Plate Theory

__________________________________________________________________________________________

PLATE THEORY

Reference & extracts: Hughes, O.F.,

Ship Structural Design
S.N.A.M.E., New Jersey 1988
1
MODULE

1 Introduction

Three accepted plate theories are available to the naval architect for the analysis of the structural
response in plating. Each theory has its limitations of application which need to be understood in
order for the designer to select the most appropriate analysis technique for the plating in
question. The 3 theories are:

• Small Deflection Plate Theory;

• Large Deflection Plate Theory;
• ElastoPlastic Plate Theory.

Prior to examining each theory it is necessary to introduce certain basic characteristics of plating.

2 Basic Characteristics of Plating

a t

b b

PLAN VIEW EDGE VIEW

Figure 1.1

Referring to Figure 1.1 above, and with respect to a panel of plating, a is always used for the
longer dimension (length) and b is always the shorter dimension (width) of plate. Thus b will
represent the stiffener spacing in longitudinally stiffened decks, usually the stiffener spacing in
longitudinally framed sides, and will represent the side-frame spacing in transversely framed
sides.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

1
Plate Theory
__________________________________________________________________________________________

2.1 Aspect Ratio

The aspect ratio of a plating panel is the ratio of the length (a) to the width or shorter dimension
(b). When the aspect ratio is greater than 2.5 the panel is referred to as a ‘long’ plate.

a
Aspect Ratio =
b

2.2 Slenderness Ratio

The slenderness ratio for a plate panel is the ratio of the shorter dimension (b) to the plating
thickness (t).

b
Slenderness Ratio =
t

A ship’s deck and side-shell plating (plating subjected to large lateral loads) generally has a
slenderness ratio greater than 30 but less than 80, however in superstructure and light craft the
slenderness ratio may exceed 80. The higher the value of this ratio the more slender the plate.

2.3 Slenderness Parameter ( )

The slenderness parameter ( ) is a non-dimensional parameter defined as:

b Y
 = (1.1)
t E

where  Y = yield strength of the plating material

Plates may be divided into 2 broad categories:

Slender plates β > 2.4 approximately,

Sturdy plates β < 2.4

3 Plate Panel Boundary Conditions

The types of restraint around the boundary of a plate can be idealised as:

1 Simply-supported: edges free to rotate and to move in the plane of the plate (pull-in);
2 Pinned: edges free to rotate but not free to move in the plane of the plate;
3 Clamped & free to slide: no edge rotation but free to move in the plane;
4 Rigidly clamped: no edge rotation and not free to slide in the plane.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

2
 Plate Theory
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Prevention of in-plane movement (pull-in) for the conditions 2 and 4 can only occur if the
structure supporting the plate is very rigid in this direction. In most plated frame structures,
including ship structures, individual panels of plating receive very little restraint against edge
pull-in as such restraint would have to come ultimately from the frames at the edges of the
overall stiffened panel and beam stiffness is generally insufficient to provide such rigid in-plane
support. Therefore conditions 1 (simply-supported and free to slide) and 3 (clamped edges and
free to slide) are generally applicable in ship structures.

Condition 1 is appropriate when a load acts on a single panel of plating because neither the
stiffeners nor surrounding panels would provide much rotational restraint. Condition 3 would be
appropriate for a distributed pressure loading extending over several panels.

4 Application of Plate Theories

Which of the 3 plate theories should be applied to the structural design is dependent upon the
area of the vessel in question. The approach generally adopted is just how much deflection
(elastic or plastic) in the plating is regarded as acceptable for that particular structural section.
For example, for the immersed hull plating of a vessel small deflection plate theory should be
adopted as large deflections would create an increase in the hull resistance. However, for vessels
in which hull resistance is less of an issue (i.e., floating crane vessels and MODUs) larger
deflections in immersed plating may be a more rational approach. Large deflection theory may
be acceptable for the non-immersed hull shell (freeboard and transom areas) and under certain
circumstances elasto-plastic theory may be applied to decks and bulkheads.

5 SMALL DEFLECTION PLATE THEORY (SDPT)

5.1 Long Plate & Cylindrical Bending

Unlike a beam, in which bending occurs only along the length, the bending in a plate usually
occurs in 2 orthogonal directions. An equation relating the deflections to the loading can be
developed for the plate, as for the beam.

