Finite Element Modelling of Thick Plates On Two-Parameter Elastic Foundation

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR NUMERICAL AND ANALYTICAL METHODS IN GEOMECHANICS
Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1409}1427 (DOI: 10.1002/nag.187)
Finite element modelling of thick plates on two-parameter elastic

foundation
Ryszard Buczkowski* and Witold Torbacki

¹echnical ;niversity of Szczecin, Piastow 41, 71-065 Szczecin, Poland
SUMMARY
This paper is intended to give some information about how to build a model necessary for bending analysis
of rectangular and circular plates resting on a two-parameter elastic foundation, subjected to combined
loading and permitting various types of boundary conditions. The formulation of the problem takes into
account the shear deformation of the plate and the surrounding interaction e!ect outside the plate. The
numerical model based on an 18-node zero-thickness isoparametric interface element interacting with
a thick Reissner}Mindlin plate element with three degrees of freedom at each of the nine nodes, which
enforce C continuity requirements for the displacements and rotations of the midsurface, is proposed.
Sti!ness matrices of a special interface element are superimposed on the global sti!ness matrix to represent
the sti!ening elastic foundation under and beyond the plate. Some numerical examples are given to illustrate
the advantages of the method presented. Copyright 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
KEY WORDS: Mindlin plate-bending element; two-parameter foundation; zero-thickness element
1. INTRODUCTION
Analysis of plates on an elastic foundation is of great interest for design of many engineering
problems. In the analysis of plates resting on the elastic foundation using the Winkler model,
a single parameter k is used to describe the foundation behaviour. In that method, it is assumed

that de#ection at each point is proportional to the pressure applied at the point and completely
independent of the pressures or de#ections occurring at the neighbouring points along the
foundation. A model of such a medium can be represented by an in"nite row of closely spaced
elastic springs, each of them being deformed only by the pressure acting on it, without any shear
deformations between them. One of the major drawbacks of this model is that a plate undergoes
rigid body displacements without any bending moments and shear forces in it when subjected to
uniform loads, see Reference [1]. Moreover, the assumption that the foundation reactions are
proportional to the plate de#ections is not feasible considering the more realistic cases encoun-
tered in engineering practice, especially in considering tensionless non-linear foundation and the
*Correspondence to: Ryszard Buczkowski, Technical University of Szczecin, Piastow 41, 71-065, Szczecin, Poland
RE-mail: rb@zmod.tuniv.szczecin.pl
Received 10 January 2000

Copyright 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Revised 29 May 2001
1410 RYSZARD BUCZKOWSKI AND WITOLD TORBACKI
surrounding interaction e!ect outside the plate. On the other hand, the use of the Winkler model
involves di$culties in determining the value of k . According to Vallabhan and Daloglu [1], the

value of k may depend on the depth of the soil, geometry of the structure, the distribution of the

load and sti!ness of the plate and foundation.
HeteH nyi [2], Reissner [3], Filonenko}Borodich [4] and Pasternak [5] have attempted to make
the classical Winkler model more realistic by postulating a two-parameter model. Their model
takes into account the e!ect of shear interaction among adjacent points in the foundation. In this
model, the shear parameter has to be determined experimentally. Vlasov and Leont'ev [6] have
introduced another arbitrary parameter, , dependent on soil material and thickness of the soil
layer and suggested an approximate value of between 1 and 2. However, they did not report the
method of determining this parameter. In the work of Vallabhan and Daloglu [1], it has been
shown how the soil parameter, , can be estimated using an iterative computational procedure for
plates. Based on an idea of Vlasov and Leont'ev [6], Kolar and Nemec [7] have developed
a 3D-FEM model allowing for the contribution from the soil medium located outside the area of
the plate. In their model, the e!ect of the reaction of the foundation outside the plate is involved
by the use of the elastic springs distributed along the plate. Recently, helik and Saygun [8] have
presented an entirely new "nite element technique where the material properties of the soil are
taken into account to incorporate the surrounding e!ect. In their work, both the plate and the
surrounding medium outside the plate are divided into plate and soil "nite elements, respectively.
The elastic plates of rectangular shape resting on a tensionless Winkler foundation has been
analysed by Celep [9]. In his paper, the Galerkin orthogonalization method has been employed
to reduce the problem to a system of algebraic equations. The problem of tensionless elastic
foundation under #exible rectangular Mindlin plates has also been studied by Mishra and
Chakrabarti [10]. The tensionless character of the foundation was achieved by employing a set of
uncorrelated elastic springs attached to each node of the plate and by making these springs active
in compression stage only. A unilateral plate contact with the elasto-plastic one-parameter
Winkler foundation model was presented by Lewandowski and SD witka [11]. The problem
including unilateral conditions was approached by the "nite element method combined with an
iterative procedure to determine contact and plastic zones. In the paper of Eratll and AkoK z [12],
a new solution for Reissner plates on Winkler foundation based on the Ga( teaux derivative theory
was formulated. OG zielikoK rs et al. [13] also used the Ga( teaux di!erential method combined with
the classical Hellinger}Reissner and Hu}Washizu variational formulations to obtain a solution
for interaction of orthotropic Kirchho! plate and orthotropic Pasternak foundation. The ap-
plication of mixed Galerkin-perturbation technique to non-linear bending analysis of rectangular
Reissner}Mindlin plate with free edges, resting on Pasternak elastic foundation, has been recently
attempted by Shen [14]. In the work of Feng and Owen [15], a coupled "nite element/boundary
element procedure to analyse a plate-foundation problem was described in which the boundary
element equations of the foundation were not explicitly assembled with the "nite element
equations, but an iterative procedure was proposed to obtain the "nal coupled solution instead.
In addition, some important issues related to the scheme, such as convergence conditions and free
selected parameters, were discussed there.
This study concentrates on building a two-parameter model for bending analysis of the Mindlin
plate resting on an elastic foundation. In Section 2, we begin with a description of the two-
parameter foundation model and the "nite element procedure in order to determine the sti!ness
matrices of the "nite interface element. In Section 3, some numerical examples are presented to
illustrate the validity of the method proposed. In the "nal section, some conclusions are drawn.
Copyright 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1409}1427
FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING OF THICK PLATES 1411
Figure 1. 18-node quadratic interface element of zero thickness.
2. FINITE ELEMENT PROCEDURE
In this section, we present expressions for the element sti!ness matrix and the soil reactions
based on quadratic Lagrange 9-node Mindlin plate (nodal dof: w*transverse displacement in the
direction z and , *the normal rotations about the x- and y-axis, respectively) and 18-node
V W
zero-thickness foundation elements (see Figure 1).
2.1. Why lagrangian plate element?

