Pna Module 9 Local Structural Analysis

Local Structural Analysis
__________________________________________________________________________________________
LOCAL STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
MODULE
Reference & extracts:
Hughes, O.F.,
Ship Structural Design
S.N.A.M.E., New Jersey 1988
Introduction
A metallic vessels typical structure is characterised by steel or aluminium plating which is

stiffened and supported by a grid of structural profiles welded usually orthogonally to that
plating. This basic model constitutes local structure. The magnitude and orientation of loads
imposed on that basic model vary considerably according to the location of the panel of structure
within the vessel. At the most elemental level the section of local structure to be analysed may
consist of a single plate panel delimited by stiffeners running in one direction and frames
oriented 90 to, and supporting those stiffeners. A greater level of complexity would be a
grillage of those elemental panels forming a local area or region of stiffened plating, such as a
section of deck, hull side structure or a bulkhead. In this module numerous methods of analysis
are outlined for such structural models with their application dependent upon the type and
orientation of loads.
1.1
Plate Theory
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;
ElastoPlastic Plate Theory.
Prior to examining each theory it is necessary to introduce certain basic characteristics of plating.
Basic Characteristics of Plating
Referring to Figure 9.1 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.
__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________
PLAN VIEW
EDGE VIEW
Figure 9.1
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.
Aspect Ratio =
2.2
a
b
Slenderness Ratio
The slenderness ratio for a plate panel is the ratio of the shorter dimension (b) to the plating
thickness (t).
Slenderness Ratio =
b
t
A ships 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:
where
b Y
t E
(9.1)
Y = yield strength of the plating material
Plates may be divided into 2 broad categories:

Slender plates > 2.4 approximately, and sturdy plates
< 2.4
__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________
2.4 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);
Pinned: edges free to rotate but not free to move in the plane of the
Clamped & free to slide:
Rigidly clamped: no edge rotation and not free to slide in the plane.
plate;
no edge rotation but free to move in the plane;
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.
2.5
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.
Small Deflection Plate Theory (SDPT)
3.1
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 9.2.
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.
__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________
b
a
da
y
x
Figure 9.2
da
y = 0
Figure 9.3
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
y
E
y
E
=0
From the second equation it can be seen that
y = x
and hence the first equation becomes:
x =
and so:
x =
x 1
E
1
(9.2)
__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Equation 9.2, when compared to the case of a beam, i.e., x = Ex suggests the definition of a
quantity:
E1 =
E
1
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
384E 1 I
5Pb 4 1
32Et 3
Pb 4 1
32Et 3
(9.3)
and for the clamped case:

wMAX
3.2
Pb 4
384E 1 I
(9.4)
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 that the external bending moment M may be expressed as:
M =
where:
rx
Et 3
12 1 2 rx
= radius of curvature in x direction (across the plate)
This expression is simplified by using:
where:
3.3
Et 3
12 1
= flexural rigidity of the plate (analogous to the quantity EI in beam theory).
(9.5)
Maximum Stress in a Plate
In a beam the maximum bending stress is given by:
__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________
MAX
My
I
M
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:
t3
12
and that y, the distance from the neutral axis to the outermost point of a plate, is t /2, then the
section modulus (Zplate) for a unit strip of plating is:
Z plate
I
y
t3
= 12
t
2
t2
6
Thus for a unit strip of plate, experiencing a uniform pressure P, the maximum stress may be
expressed as:
MAX
or:
M
Z plate
Pb 2
t2
6
This is usually expressed in the form:
MAX
b
= kP
t
(9.6)
where the value of the coefficient k is dependent upon the plates boundary conditions.
For simply-supported edges:
= 0.75
For clamped edges:
= 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).
3.4
SDPT Limits of Application
This theory is only applicable if:
3t
4
The maximum stress nowhere exceeds the plate yield stress (i.e., the material remains
elastic).
The deflections of the plate are small; i.e.:
__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________
3.5
SDPT Illustrative Example
transverse (web) frame

500 mm
longitudinal stiffener
900 mm
Figure 9.4 A panel of orthogonally-stiffened structure.

For the plating panel of a vessels bottom structure, (shown in Figure 9.4.), and given the
following data:
Yield stress:
Modulus of Elasticity:
Poissons Ratio:
Draft:
235 MPa
206 GPa
0.3
3.50 metres (seawater 1.025 t/m3)
Determine the maximum stresses and deflections for both simply-supported and clamped-edge
conditions for a plate thickness of 7 mm. What observations and suggestions can you make ?
Solution
Aspect ratio
a
b
900
500
= 1.8
P
= gt
= 1025 9.81 3.5
= 35193 Pa
i)
Simply-supported edge conditions:

wMAX
= k1
5Pb 4 12(1 2 )
384E t 3
__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________
From Hughes Design Curves Figure 9.5:
k1 = 0.814 , therefore:
5 35193 0.5 12(1 0.32 )

384 206 109 0.0073
4
wMAX
= 0.814
= 0.0036 m
= 3.6 mm
MAX
b
= kP
t
(< 0.75 t , therefore SDPT is valid for this analysis)
MAX
0.5
= 0.567 35193
0.007
k = 0.567 , therefore:
= 101.8 106 Pa
(< Y , therefore SDPT is valid for this analysis)
= 101.8 MPa
ii) Clamped edge conditions:

wMAX
= k2
5Pb 4 12(1 2 )
384E t 3
k 2 = 0.943 , therefore:
5 35193 0.5 12(1 0.32 )

384 206 109 0.0073
4
wMAX
= 0.943
= 0.0008 m
= 0.8 mm
MAX
b
= kP
t
(<< 0.75 t , therefore SDPT is valid for this analysis)

