Strain energy method applied to the solution of elastic-stability problems

It is often convenient to use a strain energy method for calculating critical loads and stresses, and
considerable use will be made of this method later, when dealing with plate problems.

Figure 103 shows a column subjected to the critical load Pcr. When buckling takes place, the two
ends of the column come together an amount x, because of the fact that the original length l of
the column is now the length of the curve formed by the bowed form. The work done by the load
is equal to P x x and this must be exactly equal to the strain energy of the bent column when the
load is equal to the critical load. Assuming in the meantime, that this strain energy is simply that
due to bending then it is equal to

EI  d 2 y 
l

0 2  dx2  dx
So that

EI  d 2 y 
l
Pcr   x     dx
0
2  dx 2 

or

EI  d 2 y 
l

0 2  dx2  dx
Pcr 
x

Now x can be found in terms of the deflection. If ds is the length of the curve between x and
x + dx, then ds2 = dx2 + dy2
 2
 dy 
ds   dx 2
 dy 2
  1    dx
 dx 

For small deflections, and at the instant of buckling dy/dx is small compared with unity, so that
1
  dy 2  2 1  dy 
2


   
1  1   
  dx   2  dx 

Neglecting higher terms in the binomial expansion.

 1  dy  2 
l l
1  dy 
2

 length of curve from 0 to l   1    dx  l     dx

 2  dx  
0  0
2  dx 

2
1  dy 
l
The difference in length between the arc and the chord is therefore    dx and this is
0
2  dx 
equal to x.

From this is will be seen that

EI  d 2 y   d2y 
l l

0 2  dx 2  dx
0  dx 2  dx
EI
Pcr  l 2
 l 2
1  dy   dy 
0 2  dx  dx 0  dx  dx
In order to evaluate the critical load, the form of the deflection of the column must be assumed.
If a hinged-ended uniform member is being considered, then the sine form for the deflection
curve is the reasonable one to assume. Suppose therefore that y = A sin(x/l), then

4 x
l

 EI l 4
A2 sin 2
l
dx
 2 EI
Pcr  0

2 x
l
l2
l
2 2
2
A cos dx
0
l

This is the exact result obtained from Euler’s formula. It is exact here because the correct form of
the deflection curve was assumed. In general one would not know the correct form of the curve,
and the assumed form would only approximate to the true form.
Buckling of a Wide Plate
If a wide plate is considered as in Fig. 104, without support along the edges parallel to the
direction of application of the load, then the buckling load is,

obtained in the same way as for a simple column, except that the product El in- the simple
formula is replaced by D and the buckling load per unit width is

 2D
Pcr 
l2

or the critical stress is

 2D
 cr 
l 2t

The buckling stress so determined is greater than that for the simple column of the same
moment of inertia because of the factor 1 1  2 which appears in D. Remembering that
D  Et 3 12 1  2  it will be seen that the factor governing the buckling stress is l/t or the span
thickness ratio, and. In considering the buckling of the plating in the structure of a ship, the
ratio of the spacing of the transverse stiffeners to the thickness of the plating will govern the
buckling stress.
Buckling of a simply supported Rectangular Plate:
The plate of the structure of a ship is divided into relatively small rectangular panel by means of beams or
longitudinal and girders or transverses. These panels have some constraint at their edges, which is
provided by the torsional rigidity of the stiffening members. Consider a section , the deck of a
transversely framed ship, when buckling of the deck occurs the plating takes up the configuration, the
beam twisting. The twisting of the beams provided an edge constraining moment which is a function of
the torsional properties of the rolled sections. Such sections are known to be very weak in torsion, so that
the constraint moment at the edges is likely to be small and consequently the degree of fixity of the edges
of the panel will be small.

A simply supported panel, length l and breadth b, the load being applied in the direction of the length. The
form of the deflection curve of the panel when buckling occurs can be assumed to be
m x n y
w  A sin sin
l b

cr

cr
This means that the panel will buckle into m half waves in the length and n half wave sin the breadth.

