Int. J. mech, Sci., Vol. 19, pp. 335-343. Pergamon Press 1977.

Printed in Great Britain

MODIFIED STIFFNESS FORMULATION OF

U N B A L A N C E D ANISOTROPIC SANDWICH PLATES

G . R. MONFORTON
Civil Engineering Department, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada

and

I. M. IBRAHIM
School of Engineering, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada

(Received 24 September 1976, in revised form 22 March 1977)

Summary--An approximate formulation is presented for the analysis of sandwich plates

consisting of an orthotropic core and two unequal thickness anisotropic face plates. The
method uncouples the membrane and bending actions, thereby significantly reducing the effort
involved in accurately predicting displacements and stresses. Defining modified stiffnesses, the
formulation is valid for relatively thick anisotropic laminated face plates and can be combined
with a variety of analysis techniques. Using a series solution, results are generated herein for
simply supported sandwich plates with unbalanced cross-ply and angle-ply faces.

NOTATION
a,b plate dimensions in x and y directions, respectively
e~,et distance between reference surface and middle planes of core and faces, respectively
f subscript or superscript denoting lower (f = 1) and upper ([ = 2) faces
h distance between middle planes of faces (h = e, + e2)
q transverse load
t~,tt thickness of core and face, respectively
U, I) x and y displacement components of reference surface
ul, vt x and y displacement components of face f
W total transverse deflection
wb~, Why partial transverse deflection in x and y directions, respectively, due to bending
ws~, w,y partial transverse deflection in x and y directions, respectively, due to shear
X, y , Z rectangular coordinate system
A surface area of plate
EH, E22 principal moduli of elasticity of lamina
G. Q shear moduli of orthotropic core
G~2 shear modulus of lamina
M q ~ Mytt) MtI) moment resultants of face plate f
force resultants of face plate f
Q,,Oy transverse shear force of core
s,,s, shear rigidities of core
U total strain energy
u,,u~ strain energy of core and faces, respectively
0 angle between principal axes of lamina and reference axes
MI2, V21 Poisson ratios of lamina

INTRODUCTION
Sandwich plates with unbalanced laminated faces are characterized by coupling
between bending and membrane actions due to transverse shear deformations in the
core, unequal face thicknesses and the anisotropic nature of the face plates. For
certain types of sandwich plates, such as those with unbalanced angle-ply faces,
rigorous solutions have not been realized due to the existence of anisotropic coupling
stiffnesses. Neglecting the coupling action can result in appreciable errors in the
deflection and stress predictions; the magnitude of these errors depends upon the
elastic and geometric properties of the faces and core, the lay-up and orientation of
the plies in the face plates as well as the reference surfaces chosen in deriving the
formulation.
335
336 G. R. MONFORTON and I. M. IBRAHIM

A thorough study of the influence and significance of bending-membrane coupling

on the structural response of simply-supported sandwich plates with unbalanced
cross-ply faces was presented in Ref. (1). The objective of this paper is to present a
modified stiffness formulation for unsymmetrical sandwich plates with unbalanced
anisotropic laminated faces and to demonstrate the potential of the formulation for
the analysis of plates with anisotropic coupling stiffnesses which are not amenable to
rigorous solutions. In the work considered herein, the use of approximate modified
stiffnesses allows the uncoupling of the membrane and bending actions in the
sandwich plate. The method is based on the partial deflection approach presented in
Ref. (2) and the "reduced" stiffness formulation for thin nonsandwich plates presen-
ted in Ref. (3). The formulation presented employs the principle of minimum potential
energy and reduces the analysis to that of an equivalent sandwich system for which
solutions can be generated using a variety of analysis techniques. In order to
demonstrate the potential of the approach, solutions are generated herein using a
double Fourier series procedure. The modified stiffness approach, although an ap-
proximate formulation, yields solutions which are in complete agreement with those
of Ref. (1) for sandwich plates with unbalanced cross-ply faces; the method should
therefore be accurate for other sandwich plates such as those with angle-ply faces.

GENERAL FORMULATION
The unsymmetrical sandwich plate shown in Fig. I consists of two unbalanced laminated face plates and
an orthotropic core. It is assumed that the core is incompressible in the transverse direction and carries no
longitudinal stresses but that transverse shear strains are significant. The faces are assumed to behave as
thin plates with negligible transverse shear deformations. The reference surface of the sandwich system is
located at a distance

t (t I - t2)
e, (I)
2 (t~ + t2)

from the middle plane of the core.

