See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/245151771

Buckling of rectangular plates with various

boundary conditions loaded by non-uniform
inplane loads

Article in International Journal of Mechanical Sciences · June 2010

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2010.01.009

CITATIONS READS

24 486

2 authors, including:

Ls Ramachandra
Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
62 PUBLICATIONS 538 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Inelastic Response and Energy Dissipation in Ceramics using Deshpande and Evans Constitutive
Model View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ls Ramachandra on 13 July 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 52 (2010) 819–828

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Mechanical Sciences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmecsci

Buckling of rectangular plates with various boundary conditions loaded by

non-uniform inplane loads
Sarat Kumar Panda, L.S. Ramachandra 
Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Kharagpur 721302, India

a r t i c l e in fo abstract

Article history: In the present paper, buckling loads of rectangular composite plates having nine sets of different
Received 20 December 2008 boundary conditions and subjected to non-uniform inplane loading are presented considering higher
Received in revised form order shear deformation theory (HSDT). As the applied inplane load is non-uniform, the buckling load is
20 December 2009
evaluated in two steps. In the first step the plane elasticity problem is solved to evaluate the stress
Accepted 18 January 2010
Available online 25 January 2010
distribution within the prebuckling range. Using the above stress distribution the plate buckling
equations are derived from the principle of minimum total potential energy. Adopting Galerkin’s
Keywords: approximation, the governing partial differential equations are converted into a set of homogeneous
Buckling linear algebraic equations. The critical buckling load is obtained from the solution of the associated
Non-uniform inplane loading
linear eigenvalue problem. The present buckling loads are compared with the published results
Parabolic loading
wherever available. The buckling loads obtained from the present method for plate with various
Ritz method
Galerkin method boundary conditions and subjected to non-uniform inplane loading are found to be in excellent
agreement with those obtained from commercial software ANSYS. Buckling mode shapes of plate for
different boundary conditions with non-uniform inplane loadings are also presented.
& 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Often, plates are a part of complex structural system and hence
load coming on it may not be always uniform. For example, in the
case of I-beam or wide flanged beam subjected to bending
moment at the ends or lateral loads on the flange, the web of the
beam is subjected to non-uniform inplane loads. The load exerted
on the aircraft wings, or on the stiffened plate in the ship
structures or on the slabs of a multi-storey building by the
adjoining structures usually is non-uniform. The type of distribu-
tion in an actual structure depends on the relative stiffnesses of
the adjoining elements. Behaviour of structures subjected to non-
uniform inplane compressive loading and shear loading is
important in aircraft, civil and ship-building industries. Much
work has been reported in the literature on the buckling of
rectangular plates subjected to uniform inplane loading. However,
very few papers deal with the buckling of plates subjected to non-
uniform inplane loads. Buckling of plates subjected to sinusoidal
[1] and parabolic [2] inplane compressive loading was obtained
by earlier researchers based on unrealistic inplane stress
distribution. Wang et al. [3] have adopted Galerkin procedure
with Legendre polynomials as shape function to analyse buckling
of rectangular plates subjected to linearly varying inplane edge
compressive load with two loaded edges simply supported, one
 Corresponding author. Tel.: + 91 3222 283444; fax: + 91 3222 282254.
E-mail address: lsr@civil.iitkgp.ernet.in (L.S. Ramachandra).
side free and the other side simply supported, clamped or
rotationally restrained. Biggers and his co-workers have exploited
the stiffness-tailoring concept to improve the buckling load
capacity of plates subjected to, compressive load [4], and shear
load [5]. Whereas, Baranski and Biggers [6] have used the same
concept to study the postbuckling response of damaged compo-
site plates. In a companion paper Xie and Biggers [7] have
extended the stiffness-tailoring concept to improve the compres-
sive buckling loads and ultimate loads of flat pates and curved
panels with cutouts. Buckling of moderately thick composite
plates subjected to partial edge compression was studied by
Sundaresan et al. [8] within the framework of finite element
method. Solving the prebuckling equations, authors’ obtained
stress distributions within the plate and hence evaluated the
geometric stiffness matrix. Bert and Devarakonda [9] studied
buckling analysis of simply supported rectangular Kirchhoff plate
subjected to sinusoidal distribution of inplane loading by super-
position method based on more realistic but approximate stress
distribution. In recent years, Kang and Leissa [10,11], Leissa and
Kang [12] presented exact solutions for the Kirchhoff plate having
two opposite edges simply supported subjected to linearly
varying inplane loading. They have considered all other possible
boundary conditions on the unloaded edges. As the loaded edge is
simply supported, authors assumed the transverse displacement
(w) to vary as sin((mpx)/a) (where a is the size of the plate along
x-direction and b along y-direction) and reduced the governing
partial differential equation to an ordinary differential equation in
y with variable coefficients, for which an exact solution was

0020-7403/$ - see front matter & 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2010.01.009
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
820 S. Kumar Panda, L.S. Ramachandra / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 52 (2010) 819–828