The strain energy due to the bending of the plate is

2
D  2w 2w 
l b
V     2  2  dxdy
0 0
2  x y 

2
l b
 4 DA2  m 2 n2  m x 2 n y  m x n y 
   2  2 
sin 2 sin dxdy  w  A sin sin
0 0
2 l b  l b l b 

2
 4 DblA2  m 2 n2 
  2  
8 l b2 

If the critical stress is cr then the load on a strip length l and width dy is (cr x t xdy) and the work done
by this load in buckling is

1  w 
l 2

 cr tdy    dx
0
2  x 
So the total work done is obtained by integrating for all such strips across the breadth of the plate.
Hence, Work done
1  w 
b l 2

  cr t     dxdy
0 0
2  x 
1 A2 m 2 2 m x 2 n y
b l
  cr t   2
cos 2 sin dxdy
0 0
2 l l b

 2 m2 A2b cr t

8l

Now equating the total work done with the strain energy, we get
2
 2 m 2 A2b cr t  4 DblA2  m 2 n2 
  2  
8l 8 l b2 

2
 2 m2 A2b cr t  m2 n2 
 2  2 
8l l b 

2
 2 D  b n2 l 
 cr  m  
b 2t  l m b 
The least value of buckling stress is required, and this it will be seen is associated with n = 1, which
means that the panel buckles into one half wave in the breadth, so that

 2D  b
2
1 l
 cr  2  m  
b t  l m b

It remains now to find the value of m which will make the above equation a minimum. This can be done
by differentiating with respect to m and equating to zero.

d cr  2 D  b 1 l  b 1 l 
 2 2 m    0
dm b t  l m b  l m2 b 

For maximum and minimum. Multiplying out the brackets

b2 1 1 1 l 2
m    0
l 2 m m m3 b 2

l4 l
m4  4
,m
b b

The wave length is l/m so that this is equal to b. A long panel of plating therefore buckles into a number
of square panels. This will only be true if l is an exact multiple of b and, if this is not so, the panel will
buckle into the nearest whole number of half waves which will make the critical stress a minimum.

Another approach to the problem is to assign various values to m in equation below

  2D  b
2
1 l
 cr  2 
m  
b t  l m b

2
 b 1 l
k  m  
 l m b

and calculates the value of the quantity multiplying(2D/b2t). This may be conventionally called k. The
values of k have been worked and shown in table below.

m Vales of K for l/b

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 4.0 6.25 11.1 18.1 27.4
2 6.25 4.0 4.65 6.25 8.41 11.1
3 11.1 4.65 4.0 4.31 5.16 6.25 7.6 9.2
4 18.1 6.025 4.31 4.0 4.2 4.65 5.4 6.25
These results for k have been plotted in figure below as curves for constant values of m against the ratio
l/b.

20

15 m=1

10 m=2
m=3
k

m=4
5

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
l/b
Consider the curves for m = 1, these gives the least value of k at l/b = 1 but at some position between l/b =
1 and l/b = 2 the curves intersects that for m = 2. At this position the plate would buckle indifferently into
one or two half waves. Similarly between l/b = 2 and 3, the curve for m = 2 intersect that for m =3 in
which case the plate buckles indifferently with two of three half waves and so on. All theses curves are
tangent to a line k = 4 and it will seen that when the length of the plate is an exact multiple of the breadth,
the value for k for minimum buckle stress is 4. Where the length of the plate is not exact multiple of
breadth , the values of k is a little greater than 4 abut as l/b increases the amount by which k exceeds in
this case diminishes.
As a general working rule, it can be assumed that k is 4 and the critical stress becomes
4 2 D
 cr 
b 2t

Case Study:

(a) When the length (l) of the panel is less than the breadth (b), and here it will be noted that m must be
equal to unity

 2D  b
2
l
 cr  2   
b t  l b

After re arrange
2
 2D 
l2 
 cr  2 1  2 
lt  b 

Now it is possible to examine the relative merits of stiffening a large sheet of plating in the longitudinal
direction or transvers direction.
Largest sheet of plating, length, L and breadth B is stiffened by
(i) Longngitudinal, spaced b apart. The buckling of the plating between the stiffeners is then

4 2 D
 cr 
b 2t
(ii) The stiffeners is turned round, so that there are now transverse stiffeners spaced b apart, it will
seen that the buckling strength of the plating between stiffeners is obtained from

2
 2D  l2 
 cr  2 1  2 
lt  b 
By putting l = b and b = B

2
 2D  b2 
 cr  2 1  2 
bt  B 
In ship structures the ratio b/B would be about 1/6, so that the term in the brackets is not greatly different
from unity, and from this it can be concluded that the buckling strength of the plating with longitudinal
stiffening is nearly four times as great when transvers stiffening is employed. This shows the great
advantages of longitudinal over transvers stiffening in ship structure and the trend in the modern ships is
to use the former type of stiffening in nearly all classes of ships. Apart from the intrinsic advantages of
using this type of stiffening to increase the buckling strength of the plating, it also has the advantages
of preventing the development of permanent set in the plating in welded ships where there is a greater
tendency to have initial unfairness. Classification Societies almost compel the structural designer to
use longitudinal stiffening in welded ships by imposing quite severe penalties on the scantlings of
bottom plating, for example, when transverse framing is employed.