The displacement components of the middle surfaces of the face plates ( u t, v t ) are related to the system
reference surface displacements (u, v) by

OWbx OWsx
Ur = U -- Z - - - - Z r (2a)
3x Ox

face
tz
f=

Deformed

Undefor
secti

Face

f=i
Owbx :aws~
ax

FIG. I. Sandwich plate and displacements.

 Modified stiffness formulation of unbalanced anisotropic sandwich plates 337

aWby aWsy
v/= v - z - zt (2b)
Oy Oy

where the subscript f = 1, 2 refers to the lower and upper faces, respectively, and

1 tt tl
Zl=Z+el; e,=~(tc +tl)+ec; --2<~zl<~ (3a)

1 t2 t2
z2 = z - e2; e2 = ~ (to + t2) - ec ; - 2- ~< z2 ~<2" (3b)

In equations (2), wbx and why are the partial transverse deflections due to bending in the x and y
directions, respectively; similarly, wsx and wsr represent the partial deflections due to transverse shear
deformations in the core. The partial deflections are related to the total transverse deflection (w) by the
following relations:

w = wb~ + Wsx = wb~ + wsr (4)

Force-de[ormation relations
The force and moment resultants of the face plates can be expressed in terms of the partial deflections
and reference surface displacements of the sandwich system by the following force-deformation equations:

where

{Nt} r = {N~~), N~~t), N~ )} (6a)

{M/} r = { M J ), Mr ~), M~ ~} (6b)

{e}T = {aulax, avlay, (aulay + avlax)} (6c)

{Kb}r = {-- 02wb~lOx2, - 02woJOy 2, - O2(Wo~+ Wby)lc~xay} (6d)

{r~}r = { - 02wJ Oxz, - 02w~ylOy2, - 02( ws~ + w~y)laxOy}. (6e)

Each of the matrices [At], [Bt], [Ct], [DI] and [Ht] in equation (5) are 3 × 3 symmetric stiffness matrices
for the anisotropic face plates (see Appendix A).
The transverse shear forces in the orthotropic core ( Q , Q ) are given by

0lf w.0 /
where

S, = hGx; S, = hG, (8)

are the shear rigidities of the core and h = e~ + e 2 is the distance between the middle planes of the faces.

Strain energy
The total strain energy of the sandwich plate under consideration is the sum of the strain energies of the
two anisotropic faces and core:
2

U: U~ + 2 Ur (9)
/=1

The strain energy of the core, U~, is given by

u~=~ f~f [s~(ow,~/dx:+S,(Ow,/oy)Z]dA. (10)

The strain energy contribution of the two face plates can be expressed in terms of {~}, {Kb} and {K~}as
follows:

Ut = ~1 /a f [{e}r[Al{e} + 2{'}r[C]{Kb} + 2{'}r[B]{"} + {Kb}r[R]{'~b}

+ 2{K~}r[Hl{t%} + {K,}r [O]{K~}] d a (1 i)

338 O . R . MONFORTON and 1. M. IBRAHIM

where

([AI, [B], [CI, [D], [HI) = 2 ([Ar], [Brl, [GI, IDol, [H~]) (12a)
f=l

and

IR] = [HI + e2[C,] - et[Cd. ll2b)

Note that the strain energy expression for the faces (equation 11) exhibits coupling between the membrane
strain {e} and the partial curvatures {Kb} and {Ks} through the matrices [B] and [C]. Five governing
differential equations result from the preceding formulation and because of the coupling terms in the strain
energy expression, the equations all exhibit coupling between the membrane displacements (u, v) and the
partial transverse deflections. The presence of coupling, while significant for certain face plate configura-
tions, has made solutions inherently abstruse.

MODIFIED STIFFNESS FORMULATION

In order to remove the difficulties associated with the coupling between the membrane strains and
partial curvatures exhibited in the strain energy expression, the following approximate procedure is
introduced.
Using the upper portion of equation (5), the sum of the force resultants in the two face plates,
{N} = {N1} + {Nz}, may be written as

(N} = [A](~} + [C ](Kb}+ [BI{K,} (13)

from which

{E} = [A] ~{{N}- [C]{Kb}-- [BI{K~}}. (14)

Substitution of equation (14) into equation (11) gives the following expression for the strain energy in the
anisotropic laminated faces:

2r=, UI=~lJAj [(N}r[AI'(N}+{Kb}rIR*l{KbI+2l~cs}l[H*lb%}+{K~}r[D*l{x~}ldA (15)

In the preceding equation, the modified 3 x 3 symmetric stiffness matrices are given by

[D*I = [DI - [BI[A]-'[BI (16a)