obtained in terms of power series (i.e., method of Frobenius). where f1 ¼ Fx þwo;x ; f2 ¼ Fy þ wo;y ; f(z)=z[1(4/3)(z/h)2]; h is the
Applying the boundary conditions at y= 0 and b yields the thickness of the plate. Fx is the rotation of normal to midplane
eigenvalue problem for finding the buckling load. Zhong and Gu about y-axis and Fy is the rotation of the normal to midplane about
[13] studied buckling analysis of Reissner–Mindlin plate with x-axis due to shear deformation alone. f1 and f2 are, respectively,
various thicknesses to width ratio and subjected to linearly the total rotation of normals to midplane about y- and x-axis. The
varying inplane load. For the case of linearly varying load the von Kármán nonlinear strain–displacement relations at a generic
stress field within the plate coincides with the applied inplane point z distance away from the midplane can be written as
load distribution. Gurdal et al. [14] worked on fiber orientation ex ¼ eox zwo;xx þf ðzÞf1;x
variation for flat rectangular composite laminates that possess
ey ¼ eoy zwo;yy þ f ðzÞf2;y
variable stiffness properties. The variable stiffness concept
provides flexibility to the designer for trade-offs between overall gxy ¼ eoxy 2zwo;xy þ f ðzÞf1;y þf ðzÞf2;x ð2Þ
panel stiffness and buckling load. Recently, Wang et al. [15]
obtained the buckling loads of thin rectangular plates under where
parabolic edge compression by differential quadrature (DQ)
method. Authors considered nine possible combinations of
gxz ¼ u;z þ w;x ¼ f 0 ðzÞf1 ; gyz ¼ v;z þ w;y ¼ f 0 ðzÞf2 ð3Þ
o o
boundary condition of the plate in their study. Jana and Bhaskar The superscript ‘o’ refers to strain in the middle plane. e e and x, y
[16] have solved the plane elasticity problem exactly by super- goxy are the reference surface strains and are defined as
position of Airy’s stress function represented by Fourier series. 1 1
They have also obtained the inplane stress distribution by the eox ¼ uo;x þ ðwo;x Þ2 ;
eoy ¼ vo;y þ ðwo;y Þ2 ; goxy ¼ uo;y þ vo;x þ wo;x wo;y ð4Þ
2 2
extended Kantorovich method based on the principle of minimum
The stress strain relations for the composite plate in the
complementary energy. Using these distributions, authors have
material co-ordinate axes are given by
obtained buckling loads for simply supported plate by Galerkin
method for various inplane load distributions. fsg ¼ ½Q feg
n o
From the above literature survey it is observed that, buckling fsgT ¼ sx sy tyz txz txy ;
loads of layered composite plates subjected to parabolically n o
distributed inplane loads are not available in the literature. In fegT ¼ ex ey gyz gxz gxy ð5Þ
this study, buckling loads of isotropic and composite plates
subjected to non-uniform inplane loads are evaluated for nine where [Q]ij is the reduced stiffness matrix in material co-ordinate
different sets of boundary conditions of the plate considering system, {s}T cartesian components of stress at any point and {e}T
higher order shear deformation theory proposed by Reddy [17]. In are the corresponding strains. The governing partial differential
the first step, the plane elasticity problem is solved to evaluate the equations of nonlinear buckling of plate are derived from the
stress distribution within the prebuckling range by Ritz proce- principle of minimum total potential energy and is stated as
dure. Using the above stress distribution and adopting multi-term ZZ
Galerkin’s approximation, the governing partial differential dð1Þ p ¼  f½ðnxx Nx Þ;x þ ðnxy Nxy Þ;y du þ ½ðnxy Nxy Þ;x
equations of plate buckling are converted into a set of homo- R
geneous linear algebraic equations. The critical buckling load is 
þ ðnyy Ny Þ;y Þdv þ½Mx;xx þ 2Mxy;xy þ My;yy  ðnxx Nx Þw;x
obtained from the solution of associated linear eigenvalue  
þ ðnxy Nxy Þw;y ;x  ðnxy Nxy Þw;x þ ðnyy Ny Þw;y g;y dw
problem. For the nine cases of boundary conditions, appropriate
þ ½Px;x þ Pxy;y Qxa df1 þ ½Pxy;x þPy;y Qya df2 gdxdy
beam functions are used as displacement field approximation in Z b Z b
Galerkin’s method. When the two loaded edges are simply    
þ ðnxx Nx Þ þN x dudy þ ðnxy Nxy Þ þ N xy dvdy
supported and applied inplane load is uniform or linearly varying, 0 0
Z b Z b Z b
the plate buckles with a particular number of half-waves in the @@w
 Mx dy Px @f1 dy Pxy @f2 dy
loading direction depending on the length to width ratio of 0 @x 0 0
the plate and in combination of two or more half-waves along the Z b 
@Mxy @w @w
unloaded edge. Similarly if the applied inplane loading is non- þ Qx þ þ ðnxx Nx Þ þðnxy Nxy Þ dwdy
@y @x @y
uniform the buckling mode is a combination of two or more half- Z 0a Z a
   
waves in both loaded direction as well as the unloaded direction þ ðnyy Ny Þ þ N y dvdx þ ðnxy Nxy Þ þ N xy dudx
0 0
independent of boundary conditions. The buckling loads obtained Z a Z a Z a
@@w
by the present method are compared with those of Leissa and Kang  My dx Py @f2 dx Pxy @f1 dx
@y
[12] and Wang et al. [15] wherever possible. The present results Z 0a  0 0

@Mxy @w @w
compare well with the literature values. The present results are þ Qy þ þ ðnyy Ny Þ þ ðnxy Nxy Þ dwdx ¼ 0
0 @x @y @x
also compared with the buckling loads obtained from commercial
ð6Þ
finite element software ANSYS and found to compare well.
The force and moment resultants are defined as
00 1 0 1 0 11 0 1
Nx Mx Px Z h=2 sx
BB N C B M C B P CC Bs C
@@ y A; @ y A; @ y AA ¼ @ y Að1; z; f ðzÞÞdz ð7Þ
2. Formulation Nxy Mxy Pxy h=2
txy
Consider a composite rectangular plate having length a and Z h=2
breadth b and made up of n layers of equal thickness. The co- ðQx ; Qy Þ ¼ ðtxz ; tyz Þdz ð8Þ
h=2
ordinate system is such that the middle plane coincides with the
x–y plane and the z-axis is perpendicular to the middle plane. Z h=2
Using Reddy’s higher order shear deformation theory, the ðQxa ; Qya Þ ¼ ðtxz ; tyz Þf 0 ðzÞdz ð9Þ
displacement field can be written as h=2

where f 0 (z)=(d/dz)(f(z)); Nx, Ny, Nxy, and Mx, My, Mxy are,
u ¼ u0 zw0;x þf ðzÞf1 ; v ¼ v0 zw0;y þf ðzÞf2 ; w ¼ wo ð1Þ respectively, the force and moment resultants; Px, Py, Pxy are
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Kumar Panda, L.S. Ramachandra / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 52 (2010) 819–828 821

