ASPS Conference Proceedings 1: 1531-1537 (2022)

Proceedings of
12th Structural Engineering Convention
Convention-An
An International Event (SEC 2022)

Available at https://asps-journals.com/index.php/acp

Static Analysis of thin Rectangular Plate Resting on Elastic Foundation Using Modified
Vlasov Model
Ashis Kumar Dutta 1, *, Debasish Bandyopadhyay2, Jagat Jyoti Mandal 3
1
Ph.D Scholar, Department of Construction Engineering, Jadavpur University, Salt Lake, Kolkata, 700098, India, ee-mail: dutta.ashis2013@gmail.com
2
Department of Construction Engineering, Jadavpur University, Sa Salt Lake, Kolkata, 700098, India, e-mail:
mail:dban65@yahoo.com
3
Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technical Teachers’ Training and Research, Kolkata, 700106, India, ee-mail: jjm_civil03@yahoo.co.in

Paper ID - 150151

Abstract

A four-nodded rectangular plate bending element based on Kirchhoff theory resting on elastic foundation using modified Vlasov model. model For
evaluate the two soil parameter for Vlasov foundation the modulus of elasticity and Poisson
sson ratio of the soil is assumed constant from top surface
to the top of bottom rigid base. All the deformation stiffness matrix of plate and subsoil are evaluatedd using finite element method. A Matlab
code is developed and convergence study is carried out and then some realistic cases of plate under static load on elastic foundations are solved
to determine the static response. The results, thus obtained, are comp
compared, with the available results obtained by other researchers. It behaves
extremely well for thin plates and convergence rate is high.

Keywords: Modulus of sub-grade reaction, elastic foundation, finite element and modified Vlasov.

1. Introduction on the properties of the soil, the depth of the soil or rigid
Analyses of platess on elastic foundations have wide base and the structure as well as the type and magnitude of
applications in aerospace, civil and mechanical engineering. the loading. The analysis of plates resting res on elastic
Developing more realistic foundation models and simplified foundations is the great interest of researcher and vast area
methods to solve this complex soil-structure
structure interaction of various research studies. Buczkowski and Torbacki [8], [
problem are very important for safe and economical design. developed an 18- node isoparametric interface element of
Majority of the problems cannot be solved by ttheoretical zero-thickness that account for shear deformation of the
approach, led use the numerical techniques like finite plate, details analyzed thick plates resting on two-parameter
two
element method. elastic foundation. Daloglu and Ozgan [9] [ developed an
In analysis of plates resting on the elastic foundation using iterative method to determine the subsoil depth affected
the Winkler model, a single parameter model neglects the from the load on the plate resting on elastic foundation using
shear deformations between closely spaced elastic springs. stress distribution withinn the subsoil depending on the
Widely used Winkler model main discrepancies are the loading and dimension of the plate. Ozgan and Daloglu [10] [
discontinuity in the soil displacement between the soil under investigate in details the effect of transverse shear strains on
the structure and that outside the structure.. To overcome the thin and the thick four-nodded
nodded and eight-nodded Mindlin
discrepancies of Winkler model two-parameter
parameter foundation plate resting on elastic foundation using modified Vlasov
models developed by Hetenyi [1], Filonenko Borodich [2], model. Turhan [14]] studied in details thin plate resting on
and Pasternak [3]] provide for the displacement continuity of elastic foundation using modified Vlasov model using FEM.
the soil medium by adding of a second spring which W.T. Straughan [11]] studied in details thin plate resting on
interacts with the first spring of thee Winkler model. Vlasov elastic foundation
undation using modified
m Vlasov model using
and Leont’ev [4]] developed a new concept on two two-parameter FDM.Mishra
Mishra and Chakrabarti [12][ investigated shear and
model that has the advantage of determining soil parameters contact effects on the behavior of rectangular plates resting
depending on soil material properties, modulus of elasticity on tensionless elastic foundation using finite element
and Poisson’s ratio (Es,νs) and the thickness of the subsoil method. Celik and Saygun [13] [ developed a finite element
(H) by introducing a third parameter, γ, to characterize the formulation for plates on elastic foundation incorporating
vertical deformation profile within the soil continuum [[5]. the shear deformations in the behaviour of the plate, and the
Vallabhan and Das [6]] determined the, γ parameter as a effect of subsoil is considered as a combination of elastic
function of the characteristic of the structure and the bending and shear deformation of the soil.
foundation using an iterative procedure and named this In the present paper, a four-nodded rectangular plate
model as modified Vlasov model .The γ parameters depend bending element based on Kirchhoff theory resting on elastic