2
MAX
0.5
= 0.489 35193
0.007
k = 0.489 , therefore:
= 87.8 106 Pa
= 87.8 MPa
(< Y , therefore SDPT is valid for this analysis)
__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Observations
Both edge conditions give the use of SDPT validity in the analysis of this case; both conditions
have maximum deflections and stresses within the limits of SDPT application.
Suggestions
Deflections in the clamped case are extremely low. Since clamped may imply fully-welded
plate edges, it may be argued that fully welding the panel is unnecessary and hence intermittent
welding (and hence simply-supported edge conditions) would be perfectly satisfactory with the
inherent safety margin of 2.
Elasto-Plastic Plate Theory (Plates Loaded Beyond the Elastic Limit)
The theory presented previously in both the small and large deflection theories has been elastic
theory which only applies if the material does not yield. However, the pressure applied to a plate
which results in the onset of yield does not represent the limit of pressure that the plate can
support. The plate may withstand a pressure several times greater than this before it fails in any
significant way, or before the deformation becomes unacceptably large. In fact for continuous
plating supported by stiffeners, true ultimate failure of the plating almost never occurs because
the stiffeners usually have a much lower load capacity than the plating. When the plate deflection
becomes very large there does arise some restraint against pull-in and hence the plate gradually
becomes a fully plastic membrane for which the rupture load is enormous.
4.1
Factors Governing Design
This extreme level of load and deformation is relevant in some special design applications such
as icebreakers, ballistic and collision protection, but in general, the design of plating in which
lateral loads predominate, is governed by unserviceability rather than by ultimate failure. In
most cases the governing type of unserviceability is a maximum allowable permanent set (wP)
rather than a maximum stress level. An exception would be plating subject to cyclic loading
where fatigue considerations may impose a limit on the level of the working stress. Also,
permanent set does have some effect on ultimate strength in the case of wide or approximately
square plates that are subjected to in-plane compression and lateral loading, as would occur in a
transversely framed strength deck or bottom.
Some examples of serviceability requirements which may dictate the permissible value of wP are
the operation of fork lift trucks or other vehicles, the overall flexural stiffness of the deck or
panel, the rigidity of support for attached fittings, the robustness of the plating against damage
(dents, etc.), and the avoidance, perhaps on aesthetic grounds, of the hungry horse look. As this
list indicates, it is often a non-structural consideration which determines the maximum
permissible wP . Because of the variety of serviceability requirements no single value or
expression for the maximum permissible wP will be universally suitable.
4.2
A Rational Approach
In order to achieve a rationally-based design method which can be used for a wide variety of
applications it is essential to determine the relationship between load and permanent set and to
__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________
express this relationship in a form that is suitable for design, combining simplicity and accuracy.
For hand design it is desirable to have either design charts or simple formulas; for computeraided design a mathematical formulation is required. The approach taken by Hughes is to use a
combination of basic elasto-plastic theory and experimental results (Clarkson) to derive a simple,
semi-empirical mathematical relationship between lateral load and wP .
4.3
Application of Elasto-Plastic Theory to Laterally Loaded Plates
This section represents a simplified explanation of the formation and growth of permanent set as
presented by Hughes [1]. The purpose is to establish the relative importance of various
parameters and to derive the general form of the relationship between load and permanent set,
which is used as the basis for the design formulas presented. The load used is a uniform pressure
which also acts on adjacent panels of plating. In this case the appropriate boundary condition is
clamped; free to pull in. Therefore yielding will first occur at the boundaries of the plate, at the
upper and lower surfaces and this marks the beginning of permanent set in the plate. As the load
is further increased the yielding gradually penetrates through the thickness and the permanent set
increases. Eventually a plastic hinge forms and spreads along each of the plate boundaries and
from then on the permanent set increases rapidly.
In order to determine the basic features of the growth of permanent set we begin with the case of
an infinitely long plate, thus removing the effects of aspect ratio. Such a plate would undergo
cylindrical bending and a typical transverse strip may be treated as a beam of unit width.
b
a
da
y
x
Figure 9.5
The surface stress at the edges is given by:
x =
where
1 b
P
2 t
(9.7)
= the uniform pressure load
The stress in the orthogonal direction is:
y = x.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
10

__________________________________________________________________________________________
The third principal stress is zero and therefore using Hencky-von Mises yield criterion, the value
of x at which yield occurs is:
x Y
Y
1 - + 2
This shows that due to the y stress, yielding does not occur until after x has exceeded Y by
about 12.5%. The section modulus for a strip of plating of unit width is:
Z
t2
6
Therefore if MY denotes the bending moment corresponding to initial yield, the value of MY must
be such that:
or:
MY
Z
= Y
MY
Y
1 - + 2
t2
6
(9.8)
From equation 2.1 the pressure which causes initial yielding is:
PY =
2 Y
t

2 b
1 - +
(9.9)
By defining a non-dimensional load parameter:

Q
PE
(9.10)
Y2
and by making use of the slenderness ratio equation 9.9 may be put in the form:
QY =
1

1 - + 2
2
(9.11)
The plastic section modulus for a strip of plating of unit width is ZP and can be shown to be:
ZP =
t2
4
Therefore the bending moment required to form a plastic hinge at the edges is:
Y
t2
= 1.5 M Y
MP =
1 - + 2 4
(9.12)
The pressure which causes the plastic hinge at the edges is therefore:
__________________________________________________________________________________________
11

__________________________________________________________________________________________
PEH
12M P
b2
Combining the foregoing relations gives:

PEH
3 Y
t

1 - + 2 b
or in non-dimensional parameters is:

QEH
1

2
1 - +
3
(9.13)
Permanent set increases sharply during the formation of the edge hinge. As the load approaches
QEH the plate becomes effectively simply supported with respect to the additional load and the
rate of increase in the total deflection would eventually become 5 times the pre-hinge value.
Because of the plastic condition of the plate edges, most of this deflection would be locked in
and would therefore constitute permanent set. Hence the plate quickly reaches typical
permissible values of permanent set and there is no need to consider the formation of a third
hinge in the centre.
Throughout the range of loading up to Q = QEH the deflected shape of the plate remains a
smooth curve since there is as yet no hinge at the centre. If the load is removed after the
formation of the edge hinges the plate relaxes to an approximately parabolic shape with
permanent edge rotation P. The permanent set wP is therefore approximately:
wP =
P b
4
with the occurrence of spring-back in the edge hinges (due to residual elasticity in the
innermost part of the plates thickness) allowed for. In practice, the stored elastic energy in the
plate would cause some slight additional spring-back, but the effect is small and may be ignored.
At the completion of the edge hinge the value of wP (at this stage of the loading denoted as wPO )
can be expressed as:
wPO = 0.07 2 t
(9.14)
For plates of finite aspect ratio, yielding and hinge formation occur at 4 edges instead of 2 and
therefore the load required to cause edge hinges will be larger than for a long plate of the same
area. Also the yielding and hinge formation is a more gradual process, beginning at the midpoint
of the long sides and gradually extending along the sides, and this makes the transition zone
larger than for a long plate. In addition, some membrane effect will be present for geometric
compatibility. Never-the-less, the basic mechanism of permanent set is the same as for a long
plate and experiments by Clarkson [2] have verified that the formation of edge hinges marks the
upper bound of the loading range within which permanent set begins to increase rapidly.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
12