A crucial question for the plate-bending problem is the question of thick or thin formulations. The
performance of thick plate elements strongly depends on the ratio of thickness t to span b. It is
evident [16,17] for small t/b ratios that the results for the serendipity (quadratic) fully integrated
thick elements dramatically depart from the exact Kirchho! plate solution. The serendipity
element diverges rapidly for relatively small values, beginning with b/t"10. When this ratio
becomes small, the shear locking phenomena may occur. The locking can be eliminated by using
the reduced or selected numerical integration. However, the eight nodes of serendipity element in
which reduced 2;2 integration was employed behave poorly in the thin plate limit, i.e. as the
plate thickness tP0. A remarkable improvement in results is obtained for linear quadrilateral
elements with clamped edges. Even without the reduction of integration order, lagrangian
elements perform signi"cantly better in the quadratic interpolation. In cubic elements, however,
we notice after Zienkiewicz and Taylor [16] that almost no change occurs when numerical
integration is reduced and, again, lagrangian-type elements perform very much better. The
numerical deterioration begins for lagrangian elements at the ratios not before b/t"10.
According to Hughes [17], the Lagrange nine-node elements exhibit a stable convergence
characteristic for large b/t ratios. (An alternative possibility is the use of the heterosis element. In
such an element displacements are described by the shape function of the serendipity family while
rotations are interpolated by the shape functions of the Lagrange type, see Reference [18].)
In conclusion, the thick plate elements should be used carefully and some of them can fail on
certain occasions, either locking or exhibiting a singular behaviour in the case of using linear
quadrilaterals in which reduced integration on all the terms was chosen. It seems that lagrangian
quadratic elements can be an optimal choice for modelling thick plate interacting with non-
homogeneous soil foundation.
The present formulation is based on the theory of the plates which enables the transverse shear
deformations. The theory utilizes the assumption that straight lines originally normal to the
undeformed middle plate surface remain on a straight line during the deformation, but because of
shear deformation this line does not remain normal to the deformed middle surface. In this
theory, the displacements w and both rotations and at the plate midsurface are assumed to
V W
be independent variables. Moreover, the concept of isoparametric C "nite plate element can be
directly constructed. According to the small bending theory, the displacement components of
a point of coordinates x, y and z are
u"!z (x, y), v"!z (x, y), w"w (x, y) (1)
V W
where w is the transverse displacement and (x, y) and (x, y) are the rotations of the normal to
V W
the undeformed middle surface. (It can be noted that in the Kirchho! plate theory shear
deformations are excluded, i.e. "w and "w .)
V V W W
Considering the thick plate, the expression for the total energy function is given by
2C dx dy#2 2 C dx dy
1 k
; " (2)
. 2 b s
where the "rst term concerns the bending energy and the second one includes the energy due to
the shear e!ect. The constant k is used to take into consideration the non-uniformity of the
shearing stresses. In the paper the value of k"5/6 is taken which is exact for a rectangular,
homogeneous section of the plate and corresponds to a parabolic shear stress distribution. The
details of the thin Kirchho! and thick Mindlin plates can be found in classical books devoted to
the "nite element method, where each of them includes excellent part of plate and shell elements
[16,17,19}21].
2.2. Foundation formulation