*Corresponding author. Tel: +919232753646; EE-mail address: dutta.ashis2013@gmail.com

Proceedings of the 12th Structural Engineering Convention (SEC 2022), NCDMM, MNIT Jaipur, India| 19 19-22
22 December, 2022
© 2022 The authors. Published by Alwaha Scientific Publishing Servic
Services,
es, ASPS. This is an open access article under the CC BY license.
Published online: December 19, 2022
doi:10.38208/acp.v1.685
 Dutta et al. / ASPS Conference Proceedings 1: 1531-1537 (2022)

foundation using modified Vlasov model analysis by finite

element method. Convergence rate, accuracy and
applicability of the present formulation for static analysis of
plate on Vlasov foundation are demonstrated through
number of numerical examples.
2. Methodology
2.1 Development of the theory of Vlasov model
The total potential energy in the soil-structure system may
be
П=П +П +V (1)
Where,
П = the strain energy stored in the plate. Figure 1 Finite plates resting on two parameters Vlasov
П = the strain energy stored in the soil, and foundation
V = potential energy of the external loads.
In this model, the loads act on the plate domain in the lateral Where k and 2t are the soil parameters defined as
direction only and can consist of uniformly distributed loads E dφ
on full plate or patch loads, line loads, concentrated loads, k= dz (7 a)
moments and any combination. (1 − ν ) dz
The strain energies of the plate and soil may be written as E
2t = φ (z) dz (8 a)
П =
1 ∂ w ∂ w
, ,2
∂ w
[D]
∂ w ∂ w
, ,2
∂ w
dxdy
2(1 + ν )
2 Ω ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y E ν
(2) E = and v =
∞ ∞ (1 − ν ) (1 − ν )
П = ∫ ∫ ∞∫ ∞ σ ε + σ ε +σ ε + τ γ + τ γ + sinhγ(1 − )
τ γ ) dxdydz (3) φ(z) =
sinhγ
1 Es, νs = Young’s modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio of
V=− q wdxdy (4)
2 Ω soil.
Where, w = the vertical displacement of the plate i.e. E0, ν0 = Effective modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio
displacement in z - direction, of soil
q = the applied distributed load, E (1 − v )γ sinhγcoshγ + γ
σ, τ = normal and shear stress in the elastic foundation, k= (7 b)
(1 + v )(1 − 2v )H 2sinh γ
ε, γ = normal and shear strain in the elastic foundation, EH sinhγcoshγ − γ
H = depth of the subsoil, & 2𝑡 = (8 b)
2γ(1 + v ) 2sinh γ
Ω = domain of the plate,
For thin layer variation of
[D] = Plate rigidity matrix. z
1 ν 0 φ(z) = 1 −
H
[D] = ν 1 0 (5) E (1 − v )
( ν ) ν
0 0 ∴ k= (7 c)
H(1 + v )(1 − 2v )
E = the modulus of elasticity of the plate, EH
h = thickness of the plate, and 𝑎𝑛𝑑 2𝑡 = (8 c)
6(1 + v )
ν = Poisson's ratio of the plate. γ parameter denotes the vertical deformation within subsoil.
Vlasov suggested that the functions of u, v and w can be Using variational principles and minimizing the total
expressed as u (x,y,z) = 0; v (x,y,z) = 0; w (x,y,z) = w (x,y) potential energy of Equation (6) by taking variations in w
φ (z). Where φ (z) is the function describing the variation of and φ yields [14]
the function w from the top of the soil to its bottom such that
φ (0) = 1 and φ (H) = 0. It is further assumed that the δП = (D∇ w − 2t∇ w + kw − q)δwdxdy
Ω
thickness of the plate is small, so that the displacements of
∂ φ
the surface of the soil are equal to the displacements of the + −m + nφ δφdz
middle surface of the plate, w(x,y,0) = w(x,y). ∂z
Using the strain-displacement equations of elasticity +boundary condition = 0 (9)
∞ ∞
(Timeshenko) and the mentioned assumptions, total Where m = E w dxdy and
potential energy of the plate-soil system can be written as ∞ ∞
П ∞ ∞
∂w ∂w
n= G + dxdy
1 ∂ w ∂ w ∂ w ∂ w ∂ w ∂ w ∞ ∞ ∂x ∂y
= , ,2 [D] , ,2 dxdy
2 Ω ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y E (1 − ν ) E
1 1 E= and G =
(1 + ν )(1 − 2ν ) 2(1 + ν )
+ [kw + 2t(∇w) ] dxdy − q wdxdy (6)
2 Ω 2 Ω
Since the variations δw and δφ are not equal to zero, the
terms in the parentheses and boundary conditions must be
equal to zero.