[H*I = [HI - [BI[A] '[CI = [D*I + [/~*1 (16b)
[R*] = [H*] + [t~*] (16c)

where

[/~*] = [/~] - [fi.]IA]-I[B] (17a)

IC*] = [ C I - [fi,][A] I[C] (17b)

and

([/(], [/~], [C]) = e2([A2l, IB2], [C21)- el(lAd, [Bd, [Cd). (17c)

Note that in the revised strain energy expression for the face plates, equation (15), the sum of the force
resultants in the two faces, {N} = {N~}+ {N2} are uncoupled from the terms involving the partial curvatures
{Kb} and {K,}. Also, the partial curvatures appear in the strain energy with "modified" stiffness matrices
given by equation (16) and (17).
The approximation involved in the modified stiffness approach involves the assumption that the term
{N}r[A]-t{N} in equation (15) is negligible. This assumption is justified by the fact that the components of
{N} are small for sandwich plates that are subject to transverse loads. In addition, the membrane stiffness
of the two faces [A1] and [A2] are relatively large positive quantities so that the determinant of
[A] = [A~] + [A 2] is large and results in small values for the elements of [A] -~.
It should be noted that in the modified stiffness approach, the strain energy of the sandwich plate is a
function of the partial deflections only. As such, a variety of analysis procedures may be applied; for
example, a finite element technique can be established by assuming displacement patterns for the partial
deflections and generating element stiffness matrices directly from the modified strain energy expression.
Herein, solutions are generated from the governing differential equations in order to assess the accuracy of
the formulation.
Considering the strain energy of the core and the modified strain energy of the faces as well as the
potential of an externally applied transverse load, q, the governing differential equations generated from
application of the potential energy principle are given by the following:

01-0~x 0 R , h -I
--1--+ • --Q|=O (Iga)
Ox Lax 3y t( xd
 Modified stiffness formulation of unbalanced anisotropic sandwich plates 339

ayL ~x +-~-y-~Q]=0 (18b)

" 0 (18c)
t< L Ox oy J ox 2 oxOy 8y 2 + q =

where

f/s~}] t fedm.'i-e,lN,}] t [[~?*I'L"~*~lf~_~_G. (19)

Note that the modified stiffness formulation results in three governing equations and involves only the
transverse partial deflections. Substitution of equation (17) and (19) into equations (18) allows the
determination of the partial transverse deflections and curvatures.
Once the partial deflections and curvatures are determined, the force and moment resultants for the
individual face plates ([ = 1,2) can be directly determined from the following force-deformation equations:

(20)
{M~}J I.[H~] I [D~]J I.{Ks}J

where

[B'~] = [B t] - [As][AI-'[B] (21a)

[C'~] = [Ct] - [As][A]-'[C] (21b)
[H~] = [H t] - [Bt][a] '[C] (21c)
[D'~] = [Dt] - [BtI[A]-~[B], (21d)

The transverse shear stress resultants in the core can be obtained directly from equation (7).

NUMERICAL EVALUATION
In order to demonstrate the potential and assess the accuracy of the modified stiffness formulation, a
Fourier series approach was applied to predict the structural response of rectangular (50 in x 25 in) simply
supported sandwich plates subjected to a uniform load q = 1.0 lb/in 2. The plates were considered con-
structed of a glass fabric orthotropic core (t~ = 1.0 in; G~ = 17,000 lb/inZ; G r = 35,000 lb/in 2) combined with
face plates each consisting of two graphite-epoxy plies (E~t = 30x 1061b/in:; EIt]E2z=40; Gt2/E22 = 1.0;
u~2 = 0.25). The thickness of the lower face in all cases was taken as tt = 0.125 in.

Cross-ply faces
Cross-ply laminates consist of an even number of equal thickness plies alternately oriented at 0 = 0 ° and
0 = 9 0 °. For such cross-ply faces

A ~ ~ = A ~ ~ = B ~ ' = B~d = B ~ ~ = B~J = 0

C~t6)=C~6)=D~/d=I~6'=H~'=H~)=O ( f = 1,2). (23)

Solutions were generated for the ply lay-ups L1, L2 and L3, shown in Fig. 2 and for t~/t2 = 1 and tJt2 = 5.

Angle-ply [aces
Angle-ply laminates consist of an even number of equal thickness plies alternately oriented at ---O°.
For angle-ply face plates

A ~ ) = A ~ ~ = B ~ ' = B ~ } = B ~ ~=Bg'=D~6'=D~6 ~ ( [ = 1,2). (24)

The sandwich plates considered herein consisted of equal thickness faces with the lay-up shown in Fig. 2
and for values of O = 15°, 30 ° and 45 °.