The one-parameter Winkler foundation model is widely used in engineering practice. This
foundation is modelled by discrete vertical springs which deform independently. These models do
not take into account the transverse shear deformation provided by the foundation. In our model,
a two-parameter model for a plate resting on elastic foundation including a shear e!ect of the
foundation will be investigated. In this model, the expression relating the pressure and the
corresponding de#ection of the foundation is [5]

w w
p"k w!k # (3)
x y
where p, w and k are the surface pressure, the transverse de#ection and the shear modulus of the

foundation (second foundation parameter), respectively; k is the modulus of subgrade reaction of

the soil ("rst or Winkler foundation parameter).
The strain energy expressions for the Winkler foundation and the energy associated with the
second foundation parameter k are

1 1
; " [w(x, y)]2 k [w(x, y)] dx dy# 2 k dx dy (4)
$ 2 2 $ $

The second term in the above equation can be regarded as the strain energy in shear associated
with the parameter k , where the shear strain vector can be written as
$

w
x
" (5)
$ w
y
For the foundation elements, the soil tractions and relative soil displacements w (x, y)
are evaluated for nodes situated between the top and bottom planes of the interface element
(see Figure 1; for details refer to Reference [22]). We express these relative transverse dis-
placements as
w (x, y)"w (x, y) !w (x, y) "Nw (6)
2-. -2
where w is a vector of the nodal transverse displacements of the interface element de"ned as
w"[w w 2w w w 2w ]2 (7)

and the matrix N is given by
N"[N N N 2N !N !N !N 2!N ] (8)

where N is a shape function for node i. The matrix N includes non-di!erentiated shape functions
G
of the thick nine-node plate Mindlin element given as [21]
N " (!1) (!1), N " (#1) (!1),

N " (#1) (#1), N " (!1) (#1),

N " (1!) (!1), N " (#1) (1!),

N " (1!) (1#), N " (!1) (1!),

N "(1!) (1!) (9)

Substituting Equation (7) into the strain energy expression (Equation (4)), we obtain the total
sti!ness matrix of the foundation
NH NG dx dy#k xH xG# yH yG dx dy

N N N N
K "k (10)
GH
The Cartesian shape function derivatives used may be obtained using the chain rule of di!erenti-
ation
N N N
G" G # G (11)
x x x
and
N N N
G" G # G (12)
y y y
in which the terms /x, /x, /y and /y may be evaluated from the inverse of the
Jacobian matrix given
y y
!
x x 1
[J]\" " (13)
det J x x
!
y y
where the determinant of the transformation Jacobian matrix is expressed as
x y x y
det J" ! (14)

It can be readily shown that the components of the Jacobian matrix J for the "nite elements of
square or rectagular shape are constants equal to

a
0
2
J" (15)
b
0
2
where a and b are the lengths of the interface foundation element along the x- and y-axis,
respectively.
Following the isoparametric concept, the sti!ness submatrices linking nodes i and j of the
interface element related to the "rst k and the second foundation parameter k , (K ) and (K )
GH GH
have the form
> >
(K ) "k
GH \ \ NH NG det J d d (16)
and

> > k N y N y N y N y
(K ) "
GH
\ \
H ! H
det J
G ! G

d d

> > k N x N x N x N x
#

\ \
! H # H
det J
! G # G

d d (17)
Using Equation (3), the reactions of foundation related to the "rst parameter k and the second

one k , that is the transverse force = and the shear forces T"(¹ , ¹ ), respectively, can be
V W
expressed as
="k
w dx dy (18)
and

w w
¹ "k dx dy, ¹ "k dx dy (19)
V x W y
Substituting Equations (7) and (13) into Equations (18) and (19) we get the following formulae for
nodal reaction forces at the node i:
> >
(=) "k
G \ \ NG wG det J d d (20)
and
\ \ G ! G wG d d

> > N y N y
(¹ ) "k (21)
VG

> > N x N x
(¹ ) "k G ! G w d d (22)
WG G
\ \
in which the expressions x/, x/, y/ and y/ are components of the Jacobian
matrix.
The numerical integration of Equations (16) and (17) for the quadrilateral element of rectangu-
lar shape with 3;3 sampling points leads to

(K ) " N2 ( , ) k N ( , ) det J ( , ) = = (23)
GH G N O H N O N O N O
N O
and
b k
(K ) " (N ) ( , ) = =
GH 4 det J ( , ) GK N O N O
N O N O
a k
# (N ) ( , ) = = (24)
4 det J ( , ) GE N O N O
N O N O
with = and = being the integration weights.
N O
The sti!ness matrices of the interface element related to the "rst, k , and the second parameter,

k (Equations (23) and (24)) were integrated and their explicit forms are given in Appendices