additional moment resultants due to additional changes of where

curvature f1,x, f2,y, (f2,x + f1,y) due to shear deformation. Qxa ; Qya  
y2 y y2
are additional transverse shear force resultants. nxx, nyy, nxy are the F0 ¼ 2N 0  2
3 b 2b
plate internal stress resultants due to applied end non-uniform
inplane loading and can be determined by the Principle of Least which gives
Work applied to membrane problem. Minimizing the total
@2 F0 @2 F0
potential energy and substituting for force and moment resultants N yy ¼ ¼ 0; N xy ¼  ¼0
@x2 @x@y
in terms of displacement components, the partial differential
equations governing the postbuckling analysis of cross-ply @2 F0 y y
composite plate in displacement variables are obtained and are N xx ¼  ¼ 4N 0 1
@y2 b b
given in Appendix A (Eqs. (A.1)–(A.5)).
The remaining functions F1, F2, F3 are chosen such that the
stresses corresponding to them vanish at the boundary.
2.1. Plate prebuckling analysis
Substituting Eqs. (11) and (14) into Eq. (10) and carrying out
integration, an expression in second degree in a1, a2 and a3 is
In the present investigation, parabolically and linearly varying
obtained. Then, the strain energy function V is minimized with
inplane compressive loads are considered. However, for linearly
respect to the constants a1, a2 and a3. Then the constants a1, a2
varying in-plane load, the stress distribution within the plate
and a3 are evaluated from the 3 algebraic equations resulting
coincides with the applied edge loading. In the case of parabolic
from the condition, (qV/qa1)= 0, (qV/qa2) =0, (qV/qa3)=0.
non-uniform inplane loading, the stress distribution within the
plate due to applied inplane loading is obtained by solving the
2.2. Plate buckling analyses
plate membrane problem. The correct stress distribution within
the plate is the one which satisfies the boundary condition and
minimizes the membrane strain energy of the plate. The The critical buckling load of composite rectangular plate with
membrane strain energy of a plate of thickness h of composite various boundary conditions and subjected to parabolically
plate is given by varying inplane compressive load is obtained using Galerkin’s
8 92 31 8 9 method. In the present investigation following nine sets of
ZZ > nxx >= A11 A12 A16 > n
< xx > boundary conditions are considered: SSSS, SSCS, SCSS, CSCS, SCSC,
h < =
V¼ nyy 6 7
4 A12 A22 A26 5 nyy dxdy ð10Þ SSCC, CCSC, CCCS and CCCC, where S stands for simply supported
2 > :n > ; A A A >
:n > ;
A xy 16 26 66 xy edge and C for clamped edge. The letters indicate the boundary
conditions on the edge of the plate in the anti-clockwise fashion
where starting from the left hand corner. In the Galerkin’s method, the
Z out-of-plane displacement field w(x,y) satisfying the boundary
@2 F @2 F @2 F h=2
nyy ¼ ; nxx ¼ ; nxy ¼  ; Aij ¼ Q ij dz ð11Þ conditions of the plate is expressed as the product of beam
@x2 @y2 @x@y h=2
function as [19]
where Q ij the transformed reduced stiffness and F is the stress 1 X
X 1
function. The membrane strain energy is minimized in this study wðx; yÞ ¼ Xm ðxÞYn ðyÞ ð15Þ
using Ritz method [18]. The boundary conditions of the plate m¼1n¼1

membrane problem are given here for parabolically varying where Xm(x) and Yn(y) are the eigen functions of the beam having
uniaxial inplane load (see Fig. 1) as the following.For the same boundary conditions as that of two opposite edges of the
y y plate. This choice of functions satisfies all boundary conditions of the
x ¼ 0; a N xy ¼ 0 N x ¼ 4N 0 1 y ¼ 0; b N xy ¼ 0 N y ¼ 0
b b plate exactly. In present case following beam functions are adopted.
ð12Þ
The stress function is assumed in the form of a series: (a) Simply support along two opposite edges, at x =0 and x= a
ss mpx
F ¼ F0 þ a1 F1 þ a2 F2 þ a3 F3 þ a4 F4 þ    ð13Þ Xm ðxÞ ¼ sin ðm ¼ 1; 2; 3; . . .Þ ð16Þ
a
where a1,a2,a3, y are constants and are determined such that the (b) Clamped support along two opposite edges, at x= 0 and x= a
boundary conditions (12) are satisfied. In the present case, for    
cc x 1 sinðxm =2Þ x 1
parabolic loading, the stress function is assumed as Xm ðxÞ ¼ cosxm  þ coshxm  ðm ¼ 2; 4; 6; . . .Þ
a 2 sinhðxm =2Þ a 2
 
y2 y y2 ð17Þ
F ¼ 2N 0  2 þ ðx2 axÞ2 ðy2 ybÞ2 ða1 þ a2 x þ a3 y þ   Þ
3 b 2b
where xm are obtained as roots of
ð14Þ
tanðxm =2Þ þ tanhðxm =2Þ ¼ 0 ð18Þ
and
y    
cc x 1 sinðxm =2Þ x 1
Xm ðxÞ ¼ sinxm   coshxm  ðm ¼ 3; 5; 7; . . .Þ
y y a a 2 sinhðxm =2Þ a 2
N x = 4 N0 (1 − ) where xn are obtained roots of
b b
tanðxm =2Þtanhðxm =2Þ ¼ 0 ð19Þ
(c) Clamped support along the edge, x =0 and simply supported
b at x =a
   
cs x 1 sinðxm =2Þ x 1
Xm ðxÞ ¼ sinxm   sinhxm  ðm ¼ 2; 3; 4; . . .Þ
2a 2 sinhðxm =2Þ 2a 2
x
ð20Þ
Fig. 1. Geometry and loading of the plate. where xm are obtained as roots of Eq. (19).
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
822 S. Kumar Panda, L.S. Ramachandra / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 52 (2010) 819–828