Small deflection theory is based on the conditions existing in the case of a plate that is bent about
1 axis only (cylindrical bending) as occurs for long plates (a  b). Refer to Figure 1.2.

b
a

da
y

z x

Figure 1.2

__________________________________________________________________________________________

3
Plate Theory
__________________________________________________________________________________________

An elemental strip of width da of the plate is shown. If this strip was an isolated beam its
transverse section would deform as shown by the dashed lines in Figure 1.3 below. This is
termed anticlastic curvature. However, in plating this transverse deformation does not occur
because such deformation would require that the plate take on a saddle shape, which would mean
considerable stretching of the neutral surface and would require enormous strain energy.

da

y = 0

Figure 1.3

The prevention of this strain (y = 0) gives rise to a transverse stress (y = x) as may be seen
from the strain equations:

x y
x = 
E E
y x
y =  =0
E E

From the second equation it can be seen that

y =  x

and hence the first equation becomes:

x =

 x 1  2

E

E
and so: x = x (1.2)
1  2

Equation 1.2, when compared to the case of a beam, i.e., x = Ex suggests the definition of a
quantity:

E
E1 =
1  2

__________________________________________________________________________________________

4
 Plate Theory
__________________________________________________________________________________________

which could be regarded an ‘effective’ or ‘plate’ modulus of elasticity. Obviously this effective
modulus is always greater than E (since  is always greater than zero), and thus it may be
concluded that a plate is always stiffer than a row of beams.
This effective modulus is a useful parameter because for a long plate the effect of this extra
stiffness may be fully accounted for by using E1 in place of E in all of the various beam
deflection formulas (the width of the beam being taken as unity). For example, the expression
for maximum deflection of a long prismatically loaded (UDL) simply-supported plate due to a
lateral pressure P is:

wMAX =
5Pb 4
=

5Pb 4 1   2
 (1.3)
384E 1 I 32Et 3

and for the clamped case:

wMAX =
Pb 4
=

Pb 4 1  2
 (1.4)
384E 1 I 32Et 3

5.2 Flexural Rigidity of a Plate (D)

As with beams, the moment-curvature relation may be obtained by imposing equilibrium

moments over the cross section of an elemental strip of plating (taking the width as unity). It can
be shown (refer Hughes, page 333) that the external bending moment M may be expressed as:

Et 3
M =

12 1  2 rx 
where: rx = radius of curvature in x direction (across the plate)

This expression is ‘simplified’ by using:

Et 3
D =

12 1   2
 (1.5)

where: D = flexural rigidity of the plate (analogous to the quantity EI in beam theory).

D
Thus: M =
rx

5.3 Maximum Stress in a Plate

In a beam the maximum bending stress is given by:

My M
 MAX = =
I Z

This expression is also true for a unit strip of long plate. Noting that the second moment of area,
I, for a strip of plate of unit width is given by:

__________________________________________________________________________________________

5
Plate Theory
__________________________________________________________________________________________

t3
I =
12
and that y, the distance from the neutral axis to the outermost ‘fibres’ for a plate, is t /2, then the
section modulus (Zplate) for a unit strip of plating is:

t3
I t2
Z plate = = 12 =
y t 6
2

Thus for a unit strip of plate, experiencing a uniform pressure P, the maximum stress may be
expressed as:

M
 MAX 
Z plate

Pb 2
or: 
t2
6

This is usually expressed in the form:

2
b
 MAX = kP   (1.6)
t

where the value of the coefficient k is dependent upon the plate’s boundary conditions.

For simply-supported edges: k = 0.75

For clamped edges: k = 0.5

This same form of equation is used for all plates, whether long or not, and the coefficient k also
accounts for the effects of aspect ratio (a/b).

5.4 SDPT Limits of Application

This theory is only applicable if:

3t
• The deflections of the plate are small; i.e.: w
4
• The maximum stress nowhere exceeds the plate yield stress (i.e., the material remains
elastic).

