This page provides engineering formulas and coefficients for estimating stress and deflection in thin flat plates subjected to transverse loading. Configurations include circular and rectangular plates, plates with central holes, uniform pressure loading and concentrated loads, with simply supported or clamped boundary conditions.
The equations and coefficients on this page provide estimates of maximum stress and deflection for flat plates under a number of common loading and support conditions.
They are based on classical thin-plate bending assumptions. In particular:
The original RoyMech calculations were prepared principally for steel plates using a Poisson's ratio of approximately 0.3. Where coefficients or equations have been derived using this value, they should not automatically be applied to materials having substantially different Poisson's ratios.
The original notes also limited their use to plates having a thickness less than approximately 10% of the relevant plate span or diameter. This is a useful screening rule rather than a complete definition of thin-plate behaviour.
For the simply supported rectangular-plate cases on this page, the loaded plate edges are assumed to remain in contact with their supports and to be restrained from lifting away from them.
These equations are suitable for preliminary calculations and engineering estimates. For critical design, unusual geometry, large deflection, local loading or more accurate stress determination, a recognised plate reference such as Roark's Formulas for Stress and Strain, an appropriate analytical method or validated finite-element analysis should be used.
| Symbol | Description | Typical SI Unit |
|---|---|---|
| a | Major dimension of rectangular plate; for annular configurations see individual diagram | m |
| b | Minor dimension of rectangular plate; for annular configurations see individual diagram | m |
| r | Radius of circular plate | m |
| t | Plate thickness | m |
| p | Uniform transverse pressure | Pa (N/m2) |
| P | Concentrated transverse force | N |
| σm | Maximum plate bending stress | Pa or MPa |
| ym | Maximum transverse deflection | m |
| E | Young's modulus | Pa |
| ν | Poisson's ratio | dimensionless |
| D | Plate flexural rigidity | N m |
| k1, k2, k3 | Dimensionless plate coefficients defined for the individual load case | — |
For a homogeneous isotropic plate:
The cubic dependence on thickness is particularly important: plate bending stiffness changes rapidly with plate thickness.
Circular plate subjected to uniform transverse pressure with the outer edge simply supported.
Circular plate subjected to uniform transverse pressure with the outer edge clamped.
Circular plate subjected to a concentrated transverse load at its centre, with the outer edge simply supported.
Circular plate subjected to a concentrated transverse load at its centre, with the outer edge clamped.
The response of a rectangular plate depends strongly on its aspect ratio a/b as well as its loading and support conditions.
Rectangular plate subjected to uniform transverse pressure with simply supported edges.
Rectangular plate subjected to uniform transverse pressure with clamped edges.
| Coefficient | Aspect Ratio a/b | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 2.0 | 3.0 | ≥ 4 | |
| k1 | 0.127 | 0.138 | 0.148 | 0.162 | 0.170 | 0.177 | 0.180 | 0.185 | 0.185 |
| k2 | 0.435 | 0.565 | 0.650 | 0.789 | 0.875 | 0.927 | 0.958 | 1.000 | 0.000* |
| Coefficient | a/b = 1.0 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 2.0 | ≥ 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| k1 | 0.061 | 0.071 | 0.076 | 0.078 | 0.0786 | 0.0788 | 0.0791 |
| k2 | 0.754 | 0.894 | 0.962 | 0.991 | 1.000 | 1.004 | 1.008 |
| k3 | -0.238 | -0.0078 | 0.011 | 0.053 | 0.068 | 0.067 | 0.067 |
The sign of a plate coefficient can identify the sense of the associated bending stress or moment according to the convention used in the accompanying equation. A negative coefficient should therefore not automatically be treated as an error.
The following cases apply to annular plates. For these configurations the dimensions a and b and the ratio a/b are defined by the individual diagrams. Use the geometry shown with each equation rather than transferring the rectangular-plate definitions of a and b.
| a/b | k1 | k2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1.25 | 0.341 | 0.100 |
| 1.5 | 0.519 | 1.26 |
| 2 | 0.672 | 1.48 |
| 3* | 0.734 | 1.88 |
| 4 | 0.724 | 2.17 |
| 5 | 0.704 | 2.34 |
| a/b | k1 | k2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1.25 | 0.184 | 0.592 |
| 1.5 | 0.414 | 0.976 |
| 2 | 0.664 | 1.44 |
| 3 | 0.824 | 1.88 |
| 4 | 0.830 | 2.08 |
| 5 | 0.813 | 2.190 |
| a/b | k1 | k2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1.25 | 0.00504 | 0.194 |
| 1.5 | 0.0242 | 0.320 |
| 2 | 0.0810 | 0.454 |
| 3 | 0.172 | 0.673 |
| 4 | 0.217 | 1.021 |
| 5 | 0.238 | 1.305 |
| a/b | k1 | k2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1.25 | 0.00199 | 0.105 |
| 1.5 | 0.0139 | 0.259 |
| 2 | 0.0575 | 0.480 |
| 3 | 0.130 | 0.657 |
| 4 | 0.162 | 0.710 |
| 5 | 0.175 | 0.730 |
| a/b | k1 | k2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1.25 | 0.00343 | 0.122 |
| 1.5 | 0.0313 | 0.336 |
| 2 | 0.125 | 0.740 |
| 3 | 0.221 | 1.210 |
| 4 | 0.417 | 1.450 |
| 5 | 0.492 | 1.590 |
| a/b | k1 | k2 |
|---|---|---|
| 10 | 0.149 | 0.728 |
| 3 | 0.074 | 0.58 |
| 2 | 0.023 | 0.36 |
| 1.5 | 0.003 | 0.151 |
| 1.1 | — | 0.019 |
A plate calculation is only meaningful when the geometry, loading and boundary conditions match the selected solution.
Classical small-deflection plate theory assumes that transverse deflection does not significantly alter the geometry of the plate or introduce important in-plane membrane forces.
As deflection becomes comparable with plate thickness, membrane action can become significant and the load-deflection relationship becomes nonlinear. The equations on this page should then be replaced by an appropriate large-deflection plate analysis.
An ideal mathematical point load can produce highly localised stresses. Actual engineering loads are normally transferred through a finite contact area, washer, boss, bearing surface or attachment. Local bearing, bending, punching, yielding or contact stresses may therefore require separate assessment.
The maximum bending stresses calculated by classical plate theory are nominal elastic stresses for the idealised plate model. Holes, welds, sharp changes in thickness, attachments and other geometric details can introduce local stress concentrations that are not represented by these simple solutions.