The edge surfaces are rigid
Conclusion:
30-Apr-10
Plane Stress/ Strain Elasticity

 Plane Stress
Stress Tensor
Strain Tensor
Constitutive Matrix
Premise 1:
Premise 2: Loads are applied only within the plane
Premise 3: The applied loads are independent of
Premise 4: No load is applied on the boundary surfaces normal to the
Conclusion:

30-Apr-10
What are the types of Finite Elements used

in plane stress/strain formulations?

The CST Element

Constant Strain Triangle 3
The Constant Strain Triangle
element is historically the first
finite element ever used in
engineering practice (Argyris,
1960, Turner, 1956) for the
1 2 evaluation of stress distribution
in wing panels.
We number the nodes in counter-clockwise order. In

this way, the normal vector to the 123 surface will
point towards the positive z axis and the resulting
area of the triangle will be a positive quantity.
 Plane Element
i. The displacement field varies within the x-y plane
 Constant strain field

i. The strain does not vary within the element
 Elastic Material Behaviour
30-Apr-10
The CST Element
Remember that the deformation is the first

derivative of the displacement field Compatibility equations in
the 2D plane
The displacement field has to be a

linear function of
Therefore if we ask for the

strain field to be constant

30-Apr-10
The CST Element
1 2
Therefore, the following “candidate” displacement field approximation is

considered:

30-Apr-10
The CST Element

Therefore the shape functions of the CST element are readily derived as
where the shape function matrix assumes the following form
and

30-Apr-10
CST Shape Functions

and if we plot these shape functions over the surface of the element:
1 3
2
1
3

30-Apr-10
The Q4 Element
 The CST element is fairly accurate within zones of small variation of

stresses. However a fine mesh is required in every other case in
order for FEA to converge to an accurate solution.
 As already discussed during the Galerkin lectures, the FEA solution

is refined either by increasing the number of finite elements or by
increasing the order of the interpolating (test) functions used in the
FE formulation. Thus, there is a trade-off between required mesh-
size and interpolation complexity for the same degree of accuracy.
 Based on that rationale, the Quadrilateral 4-node (Q4) finite element

was introduced in an effort to effectively model the stress variations
of plane elasticity problems.

30-Apr-10
The Q4 Element
 Formulation Assumptions
4 3
1 2
 Plane Element
i. The displacement field varies only within the x-y plane

30-Apr-10
The Q4 Element
4 3
1 2
We number the nodes in counter-clockwise order. In

this way, the normal vector to the 1234 surface will
point towards the positive axis and the resulting
area of the triangle will be a positive quantity.
 Plane Element
i. The displacement field varies only within the x-y plane

30-Apr-10
The Q4 Element
4 3
1 2
The following bilinear “candidate” displacement field approximation is considered:

30-Apr-10
The Q4 Element
4 3
The formulation is indifferent to the
coordinate system.
So why not make things easier?
1 2
The following bilinear “candidate” displacement field approximation is considered:

30-Apr-10
The Q4 Element
The arbitrary nodal displacement values are introduced at the r.h.s. of the
interpolation equation:
Exactly the same procedure as in the CST element!

30-Apr-10
The Q4 Element
Following the standard procedure, the arbitrary nodal displacement values are
introduced at the r.h.s. of the interpolation equation:
Therefore the Shape Function Matrix is derived form the following:
Shape Functions

30-Apr-10
The Q4 Element

30-Apr-10
The Q4 Element
The compatibility relations are again expressed in matrix form
and therefore by substituting the interpolation equation into the r.h.s.
where now

30-Apr-10
Q4 Stiffness Matrix
The stiffness matrix is derived as
and given that the element is rectangular

/2 /2
x = −a / 2 /2
and if the thickness is constant

/2 /2
x = −a / 2 /2
The evaluation of the stiffness matrix can be performed analytically.