__________________________________________________________________________________________

6
 Plate Theory
__________________________________________________________________________________________

6 LARGE DEFLECTION PLATE THEORY (LDPT)

6.1 Combined Bending & Membrane Stresses  Elastic Range

In many cases the use of SDPT for the design of laterally loaded plating leads to thicknesses
which are excessive. SDPT fails to allow for membrane effects (stretching of the neutral surface)
and hence membrane stresses that arise when the deflection becomes large and/or when the edges
are restrained from pulling in. If the edges are prevented from pulling in, membrane action
becomes significant when the lateral deflection (whether initial or due to load) exceeds half the
plate thickness. If the edges are free to pull in (which is often the appropriate assumption for
ship plating) membrane action becomes significant somewhat later, typically at a deflection
greater than the plate thickness.

As the deflection increases, an increasing proportion of the load is carried by this membrane
action. This situation, in which the lateral load is supported by both bending and membrane
action requires a more comprehensive plate theory, usually referred to as large deflection plate
theory.

(A summary of the theory applied is given in the following notes, however, for a more detailed
description the student is referred to Hughes, Ship Structural Design, pages 339  341.)

Nx Ny
Nxy
a

wMAX

b
x
y

Figure 1.4

Referring to Figure 4. The membrane tensions and membrane shearing force per unit width are
denoted:

Nx = membrane tension in x-direction

Ny = membrane tension in y-direction

__________________________________________________________________________________________

7
Plate Theory
__________________________________________________________________________________________

N xy = membrane shearing force

Lagrange developed the plate bending equation:

 4w  4w  4w P
 2  =
 x4  x 2 y 2  y 4 D

which is often abbreviated to:

P
4w =
D
Von Karman developed this equation further for the case of large deflections and hence
accounting for the membrane tensions and shear forces, so that it may be expressed as:

1   2w  2w  2w 
4w = P  Nx  2 N  N  (1.7)
  2 xy
 
y
 2 
D  x x y y 

In general, values for membrane tensions and shearing forces are not easy to obtain. The
principal application in ship structures is for plating that is subjected to an in-plane compressive
load Nx which brings with it the possibility of buckling. In this case Nx is an applied load and
hence a known quantity, and in many practical situations Ny and Nxy may be taken as zero and
the solution of equation 6 presents little problem. Plate buckling, however will be dealt with
separately and later.

As explained earlier, in ship plating there is relatively little restraint against edge pull-in as long
as the deflections are not large. For large deflections such restraint does become significant but
in many cases the load required to cause such large deflections would have already caused failure
in the stiffeners or beams which support the plating. Never-the-less there are some situations in
which these large deflections can be permitted and in these cases the use of membrane tension
can give substantial weight savings.

6.2 Effect of Initial Deformation

Muckle derived an expression for the application of LDPT which accounted for the effects of any
initial deflection in the plating (such as due to weld heat shrink).

If: w0 = initial deflection

w1 = deflection due an applied load
For plates which have an initial deflection:

 2 t2  32Pb 4
w13  4w0 w12   4w02   w1
 
3 1  2
 

=
 5E t
(1.8)

For plates which have no initial deflection; i.e. w0 =0

__________________________________________________________________________________________

8
 Plate Theory
__________________________________________________________________________________________

2 t2 32Pb 4
w13  w = (1.9)
3 1  2  5E t
1

For the initial stages of loading the deflection w1 will be small relative to the thickness and hence
the first term may be neglected. This gives:

w1
=
 
48 1   2 P  b 
 
4

t  5E  t 

4
P b
= 0.143   (1.10)
Et

P b4
or: w1 = 0.143 (1.11)
E t3

It must be remembered that membrane action requires some deflection, either initial or due to
load, and if there is no initial deflection then membrane action does not become significant until
the deflection due to load approaches the plate thickness.

Although initial deflection due to weld heat shrink may be undesirable from consideration of
appearance, fluid resistance, etc., it can have beneficial influence on the elastic strength of plates,
provided that the edges are at least partially restrained from pulling in, thus allowing the
development of in-plane tension. However, when there is an in-plane compression, the lateral
deformation can be quite detrimental if the lateral pressure causes a dished profile in line with the
in-plane load because the latter acts to increase the deformation which increases the bending
stress and also induces buckling failure.

On the other hand, for transverse bulkheads, platform decks, and other such plating, a larger
amount of lateral deformation is permissible and such plating is usually designed on the basis of
not exceeding a specified value of permanent set. The choice of maximum permissible set
depends upon the application. For example, in the case of a collision bulkhead a very large value
would be chosen.

__________________________________________________________________________________________