Analysis
In the case of both the cross-ply and angle-ply faces under consideration
/~'2 =
/~'6 -*--* B 6 6
= B26- = Cl*6 = C'~6 = 0

H*6 = H*6 = D*s = D* 6 = 0. (25)

Note that the modified anisotropic stiffnesses B*6, B*6, C1'6, C~6 , Hi6,
* H26,
* O16,
* D~' 6 vanish (see Appendix
A). The boundary conditions generated from application of the principle of minimum potential energy for a
rectangular (a × b) simply supported plate are taken as follows:

wbx=%y=%x=Mx=lq~=O for x=O,a

%x=wby=,'sx=My=/V~=O for y = 0 , b. (26)
340 G. R. MONFORTON and 1. M. 1BRAHIM

l y, v

!= o

O. O*

L X

LI L2 L3

0 90 0
90 0 90

Cross- ply faces

z
-8
*8

;- x

-0
+0

Angle- ply faces

FIG. 2. Sandwich plate cross-sections.

The boundary conditions and differential equations (equations 18) are satisfied by the following series
expansions:

~ mTrx nTry
(q, wb~, Why, W s , ) = ( q , . . , W~. . . . W b. . . . W..... ) sin sin-- (27)
m=l n-I a b

where qm,, wbxm,, wbym,, wsx,,, are undetermined coetficients. Substitution of the preceding series into the
governing differential equations for the sandwich plates considered yield the following set of simultaneous
equations for each combination of m and n:

(28)
/g~, g2= g=3jlwb~m, =
L g31 g32 g33 Ws~mn n

where the expressions for gli (i,i = 1,2, 3) are given in Appendix B. Solutions of the preceding equations
lead directly to the results for deflections through the series expansions and to the stress resultants through
equation (7) and (20).

Results
The results for the sandwich plates with the cross-ply faces are given in Table i. The results are in
excellent agreement with those obtained using the formulation presented in Ref. (1); in addition to those
presented herein, the proposed modified stiffness formulation reproduced all results presented in Ref. (1) to
three significant figures and in the majority of cases to at least four significant figures.
In Table 2 results are presented for the plates with angle-ply faces. Although rigorous solutions are
unavailable for such plates, it is expected that the results are of the same degree of accuracy as those for
cross-ply faces.
 Modified stiffness formulation of unbalanced anisotropic sandwich plates 341

TABLE I. DEFLECTION AND STRESS RESULTS FOR CROSS-PLY SANDWICH PLATE ( a = 50 in, a/b = 2, q - l lb/in z,
tt = l/8in, tc = I in)

Thickness Lay-Up Deflection Stress Stress Shear Shear

Ratio Design w (inches) N(f}x (ib/in) N (f)y (Ib/in} Qx (ib/in) Qy (ib/in)
(tl/t 2} (Fig. 2) x-a/21 y=b/2 x=a/2; y~b/2 x=a/2; y=b/2 x=-O; y=b/2 x=a/2; y=0

L1 0.6180 ~ 10 -2 + 16.25 + 72.09 5.184 11.28

L2 0.5605 ~ 10 -2 ~ 13.38 ~ 68.87 5.003 10.75

L3 0.6824 ~ 10 -2 + 19.61 + 75.33 5.387 11.82

L1 1.593 ~ 10 -2 + 13.75 + 75.73 5.527 11.79

L2 1.561 g 10 -2 + 13.14 + 75.01 5.500 11.67

L3 1.765 x 10 -2 + 17.11 + 79.34 5.681 12.39

TABLE 2. DEFLECTION AND STRESS RESULTS FOR ANGLE-PLY SANDWICH PLATE ( a = 50 in, a/b = 2, q = 1 lb/in 2,
t, = t2 = 1/8 in, tc = I in)

Angle Deflection Stress Stress Shear Shear

8 w (inches) N(f)x (Ib/in) N (f)y (Ib/in) Qx (Ib/in) ~ (ib/in)
(degrees} x=a/21 y~a/2 x~a/2! y-a/2 x-a/2; y=b/2 x=0, y=b/2 x=a/2, y=0

15 ° 1.852 x 10 -2 ~ 98.26 ~ 22.24 14.47 6.877

30" 0.9974 x 10 -2 ~ 59.54 ~ 30.09 11.95 7.759

45" 0.6276 x 10 -2 ~ 38.49 ~ 45.95 8.934 8.965

CONCLUSIONS
A modified stiffness formulation for predicting the structural r e s p o n s e of unsym-
metrical sandwich plates with anisotropic laminated faces has been presented. The
proposed approximate formulation defines modified stiffnesses which allow the
uncoupling of the bending and membrane actions in the plate; as a result the labour
involved in accurately predicting deflections and stresses in anisotropic sandwich
plates is reduced significantly.
Using a series solution, the formulation was applied to sandwich plates with
cross-ply faces and the results proved to be in c o m p l e t e agreement with previously
published results. This agreement is attributed to the definition of the modified
stiffnesses and the considerations involved in uncoupling the expression for the strain
energy of the face plates. The method was also applied to plates with anisotropic
angle-ply faces for which previous solutions are unavailable. The modified stiffness
formulation appears valid for the entire spectrum of anisotropic sandwich plates and
can be used in conjunction with a variety of analysis techniques such as the finite element
method.

Acknowledgement--This research was sponsored by the National Research Council of Canada under grant
No. A4126.
342 G.R. MONFORTON and 1. M. IBRAHIM

REFERENCES
1. G. R. MONFORTON and 1. M. IBRAHIM, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 17, 227-238 (1975).
2. F. J. PLANTEMA, S a n d w i c h Construction, Wiley, New York (1966).
3. J. E. ASHTON, J. Comp. Mat. 3, 189-191 (1969).
4. J. E. ASHTON, J. C. HALPlN and P. H. PETIT, Primer on Composite Materials: Analysis. T e c h n o m i c
Publishing, New York (1%9).

APPENDIX A

Face plate stiffnesses

Generally each ply of a laminated face is orthotropic and the s t r e s s - s t r a i n equations with respect to the
principal axes (1,2) (see Fig. 2) are given by

[-o,,
Q22
0
0
Q~
oil:: Yi~
(AI)

where Oil = Ell/(1 - - P 1 2 P 2 1 ) • Q22 = E2J(I v,2"21), QI2 = vylOll, Q ~ = G ~ 2 and v?lEii = Vl2E22. W h e n the
principal axes of the lamina are rotated an angle 0 with respect to the reference axes (x, y) of the face plate,
the s t r e s s - s t r a i n equations for the lamina m a y be transformed and expressed as follows in terms of the
stresses and strains in the (x y) coordinates (Ref. 4):

I,, o,2
The force and m o m e n t resultants of a face plate (f = 1,2) are defined by

',;: o-~ - M y ql- q,~ (A3)

1Nv(f) ~ o-,, dy_f : 2f dzf.
t N~'J 'o~ T . tM<S ,j '"" r .

With the preceding definitions and equations (2), (3) and (6), the force-deformation equations for a face
plate fabricated of n plies may be expressed by equation (5) where the elements of the stiffness matrices
[At}, [Bs}, [Csl, [Drl and I/-/A are given, respectively, by the following (f = 1,2: L j = 1,2, 6):

"47' = 2 - , kQ,i
, ( h k - h ~ i) (A4al

C',j" = B'i] >- e,a(] : C',~>= BI~' + e,.al~' (A4c)

1

k=l

Hlsl, = D~]I-
i elB #0,., Hit(2i = ~i 2i 4- e,B~i~,. (A4e)

k=n

t~/2

T
k=i

k=3

t,12 k=2

k:[

FIG. 3. Laminated face plate cross-section.

 Modified stiffness formulation of unbalanced anisotropic sandwich plates 343

In equations (A4), ~//~) represents the (~ij in equation (A2) for the kth lamina and h k is the height of the
upper surface of the kth ply above the middle surface of the face plate (Fig. 3). Note that the membrane,
coupling and bending stiffnesses (A~% B~ ~, D~,~) of a face may also be determined by experimental or
semi-empirical methods.

APPENDTX B
Coe~icients go

[3 = mTrla; ~ = n~r/b

g.--([3 C , , + r l C66)
g,2- rt(C12+C*6)
h
gls = --S. - B2B i*1
tc
h
g~, = ~ S, - ~ ( d , * ~ + ~*~) - n~/~*~

h
g~= --- S,-~'~- rl ~( C- 2*2 - B 2 2- )*
t~

h
g2~ = - S~ - ~_~21:1"2
t~

h
4 ~
g31 = --'r/2Sy + ~ 4 H ' ~ t + 7/ D22 + rl 2/32 ( D I~2 + 2 D 6~6 + H ~12 + 2H66)
t~
h
g32 = ----'02St + '04(H22
~ ~ 2 2
- - D22) + r/ B (H ,2 + 2H'6 -- D~'2- 2D~66)
tc
h
g33=--(f12Sx+Tq2Sy)+~4D*l+.o4D~2+
t~ 2n 2/32 (Di2+
* 2D'6).