__________________________________________________________________________________________
It has also been observed experimentally that once QEH is exceeded the growth of wP is very
linearly proportional to further increases in load. The main reason for this is that once plastic
hinges have formed at the boundaries there is no further change in the basic nature of the
boundary conditions with further increase of load.
Q
QC = 2QY
QC
QEH = 1.5QY
QEH
QY
QY
MY
MP
ME
transition
zone
wPO
wP
Figure 9.6 Load, moment and permanent set for plates of

infinite aspect ratio.
The commencement of permanent set occurs at the initial yield load QY which can be calculated
from elastic theory. Ultimately, as the load increases, plasticity spreads throughout the central
region of the plate and some membrane straining begins to occur because of the large deflections.
For typical ship plates, Hughes argues, that there is no need to carry the analysis further because
the magnitude of the permanent set has already exceeded typical serviceability limits.
4.4
Design of Plating Based on Allowable Permanent Set
Because permanent set involves complicated elasto-plastic behaviour there is no analytical,

closed-form method available for the direct calculation of the load required to cause a specified
level of permanent set. Some approximate analytical solutions have been obtained for special
cases but an accurate and general solution requires the use of numerical techniques such as
incremental finite element analysis or the solution of the non-linear plate equations by finite
differences. These methods involve too much computation for ordinary design applications. For
this purpose the designer requires a rapid and simple method ideally a single formula for
estimating the load which would produce a given level of permanent set and since the choice of
that level is somewhat arbitrary and does not involve ultimate failure, the calculation does not
require the accuracy of these sophisticated techniques.
4.5 Plating Subjected to Uniform Pressure
In order to facilitate the use of the formula in non-computer-aided situations, design curves are
given in PDF file Hughes Design Curves Figure 9.17 for wP t = 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and 1.0.
To use the curves, the designer computes Q for the given load (factored if appropriate), and then
for a selected stiffener spacing b (and hence aspect ratio a/b) the value of is read, from which
__________________________________________________________________________________________
13

__________________________________________________________________________________________
the thickness may be obtained. If this t is not satisfactory for some reason the value of b, or
perhaps Y may be varied as required.
4.6
Initial Permanent Set due to Welding
Antoniou [3] presented the results of a regression analysis of over 2000 values of wPi /t measured
on newly-built ships over a number of years, showing that the significant parameters are and
the ratio tW /t where tW is the thickness of the stiffener web, and that the following expression
gives a satisfactory fit to the data:
wPi
t
t
= 0.073 1.65 W
t
0.42
(9.15)
Typical ship plates have 0.6 < tW /t < 0.9 and therefore the mean value is approximately:
wPi
= 0.065 1.65
t
(9.16)
Antoniou also proposed the following formulae for the maximum permissible value of weldinduced permanent set:
w
for t > 14 mm: Pi
t MAX
b
= 0.014 0.32
t
(9.17)
w
for t < 14 mm: Pi
t MAX
b
= 0.018 0.55
t
(9.18)
Antoniou showed that this requirement is quite reasonable and is consistent with other
formulations and with general shipbuilding practice.
4.7
Acceptable Levels of Permanent Set
Total levels of permanent set considered acceptable must be left to the designer. For naval
vessels, where weight saving is important, a large value would be appropriate, such as wPT =
b/50. For commercial vessels a lower value would generally be preferred such as b/100. The
influence of permanent set on the in-plane compressive strength is significant. In brief, for
longitudinally stiffened panels, initial deflections caused by welding and by lateral pressure does
not diminish the ultimate compressive strength. For transversely stiffened panels even a
moderate amount of permanent set causes higher stresses and a lower ultimate compressive
strength, and a large permanent set causes a drastic reduction in strength. Since some permanent
welding set is nearly always present, transverse stiffening should be avoided where good in-plane
compressive strength is required, and if it is used in any panel then that panel should not be
included in the hull girder calculations.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
14

__________________________________________________________________________________________
4.8
Elasto-Plastic Plate Theory Illustrative Example
For a plate panel delimited by orthogonal framing and considered to have boundary conditions
clamped but free to pull in, with the following characteristics:
Longitudinal stiffener spacing:
Web frame spacing:
Thickness:
E:
Yield Strength:
750 mm
1500 mm
12 mm
206 GPa
355 MPa (LRS DH36 High Tensile Steel RAEX 36 Polar)
Determine the pressure loading that can be sustained if the maximum permanent set is set at
75% of the plate thickness.
[Use Hughes Design Curves Figures 9.17(a) (e) and assume no initial permanent deflection
due to welding.]
Solution
a
b
Plate aspect ratio:
1500
750
= 2
Max. permanent set:
wP = 0.75 t
= 0.75 0.012
= 0.009 m
= 9.0 mm
Slenderness parameter:
b Y
t E
0.75 355 106

0.012 206 109
= 2.595 (use 2.6)
For design curve use:
wP
b
0.009 206 109

0.75 355 106
= 0.289
Interpolation between Figs. 9.17 (a) and 9.17 (b) will be necessary:
Using Fig. 9.17 (a):
wP
b
= 0.2
Q = 0.95
(See figure below)
__________________________________________________________________________________________
15

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Q 0.95
a
2.6
Using Fig. 9.17 (b):
wP
b
= 0.4
= 1.15
(See figure below)
Q 1.15
a
2.6
Interpolating for :
wP
b
= 0.289
Y
Q0.289
0.289 0.2
=
1.15 0.95 0.95
0.4 0.2
= 1.039
Using:
Q =
PE
Y2
Q Y2
E
1.039 355 106

206 109
= 635 631 Pa
= 635.63 kPa
__________________________________________________________________________________________
16