A and B.
2.3. Foundation parameters k0 and k1

The two parameters k and k in terms of the elastic constants and the dimensions of the plate and

the soil foundation have been evaluated by Vallabhan et al. [23]. These parameters applied to
a foundation with a "nite depth of soil, h, can be de"ned by
F

E
k " (z) dz (25)
(1!)

and
F

E
k " (z) dz (26)
2 (1# )

with the mode function (z) which can be obtained using variational principles and applying the
proper boundary conditions, such as (0)"1 and (h)"0, so due to Vallabhan et al. [23] this
function is given as
sinh (h!z/h)
(z)" (27)
sinh
The generalized modulus of elasticity, E , and the Poisson ratio, , are de"ned by

E
E " $ , " $ (28)
1! 1!
$ $
where E and are the modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio of the foundation, respectively,
$ $
and h is the foundation depth. Using the mode function (z) as given in Equation (27), the
foundation parameters k (Equation (25)) and k (Equation (26)) become

E (1! ) 2 sinh 2#4
k " $ $ (29)
8h (1# ) (1!2 ) sinh
$ $
and
E h 2 sinh 2!4
k " $ (30)
16 (1# ) sinh
$
However, these parameters also depend on a coe$cient, , which represents the rate of decrease of
the displacement and the normal stresses in the vertical direction in the soil foundation, as shown
in Figure 2. According to Vallabhan et al. [23], the parameter can be expressed as
> >
"h
(1!2 )
Q \ \

(w(x, y)/x)#(w(x, y)/y) dx dy
(31)
> >
\ \
2(1! )
Q w (x, y) dx dy
Figure 2. Mode function (z) vs the value of .
Figure 3. Circular plate and its discretizations of one quadrant.
For plates on the elastic foundation, the dimensionless parameter, , can be evaluated using an
iterative procedure after the determination of the vertical displacement w (x, y) as shown in
Vallabhan, et al. [23]. (It is noted that a similar mechanism to estimate the value of for beams
lying on elastic foundation has been given for the "rst time by Vallabhan and Das [24,25].
3. NUMERICAL APPLICATIONS
A computer program for the "nite element analysis of bending thick Mindlin plates resting on
a two-parameter elastic non-homogeneous layered foundation is used to verify the accuracy of
the proposed model.
3.1. Clamped circular plate (Figure 3)

The clamped circular plate on the elastic foundation, with a thickness/radius (t/r) ratio equal to
0.08, under uniform load is considered "rst. Due to symmetry conditions only a quarter of the
plate is taken. The plate properties are: Young's modulus E"2;10 kN/cm, plate thickness
t"0.8 cm, Poisson's ratio "0.15, radius r"10 cm and the Winkler modulus k "0, 10, 100,

and 1000 kN/cm, respectively. The plate is loaded vertically by a uniformly distributed load
q"100 kN/cm. The dimensionless plate factor, a , can be expressed as
K
64D
a "w (32)
K qr
with the bending modulus
Et
D" (33)
12(1!)
where E is the modulus of elasticity, t is the plate thickness, denotes Poisson's ratio and w is the
vertical displacement at the centre of the plate.
Figure 4 shows the results of dimensionless plate factor a corresponding to (32) for various
K
values of the "rst parameter. It may be seen that only small changes are observed as a result of
di!erent "nite element meshes.
Figure 4. De#ections of clamped circular plate under a uniform load on the Winkler foundation.
Considering the "rst parameter only and assuming that the "nite element nodes overlap the
positions of integrating points (this particular process leads to the well-known Lobatto quadra-
ture formulae) we arrive at diagonal (or lumped) sti!ness matrices. In such cases, lumping for
Lagrangian elements results in positive diagonal sti!ness matrices, i.e. each node in the element
has a positive sti!ness lump associated with it. Thus, the sti!ness matrix of the interface element
can be expressed as
k ab
K< " diag [1 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 16] (34)
36
The response of the foundation can now be determined directly from the reaction forces at the
nodes lying on the bottom face of the interface element (the circles) and from the reactions owing
to prescribed constraints imposed on the edge of a plate (the bullets in Figure 5).
3.2. Simply supported rectangular plate

A simply supported square plate element resting on an elastic foundation with one parameter is
considered next. A dimensionless relative sti!ness, K, is de"ned to incorporate both the plate and
foundation characteristics as
K"b ( k /D (35)

where k denotes the "rst foundation parameter, b is the length of the plate, and D is de"ned by

Equation (33).
For numerical calculations, di!erent values of the relative sti!ness, K, have been examined. The
dimensionless factor a is now de"ned by the expression given "rst by Timoshenko and
K
Woinowsky}Krieger [26]
D
a "w (36)
K qb
Figure 5. Reactions as a response of (one parameter) foundation medium (circles) and reactions from the
plate boundary conditions (bullets) for: (a) k "0; (b) k "10; (c) k "100; (d) k "1000 N/m.

