Nice section on plate modelling. I checked the "Mindlin-Reissner theory for thick plates Section" since I was looking for a detail on it, and I think I picked up some typos in formulas. Here they are:

1. When deriving the small strains, the symmetric part of the gradient of displacement is used. This is OK for the u^0 part, but for the phi part, only the gradient is mentioned here. It seems to me that the symmetric part should be involved for phi as well. This typo pertains in the following developments.

2. When using a shear correction factor kappa, this factor should appear only once, for instance in the variation of the internal energy deltaU. If (as done presently) it is in the expression of epsilon_alpha3 then, with its appearance in the first expression of internal energy, its squared value (kappa^2) should appear in the expression of Q_a, which seems not correct. I seems to me that the general usage is to make it not appear in epsilon_alpha3.

I guess that these remarks need first the approval of a plate expert, and second an editing to fix them if they appeared to need fixing. Dureisseix (talk) 10:21, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some thoughts:

The form in the article is consistent with the von Karmen equations. The phi_beta,alpha term is omitted, most probably, to retain consistency with the Timoshenko theory where phi = dw/dx and the order of differentiation is changeable. I'm not sure exactly why. Have you found an alternative form in a text? If you have, you can update the equations accordingly.
The shear correction factor is traditionally associated with the stress term in the internal energy (sigma:eps). We could alternatively have it apply to the strain term, as in the article. Or one can think of a sqrt{kappa} in both the stress and the strain terms. More detail will certainly help this important aspect of the Mindlin theory.

Bbanerje (talk) 20:22, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the links to this page list plate and shell theory but nothing is provided on shell theory. At least Donnell shell theory should be mentioned and referenced to continuum mechanics books or finite element method books. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:14D:8400:4B2:2828:F057:A060:8E4E (talk) 15:46, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

History

Seems pretty weird there's not one remark about Chladni or Ritz here though Chladni made the most famous\popular experiment in this field and Ritz analysed it, whilst laying the foundation of Finite Element Analysis (paper - http://www.unige.ch/~gander/Preprints/Ritz.pdf. See page 12 and everything after it) Sonicrs (talk) 10:00, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia articles are a community project and are always a work in progress. If you find something missing please add that to the article. Bbanerje (talk) 22:44, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

History 2

The plate theory was completed by Kirchhoff in 1850. The first version of the shell theory was made by Love in 1888. In a book on plates and shells it makes sense to use a Kirchhoff-Love hypothesis. In a text on plates only it makes no sense to mention Love. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.130.76.184 (talk) 02:25, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]