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Plating Subjected to Concentrated Loads
Ship plating is subjected to concentrated loads of various types, such as wheel loads, fenders,
pallets, and even falling objects. For design purposes there are 2 main types of concentrated
loads depending on the number of different locations where they occur in the panel: single
location or multiple location. (Multiple is not to imply numerous simultaneous loadings
rather, multiple occurrence over the life of the vessel.) The distinction between single and
multiple is important because they require different design methods.
Single location loads are either deliberate (e.g. the weight of a fixed installation) or accidental
(e.g. dropping of a heavy object). Deliberate single location loads do not usually influence plate
design because they can be placed over a stiffener, girder or bulkhead, or additional stiffeners or
other supporting structure can be provided. This is nearly always preferred to having thicker
plating.
Although the position of accidental loads may be random, for design purposes the worst position
(midway between stiffeners) must be assumed. Note that the term accidental implies rare. If it
is expected to occur numerous times in the life of the vessel and at various locations in the panel
(e.g. heavy landings of a helicopter on a flight/heli-deck, berthing impacts, tug landings) it is
classified as a multiple location. Wheel loads and all other moveable loads are classified as
multiple load locations.
5.1
Load Duration
Concentrated loads may be either static, quasi-static, or dynamic.

Dynamic loads are those which have such a short duration that the inertia and dynamic response
of the plating becomes significant. Examples of a dynamic concentrated load are rare, probably
the only relevant example being projectile impact. In this case it is necessary to investigate the
possibilities of puncture, plate rupture and additionally, large permanent set.
Quasi-static loads are those in which the motion of the load can be accounted for by means of
static inertia forces. Usually ship speeds are such that collision loads fall into this category, but
here it is also necessary to investigate puncture and rupture as well as permanent set. Common
example of quasi-static loads are the heavy landings of fixed- or rotary-wing aircraft, and wheel
loads of vehicles when the vessel is encountering heavy seas (i.e. significant motions and
accelerations).
5.2
Design Load Magnitude
When the load magnitude has a high degree of variability, such as the heavy landing of a
helicopter, the design load is usually an extreme value, which either corresponds to some
probability of occurrence or is associated with some identifiable result (e.g. collapse of landing
gear). Alternatively, in commercial vessels there sometimes exists the possibility of controlling
and limiting the maximum load by means of operating regulations, such as maximum permissible
axle load, wheel load, and tyre pressure. If this approach is adopted the maximum permissible
load is derived from the maximum allowable permanent set, and this load, factored to allow for a
margin of accidental overload, becomes the design load.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
17

__________________________________________________________________________________________
5.3
Parameters for Describing Concentrated Loads
For simplicity the concentrated load is taken to be rectangular in shape, of dimension e f , with
e parallel to b (stiffener spacing) as shown in Figure 9.7.
f
e
Figure 9.7 Geometry of single location concentrated load.
The extent of the load is measured by the geometric average (em ) of its 2 dimensions because
over a period a multiple location load will occur in all orientations to the plate.
em =
ef
(9.19)
For wheel loads em is related to the load P and tyre pressure pt by:
em =
where:
P
pt
(9.20)
vehicle weight + vehicle load

numberof wheels
It is also necessary to have a parameter which describes the degree of concentration of the load.
For this purpose we define:
em
b
(9.21)
Finally, the load parameter which is most commonly used for concentrated loads is:
QP =
PE
b 2 Y2
(9.22)
__________________________________________________________________________________________
18

__________________________________________________________________________________________
5.4
Design for Multiple Location Loads
Since a wheel load is the most obvious example of a multiple location load, the outline provided
here will be in terms of this type of load, however, the results apply to all types of multiple
location loads.
Over a period with wheel loads moving around in all directions and with
varied tyre dimensions, the permanent set caused will have a cumulative effect which is basically
similar to that caused by a uniform pressure load. This is true not only for wheel loads but also
for all multiple location loads because over a period they will occur in different locations on the
panel. Hence for a given design load parameter QP the eventual value of permanent set is
essentially the same as that caused by an equivalent uniform pressure pe , with the equivalent
load parameter QE given by:
QE =
pe E
Y2
= rQ P
where:
QE
QP
pt b 2
P
b2
e m2
1
2
(9.23)
(in terms of tyre pressure and load)
An expression for r derived from experimental data is given by:
0.88 1.5
1
0.44 2 2
where:
a
= aspect ratio
b
(9.24)
Design Curves Figures 9.17 (a) to (e) are then employed for the analysis of multiple location
loads.
5.5
Design for Single Location Concentrated Loads
Concentrated loads which are expected to occur only rarely should be taken as occurring in the
centre of the panel. With such loads the pattern of plasticity in the plate is very complicated and
it difficult to derive an expression for predicting permanent set purely from theoretical
considerations. Hence for this case an approximate semi-empirical design formula is used which
combines some basic theory with experimental results.
Experiments have shown that for this
type of load the panel aspect ratio, , has little effect on the permanent set and that the only
effect of load aspect ratio, e/f , is that loads which are approximately square cause slightly more
permanent set than elongated loads. The formula used accounts for the latter by means of a
simple correction factor, . The range of values for covered in the experiments was 0.24
0.79. Thus the design formula may not be accurate for values of less than 0.24, and it is
__________________________________________________________________________________________
19

__________________________________________________________________________________________
recommended that the formula should not be used at all for values of greater than 0.8. The
formula is:
where:
QP
5 2
1.1
0.8
3.56

wP

0.34 1.6 0.23
=

1 t
2
ef
= 1 0.8 2
e f
(9.25)
(9.26)
Design curves [Figures 9.25 (a) to (c)] are based on the above formula.
Note:
is a parameter reflecting the degree of concentration of the loading (i.e., the lower the value of
, the greater the degree of concentration). The value of determines the approach to adopt in
the resolution of the design problem and therefore determination of should be the first step
undertaken in the analysis.
For values of < 0.4, the single-location approach should always be used.
For values of 0.4 < < 0.8, the single- and multiple-location approaches should be blended in
the words of Hughes. However, for values of > 0.4 and above, the influence of the singlelocation component within a blended approach is minimal and diminishes further with
increased values of . Thus, it is practical to use the multiple-location approach alone for values
of > 0.4 and above.
5.6
Illustrative ExampleSingle Location Concentrated Loads
A steel vehicle deck on a Ro-Ro vessel has a web-frame spacing of 1500 mm and a stiffener
spacing of 500 mm. The maximum allowable permanent set is 5 mm. The largest concentrated
design load is a wheel load of 100 kN having a footprint of 200 mm 400 mm. Establish the
minimum required thickness of plating. Assume E = 206 GPa and a yield strength of 235 MPa.
Solution
The applied concentrated load is a wheel load and therefore is regarded as multiple location
loading.
The parameter which describes the degree of concentration of the load is :
=
=
ef
b
0.2 0.4
0.5
= 0.566
__________________________________________________________________________________________
20