where q is the intensity of uniformly distributed load, w denotes the vertical displacement at the
centre of plate.
Similarly, for plates subjected to point load, P, the dimensionless plate factor a is calculated
K
using the following expression:
D
a "w (37)
K Pb
Table 1 contains the computational results obtained for both the thick and thin plates. As
expected, in most cases the values of a calculated for thick plates are a little higher in comparison
K
with the results of thin plates for which the ratio of b/t is assumed equal to 20. It may be seen that
the dimensionless factor a decreased with increasing the relative sti!ness, K. The shear e!ect in
K
the plate is more dominant with an increase of its thickness, especially in the case of a concen-
trated load than the uniformly distributed one. The e!ect becomes signi"cant when the relative
sti!ness, K, is smaller.
3.3. Free rigid square plate (Figure 6)

To show the shear in#uence on the plate de#ections a free rigid square plate under a uniform load
is considered. Due to the symmetry only a quarter of the square plate is taken into consideration.
Table I. Comparision of the values a for simply supported square plates (b/t"20).*
K
Uniformly distributed load
K Present Thick plate FEM [10] Analytical [26] Thin plate FEM [10]
0 4.1197 4.1300 4.0624 4.0060

1 4.1088 4.1200 4.0517 3.9950
3 3.3855 3.3900 3.3472 3.3040
5 1.5114 1.5100 1.5060 1.4910
10 0.1096 0.1100 0.1115 0.1120
15 0.0191 0.0200 0.0195 0.0220
Point load
K Present Thick plate FEM [10] Analytical [26] Thin plate FEM [10]
0 12.139 12.500 11.600 11.498

1 12.112 12.472 11.574 11.472
3 10.316 10.650 9.826 9.737
5 5.621 5.610 5.223 5.155
10 1.571 1.570 1.247 1.197
15 0.787 1.050 0.555 0.519
*All values of a are scaled by 1000.

K
Figure 6. Arrangement of plate on elastic foundation.
The material constants and the dimensions of the plate are as follows: Young's modulus
E"10 N/m, Poisson's ratio "0.3, a"b"0.8 m, plate thickness t"0.1 m; thus, for the
above material parameters the plate can be treated as rigid. The plate is loaded vertically by
uniformly distributed load q"1 N/m. For the same "rst coe$cient k "1000 N/m, the

Figure 7. The settlement of foundation for the free rigid plate.
following second parameters k are chosen: 1, 10, 100, and 1000 N/m. The results of the settlement

of foundation are presented in Figure 7. As expected, for larger parameter k the settlements of the

plate are smaller as a result of the in#uence of shear resistance of the foundation. In particular, for
very small values of the parameter k the foundation behaviour approaches the Winkler

foundation model for which the second parameter k is assumed to be zero.

3.4. Free rectangular plate on a layered foundation (Figure 8)

A plate of size 9.144;12.192 m and thickness of t"0.1524 m resting on a non-homogeneous
layered soil medium with properties varying linearly in the vertical direction is considered. The
problems of rectangular plate on two-parameter foundation subjected to uniformly distributed
(Figure 9(a)) and concentrated load (Figure 9(b)) have been recently solved by di!erent methods
in References [8 and 23]. Vallabhan et al. [23] developed a "nite element Vlasov model for
rectangular plates resting on an elastic layered soil medium. They performed calculations for
di!erent values of E /E (1, 2, 3, and 10) where the foundation parameters k and k are assumed

to be dependent on material properties and the depth of the soil medium as well as on the
dimensionless parameter given by equation (31). The same case but for E "E was also studied

by helik and Saygun [8]. To enable comparison of our results with those reported by helik and
Saygun [8] and Vallabhan et al. [23], we made calculations for E "68 950 kN/m and as

taken by them. The calculations are performed for four depth of the foundation, h"3.048, 6.096,
9.144, and 15.24 m, the Poisson ratios "0.25 and "0.20 for the soil and plate, respectively.
Q N
To analyse cases in which the moduli of elasticity of the soil can vary linearly in the vertical
direction from E at the top to E at the bottom, Vallabhan and Daloglu [1] modi"ed

expressions for the foundation parameters k and k , given by Equations (29) and (30), to the

following form:
1! E (2 sinh 2#4)#(E !E ) (cosh 2!1#2)

k " $ (38)
8h (1# ) (1!2 ) sinh
$ $
Figure 8. Square rectangular plate (due to symmetry, only one quadrant is discretized).
Figure 9. (a): Uniformly distributed load, and (b) concentrated load.
and
E h E (2 sinh 2!4)#(E !E ) (cosh 2!1!2)

k " $ (39)
16 (1# ) sinh
$
The results of our calculations are compared with those reported by Vallabhan et al. [23] and
helik and Saygun [8] (see Tables 2 and 3). Agreement is good. As seen in Tables 2 and 3, the
parameter k decreases as h increases while the parameter k increases with h. For the case of

uniformly distributed loads, the plate de#ections increase with the depth of the soil. It is
interesting that for a concentrated load, the plate de#ections do not vary signi"cantly for the
Table II. The vertical displacement at the centre of the plate for uniformly distributed load.
h(m) Reference k (kN/m) k (kN/m) w(cm)

3.048 Vallabhan et al. [23] 27192 26826 0.5766 0.0853
helik and Saygun [8] 27206 26904 0.5724 0.0872
Present (3;3 Gauss) 27207 26852 0.5724 0.0871
Present (3;3 Lobatto) 0.0872
6.096 Vallabhan et al. [23] 13757 50282 0.9297 0.1524
helik and Saygun [8] 13757 50410 0.9194 0.1526
Present (3;3 Gauss) 13758 50411 0.9194 0.1530
9.144 Vallabhan et al. [23] 9430 69506 1.2644 0.1890
helik and Saygun [8] 9377 70586 1.2064 0.1893
Present (3;3 Gauss) 9378 50587 1.2064 0.1896
15.240 Vallabhan et al. [23] 6366 94732 1.9419 0.2070
helik and Saygun [8] 5964 104664 1.6193 0.2212
Present (3;3 Gauss) 5964 104664 1.6193 0.2205
Table III. The vertical displacement at the centre of the plate for concentrated load.
h(m) Reference k (kN/m) k (kN/m) w(cm)

3.048 Vallabhan et al. [23] 31610 19130 1.9018 0.0480
helik and Saygun [8] 31898 18912 1.9478 0.0818
Present (3;3 Gauss) 31898 18913 1.9478 0.0894
6.096 Vallabhan et al. [23] 23918 23918 3.4737 0.0975
helik and Saygun [8] 24256 23596 3.5249 0.0845
Present (3;3 Gauss) 24256 23598 3.5249 0.0912
Present (3;Lobatto) 0.0855
9.144 Vallabhan et al. [23] 23376 24386 5.1669 0.0975
helik and Saygun [8] 23737 24034 5.2434 0.0846
Present (3;3 Gauss) 23738 24036 5.2434 0.0912
15.240 Vallabhan et al. [23] 23350 24410 8.6079 0.0975
helik and Saygun [8] 23710 24060 8.7369 0.0846
Present (3;3 Gauss) 23717 24054 8.7369 0.0912
various depths of the soil. We notice that the parameter k is responsible for the membrane e!ect

underneath the plate, which explains slight di!erences in plate deformations for various depths of
the soil at uniformly distributed loads. For the case of concentrated load, the foundation
parameter k and particularly k change with the depth of soil to a lesser degree than in the case of

uniformly distributed load. The results of calculation of the plate de#ection for layered soil are
plotted in Figures 10 and 11. It is seen that for both uniformly distributed and concentrated loads
the de#ections vary substantially with the E /E ratio. The results obtained allow us to conclude

that the interaction of the plate and soil depends not only on the values of the two foundation
parameters which vary with the depth of soil, but also on the distribution of applied load.
Figure 10. De#ections of the plate for uniformly varying moduli for soil (E /E "1, 3, 5, 10):

uniformly distributed load.
Figure 11. De#ections of the plate for uniformly varying moduli for soil (E /E "1, 3, 5, 10):

concentrated load at the centre.
The advantages of the method proposed are also demonstrated in the next numerical test where
the plate of varying thickness, t, is loaded uniformly at constant depth of the soil, h"15.24 m.
The ability of the nine-node Lagrange Mindlin plate element to handle thin plates on elastic
foundation is illustrated in Table 4. For relatively small values of the plate thickness t with respect
to its length b, the overall de#ection varies with b/t while for larger ratios b/t the de#ection of the
plate does not alter. The stable convergence of the results for very thin plates up to b/t"10 is
worth noting. It is seen in Tables 2 and 3 that the results of computation only slightly depend
upon the adopted schemes of the numerical integration.
Table IV. The vertical displacement at the centre of the plate for the uniformly
distributed load; "8.7368, k "23 717 kN/m, k "24 054 kN/m, h"15.240 m,

b"12.192 m.
b/t w(cm)
3;3 Gauss 3;3 Lobatto
2 0.13553 0.13584
4 0.13708 0.13737
10 0.15312 0.15342
20 0.19355 0.19350
80 0.22049 0.22055
100 0.22085 0.22090
500 0.22096 0.22104
10 0.22096 0.22104
10 0.22096 0.22104
4. CONCLUSIONS
The problem of the plate resting on the elastic layered foundation has been solved using the
zero-thickness interface elements. The adopted model can be employed to analyse both thick and
thin plates resting on an inelastic foundation with any type of common boundary conditions and
loading combinations. We recommend the nine-node Mindlin plate element of the Lagrange
family to handle extremely thin plates for very large length}thickness ratios, up to b/t"10. For
the one-parameter foundation model, the diagonal form of sti!ness matrices of the foundation
elements can be obtained by employing the Lobatto integration in which the integration points
coincide with the element nodes. The method proposed takes account of the surrounding e!ect
outside the plate. The response of the foundation can be determined directly from the boundary
reactions of the bottom face of the interface element. The results are in good agreement with both
the theoretical and numerical results reported in the literature. A solution of the problem allowing
for the unilateral contact conditions extended to a multi-layered foundation will be presented in
future.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
A part of the work was carried out during the stay of the "rst author (R.B.) at the Martin-Luther University
Halle-Wittenberg. The "nancial support of the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) is gratefully
acknowledged.
APPENDIX A
The sti!ness matrix related to the "rst foundation parameter k assembled using 3;3 Gauss

scheme

K) !K)
K "
!K) K)

with the submatrix K) expressed as

16 8 !4 !2 1 !2 !4 8 4
64 8 4 !2 !16 !2 4 32
16 8 !4 !2 1 !2 4
64 8 4 !2 !16 32
k ab
K) " 16 8 !4 !2 4
900
64 8 4 32
symm. 16 8 4
64 32
256
APPENDIX B
The sti!ness matrix related to the second foundation parameter k assembled using 3;3 Gauss

scheme

K) !K)
K "
!K) K)

with the submatrix K) expressed as

k
K) "
90
28b 28a !32b 14a 4b 7a 2b 8a !b a 8b 2a !7b 4a 14b 32a !16b 16a

# # ! # ! # # ! !
a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b
64b 112a !32b 14a !16b 16a 8b 2a !16b 16a 8b 2a !16b 16a 32b 128a
# # ! # # # ! !
a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b
28b 28a 14b !32a !7b 4a 8b 2a !b a 2b 8a !16b 16a

# # # # ! # !
a b a b a b a b a b a b a b
112b 64a 14b !32a !16b 16a 2b 8a 16b 16a !128b 32a
# # ! # ! #
a b a b a b a b a b a b
28b 28a !32b 14a 4b 7a 2b 8a !16b 16a

; # # ! # !
a b a b a b a b a b
64b 112a !32b 14a !16b 16a 32b 128a

# # ! !
a b a b a b a b
28b 28a 14b 32a !16b 16a

symm. # ! !
a b a b a b
112b 64a !128b 32a

# #
a b a b
256b 256a
#
a b
REFERENCES
1. Vallabhan CVG, Daloglu AT. Consistent FEM}Vlasov model for plates on layered soil. Journal of Structural
Engineering ASCE 1999; 125(1):108}113.
2. HeteH nyi M. A general solution for the bending of beams on an elastic foundation of arbitrary continuity. Journal of
Applied Physics, 1950; 21(1):55}58.
3. Reissner E. A note on de#ections of plates on a viscoelastic foundation. Journal of Applied Mechanics ASME 1958;
25(1):144}145.
4. Filonenko}Borodich MM. Some approximate theories of elastic foundation. ;chenyie Zapiski Moskovskogo
Gosudarstvennogo ;niversitet, Mekhanika 1940; 46:3}18. (in Russian).
5. Pasternak PL. New method of calculation for #exible substructures on two-parameter elastic foundation. Gosudar-
stvennoe Izdatelstoo. ¸iteratury po Stroitelstvu i Architekture, Moskau, 1954; 1}56. (in Russian).
6. Vlasov VZ, Leont'ev NN. Beams, plates and shells on elastic foundations. GIFML, Moskau, 1960. (in Russian).
7. Kolar V, Nemec I. Modeling of Soil}Structure Interaction. Elsevier: Amsterdam, 1989.
8. helik M, Saygun A. A method for the analysis of plates on a two-parameter foundation. International Journal of Solids
and Structures 1999; 36:2891}2915.
9. Celep Z. Rectangular plates resting on tensionless elastic foundation. Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE, 1988;
114(12):2083}2092.
10. Mishra RC, Chakrabarti SK. Rectangular plates resting on tensionless elastic foundation: some new results. Journal of
Engineering Mechanics ASCE 1966; 122(4):385}387.
11. Lewandowski R, SD witka R. Unilateral plate contact with the elastic}plastic Winkler-type foundation. Computers
& Structures 1983; 39(6):641}651.
12. Eratll N, AkoK z AY. The mixed "nite element formulation for the thick plates on elastic foundations. Computers
& Structures 1997; 65(4):515}529.
13. OG zielikoK rs Y, Omurtag MH, Demir H. Analysis of orthotropic plate}foundation interaction by mixed "nite element
formulation using Ga( teaux di!erential. Computers & Structures 1997; 62(1):93}106.
14. Shen HS. Nonlinear bending of Reissner}Mindlin plates with free edges under transverse and in-plane loads and
resting on elastic foundations. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 1999; 41:845}864.
15. Feng YT, Owen DRJ. Iterative solution of coupled FE/BE discretizations for plate}foundation interaction problems.
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 1996; 39:1889}1901.
16. Zienkiewicz OC, Taylor RL. The Finite Element Method. Solid and Fluid Mechanics and Non-¸inerarity. (4th edn.),
vol. 2. McGraw-Hill: London, 1991.
17. Hughes TJR. ¹he Finite Element Method. ¸inear Static and Dynamic Finite Element Analysis. Prentice-Hall:
Englewood Cli!s, NJ, 1987.
18. Hughes TJR, Cohen M. The &heterosis' "nite element for plate bending. Computers & Structures 1978; 9:445}450.
19. Bathe K-J. ¹he Finite Element Procedures. Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cli!s, NJ, 1996.
20. MacNeal RH. Finite Elements: ¹heir Design and Performance. Marcel-Dekker: New York, 1994.
21. Hinton E, Owen DRJ. Finite Elements in Plasticity: ¹heory and Practice. Pineridge Press: Swansea, 1980.
22. Buczkowski R. 21-node hexahedral isoparametric element for analysis of contact problems. Communications in
Numerical Methods in Engineering 1998; 14(7):681}692.
23. Vallabhan CVG, Straughan WT, Das YC. Re"ned model for analysis of plates on elastic foundations. Journal of
Engineering Mechanics ASCE 1991; 117(12):2830}2844.
24. Vallabhan CVG, Das YC. Parametric study of beams on elastic foundations. Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE
1988; 114(12):2072}2082.
25. Vallabhan CVG, Das YC. Modi"ed Vlasov model for beams on elastic foundations. Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering ASCE 1991; 117(6):956}966.
26. Timoshenko SP, Woinowsky-Krieger W. ¹heory of Plates and Shells. McGraw-Hill: New York, 1970.

Finite Element Modelling of Thick Plates On Two-Parameter Elastic Foundation

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Finite Element Modelling of Thick Plates On Two-Parameter Elastic Foundation

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR NUMERICAL AND ANALYTICAL METHODS IN GEOMECHANICS

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1409}1427 (DOI: 10.1002/nag.187)

Finite element modelling of thick plates on two-parameter elastic

Ryszard Buczkowski* and Witold Torbacki

KEY WORDS: Mindlin plate-bending element; two-parameter foundation; zero-thickness element

Received 10 January 2000

Figure 1. 18-node quadratic interface element of zero thickness.

2. FINITE ELEMENT PROCEDURE

2.1. Why lagrangian plate element?

2.2. Foundation formulation

  NH NG dx dy#k   xH xG# yH yG dx dy

\ \ G ! G  wG d d

2.3. Foundation parameters k0 and k1

Figure 2. Mode function  (z) vs the value of .

Figure 3. Circular plate and its discretizations of one quadrant.

3.1. Clamped circular plate (Figure 3)

3.2. Simply supported rectangular plate

3.3. Free rigid square plate (Figure 6)

0 4.1197 4.1300 4.0624 4.0060

0 12.139 12.500 11.600 11.498

*All values of a are scaled by 1000.

Figure 6. Arrangement of plate on elastic foundation.

Figure 7. The settlement of foundation for the free rigid plate.

3.4. Free rectangular plate on a layered foundation (Figure 8)

1! E (2 sinh 2#4)#(E !E ) (cosh 2!1#2)

Figure 9. (a): Uniformly distributed load, and (b) concentrated load.

E h E (2 sinh 2!4)#(E !E ) (cosh 2!1!2)

h(m) Reference k (kN/m) k (kN/m) w(cm)

h(m) Reference k (kN/m) k (kN/m) w(cm)

3;3 Gauss 3;3 Lobatto

with the submatrix K) expressed as

28b 28a !32b 14a 4b 7a 2b 8a !b a 8b 2a !7b 4a 14b 32a !16b 16a

28b 28a 14b !32a !7b 4a 8b 2a !b a 2b 8a !16b 16a

28b 28a !32b 14a 4b 7a 2b 8a !16b 16a

64b 112a !32b 14a !16b 16a 32b 128a

28b 28a 14b 32a !16b 16a

112b 64a !128b 32a

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen

NH NG dx dy#k xH xG# yH yG dx dy

\ \ G ! G wG d d

Figure 2. Mode function (z) vs the value of .

1! E (2 sinh 2#4)#(E !E ) (cosh 2!1#2)

E h E (2 sinh 2!4)#(E !E ) (cosh 2!1!2)

h(m) Reference k (kN/m) k (kN/m) w(cm)

h(m) Reference k (kN/m) k (kN/m) w(cm)