Integration involves only linear expressions of and

30-Apr-10
Consistent nodal force vector

Consider the case of distributed loading along the element’s 12 side
External Work due to

4 3 surface tractions
Equivalent nodal vector

due to a traction load
1 2 In this case
For example, the component along the 12 side is

30-Apr-10



1 2 In this case
In matrix form

30-Apr-10



1 2 In this case
Consistent Load Vector

30-Apr-10
Taxonomy of Finite Elements

30-Apr-10
The Euler/Bernoulli beam theory

Assumptions
 Uniaxial Element But what happens if

i. The longitudinal direction is sufficiently larger than the two dimensions are
other two sufficiently larger
 Prismatic Element that the third one?
i. The cross-section of the element does not change along the
element’s length
 Euler/ Bernoulli assumption
i. Upon deformation, plane sections remain plane AND
perpendicular to the beam axis
30-Apr-10
The plate problem

• The slab thickness is sufficiently
smaller that the two leading
dimensions
• Consequently, the three

dimensional problem is reduced
to a two-dimensional one and
the plate problem is examined at
the mid-surface.
• If the thickness of the slab is

then the mid-surface is located at
a distance from each lateral
surface

30-Apr-10
The plate problem

Two possible loading states
Case 1: Loads applied within the plane Case 2: Loads applied

perpendicular to the mid-surface
Plane stress (or

Bending
membrane) problem

30-Apr-10
The plate problem

Two possible loading states
Case 1: Loads applied within the plane Case 2: Loads applied

perpendicular to the mid-surface
Plane stress (or

Bending
membrane) problem
i. Plate theory is only concerned with the response of the body due to bending loads
ii. The combined response under membrane and bending conditions of plane (or curved)
surfaces is treated under the framework of shell theory
30-Apr-10
Plate Theories
thick thin very thin
L/t 5-10 5-100 >100
transverese no transverse
Geometrically
characteristics shear shear
nonlinear
deformations deformations
Reissner,
Plate theory Kirchhoff Von Karman
Mindlin
Beam Theory Timoshenko Euler, Bernoulli

30-Apr-10
Kirchhoff-Love Plate Theory

Assumptions
• The plate is thin in the sense that the thickness
is small compared to the leading dimensions,
but not so thin that the lateral deflection
becomes comparable to .
• The plate thickness is either uniform or varies

slowly so that three-dimensional stress effects
are ignored. Gustav Robert Kirchhoff
(1824-1887)
• The plate is symmetric in fabrication about the

mid-surface.
• Applied transverse loads are distributed over

plate surface areas of dimension or greater.
• The support conditions are such that no

significant extension of the mid-surface
develops. Augustus Edward Hough Love
(1863-1940)

30-Apr-10

Assumptions
From (i), since is very small, the variation of

with respect to z can be neglected. Therefore:
Additionally, the following kinematic assumption is

introduced:
Gustav Robert Kirchhoff
(1824-1887)
“Planes perpendicular to the mid-surface will
remain plane and perpendicular to the deformed
mid-surface”
This is the two-dimensional

equivalent of the Euler-
Bernoulli kinematic
assumption for beams!!
Augustus Edward Hough Love
(1863-1940)

30-Apr-10

Remember in the one-dimensional beam problem...
Point A displacement
(that’s because the section remains plane)
(that’s because the plane remains

perpendicular to the neutral axis)

30-Apr-10

Similarly in the two-dimensional plate problem – Bending with respect to axis
Positive rotation with

respect to results in
positive displacements
along
Point A displacement


30-Apr-10

Similarly in the two-dimensional plate problem – Bending with respect to axis
Positive rotation with

respect to results in
negative displacements
along
Point A horizontaldisplacement


30-Apr-10

Compatibility Relations (Strain-Displacement)

30-Apr-10

Stress-strain relations (Considering elastic isotropic material)
and
1st Remark
The constitutive relation results when we substitute the zero deformation terms
(derived in the previous slide) to the three-dimensional elastic stress-strain
relations. The derived relation is identical to the plane-strain case. Thus,
according to the Kirchhoff-Love assumptions, every infinitesimal particle within
the plate is in a plane-strain condition
2nd Remark
An immediate consequence is that the shear stress components and vanish

30-Apr-10

Stress-strain relations (Considering elastic isotropic material)
and
Substituting for the strain components with respect to the displacement
As expected, all the stress

components are linear functions of
(I)

30-Apr-10

Stress Resultants
Since the normal stress distribution is not uniform

they give rise to a moment vector (created from the
couple of tension and compression forces.
Since the shear stress distribution is not uniform

they also give rise to a moment vector (created
from the couple of tension and compression forces.