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Using Hughes Design Curves for uniform pressure (Fig. 9.17):
wP
b
0.005 206 109

0.5 235 106
= 0.296
This means interpolation between Hughes Design Curves Figures 9.17(a) and 9.17(b) will be
required.
Calculating the concentrated load parameter, QP :

=
QP
PE
b 2 Y2
(100 103 )(206 109 )

(0.5) 2 (235 106 ) 2
= 1.492
Calculating the equivalent load parameter, QE (equivalent uniform pressure):

QE = rQ P
where:
0.88 1.5
1
0.44 2 2
0.88
0.44 (0.566)
where:
a
= aspect ratio
b
1.5
1 2
3
= 1.35
therefore:
QE = 1.35 1.492
= 2.02
Using Hughes Design Curves Fig. 9.17 (a):
QE 2.02
a
1.5
Using Hughes Design Curves Fig. 9.17 (b):
__________________________________________________________________________________________
21

__________________________________________________________________________________________
QE 2.02
a
1.6
Interpolating for
wP
b
0.296
= 0.296
0.296 0.2
=
1.6 1.5 1.5
0.4 0.2
= 1.548
Therefore determining plate thickness, t :

Using
therefore:
b Y
t E
Y
E
0.5 235 106

1.548 206 109
= 0.0109 m
= 10.9 mm
( 11.0 mm plate, if available)
Buckling of Plates (Elastic Plates Subjected to Uniaxial Compression)
6.1
Buckling of a Wide Column
As an introduction to the buckling of rectangular plating we consider first the plate shown in
Figure 9.8. The plate is subjected to in-plane compression with simple support along the loaded
edges and with no support along the unloaded edges. Because of the lack of support the plate is
acting more as a wide column than as a plate. The critical or buckling load (PCR) for such a plate
is the same as for a column except the product EI is replaced by the plate flexural rigidity (D).
Thus for a plate of length a , the Euler formula for the critical load is:
PCR
2 Db
a2
(9.27)
__________________________________________________________________________________________
22

__________________________________________________________________________________________
and the critical stress is:
CR
2D
a 2t
2E t

12(1 2 ) a
(9.28)
Figure 9.8 Buckling of a wide column.
In equation 9.28 it is evident that the thickness/length ratio plays the same role as the
slenderness ratio for columns. On the other hand, the width (b) of the plate plays no part
whatever and it is clear that from a buckling point of view, it is inefficient to use a plate in the
role of a wide column without support along the unloaded edges.
6.2
Buckling of a Simply Supported Plate
Figure 9.9 shows a simply supported panel of plating subjected to a uniform in-plane
compressive stress (a) in the x-direction (i.e. along the dimension a ). Via the use of the general
plate equation the deflected shape can be expressed in the form:
The minimum value of a is given by:
m2 n2
a D 2 2
b
a
=
2
tm
2
a CR
(9.29)
__________________________________________________________________________________________
23

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Drawn for
m=3
x
n =1
Figure 9.9 Buckled shape of a long plate.
The parameters m and n indicate the number of half-waves in each direction in the buckled
shape. Both must be integers and it can be seen that the value of n that gives the smallest value
of a is n = 1. Hence the plate will buckle into only 1 half-wave transversely, and the buckling
or critical stress is:
a CR
2D
1 a
= 2 m
mb
a t
(9.30)
[This equation was derived by G.H. Bryan in 1891.] It is usually written in a more general form
in terms of a buckling coefficient (k) and the plate width (b):
a CR
= k
2D
b 2t
(9.31)
The expression for the buckling coefficient (k) depends upon the type of boundary support.
Expressions for k for other types of boundary conditions are presented later. For design
applications, in which the plate thickness is to be determined, equation 9.31 is usually written in
the alternative form:
a CR
t
= KE
b
(9.32)
in which:
2k
12 1 2
(9.33)
__________________________________________________________________________________________
24

__________________________________________________________________________________________
In Figure 9.10 the coefficient k is plotted against aspect ratio (a/b) for various values of m. The
figure shows that the lowest and therefore truly critical value of a will occur for different values
of m, depending upon the aspect ratio. This can also be seen by setting dk/dm = 0 from which is
obtained m = a/b ; i.e., the stress is lowest when the number of half-waves in the longitudinal
direction is equal to the aspect ratio. Under these conditions k = 4.
This indicates that a long panel of plating always tends to buckle into a number of square panels;
if the length (a) is not an exact multiple of the width (b) , then the panel will buckle into the
nearest whole number of half-waves which will make the critical stress a minimum. The value of
k is therefore given by the solid and discontinuous curve in Figure 9.10 from which it may be
seen that although the value of k is somewhat greater for non-integer aspect ratios, the effect is
slight and diminishes as aspect ratio increases. Hence for long simply supported plates it is
usually assumed that k = 4. Equation 9.31 then becomes:
a CR
= 4
2D
(9.34)
b 2t
and assuming = 0.3 then equation 9.32 becomes:
a CR
t
= 3.62E
b
(9.35)
m=1
m=2
m=3
m=4
a/b
Figure 9.10
For a wide plate, in which the aspect ratio is less than 1.0, m will be equal to unity. Therefore:
a CR
2D
a
= 2 1
a t b
(9.36)
and this gives the critical stress for a simply supported wide plate. As before a more general
form of the equation can be written using a buckling coefficient. However, in the case of wide
__________________________________________________________________________________________
25