Problem: Breadth of Panel = 15 Ft.

Stiffener Spacing = 30 inch
P late thickness = 0.6 inch
E =13500 Tons/inch^2
 Et 3 13500  0.63
D   267 tons  in2 / in  E  13500 tons / in2 ,  0.3
12(1  ) 12(1  0.3 )
2 2

(a) Longitudinal Stiffeners:

4 2 D 4   2  267
 cr long    19.5 tons / in2
2
bt 30  0.6
2

(b) Transverse Stiffeners:

2 2
 2D 
b 2   2  267  2.52 
 cr transvers  2 1  2   2 1    5.15
b t  B  30  0.6  152 

(c) Ratio of buckling Stress in two cases:

 cr long 19.5
  3.78  4.0
 cr transvers 5.15
Influence of longitudinal stiffeners on the buckling strength of
plating:

In order to develop the full buckling strength of a panel of plating between stiffeners, it is important that
the stiffeners themselves should remain rigid so as to provided support to the small panels. If a large sheet
of plating stiffened by longitudinal members is considered, there is the possibility that the sheet as whole
may buckle, and this possibility will now be examined. Consider a sheet of plating simply supported
round it edges, length l and breadth b, as shown in Fig below. If this sheet buckles, then the equation for
the whole surface can be written

x y
w  A sin sin
l b
To some extent this assumption for the deflection of the stiffened panel is an approximation, since if a
section through the plating is considered the deflection curve would probably be more accurately
represented by the Figure below 111, because the influence of the stiffeners is to restraint the plating at
the attachment to the stiffeners.

The strain energy of the bending of the stiffened panel consists of that of the plating, plus in this case the
additional strain energy of the stiffeners. The rigidity of the stiffeners are represented by the moment of
inertia I may be difficult to define, but it will be assumed that it is possible to put a value to I which
should really include the influence of a certain breadth of plating to which the stiffeners is attached.
Assuming that I represents the increased moment of inertia provided by one stiffener, then
2
EI   2 w 
l

2 0  x 2 
Stain energy of stiffener    dx

A2 4 x 2 y
l
EI

2 
0
l 4
sin 2
l
sin
b
dx

 4 EIA2 y
 3
sin 2
4l b

Fig. Section through buckled stiffened plating

The value of y in this expression should be that appropriate to the particular stiffener. If there are n evenly
spaced stiffeners, then the value of y for the pth stiffeners is yp= pb/(n+1), so that

 4 EIA2 p
Strain energy of stiffeners  sin 2
4l 3
n 1

To obtain the total strain energy this requires summing for all the stiffeners. Thus

p n
 4 EIA2 p
Strain energy of all stiffeners   sin 2
p 1 4l 3
n 1

p n
p n 1
It can be shown that  sin
p 1
2

n 1

2
  4 EIA2 (n  1)
Strain energy of stiffeners 
8l 3

The strain energy of bending of plate is

 4 DblA2  1
2
1
Strain energy of bending of plate   2 2
8 l b 

The workdone by the critical load on the plate will be given by the following equation with m = 1,

 2 m2 A2b cr t

8l

but to this must be added the work done by the load on the stiffeners. If a is the additional area provided
by one stiffeners, then

 cr a l  w 
2

work done on one stiffener 

2   x 
0
dx

 cr a l A2 2 x y

2 
0
l 2
cos 2
l
sin 2
b
dx

 2 cr aA2 y
 sin 2
4l b
p n
 2 cr aA2 p
For all stiffeners work done   sin 2
p 1 4l n 1

 2 cr aA2 (n  1)

8l

Now equating total work done to the total strain energy

 2 cr btA2 (n  1)  2 cr aA2 (n  1)  4 DblA2  1 1   4 EIA2 (n  1)

2

   2   
8l 8l 8 l b2  8l 3

From this it will be seen that

 2 1 1  EI (n  1) 
2

  Dbl  2  2  
2

 l b  l2 
 cr 
bt  a(n  1)
For economical design from a buckling point of view, the critical stress determined from above equation
should be equal to the critical stress for a panel of platting between two stiffeners. The breadth of small
panel will be b/(n+1) and the corresponding buckling stress will be