30-Apr-10

Stress Resultants
However, are not the only stress-resultants. For these moments to

be in equilibrium, a pair of shear forces must exist. Considering an infinitesimal
mid-surface element the positive moments are defined as:

30-Apr-10
Stress Resultants
If a distributed load is applied onto the element, equilibrium with respect to the
vertical axis z results in:

30-Apr-10
Stress Resultants
Similarly, the following equations are derived, considering moment equilibrium

with respect to axes

30-Apr-10

Differential Form with respect to
Substituting the stress-displacement relations (I) into the definition of the moment
components the following relations are derived
the bending rigidity of the plate

30-Apr-10

Square simply supported plate subject to uniform distributed loading
bending in both directions
pay attention to the way the

corner regions deform….

30-Apr-10

This is the effect of the twisting moment
and this is why specifications make
sure that an additional amount of
reinforcement is provided for
corner areas of slabs
bending in both directions
darker areas denote larger

values of twisting moments

30-Apr-10

The Kirchhoff-Love plate theory
• extends the Euler/Bernoulli beam assumptions to the two-dimensional
case
• Based on that, every significant measure of rotation, force, moment is
evaluated with respect to the vertical deflection
Assumptions:
The main kinematic assumption is that “Plane surfaces remain plane and
perpendicular to the mid-surface of the plate”.
General Remarks
The Kirchhoff-Love theory predicts a zero distribution of shear stresses

along the z direction. Thus, it can only be applied in problems where the
variation of such stresses is expected to be small and their mean value
does not deviate from 0. Such can be considered the case of thin plates.

30-Apr-10

Lecture - 6 - CH Quad4 Kirchoff Love Plate

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lecture - 6 - CH Quad4 Kirchoff Love Plate

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Institute of Structural Engineering Page 1

*slides are prepared in collaboration with Dr. S. Triantafyllou, Assistant

Method of Finite Elements I

Today’s Lecture Contents

Method of Finite Elements I

Method of Finite Elements I

Method of Finite Elements I

Method of Finite Elements I

Examples of Plane Strain

Long Cylinders Semi-Infinite Regions Under

Method of Finite Elements I

Plane Strain Equations

σ x = λ (ex + e y ) + 2µex , σ y = λ (ex + e y ) + 2µe y ∂u ∂v 1  ∂u ∂v 

Equilibrium Equations Strain Compatibility

Method of Finite Elements I

Method of Finite Elements I

Examples of Plane Stress Problems

Thin Plate With

Circular Plate Under

Plane Stress Equations

Equilibrium Equations Strain Compatibility

Method of Finite Elements I

Plane Stress/ Strain Elasticity

Plane Stress/ Strain Elasticity

Method of Finite Elements I

What are the types of Finite Elements used

Method of Finite Elements I

The CST Element

We number the nodes in counter-clockwise order. In

 Constant strain field

The CST Element

Remember that the deformation is the first

The displacement field has to be a

Therefore if we ask for the

Method of Finite Elements I

The CST Element

Therefore, the following “candidate” displacement field approximation is

Method of Finite Elements I

The CST Element

where the shape function matrix assumes the following form

Method of Finite Elements I

CST Shape Functions

Method of Finite Elements I

 The CST element is fairly accurate within zones of small variation of

 As already discussed during the Galerkin lectures, the FEA solution

 Based on that rationale, the Quadrilateral 4-node (Q4) finite element

Method of Finite Elements I

 Elastic Material Behaviour

Method of Finite Elements I

We number the nodes in counter-clockwise order. In

 Elastic Material Behaviour

Method of Finite Elements I

The following bilinear “candidate” displacement field approximation is considered:

Method of Finite Elements I

So why not make things easier?

Method of Finite Elements I

Exactly the same procedure as in the CST element!

Method of Finite Elements I

Therefore the Shape Function Matrix is derived form the following:

Method of Finite Elements I

Method of Finite Elements I

and therefore by substituting the interpolation equation into the r.h.s.