__________________________________________________________________________________________
plates the buckling equations are usually written in terms of the length (a) rather than the width
(b) because a wide plate more nearly resembles a column. The general wide plate equation is
then:
a CR
= k
2D
a 2t
(9.37)
where:
a
= k
b
(9.38)
For design purposes equation 9.37 may be written as:
a CR
t
= KE
a
(9.39)
in which:
2
=
12 1 2
a 2
1
b
(9.40)
where, for = 0.3 :
6.3
a 2
= 0.9051
b
(9.41)
Longitudinal Versus Transverse Stiffening
The question of wide plates versus narrow plates leads to consideration of the relative merits of
stiffening a large sheet of plating in the longitudinal or in the transverse direction. Let the plating
be of length L and breadth B and subject to a uniform compressive stress a . If longitudinal
stiffeners are fitted at a spacing, s (as in Figure 9.11a) then the buckling stress is found from
equation 9.34 with b = s :
a CR
4 2 D
s 2t
(9.42)
On the other hand, if the stiffeners are fitted transversely at the same spacing then the critical
stress is obtained from equation 9.36 with a = s and b = B :
a CR
2D
s
= 2 1
s t B
(9.43)
The term s/B is generally quite small for a vessel (seldom greater than 1/6) and so the term in
brackets is approximately unity. Therefore the buckling strength of longitudinally stiffened
__________________________________________________________________________________________
26

__________________________________________________________________________________________
plating is nearly 4 times as great as that of transversely stiffened plating. This illustrates the
great advantage of longitudinal over transverse stiffening in ship structures, and the former is
used wherever possible. (The deep web frames of a longitudinal framing system may make this
system undesirable in some instances.)
6.4
Other Boundary Conditions
The foregoing discussion has assumed that the sides of the plates are simply supported. If any
other type of boundary condition exists along the plate edges then a new solution must be
obtained for the general plate equation which satisfies this condition. Many authors have
presented solutions for a variety of cases and the principal cases are summarized in Hughes
Design Curves Figures 12.5 (a) and (b). Figure 12.5 (b) gives values of K in the design version
of the Bryan formula
.
L
s
Figure 9.11 (a) Longitudinally stiffened panel.
L
s
Figure 9.11 (b) Transversely stiffened panel.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
27

__________________________________________________________________________________________
6.5 Illustrative Example
An 8.0 mm thick, long steel plate spans a web-frame spacing of 2500 mm and is required to
withstand a longitudinal in-plane compressive stress of 105 MPa. Y = 235 MPa, E = 206 GPa,
and = 0.3. If the loaded edges are regarded as simply supported and the non-loaded edges as
clamped, determine the maximum stiffener spacing to adopt if elastic buckling of the plate is to
be avoided employing a safety factor of 1.5.
Solution
a CR
= a SF
= 105MPa 1.5
= 157.5 MPa
a CR
t
= KE
b
= KE
t2
b2
therefore:
KEt 2
( a ) CR
where:
2k
12 1 2
where k is from Design Curve Figure 12.5 (a):
Using Design Curve Figure 12.5 (a): loaded

clamped, k = 6.98
Therefore:
2 (6.98)
12 1 0.3 2
edges
simply-supported,
non-loaded
edges
= 6.309
Therefore:
KEt 2
( a ) CR
(6.309)(206 109 )(0.008) 2

(1.57.5 106 )
= 0.728 m
= 728 mm
use 700 mm
__________________________________________________________________________________________
28

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Buckling of Stiffened Panels
Stiffened panels can buckle in essentially 2 different ways. In overall buckling, the stiffeners
buckle along with the plating; in local buckling either the stiffeners buckle prematurely (because
of inadequate rigidity or stability), or the plate panels buckle between the stiffeners, thus
shedding extra load into the stiffeners so that eventually the stiffeners buckle in the manner of
columns. For most ship panels the proportions are such that the buckling of whichever type
is inelastic, and when dealing with that, the word failure is more properly used instead of
buckling. Hence the terms used should be overall panel failure, local stiffener failure, local
plate failure. Nevertheless, an elastic buckling analysis gives a good indication of the likely
modes of failure.
The way in which a stiffened panel will buckle when subjected to in-plane longitudinal
compressive forces depends mainly on the stiffeners. The 2 principal requirements are that they
have sufficient torsional stability so that they do not buckle prematurely (i.e., before the plating)
and that they have sufficient lateral rigidity so that the possibility of overall buckling is either
eliminated or sufficiently unlikely.
For all practical purposes stiffener buckling is synonymous with overall buckling because if the
stiffeners buckle the plating is left with almost no lateral rigidity whatever. Since overall
buckling involves the entire panel, it is usually regarded as collapse rather than as
unserviceability. Moreover, it is quite a sudden mode of collapse and therefore more undesirable
than other modes. Thus the first and most basic principle in regard to stiffeners is that they
should be at least as strong as the plating; i.e., they should be sufficiently rigid and stable so
that neither overall buckling or local stiffener buckling occurs before local plate buckling.
Most ship panels must carry substantial lateral loads and this requirement usually produces
stiffeners that are already larger and more rigid than the minimum sizes required by
consideration of elastic overall buckling. Therefore in most cases an inelastic failure analysis is
required. However, if the panel is slender (defined later) as may occur with small lateral loading
and in light weight construction, (small, closely spaced stiffeners), then elastic overall buckling
becomes a possible collapse mode and an elastic buckling analysis becomes essential.
Generally it is not possible, without a specific analysis to determine with certainty just what
failure modes elastic or inelastic will be the governing requirements which determine the
plate thickness and the stiffener sizes and spacing. The best approach is to first perform an
elastic buckling analysis because: (1) it is relatively simple, consisting mostly of explicit
formulae; (2) for slender panels elastic buckling of one type or another may be possible and may
be one of the governing failure modes; and (3) the elastic analysis indicates whether or not an
inelastic analysis is required, and some of the basic elastic buckling parameters are needed for
such an analysis.
7.1
Longitudinally Stiffened Panels
Figure 9.12 illustrates overall and local buckling for longitudinally stiffened panels.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
29

__________________________________________________________________________________________
OVERALL BUCKLING
section
LOCAL (PLATE) BUCKLING
section
Figure 9.12 Buckling of longitudinally stiffened panels.
7.2
Overall Buckling Versus Plate Buckling
.1
Calculation of Overall Buckling Stress

One approach is to calculate the overall buckling stress (a)cr and compare it to the plate
buckling stress (o) to ensure that the overall buckling stress is larger. One method of calculating
(a)cr is to regard each stiffener with its associated width of plating as a column, having some
equivalent slenderness ratio (L/r )eq where:
= column length ( a )
= radius of gyration
=
I
A
__________________________________________________________________________________________
30