4 2 D(n  1) 2
 cr 
b 2t

And if the buckling stress for the two modes of failure is to be same,

  1 1  EI (n  1) 
2

 2  Dbl 2     
4 2 D(n  1) 2 l b2 
2
 l2 

b 2t bt  a (n  1)

Having decided upon the required buckling stress for a particular problem for a plate of given principal
dimensions and thickness, it is possible to determine the value of n. An equation involving two unknowns
a and I would be obtained from the above equation. Unless a relation existed between I and a it would not
be possible to solve for I completely. The best away to deal with this would be to assume a as some
percentage of cross sectional area bt of the plate.

Problem:

Consider a sheet of plating 15 ft long, 20ft breadth and 0.6 inch thick, with stiffener spacing 30 inch
apart.

L = 15 ft

B = 20 ft

T = 0.6 inch

Stiffener spacing l = 30 inch

Et 3 13500  0.63
D   267 tons  in2 / in  E  13500 tons / in2 ,  0.3
12(1  ) 12(1  0.3 )
2 2

If the stiffeners are spaced longitudinally, then the buckling stress of the plating between stiffeners is

4 2 D 4   2  267
 cr  2   19.5 tons / in2
bt 30  0.6
2
Let the area of longitudinal is 20% , the area of plating

a(n  1)  0.2  240  0.6  28.8 in2

240
n 1  7
30

  1 1  EI (n  1) 
2

 2  Dbl 2   2 
 
l b 
2
 l2 
 cr 
bt  a(n  1)


 2 1 1  13500 I (7  1) 
2

 267  240 180 
2
 2 
 
 240 180 
2 2

 180 

 cr 
bt  a(n  1)  240  0.6  1.2 

47.52  32.86 I
 cr 
172.8

Equating with the buckling strength of the stiffened panel to that for the panel between stiffeners, the
value of I

172.8 19.5  47.52

I  101.1 in 4
32.86

A section which would satisfy the requirement is a 7 in. x 3.5 in. x 0.44 in. toe welded angle bar and
this has area of 4.43 in2. The total area is (4.43 x 7) = 31.01 which is slightly higher than 28.8 in2.
Comparison between buckling strength of plating in
riveted and welded ships

What follows applies particularly to transversely stiffened sheets of plating such as decks. In a
riveted ship there will be overlaps, probably, every five or six feet in th< breadth, and at these
positions, since there is a double thickness of plating, the seams behave as longitudinal stiffening
members.
If b1, is the breadth of a seam, then the moment of inertia of the seam is

I r  1 12  b1  2t   2 3 b1t 3
3

whereas for the single thickness of plating of the same breadth it is

I w  1 12 b1t 3

The seam can therefore be treated as a longitudinal stiffener of moment of inertia equal to

I ls  I r  I w  2 3 b1t 3  1 12 b1t 3  7 12 b1t 3

Suppose in the example worked in the previous section there are two seams in
the breadth of 20 ft and that the breadth of the seams is 3 in. Then in equation (213)

I ls  7 12  b1t 3  7 12  3  0.63  0.378 in 4

With transverse stiffeners spaced 2 ft 6 in. apart the buckling stress for the plane plating between
stiffeners is

2
 2  267  2.52 
 1  2 
 5.03 ton / in 2
30  0.6 
2
20 

Allowing for the presence of the seams,

  1 1  EI (n  1) 
2

 2  Dbl 2   2  
l b 
2
 l2 
 cr 
bt  a(n  1)
  1 1  13500  0.378  3 
2

 2 267  240  302   2 

 
 240 30 
2
 302 
 cr   5.97 ton / in 2
240  0.6  3  3  0.6
The increase in buckling strength due to the seams is therefore about 18.7%. In welded plating
there are no seams, so that the buckling strength is that much lower and the margin of safety
against buckling is reduced.

In discussing this problem of the influence of seams on the buckling stress it should be noted that
another mode of failure is possible, viz. that t he plating may buckle as a small panel between
seams. In the example worked the influence of the seams would be to reduce the panel breadth to
6.66 ft, so that the buckling stress would be
2
 2  267  6.662 
 1  2 
 6.02 ton / in 2
30  0.6 
2
20 
Since this gives a greater buckling stress than for the panel buckling in one half-wave in the
breadth the latter will be the mode of buckling which will take place.