o o
The functions Yn(y) are similarly chosen by the condition at y= 0 w0;y ¼ uo ¼ vo ¼ wo ¼ f1 ¼ f2 ¼ 0 at y ¼ 0
and y= b by replacing x by y, a by b and m by n in respective ny Ny ¼ N y ; o o o
u ¼ w ¼ f1 ¼ Py ¼ My ¼ 0 at y ¼ b ð25Þ
equations, where m and n are, respectively, the number of nodal
lines along x and y directions. In all cases, only normal inplane
displacements are allowed and inplane tangential displacements Following displacement fields satisfy the above boundary condi-
and out of plane displacements are prevented.The boundary tions:
conditions for SSSS plate are X
i j
X mpx npy
u~ o ¼ Umn cos cos
a b
nxx Nx ¼ N x ; vo ¼ wo ¼ Px ¼ fo2 ¼ Mx ¼ 0 at x ¼ 0; a m¼1n¼1
X
i j
X
o
ny Ny ¼ N y ; uo ¼ wo ¼ f1 ¼ Py ¼ My ¼ 0 at y ¼ 0; b ð21Þ v~ o ¼ cs
Vmn Xm ðxÞXncs ðyÞ
m¼1n¼1
X
i j
X
Following displacement fields satisfy the above boundary condi- ~o¼
w cs
Wmn Xm ðxÞXncs ðyÞ
tions: m¼1n¼1
Xi Xj mpx npy
X
i j
X mpx npy o
f~ 1 ¼ Kmn cos cos
u~ o ¼ Umn cos sin a b
m¼1n¼1
a b m¼1n¼1
X
i j
X
j mpx npy o
X
i X f~ 2 ¼ cs
Lmn Xm ðxÞXncs ðyÞ ð26Þ
v~ o ¼ Vmn sin cos
m¼1n¼1
a b m¼1n¼1

X
i j
X
~o¼
w ss
Wmn Xm ðxÞXnss ðyÞ The displacement fields for other boundary conditions can be
m¼1n¼1
assumed by suitably combining the displacement functions
X
i j
X mpx npy
o described above.
f~ 1 ¼ Kmn cos sin
m¼1n¼1
a b
o X
i j
X mpx npy
f~ 2 ¼ Lmn sin cos ð22Þ
m¼1n¼1
a b
3. Numerical results and discussion
The boundary conditions for CCCC plate are
3.1. Prebuckling analysis
o o
w0;x ¼ uo ¼ vo ¼ wo ¼ f1 ¼ f2 ¼ 0 at x ¼ 0; a
o o
w0;y ¼ uo ¼ vo ¼ wo ¼ f1 ¼ f2 ¼ 0 at y ¼ 0; b ð23Þ In present case, non-uniform inplane loads are assumed to
vary according to parabolic and linearly varying functions.
Parabolically varying inplane load is represented by (see Fig. 1)
Following displacement fields satisfy the above boundary condi-
tions:
y y
j mpx npy N x ¼ 4N 0 1 ð27Þ
i X
X b b
u~ o ¼ Umn sin sin
m¼1 n¼1
a b
j mpx npy Linearly varying loads are defined as
i X
X
v~ o ¼ Vmn sin sin
m¼1 n¼1
a b h y i
j
Nx ¼ N0 1Z ; y A ð0; bÞ ð28Þ
i X
X b
~o¼
w cc
Wmn Xm ðxÞXncc ðyÞ
m¼1 n¼1
By taking various values of Z, we obtain different inplane
Xi X j mpx npy
o
f~ 1 ¼ Kmn sin sin load distribution (uniform (Z = 0), trapezoidal (Z =0.5), triangular
m¼1 n¼1
a b (Z =1), partial tension (Z = 1.5) and pure bending (Z =2.0)). Initially
o X
i j
X mpx npy the plate membrane equations are solved to determine the
f~ 2 ¼ Lmn sin sin ð24Þ stress distribution within the plate as described in Section 2.1.
m¼1 n¼1
a b
In the present case, the stress function is represented as a
truncated series with four terms (14). After evaluating
The boundary conditions for plate (CSCS) with clamped support at the constants ai (i =1,2,3), the stress distribution within the
x= 0, y= 0 and simple support at x= a, y=b are plate are obtained. The explicit expressions for constants ai for the
o o case of isotropic plate are given below. Similar expressions
w0;x ¼ uo ¼ vo ¼ wo ¼ f1 ¼ f2 ¼ 0 at x ¼ 0
in the case of composite plate are given in Appendix A
nxx Nx ¼ N x ; o
v ¼ w ¼ Px ¼o
fo2 ¼ Mx ¼ 0 at x ¼ a (Eqs. (A.7)–(A.9))

N 0 ð33a8 þ 79:44a6 b2 þ 241:9662a4 b4 þ79:44a2 b6 þ33b8 Þ

a1 ¼ ð29Þ
ðb þ 5:1844b a2 þ 36:4435b10 a4 þ 29:0127b8 a6 þ36:4435b6 a8 þ 5:1844b4 a10 þ b2 a12 Þ
14 12

N 0 ð114:4a7 þ 197:6a5 b2 þ 27:2a3 b4 þ 3:52ab6 Þ

a2 ¼ ð30Þ
ðb14 þ 5:1844b12 a2 þ 36:4435b10 a4 þ 29:0127b8 a6 þ36:4435b6 a8 þ 5:1844b4 a10 þ b2 a12 Þ

N 0 ð3:52a6 þ 27:2a4 b2 þ197:6a2 b4 þ114:4b6 Þ

a3 ¼ ð31Þ
ðb14 þ 5:1844b12 a2 þ 36:4435b10 a4 þ 29:0127b8 a6 þ36:4435b6 a8 þ 5:1844b4 a10 þ b2 a12 Þ
Table 1
Comparision of dimensionless buckling load coefficient ki for SCSC rectangular plate (a/h = 100) subjected to linearly varying inplane load.

a/b

g =0 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

m= 1 m =1 m= 1 m =1 m= 1 m= 1 m =2

Leissa and Kang [12] 93.247 75.910 69.632 69.095 72.084 77.545 75.910
Energy method [12] 93.2 75.9 69.6 69.1 71.9 77.3 75.9
Present methodn 93.305 75.943 69.652 69.108 72.093 77.545 75.943
Present method 93.231 75.879 69.588 69.036 72.007 77.443 75.774

a/b

g=1 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.4
m=1 m =1 m= 1 m= 1 m= 1 m=1 m= 1 m= 2 m= 2 m=2

Leissa and Kang [12] 174.4 145.2 134.8 133.7 134.6 141.0 152.0 145.2 134.8 134.6
Energy method [12] 175.0 145.0 135.0 133.8 134.7 141.0 152.1 145.0 135.0 135.0
Present methodn 174.5 145.3 134.8 133.7 134.6 141.0 152.0 145.3 134.8 134.6
Present method 174.3 145.1 134.6 133.6 134.4 140.8 151.8 144.9 134.4 134.1

a/b
ARTICLE IN PRESS

g =2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.5 2.0
Author's personal copy

m= 1 m=1 m =1 m= 1 m= 2 m= 2 m= 2 m= 3 m= 3 m=4

Leissa and Kang [12] 464.5 400.4 391.5 411.8 422.5 400.4 391.5 400.4 391.5 391.5
Energy method [12] 467.0 402.0 392.2 412.2 424.0 402.0 392.0 402.0 392.0 392.0
Present method* 467.2 401.5 392.1 412.1 424.1 401.5 392.1 401.5 392.1 392.1
Present method 466.9 401.3 391.8 411.7 422.4 400.3 391.0 399.6 389.7 387.9

n
Without Shear Deformation and inplane displacements.
S. Kumar Panda, L.S. Ramachandra / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 52 (2010) 819–828
823
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
824 S. Kumar Panda, L.S. Ramachandra / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 52 (2010) 819–828

For linearly varying inplane load the computation of inplane

stress distribution is unnecessary since the internal stress
450
distribution coincides with the applied inplane load distribution. η=2
400
m=1 m=2 m=3 m=4 m=5 m=6
350

Buckling Coefficient
3.2. Buckling analysis
300
The following mechanical properties are assumed, E11 = E22,
G23 =G13 = G12 =E22/2.5, n12 = 0.25 for isotropic plate and E1 = E2 = 25, 250 η = 1.5
G12 =G13 = 0.5E2, G23 = 0.6E2, n12 = 0.25 for composite lamina in the
analysis. Dropping the nonlinear terms in the plate nonlinear 200
equations, the plate buckling equations are obtained. Using
displacement fields given in Section 2.2 and adopting Galerkin’s 150 η = 1.0
method, the governing partial differential equations of plate η = 0.5
buckling equations are converted into a set of linear homoge- 100
η=0
neous algebraic equations. For a nontrivial solution this is posed
as an eigenvalue problem, solving which critical buckling loads 50 m=1 m=2 m=3 m=4
are obtained. To validate the present formulation, the dimension-
less buckling load coefficients of a SCSC plate obtained by the
0
present method (neglecting shear deformation and considering 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
only w displacement) are compared with that of Leissa and Kang a/b
[12] in Table 1 for Z = 0, 1 and 2 and for various aspect ratios. The
buckling loads obtained by the present method considering Fig. 2. Variation of buckling coefficients of SCSC plate with the aspect ratio (a/b)
for different inplane load distributions.
higher order shear deformation and inplane displacements are
also given in the table. It is observed that the present results
without shear deformation compare well with the energy method
values. For uniform (Z = 0) compressive load, the present results
compare well with that of Leissa and Kang. For triangular (Z = 1)
and pure inplane (Z =2) loading, the present results obtained
without shear deformation compare well with that of Leissa and
Kang results for a/b o1.0. The dimensionless buckling load
coefficients for a simply supported isotropic plate (h/a= 0.01)
obtained by the present method are given in Table 2 for uniform
and parabolic load distributions. In case of plates with aspect
ratios a/b= 1 and 3 and subjected to uniformly distributed inplane
loads the converged value of buckling load is obtained by
considering one term in the displacement field approximations.
For parabolically distributed loads, 6 terms are required to obtain
the converged buckling load in the case of square plate. However
for the plate with aspect ratio a/b= 3, 15 terms are required to
obtain the converged buckling load. The number of terms
required to obtain the converged buckling load also varies
depending upon the boundary conditions. In all further
calculations 36 terms are considered.The variation of
dimensionless buckling load coefficients ki( = Ncrb2/p2D) of a
SCSC isotropic plate (a/h =100) with two opposite simply
supported edges subjected to linearly varying inplane load Fig. 3. Buckling modes for SCSC rectangular isotropic plate under uniform inplane
against aspect ratio of the plate is shown in Fig. 2, for various load distributions (Z = 0).

Table 2
Dimensionless buckling load of SSSS rectangular isotropic plate with uniform and parabolic in-plane loadings.

a/b= 1 a/b = 3

Uniform Parabolic Uniform Parabolic

Mode Buckling Modes Buckling Mode Buckling Modes Buckling

(m  n)/term coefficient (ki) (m  n)/terms coefficient (ki) (m  n)/term coefficient (ki) (m  n)/terms Coefficient (ki)

[1  1]/ (1) 3.997 [1  1] /(1) 5.252 [1  1]/ (1) 3.997 [1  1] /(1) 5.633
(1,1) [2  2] /(4) 5.251 (3,1) [3  3] /(9) 5.632
[2  3] /(6) 5.250 [4  3]/(12) 5.622
[3  2] /(6) 5.241 [5  3]/(15) 5.547
[3  3] /(9) 5.241 [6  3]/(18) 5.547
[4  3]/(12) 5.241 [6  4]/(24) 5.547
[3  4]/(12) 5.241 [6  5]/(30) 5.547
[6  6]/(36) 5.547

Ki( =Ncrb2/p2D).
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Kumar Panda, L.S. Ramachandra / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 52 (2010) 819–828 825

values of Z. It is observed from the figure that for very long

(a/b43) plates, the buckling loads remains the same. For uniform,
trapezoidal and triangular loading (i.e., Z = 0, 0.5 and 1) the
buckling mode in the loading direction is four half-waves (m) for
the plate aspect ratio a/b= 2.8, where as for partial tension and
pure bending the buckling mode is five and six half-waves (m)
respectively (see Fig. 2). The three dimensional buckling modes
with contour plots (lines of constant displacements) for all the
above cases is shown in Figs. 3–6.Nine different plate boundary
conditions are considered with parabolic inplane load
N x ¼ 4N 0 ðy=bÞð1ðy=bÞÞ distributions. For all the boundary
conditions, the aspect ratio a/b is varied up to 3. Effect of shear
deformation is shown in Figs. 7–9 for plate with SSSS, SCSS and
SCSC boundary conditions respectively for length to thickness
ratios a/h= 100, 50, 20 and 10. The buckling loads are calculated
for all these boundary conditions by considering 6 terms along
x-axis and 6 terms along y-axis in the multi-term Galerkin
method from convergence considerations. However, for SSSS plate
less number of terms is required to obtain converged buckling
loads as shown in Table 2. In Figs. 7–9, m= 1, m =2,y, indicate the

Fig. 6. Buckling modes for SCSC rectangular isotropic plate under pure inplane
bending load distributions (Z = 2.0).

16

14
y

12
a/h = 100
Buckling Coefficient

a/h = 50
10 b a/h = 25
a a/h = 10
x
8
m=1 m=2 m=3
6

Fig. 4. Buckling modes for SCSC rectangular isotropic plate under triangular
2
inplane load distributions (Z = 1.0).
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
a/b
Fig. 7. Variation of buckling coefficients of SSSS plate with parabolic inplane
loading for different aspect ratios (a/b) and length to thickness (a/h) ratio.

dominant half-waves along x-direction. With the decrease of

Fig. 5. Buckling modes for SCSC rectangular isotropic plate under partial inplane
tension load distributions (Z = 1.5).
length to thickness ratio, the non-dimensional buckling load
decreases and the curve bends away as shown in the figure. From
Figs. 7–9, it is clear that the effect of shear deformation increases
with the increase in aspect ratio and end restraint. Thus the effect
of shear deformation is the maximum for SCSC boundary
condition as observed from Fig. 9. It is observed that the plate
buckles into more number of half-waves for the same aspect ratio
as the edge restraint increases from SSSS to SCSC.
The plates with SSSS, SCSS and SCSC boundary conditions, the
plates buckle into two half-waves for a/b ratio beyond 1.325,
1.075 and 0.9, respectively. Buckling into four half-waves is
possible only for SCSS and SCSC plates within a/b= 3. The plate
buckles into three half-waves at a/b ratio 2.475 for SSSS boundary
condition, 1.950 for SCSS and 1.625 for SCSC boundary condition
(see Figs. 7–9). The buckling modes for SSSS, SCSS and SCSC plate
for parabolic inplane loading are shown in Figs. 10–12 for aspect
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
826 S. Kumar Panda, L.S. Ramachandra / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 52 (2010) 819–828

16
y
14
a/h = 100
12 a/h = 50
Buckling Coefficient

b a/h = 20
x a/h = 10
10

m=1 m=2 m=3

8

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

a/b Fig. 10. Buckling modes for SSSS rectangular isotropic plate under parabolic
inplane load distributions.
Fig. 8. Variation of buckling coefficients of SCSS plate with parabolic inplane
loading for different aspect ratios (a/b) and length to thickness (a/h) ratio.

16 y

14 a/h = 100
a/h = 50
b a/h = 20
Buckling Coefficient

12 a a/h = 10
x

m=1 m=2 m=3 m=4

10

4
Fig. 11. Buckling modes for SCSS rectangular isotropic plate under parabolic
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
inplane load distributions.
a/b

Fig. 9. Variation of buckling coefficients of SCSC plate with parabolic inplane

loading for different aspect ratios (a/b) and length to thickness (a/h) ratio.

ratio of 2.8. It is observed from Fig. 10 that plate with SSSS

boundary condition buckles in three half-waves for aspect ratio
a/b= 2.8. Figs. 11 and 12 show the four half-waves buckling for
SCSS and SCSC plates. It is observed that for the same aspect ratio,
the SCSS and SCSC boundary condition plate buckles into more
number of half-waves due to the increase in boundary restraint.
Recently, Wang et al. [15] obtained the accurate non-dimen-
sional buckling load coefficients of thin rectangular isotropic
plates under parabolic edge compression by differential quad-
rature (DQ) method for above nine boundary conditions. How-
ever, they have not considered shear deformation in their
analysis. The buckling loads of plates with all the above boundary
conditions are also obtained by commercially available finite
element software ANSYS. In ANSYS, 8 noded SHELL93 element has
been used to discretize the plate geometry. The element has
6 degrees of freedom at each node; translations along x, y and
z directions and rotations about the nodal x, y and z axes. Fig. 12. Buckling modes with for SCSC rectangular isotropic plate under parabolic
The present results for isotropic plate with nine boundary inplane load distributions.
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Kumar Panda, L.S. Ramachandra / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 52 (2010) 819–828 827

Table 3
Comparison of dimensionless buckling load coefficient ki of isotropic rectangular plate (a/h = 100) with different boundary conditions subjected to parabolic in-plane
loading.

Support Source a/b

0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.5 2.0 3.0

SSSS Present 9.654 7.271 6.078 5.211 5.242 5.704 5.478 5.547
Wang et al.[15] 9.663 7.274 6.080 5.211 5.262 5.734 5.628 5.630
ANSYS 9.661 7.273 6.079 5.212 5.250 5.739 5.531 5.621
SSCS Present 17.02 12.03 9.401 7.035 6.254 6.023 5.768 5.671
Wang et al.[15] 17.02 12.03 9.399 7.045 6.277 6.058 5.825 5.756
ANSYS 17.02 12.03 9.399 7.041 6.285 6.065 5.825 5.744
SCSS Present 10.06 7.877 6.938 6.692 7.551 7.104 7.412 7.373
Wang et al.[15] 10.06 7.888 6.940 6.698 7.573 7.135 7.482 7.456
ANSYS 10.06 7.880 6.939 6.699 7.582 7.135 7.465 7.403
CSCS Present 30.65 21.01 15.82 10.95 9.032 8.127 7.063 6.495
Wang et al.[15] 30.69 21.02 15.83 10.96 9.054 8.153 7.123 6.571
ANSYS 30.70 21.01 15.82 10.95 9.062 8.163 7.121 6.557
SCSC Present 10.52 8.652 8.087 8.877 9.172 9.114 9.053 9.117
Wang et al.[15] 10.54 8.663 8.092 8.887 9.194 9.141 9.120 9.345
ANSYS 10.53 8.661 8.088 8.882 9.194 9.130 9.080 9.226
SSCC ‘Present 17.28 12.49 10.07 8.231 7.957 7.645 7.390 7.451
Wang et al.[15] 17.29 12.50 10.09 8.233 7.971 7.679 7.598 7.544
ANSYS 17.29 12.49 10.08 8.232 7.973 7.678 7.420 7.492
CCSC Present 17.58 13.04 10.94 9.814 9.847 9.340 8.309 9.205
Wang et al.[15] 17.59 13.06 10.95 9.821 9.868 9.393 9.367 9.352
ANSYS 17.58 13.05 10.94 9.817 9.867 9.378 9.323 9.235
CCCS Present 30.54 21.35 16.42 12.12 10.88 9.735 9.185 8.571
Wang et al.[15] 30.58 21.38 16.44 12.12 10.91 9.767 9.246 8.693
ANSYS 30.54 21.36 16.43 12.12 10.91 9.761 9.230 8.634
CCCC Present 31.01 21.74 17.15 13.66 13.55 11.58 11.17 10.77
Wang et al.[15] 31.03 21.80 17.17 13.71 13.58 11.63 11.26 10.92
ANSYS 31.01 21.76 17.16 13.68 13.57 11.61 11.21 10.79

Table 4 laminated square plate subjected to non-uniform inplane

Dimensionless buckling coefficients kc of rectangular cross-ply laminated (0/90/0) parabolic compression is given in Table 4 along with the ANSYS
plate (a/h = 100) with different boundary conditions subjected to parabolic in-
results. Material properties used in the analysis are E1 = E2 =25,
plane loading.
G12 = G13 = 0.5E2, G23 =0.6E2, n12 =0.25. In ANSYS, linear SHELL99
Support Source a/b shell element has been used to discretize the plate geometry. The
element has 6 degrees of freedom at each node; translations along
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 x, y and z directions and rotations about the nodal x, y and z axes.
SSSS Present 35.69 41.50 54.42 87.38 154.26 227.32
The present results compare well with that of Wang et al. [15] and
ANSYS 35.71 41.55 55.61 88.87 156.81 229.55 ANSYS results.
SSCS Present 70.38 77.54 90.73 119.68 171.89 246.06
ANSYS 70.58 78.35 91.80 120.27 173.19 248.09
SCSS Present 35.73 44.88 73.53 146.77 224.23 301.95 3.3. Conclusions
ANSYS 35.83 44.92 73.75 147.53 227.41 304.66
CSCS Present 133.31 145.92 162.35 192.89 247.03 333.43
ANSYS 133.51 146.28 162.63 192.68 248.00 337.21 Leissa and Kang used power series (i.e., method of Frobenius)
SCSC Present 35.77 49.90 103.66 199.42 281.31 424.48 method to obtain the buckling load of the plate with linearly
ANSYS 35.79 49.90 103.73 201.91 284.20 428.98 varying inplane loads. Authors mentioned in their conclusion that
SSCC Present 70.31 80.79 105.81 162.17 249.86 336.10
ANSYS 70.45 80.85 105.97 163.37 252.18 340.27
whenever the inplane edge loading is more general than linearly
CCSC Present 70.38 83.93 127.51 218.13 315.11 437.39 varying ((i.e., Ny = f(y)) the method is not fruitful and suggested
ANSYS 70.42 84.01 127.63 219.35 318.14 443.24 first to solve the plane elasticity problem to determine Nx, Ny and
CCCS Present 133.21 148.60 174.49 233.96 342.35 436.43 Nxy. In present study, the buckling load of a composite plate
ANSYS 133.33 148.75 175.38 234.51 344.11 438.44
subjected to parabolically distributed compressive inplane loads
CCCC Present 133.31 150.69 193.26 296.00 406.95 525.41
ANSYS 133.71 150.83 194.21 298.12 410.17 532.82 are reported for the first time. For this case, first plane elasticity
problem is solved to determine the stress distributions within the
plate. Using the above stress distribution and adopting Galerkin’s
approximation the critical buckling loads are evaluated. Beam
functions are used as shape functions in the Galerkin technique. It
conditions are compared with the ANSYS results and that of Wang is observed that, whenever the plate restrained condition
et al. [15] in Table 3. The small difference of values between the increases, the number of terms required is more to get the
three results is due to the reason that in the present method shear converged buckling load. When the two loaded edges are simply
deformation and inplane displacement have been considered, supported and applied inplane load is uniform or linearly varying,
where as Wang et al. [15] have not considered the same. Critical the plate buckles with a particular number of half-waves in the
buckling coefficients kc(Ncra2/E22p2h3) of 3-layered cross-ply loading direction depending on the length to width ratio of the
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
828 S. Kumar Panda, L.S. Ramachandra / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 52 (2010) 819–828
plate and in combination of two or more half-waves along
the unloaded edge. Similarly if the applied inplane loading is
non-uniform the buckling mode is combination of two or more
half-waves in both loaded direction as well as the unloaded
direction independent of boundary conditions. As the applied load
is non-uniform we need to take six terms in x-direction and six
terms in y-direction to get the converged buckling load up to
aspect ratio of a/b= 3 for maximum restrained plate i.e., CCCC
N 0 ða8 þ 65:0455a6 b2 þ346:8788a4 b4 þ 125:4424a2 b6 þ 3:7194b8 Þ
a1 ¼
ð0:0303a12 b2 þ 4:2449a10 b4 þ 70:3424a8 b6 þ 222:9a6 b8 þ135:6604a4 b10 þ 15:7885a2 b12 þ 0:2174b14 Þ
N 0 ða7 þ 46:6708a5 b2 þ 146:0881a3 b4 þ 1:6034ab6 Þ
a2 ¼
ð0:0087a12 b2 þ 1:2245a10 b4 þ 20:2911a8 b6 þ 64:3181a6 b8 þ 39:1328a4 b10 þ 4:5544a2 b12 þ0:0627b14 Þ
N 0 ða6 þ175:7171a4 b2 þ 108:2630a2 b4 þ 4:4737b6 Þ
a3 ¼
ð0:0105a b þ 1:4728a b3 þ24:4064a8 b5 þ 77:3628a6 b7 þ47:0696a4 b9 þ 5:4781a2 b11 þ 0:0754b13 Þ
12 10
plate. For other boundary conditions less number of terms is
required to get the converged solution. From Figs. 7–9, it is clear
that the effect of shear deformation increases with the increase in
aspect ratio and end restraint. It is observed that for the same
aspect ratio, the SCSS and SCSC boundary condition plate buckles
into more number of half-waves due to the increase in boundary
restraint (vide Figs. 11 and 12). The buckling loads of isotropic and
composite plates presented for different boundary conditions and
loading conditions in this paper can be used to benchmark future
studies.
Appendix A
Nonlinear governing partial differential equations of cross-ply
composite plate in displacement variables are,
A11 uo;xx þ A66 uo;yy þ ðA12 þ A66 Þvo;xy þ ðA11 wo;xx þ A66 wo;yy Þwo;x þ ðA12 þ A66 Þwo;y wo;xy ¼ 0
ðA:1Þ
ðA12 þ A66 Þuo;xy þ A66 vo;xx þ A22 vo;yy þ ðA66 wo;xx þ A22 wo;yy Þwo;y þ ðA12 þ A66 Þðwo;x wo;xy Þ ¼ 0
ðA:2Þ
o
D11 wo;xxxx 2D12 wo;xxyy D22 wo;yyyy 4D66 wo;xxyy þE11 f1;xxx
o o o o o plates subjected to linearly varying inplane loading. Journal of Engineering
þ E12 ðf1;xyy þ f2;xxy Þ þ E22 f2;yyy þ 2E66 ðf1;xyy þ f2;xxy Þ
þ wo;xx ðA11 p1 þ A12 q1 Þ þwo;x ðA11 p1;x þ A12 q1;x Þ nxx wo;xx nxx;x wo;x
þ 2wo;xy ðA66 r1 Þ þ wo;x ðA66 r1;y Þ þwo;y ðA66 r1;x Þ2nxy wo;xy nxy;y wo;x
nxy;x wo;y þ wo;yy ðA12 p1 þ A22 q1 Þ þ wo;y ðA12 p1;y þ A22 q1;y Þ
nyy wo;yy nyy;y wo;y ¼ 0 ðA:3Þ
o o o o
E22 wo;yyy ðE12 þ2E66 Þwo;xxy þ F66 f2;xx þ F22 f2;yy þðF12 þ F66 Þf1;xy H44 f2 ¼ 0
ðA:4Þ
o o o o
E11 wo;xxx ðE12 þ 2E66 Þwo;xyy þ F11 f1;xx þ F66 f1;yy þ ðF12 þF66 Þf2;xy H55 f1 ¼ 0
ðA:5Þ
View publication stats
where
p1 ¼ uo;x þ0:5ðwo;x Þ2 ; q1 ¼ vo;x þ 0:5ðwo;y Þ2 ; r1 ¼ uo;x þ vo;x þwo;x wo;y ;
p2 ¼ wo;xx ; q2 ¼ wo;yy ; r2 ¼ 2wo;xy ;
o o o o
p3 ¼ f1;x ; q3 ¼ f2;y ; r3 ¼ f1;y þ f2;x ðA:6Þ
Explicit expression for a1, a2 and a3 for the case of cross-ply
composite plate are
ðA:7Þ
ðA:8Þ
ðA:9Þ
References
[1] van der Neut A. Buckling caused by thermal stresses. In: High temperature
effects in aircraft structures. AGARDograph 1958;28:215–47.
[2] Benoy MB. An energy solution for buckling of rectangular plate under non-
uniform inplane loading. Aeronautical Journal 1969;73:974–7.
[3] Wang JTS, Biggers SB, Dickson JN. Buckling of composite plates with a free
edge in edgewise bending and compression. AIAA Journal 1984;22(3):394–8.
[4] Biggers SB, Srinivasan S. Postbuckling response of piece-wise uniform tailored
composite plates in compression. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and
Composites 1994;13(9):803–21.
[5] Biggers SB, Pageau SS. Shear buckling response of tailored composite plates.
AIAA Journal 1994;32(5):1100–3.
[6] Baranski AT, Biggers Jr. SB. Postbuckling analysis of tailored composite plates
with progressive damage. Composite and Structures 1999;46:245–55.
[7] Xie D, Biggers Jr. SB. Postbuckling analysis with progressive damage modeling
in tailored composite plates and shells with a cutout. Composites and
Structures 2003;59(2):199–216.
[8] Sundaresan P, Singh G, Rao VG. Buckling of moderately thick rectangular
composite plate subjected to partial edge compression. International Journal
of Mechanical Science 1998;40(11):1105–17.
[9] Bert CW, Devarakonda KK. Buckling of rectangular plates subjected to
nonlinearly distributed inplane loading. International Journal of Solids and
Structures 2003;40:4097–106.
[10] Kang JH, Leissa AW. Vibration and buckling of SS–F–SS–F rectangular plates
loaded by in-plane moments. International Journal of Structural Stability and
Dynamics 2001;1(4):527–43.
[11] Kang JH, Leissa AW. Exact solution for the buckling of rectangular plates
having linearly varying in-plane loading on two opposite simply supported
edges. International Journal of Mechanical Science 2005;42:4220–38.
[12] Leissa AW, Kang JH. Exact solution for vibration and buckling of an SS–C–
SS–C rectangular plate loaded by linearly varying inplane stresses. Interna-
tional Journal of Mechanical Science 2002;44:1925–9455.
[13] Zhong H, Gu C. Buckling of simply supported rectangular Reissner–Mindlin
Mechanics 2006;132(5):578–81.
[14] Gurdal Z, Tatting BF, Wu CK. Variable stiffness composite panels: effects of
stiffness variation on the in-plane and buckling response. Composite: Part A,
Applied Science and Manufacturing 2008;39:911–22.
[15] Wang X, Wang Xinfeng, Shi X. Accurate buckling loads of thin rectangular
plates under parabolic edge compressions by the differential quadrature
method. International Journal of Mechanical Science 2007;49:447–53.
[16] Jana P, Bhaskar K. Stability analysis of simply-supported rectangular plates
under non-uniform uniaxial compression using rigorous and approximate
plane stress solutions. Thin-Walled Structure 2006;44:507–16.
[17] Reddy JN. A simple higher-order theory for laminated composite plates.
Journal of Applied Mechanics 1984;51(4):745–52.
[18] Timoshenko SP, Gere JM. Theory of elastic stability, 2e. New York: McGraw-
Hill; 1961.
[19] Warburton GB. The vibration of rectangular plates. Proceedings of the
Institution of Mechanical Engineering, Series A 1954;168(12):371–84.