__________________________________________________________________________________________
where:
= second moment of area of the cross sectional area of plate plus stiffener
= cross sectional area of the plate plus stiffener
The elastic buckling stress (a)cr is then obtained from the Euler column formula and the
requirement that overall buckling not precede plate buckling then appears in a more explicit
form:
where:
a cr
a cr
2E
Le

r
t
o = 3.62E
b
.2
(Euler column formula)
(9.44)
(9.45)
Effective Plate Width (be)

As it stands, the purpose of this equation 9.44 is simply to verify that the critical stress for the
combined stiffener and plate is greater than the plate buckling stress (o), and for this purpose the
plate flange should be taken at its full width (b), however, this may not be the case for slender
plates. A slender plate is one in which the overall buckling stress calculated from elastic theory
is less than the yield stress; i.e., we say that a panel is slender if:
2E
2
L

r eq
< Y
(9.46)
or:
eq > 1
where:
eq = column slenderness parameter

=
L
r
(9.47)
Y
E
Since slender plates are normally designed such that plate buckling precedes overall buckling,
when the latter occurs the plate flange of the stiffener will not be fully effective over the width, b.
Instead, it is necessary to take some reduced effective width, be . The effective width for
buckling analysis (which is not the same effective breadth used in flexural analysis for beams to
account for shear lag effects) has long been a vexed question. Hughes argues that for buckling
analysis, as long as the value of (a)cr corresponding to be = b is greater than the plate buckling
stress (o), then the reduced effectiveness remains merely hypothetical. It should be noted that
Lloyds Register employs be = b in the treatment of buckling of columns and beams. If,
however, a reduced value of be is adopted, this reduced value should then be used in the
calculation of Ix , x, and r , and hence in the calculation of the slenderness parameter.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
31

__________________________________________________________________________________________
At this juncture it is appropriate to study the elastic buckling strength of columns.
7.3
Buckling Strength of Columns
The ultimate load (Pult) is the maximum load that a column can carry, and depends on initial
eccentricity of the column, eccentricity of the load, transverse loads, end conditions and residual
stresses. The Euler buckling load (Pcr) on the other hand is an idealised quantity which does not
take into account these factors (with the exception of end restraint, which is accounted for
through the use of an effective length, Le ).
The Euler buckling load for a column is given by:
Pcr
2 EI
L2e
(9.48)
The Euler buckling load is the load for which an ideal column will first have an equilibrium
deflected shape. Due to the previously mentioned factors, the ultimate load of a practical column
will be less than the Euler buckling load. In fact, buckling the sudden transition to a deflected
shape only occurs in the case of ideal columns (columns with no residual stress or eccentricity).
Moreover, even in ideal columns, the buckling load will be less than the Euler load if the
compressive stress in the column exceeds the proportional limit stress, because the diminished
slope of the stress-strain curve represents an effective weakening of the column. It has been
shown that in the region of the proportional limit ( the elastic-plastic range) buckling loads can
be predicted from the original Euler expression if the normal modulus E is replaced by the
tangent modulus, Et which is the slope of the stress-strain curve corresponding to the level of
compressive stress in the column.
stress
Et
strain
Figure 9.13 Tangent modulus.

For practical columns it is more convenient to deal in terms of stress rather than load because this
allows the effects of yielding and residual stress to be included. The Euler buckling (or critical
stress) is:
__________________________________________________________________________________________
32

__________________________________________________________________________________________
cr =
where:
2E
Le

r
Pcr
A
(9.49)
Le = effective length of the column (dependent upon end constraints)
= cross-sectional area of the column section
For ideal columns the ultimate strength would correspond to the tangent modulus load:
ult
7.4
2 Et
Le

r
Pult
A
(9.50)
Effective Length (Le)
As with a beam, the elastic response of a column is influenced by the boundary conditions (end
constraints). Table 9.1 summarises the effective lengths (Le) which apply to each of the classic
boundary conditions for a slender columns under compressive axial loading. The effective
lengths are given in terms of the actual length (L) of the column.
END CONDITIONS
EFFECTIVE LENGTH (Le)
pinned pinned
fixed fixed
0.5 L
pinned fixed
0.7 L
fixed free
Table 9.1 Effective lengths of slender columns for classic end constraints.
7.5
Combined Axial Compression & Lateral Loading for Beam Columns (& Longitudinally
Stiffened Plate Panels)
If a beam column sustains moderate axial compression such that the axial stress is well below cr
and additionally sustains a lateral load, then the axial load magnifies the deflections and stresses
caused by the lateral load. An application of this phenomenon is the calculation of the deflection
and buckling stress under typical in-service values of lateral and compression loadings of deck or
bottom plating in vessels.
It may be shown that for a pinned beam column of length (L) subjected to a uniform lateral load
(q) and an axial compression load (P), the maximum bending moment is given by:
__________________________________________________________________________________________
33

__________________________________________________________________________________________
M max
where:
qL2 21 sec
8
2
L
2
P
EI
(9.51)
P
Pcr
a cr
(radians)
(9.52)
q = load per unit length

The first factor, qL2 /8, is the central bending moment without the axial load, and the second
factor is the magnification factor for the bending moment for this case.
For a clamped beam column subjected to a uniform lateral load (q) and an axial compression
load (P) the maximum bending moment is given by:
M max
.1
qL2 3tan
12 2 tan
(9.53)
Application to Buckling of Longitudinally Stiffened Panels
An approach to the calculation of the overall buckling stress (a)cr of a longitudinally stiffened
panel is to regard each stiffener and its associated width of attached plating as a column, i.e., the
stiffened panel can be modelled as a row of such parallel columns, which, as far as buckling is
concerned, act independently. The elastic buckling stress (a)cr for the equivalent column model
may then be calculated using the Euler column formula.
In the analysis of a longitudinally-stiffened panel of bottom plating on a vessel which is
subjected to a maximum hull girder hogging stress and a hydrostatic pressure, the hydrostatic
pressure is obviously the applied uniform lateral load, the effects of which are magnified by the
axial compressive stress (the hogging stress which acts uniaxially on the equivalent column
model of the stiffened panel). The flexural (bending) stress in the column model due to the
hydrostatic load is that which results from the bending moment as calculated using equation 6.20.
It is possible therefore to check that the section modulus of the selected plating-stiffener
combination is sufficient to withstand the combined axial and lateral loadings.
In bottom plating where the lateral load is a hydrostatic load acting not only on the stiffened
panel under scrutiny but also on adjacent panels, then the boundary conditions for the equivalent
column model should be considered as fixed (clamped) end constraints. If, however, we were
examining the elastic response of a stiffened panel of the strength-deck plating with a uniform
deck loading sustained by that panel alone, then the conservative approach would be to consider
the end constraints of the equivalent column model as pinned. In this case equation 9.51 would
be employed in the analysis.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
34