1532
 Dutta et al. / ASPS Conference Proceedings 1: 1531-1537 (2022)

Therefore the field equation in the domain, Ω, can be written

as
D∇ w − 2t∇ w + kw = q (10)
∂ ∂
∇ = Laplacian operator = +
∂x ∂y
∂ 2∂ ∂
∇ = Bi − harmonic operator = ∇ ∇ = + +
∂x ∂x ∂y
Outside the plate domain, the field equation is
−2t∇ w + kw = 0 (11) Figure 2 PBR4 plate elements
The second expression within the parentheses in Equation
(9) is the field equation for the deformation pattern of the
soil in the vertical direction. The equation is 𝐸 𝐸
𝐶 = 𝑎𝑛𝑑𝐺 = ;
∂2 φ (1 − 𝜈
) 2(1 + 𝑣)
−m 2 + nφ = 0 (12) 𝐶 = 𝐶 ;𝐶 = 𝐶 ; 𝐶 = 𝑣𝐶 ; 𝐶 = 𝐶 ;
∂z
The Solution of Eq. (12) with the boundary conditions φ (0) 𝐶 = 𝐶 ;𝐶 = 𝐶 ;𝐶 = 𝐶 ;
= 1 and φ (H) = 0 yields 𝐶 = 𝐶 ;𝐶 = 𝐺;
z 𝐶 𝐶 0
sinhγ(1 − )
H
φ(z) = (13) ∴ [𝐶 ] = 𝐶 𝐶 0 ;𝐷 = z[C ] 𝑑𝑧
sinhγ 0 0 𝐶
2.2 Finite element formulation 1 ν 0
It has four corner nodes and each node is associated with Eh ν 1 0
three degrees of freedom. [D ] = 1−ν
12(1 − ν )
𝜕𝑤 𝜕𝑤 0 0
u(x, y, x) = −z ; v(x, y, z) = −z 2
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝐻𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑥,
and w(x, y, z) = w (x, y). [𝐾 ] = [𝐵] [𝐷 ][𝐵];
The nodal displacement at i node
[𝐾 ] = [𝐵 ] [𝐷 ][𝐵 ]|𝐽|𝑑𝑠𝑑𝑡
∂w ∂w
{δ } = w
∂x ∂y Following usual steps, the bending is expressed as
The element displacement vector is defined as {𝑑 } =
{𝑑 𝑑 𝑑 𝑑 } For four nodded elements. [𝐾 ] = 𝑊 𝑊 |𝐽|[𝐵 ] [𝐷 ][𝐵 ]
The element is based on thin plate theory. Hence, it is
sufficient to prescribe variation of transverse displacement w From these equations, it is observed that full 2 × 2 Point
on element region. Gauss-Legendre-type quardature is adopted for bending
𝜕𝑢 𝜕 𝑤 𝜕𝑣 stiffness.
𝜀 = = −𝑧 = −𝑧𝜒 ; 𝜀 = Considering a structural element which has a differential
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦
area ‘dA’ in contact with the foundation the lateral
𝜕 𝑤 𝜕𝑣 𝜕𝑢
𝜀 = −𝑧 = −𝑧𝜒 ; 𝛾 = + deflection of area ‘dA’ normal to the foundation is, w =
𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 [Nf]{d }
∂ w ∂ w ∂ w The strain energy Ur in a linear spring is given by eq.
𝛾 = −𝑧 + = −2𝑧
∂xdy ∂xdy ∂xdy = 𝑘𝑤
𝛾 = −z𝜒 ; 𝜀 = 𝛾 = 𝛾 = 0
𝑈 = ∫ 𝑘𝑤 𝑑𝐴; k is the soil first parameter.
𝜕 𝑤 𝜕 𝑁
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑥 ⎥ 𝑤 = 𝑤 𝑤𝑤 = {𝑑} 𝑁 𝑁 {𝑑}
𝜒 ⎢ ⎥ ⎢
𝜕 𝑤 ⎥ ⎢ 𝜕 𝑁 ⎥ 1
𝜒 =⎢ 𝑆𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦𝑈 = 𝑘{𝑑} 𝑁 𝑁 {𝑑} 𝑑𝐴
⎢ 𝜕𝑦 ⎥ = ⎢ 𝜕𝑦 ⎥ {w } 2
𝜒 ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 1
⎢2 ∂ w ⎥ ⎢2 ∂ N ⎥ 𝑈 = {𝑑} 𝐾 {𝑑}
2
⎣ ∂xdy⎦ ⎣ ∂xdy⎦ In which the foundation stiffness matrix for the element
𝜕 𝑁
⎡ ⎤ is, 𝐾 = ∫ 𝑘 𝑁 𝑁 𝑑𝐴
⎢ 𝜕𝑥 ⎥
⎢ 𝜕 𝑁 ⎥ 𝐾 = 𝑘𝑎𝑏 𝑁 𝑁 𝑑𝑠𝑑𝑡 (14)
∴ [𝐵 ] = ⎢ ;
𝜕𝑦 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢2 ∂ N ⎥ 𝐾 =𝑘 𝑁 𝑁 |𝐽|𝑑𝑠𝑑𝑡 (15)
⎣ ∂xdy⎦ If the problem deals with a plate on elastic foundation, [Nf]
[𝐵 ] = [𝐵 𝐵 … … … 𝐵 ]for four nodded elements. is identical to the shape function matrix [N] of the plate.

1533
 Dutta et al. / ASPS Conference Proceedings 1: 1531-1537 (2022)

Similarly a typical sub-matrix for foundation parameter

corresponding to i - th node is

𝐾 =𝑘 𝑊 𝑊 |𝐽|𝑁 𝑁

𝐾 = 𝐾 𝐾 ………….𝐾 (17)
For four nodded elements.
And a typical sub-matrix for foundation second parameter
corresponding to i-th node is
𝑑𝑁 𝑑𝑁
Figure 3 the length of a differential element ‘dx’in the 𝐾 = 2𝑡 𝑊 𝑊 |𝐽| + 𝑊 𝑊 |𝐽|
deformed position, ‘ds’, can be expressed as 𝑑𝑥 𝑑𝑦

d𝑤 Stiffness matrix of four nodded elements

𝑑𝑠 = (𝑑𝑥) + (𝑑𝑤) = 𝑑𝑥 1 + [𝐾 ] = [𝐾 𝐾 … … … . . 𝐾 ] (18)
𝑑𝑥
[𝐾] = [𝐾 ] + 𝐾 + [𝐾 ] (19)
𝑑𝑤 1 𝑑𝑤 𝐻𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑜𝑏𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛[𝑥] = [𝐾] {𝑓}(20)
𝑑𝑠 = 𝑑𝑥 1 + = 𝑑𝑥 1 + Equivalent Boundary Forces at the Nodes
𝑑𝑥 2 𝑑𝑥
Outside the plate domain for a rectangular plate with
1 𝑑𝑤
∴ 𝑑𝑠 − 𝑑𝑥 = 𝑑𝑥 dimensions of 2a in the x direction and 2b in the y direction.,
2 𝑑𝑥 the equivalent boundary forces due to the infinite soil
Strain energy stored by foundation parameter ‘2t’ is given domain on the plate boundary (Turhan [14]). There are two
by type of stiffness to be considered. One is axial stiffness
1 𝜕𝑤 related to the displacement of the plate boundary in the
𝑈= 2𝑡 𝑑𝑥
2 𝜕𝑥 transverse direction, and the other type is a rotational
1 stiffness related to the rotation of the plate at its edge. Thus
𝑈= 2𝑡{𝑑} 𝑁 ′ 𝑁 ′ {𝑑} 𝑑𝑥 the effect at boundary other than corner of the soil region is
2
1 modelled by adding equivalent to the stiffness term and for a
𝑈 = {𝑑} [𝐾 ]{𝑑} corner region, as shown in Figure 4. Minimizing the energy
2
with respect to displacement at that Point, the equivalent
𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒[𝐾 ] = 2𝑡 𝑁 ′ 𝑁 ′ 𝑑𝑥; 𝑆 = 𝑁 ′ corner reaction is, R=1.5twc.
3
Similarly for y-direction 𝑆𝑡𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑜𝑑𝑒 = 𝑡 (21)
2
𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝐾 = 2𝑡 𝑁 ′ 𝑁 ′ 𝑑𝑦; 𝑅 = 𝑁 ′ Thus the effect at the corner node of the soil region is
modelled by adding 3t/2 to the stiffness term representing
∴ 𝑆𝑡𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟, 2𝑡𝑖𝑠 the corner displacement. Vertical and rotational reaction
[𝐾 ] = 2𝑡 [𝑆 𝑆 + 𝑅 𝑅]𝑑𝐴 forces for a continuous boundary can be obtained by
𝑆𝑡𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 = 𝑎√2𝑘𝑡; (22)
1 𝜕𝑁 𝜕𝑁
[𝐾 ] = 2𝑡 1 2𝑡
𝑎 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 𝑅𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑆𝑡𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 = 𝑎 2𝑡 (23)
2 𝑘
1 𝜕𝑁 𝜕𝑁
+ |𝐽|𝑑𝑠𝑑𝑡 Where ‘a’ is the tributary length of respectivenode.
𝑏 𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑡
1 𝜕𝑁 𝜕𝑁
[𝐾 ] = 2𝑡𝑎𝑏
𝑎 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠
1 𝜕𝑁 𝜕𝑁
+ 𝑑𝑠𝑑𝑡
𝑏 𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑡
The element load vector for a plate due to transverse
distributed load of q per unit area acting top of the plate
{𝑓} = 𝑞 ∫ ∫ [𝑁] |𝐽|𝑑𝑠𝑑𝑡.
𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑
{𝑓} = [𝑁 ] [𝐹]
The element load matrix for n nodded plate due to transverse
distributed load of q per unit area acting top of the plate

{𝑞 } = 𝑞 𝑊 𝑊 |𝐽|𝑁 Figure 4 illustration of a rectangular plate-soil surface

divided into regions.
Integration is carried out using 2 × 2 Gauss-Legendre
integration.
{𝑓} = {𝑞 𝑞 … … … … . 𝑞 } (16)
For four nodded elements.

1534
 Dutta et al. / ASPS Conference Proceedings 1: 1531-1537 (2022)

By putting 2t = 0 the foundation model reduced to the well

known Winkler model (single parameter model) .By putting
2t = 0 and k = 0 the foundation model become applicable to
plate without foundation.
For more details of Modified Vlasov model is available in
[4, 9, 10 and 11]

3. Results and discussion

3.1 Convergence study and test the formulation
Figure 5 Forces on the boundary nodes.
After the test of the present formulation and simultaneously
Q = a√2t k w and R = 0.75 × 2t × w a convergence study the mesh size of 141 ×14 is decided for a
Where w and wc is the deflection of the respective node. reasonable result.
2.3 The iterative procedure 3.2 Validation work
In this model, the solution technique is an iterative process An example has been chosen from the study done by Ozgan
which is dependent upon the value of the γ parameter. K, Daloglu AT [11]] for validation of the present
Therefore, γ is initially set equal to one and φ is calculated. formulation. The results are presented in Fig. 7 - 12 for
These values are used for the computation of the values of uniformly distributed load and concentrated load case. As
sub-grade
grade reaction, k, and soil shear parameter, 2t, from Eqs. seen from the curves for displacements
displacem are in excellent
(7a) and (8a). With these values of k and 2t, the total agreement with the results given in [11][ get fairly closer to
coefficient matrix of the plate-soil
soil system is constructed and each other for any loading cases as the depth of the subsoil
the set of simultaneous ous equations is solved to find the increases in case of displacement and for bending moments
displacements at discrete Points in the plate. Next the value get fairly closer to each other and in excellent agreement
agre
of γ is calculated using the plate displacement values found with the results given in [111] for any loading case.
in the previous step. A comparison between this calculated The same example is considered by Buczkowski R,
value of γ and the initial by assumed γ or previously Torbacki W [8]] but only subsoil depth H = 15.24 m
calculated γ is then made. If the difference between the two different B/h ratio from 2 to 106 i.e. thin to thick plate limit
successive γ values is within a prescribed tolerance, the for uniformly distributed loading case only the curves for
analysis is stopped. Otherwise, iteration is performed and the displacements Fig. 10 are in excellent agreement with the
process is repeated until convergence is obtained. Therefo
Therefore, results given in Ref [8].
the mode shape parameter γ may be calculated at the end of
any analysis step in terms of vertical displacements of the DISPLACEMENT
foundation-subsoil
subsoil system. For more details of Modified
Vlasov model is available in [4, 12, 14 and 15] 1,00
Now how obtained the γ parameter 0,80
∞ ∞
w (mm)

γ 2 1 − 2v ∫ ∞ ∫ ∞(∇w)2 dxdy 0,60

Ozgan and Daloglu [12]
= (24)
H 2(1 − v) ∫∞ ∫∞ (w)2 dxdy 0,40
Present
∞ ∞
0,20
The integrals in equation (24) may be calculated in terms of H=3.048 m
the nodal displacements of the subsoil shear element within 0,00
plate domain is 0,00 0,05 0,10 0,15 0,20
n
b a
1 h/L
(∇w)2 dxdy = [w]T [Ke ] [w]] ((25)
2t
b a i 1 Figure 7 Comparison of deflection w of a free plate with
m
b a uniformly distributed load
and (w)2 dxdy = A[wi ]2 (26)
b a i 1 MOMENT
Where n, m and A represent the element number, the node
number and the tributary area of node i, respectively. 50 Ozgan and Daloglu [12]
40
Mx (KN-m.)

Present
30
20
10 H=3.048 m
0
0,00 0,05 0,10 0,15 0,20

h/L

Figure 8 Comparison of bending moment Mxof a free plate

with uniformly distributed load

Figure 6 4 Nodded subsoil shear element

1535
 Dutta et al. / ASPS Conference Proceedings 1: 1531-1537 (2022)

2,5
DISPLACEMENT
1,0 2,0
0,8 Ozgan and Daloglu [12]

wmax (mm)
Present 1,5
w (mm)

0,6
0,4
H=3.048 m Buczkowski and Torbacki…
1,0
0,2 Present
0,0
0,5
0,00 0,05 0,10 0,15 0,20

h/L 0,0
Figure 9 Comparison of deflection w of a free plate with Figure 13 Comparison of deflection w of a free plate with
concentrated load uniformly distributed load.
3.3 The effectiveness of the formulation
DISPLACEMENT
2,00 The previous example is considered with free boundary
conditions. The properties of the plate-soil system are the
1,50 H=6.096 m
same as before. The ratio of the plate thickness to the length
w (mm)

1,00 of the shorter side of the plate is taken as 0.001, 0.002, 0.01,
Ozgan and Daloglu [12] and 0.02. The example is solved by thin plate theory to show
0,50 the effect of several subsoil depth, and thickness of the plate
Present on displacements and bending moments. The displacement
0,00
of the plate always decreases with increasing h/L ratio for a
0,00 0,05 0,10 0,15 0,20
constant value of H for any loading cases while the bending
h/L moment of the plate increases as presented in Figs. 14–20,
the curves get fairly closer to each other as the value of h/L
Figure 10 Comparison of deflection w of a free plate with increases.
uniformly distributed load

MOMENT
70 DISPLACEMENT
Ozgan and Daloglu [12] 2,6
60
h/L=0.002
Mx (KN-m.)

50 Present
40 2,1
30
w (mm)

20 1,6
10 H=6.096 m
0 1,1
0,00 0,05 0,10 0,15 0,20
0,6
h/L
3,048 6,096 9,144 12,192 15,24
H
Figure 11 Comparison of bending moment Mxof a free plate Figure 14 Changes of deflection, w of a free plate with
with uniformly distributed load uniformly distributed load
MOMENT
MOMENT
50 H=3.048 m 0,0008 h/L=0.002
40
Mx (KN-m.)

Mx (KN-m.)

30 0,0006
Ozgan and Daloglu [12]
20
0,0004
10 Present
0 0,0002
0,00 0,05 0,10 0,15 0,20
0,0000
h/L
3,048 6,096 9,144 12,192 15,24
H
Figure 12 Comparison of bending moment Mxof a free plate Figure 15 Changes of bending moment Mxof a free plate
with concentrated load. with uniformly distributed load

1536
 Dutta et al. / ASPS Conference Proceedings 1: 1531-1537 (2022)

depth. The observations indicate that the effect of the

DISPLACEMENT
2,6 thickness of plate on the behaviour of the plate bending is
h/L=0.001 always smaller for free plates.
2,1 The presented examples show some of the advantages of the
suggested approach for numerical solution of a plate on an
w (mm)

1,6 elastic foundation. It gives opportunities for:

 Application of various loads at an arbitrary Point or a
1,1 region on the plate;
 The approach can be performed on a thin plate
0,6
effectively and efficiently;
3,048 6,096 9,144 12,192 15,24  The plate and the soil medium stiffness can vary
H
Figure 16 Changes of deflection, w of a free plate with smoothly along the plate’s length.
uniformly distributed load
MOMENT
Disclosures
0,000120 Free Access to this article is sponsored by
h/L=0.001
0,000100 SARL ALPHA CRISTO INDUSTRIAL.
Mx (KN-m.)

0,000080
0,000060
0,000040 References
0,000020 1) Hetenyi M. A general solution for the bending of beams on an
0,000000 elastic foundation of arbitrary continuity. J Appl Phys 1950;
3,048 6,096 9,144 12,192 15,24 21:55–8.
H
2) Filonenko-Borodich, M.M. (1940) some approximate theories
Figure 17 Changes of bending moment Mxof a free plate of elastic foundation, Uchenyie Zapiski Moskovskogo
with uniformly distributed load Gosudarstuennogo Universiteta Mekhanika, Moscow, 46, pp.3-
18 (in Russian).
DISPLACEMENT
0,72 3) Pasternak, P.L. (1954) on a new method of analysis of an
0,70
elastic foundation by means of two foundation constants,
Gosudarstvennoe Izdatelstvo Literaturi po Stroitelstuve i
0,68 Arkhitekture, Moscow (in Russian).
w (mm)

h/L=0.02
0,66 4) Vlasov VZ, Leont’ev NN. Beams, plates and shells on elastic
foundations. Translated from Russian. Israel Program for
0,64 Scientific Translations, Jeruselam, 1966.
0,62 5) Selvaduari APS. Elastic analysis of soil-foundation interaction.
3,048 6,096 9,144 12,192 15,24 Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1979.
H
6) Vallabhan CVG, Das YC. A parametric study of beams on
Figure 18 Changes of deflection, w of a free plate with
elastic foundations. J Eng Mech Div 1988;114(12):2072–82.
concentrated load
7) Buczkowski R, Torbacki W. Finite element modeling of thick
DISPLACEMENT plates on two parameter elastic foundation. Int J Numer Anal
1,30
Meth Geomech 2001;25: 1409–27.
h/L=0.01
8) Daloglu AT, Ozgan K. The effective depth of soil stratum for
plates resting on elastic foundation. Struct Eng Mech 2004;
w (mm)

1,25 18(2):263–76.
9) K. Ozgan, A.T. Daloglu. Effect of transverse shear strains on
plates resting on elastic foundation using modified Vlasov
1,20
model. Thin-Walled Structures, 46: 1236–1250, 2008.
3,048 6,096 9,144 12,192 15,24 10) Turhan A. A consistent Vlasov model for analysis of plates on
H elastic foundations using the finite element method. PhD.
Figure 19 Changes of deflection, w of a free plate with dissertation, Graduate School of Texas Tech. University,
concentrated load Lubbock, TX, 1992.
11) Straughan WT Analysis of plates on elastic foundation. PhD.
dissertation, Graduate School of Texas Tech. University, 1990.
5. Conclusions
12) Mishra RC, Chakrabarti SK. Shear and attachment effects on
The accuracy and the efficiency of theelementfor different the behaviour of rectangular plates resting on tensionless elastic
subsoil depth and different load cases and then a parametric foundation. Eng Struct 1997;19(7):551–67.
study are performed. The effect of subsoil depth and
thickness of plate on the displacement is larger for 13) Celik M, Saygun AA. Method for the analysis of plates on a
concentrated load case than for distributed load case, and two-parameter foundation. Int J Solids Struct 1999; 36:2891–
915.
this effect increases as h/L ratio increases for any subsoil
1537