__________________________________________________________________________________________
.3
Illustrative Example
(Bottom plating Hogging condition)
A longitudinally-stiffened panel of a vessels bottom plating is 9.0 mm thick and stiffened with
140 7 OBP at 400 mm spacing. The stiffeners span double-bottom floors at 1200 mm spacing.
The yield strength of the steel is 235 MPa. The hull girder hogging stress at the keel is 32.83
MPa. If the section modulus for the stiffener-plating combination is 68.64 cm3 , I = 852.17 cm4
and the cross-sectional area = 4828 mm2, determine if the selected combination is adequate to
withstand overall buckling of the panel when sustaining the combined axial and lateral loading, if
the lateral loading is an assumed head of seas of 9.811 m. E for the steel is 207 GPa. [A design
factor of 1.75 was adopted for both yield and buckling failure.]
Solution
The axial load (P) acting on the equivalent column model (consisting of 1 stiffener with
attached plating of width equal to the stiffener spacing) is thus:
P
where:
therefore
= c A
c = compressive axial stress

A
= cross-sectional area of stiffener-plating combination
= 32.83 106 0.00483

= 158.5 kN
The design factor of 1.75 is used in determining an allowable Pcr for the equivalent column.
2 EI
L2
e
=
DF
Allowable Pcr
2 EI
1.75L2e
2 207 109 8.521 106

1.750.6
= 27.63 MN
(where Le is taken as 0.5L for a clamped-clamped column, i.e., 0.6 m)
Calculating :
P
Pcr
158.5 103
2 27.63 106
= 0.119 radians
(therefore:
Tan
= 0.1196)
__________________________________________________________________________________________
35

__________________________________________________________________________________________
The uniform lateral load due to the hydrostatic pressure given by:
where:
= ghs
= head of sea water
= stiffener spacing
= 1025 9.81 9.811 0.4
= 39 460 N/m
M max
qL2 3tan
12 2 tan
39460 1.2 2 30.1196 0.119

0.119 2 0.1196
12
= 5 033.5 Nm
The total stresses in the equivalent column should not exceed the yield strength of the steel. If a
design factor against yield failure of 1.75 is used, then we can say:
Y
DF
where:
therefore:
therefore:
= 1 2
1 = axial compressive stress in the equivalent column

2 = maximum permitted flexural stress in the equivalent column due
to the lateral load
235
= 32.83 2
1.75
2 = 101.46 MPa
The minimum section modulus for the equivalent column model required to resist the bending
stress due to the hydrostatic (lateral) load is given by:
Z req =
M max
5033.5
101.46 106
= 49.61 106 m3
= 49.6 cm3
The structural combination (stiffener plus plate) selected has a section modulus (Z) of 68.64 cm3.
Therefore the stiffened panel is adequate for the combined axial compressive and lateral loading
and hence will not experience overall buckling.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
36

__________________________________________________________________________________________
References
Hughes, O.F.
Design of Laterally Loaded Plating Uniform Pressure Loads
J. Ship Res., 25 (2) June 1981
Clarkson, J.
Uniform Pressure Tests of Plates with Edges Free to Slide Inwards
Trans. RINA, 104, 1962, pp 67 76.
Antoniou, A.C.
On the Maximum Deflection of Plating in Newly Built Ships
J. Ship Res., 27 (4) March 1980
__________________________________________________________________________________________
37

Pna Module 9 Local Structural Analysis

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Pna Module 9 Local Structural Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Local Structural Analysis

LOCAL STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

A metallic vessels typical structure is characterised by steel or aluminium plating which is

Small Deflection Plate Theory;

Large Deflection Plate Theory;

ElastoPlastic Plate Theory.

Basic Characteristics of Plating

Local Structural Analysis

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

Y = yield strength of the plating material

Plates may be divided into 2 broad categories:

Local Structural Analysis

2.4 Plate Panel Boundary Conditions

Clamped & free to slide:

no edge rotation but free to move in the plane;

Application of Plate Theories

Small Deflection Plate Theory (SDPT)

Long Plate & Cylindrical Bending

Local Structural Analysis

From the second equation it can be seen that

Local Structural Analysis

and for the clamped case:

Flexural Rigidity of a Plate (D)

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

= radius of curvature in x direction (across the plate)

This expression is simplified by using:

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

Maximum Stress in a Plate

In a beam the maximum bending stress is given by:

Local Structural Analysis

This is usually expressed in the form:

For clamped edges:

SDPT Limits of Application

This theory is only applicable if:

The deflections of the plate are small; i.e.:

Local Structural Analysis

SDPT Illustrative Example

transverse (web) frame

Figure 9.4 A panel of orthogonally-stiffened structure.

Simply-supported edge conditions:

Local Structural Analysis

From Hughes Design Curves Figure 9.5:

5 35193 0.5 12(1 0.32 )

(< 0.75 t , therefore SDPT is valid for this analysis)

From Hughes Design Curves Figure 9.6:

ii) Clamped edge conditions:

From Hughes Design Curves Figure 9.5:

5 35193 0.5 12(1 0.32 )

(<< 0.75 t , therefore SDPT is valid for this analysis)

From Hughes Design Curves Figure 9.6:

(< Y , therefore SDPT is valid for this analysis)

Local Structural Analysis

Elasto-Plastic Plate Theory (Plates Loaded Beyond the Elastic Limit)

Factors Governing Design

Local Structural Analysis

Application of Elasto-Plastic Theory to Laterally Loaded Plates

The surface stress at the edges is given by:

= the uniform pressure load

The stress in the orthogonal direction is:

Local Structural Analysis

By defining a non-dimensional load parameter:

Local Structural Analysis

Combining the foregoing relations gives:

or in non-dimensional parameters is: