Alphabet’s Pronunciation

Capital Lower-case Sound English Name

A α (vowel) Alpha Alhpa
B β Veeta Beta
Γ γ Yama Gama
Δ δ Thelta (the*-lta) Delta
E ε (vowel) Epsilon Epsilon
Z ζ Zeeta Zeta
H η (vowel) Eeta Eta
Θ θ Theeta Theta
I ι (vowel) Yiota Iota
K κ Kapa Kappa
Λ λ Lamtha (Lam-th*(e)a) Lambda
M μ Mee Mu
N ν Nee Nu
Ξ ξ Xee Xi
O ο (vowel) Omicron Omicron
Π π Pee Pi
P ρ Ro Rho
Σ σ,ς Siyma Sigma
T τ Taf Tau
Y υ (vowel) Ypsilon Upsilon
Φ φ Fee Phi
X χ Hee Chi
Ψ Ψ Psee Psi
Ω ω (vowel) Omeya Omega
*same sound as the English “the”.
 Thin vs. Thick shells
 Added by Mike Abell, last edited by Ondrej Kalny on Aug 03, 2016 (view change)
Go to start of metadata

What is the difference between thin and thick shell formulations?

Answer: The inclusion of transverse shear deformation in plate-bending behavior is the main
difference between thin and thick shell formulation. Thin-plate formulation follows a Kirchhoff
application, which neglects transverse shear deformation, whereas thick-plate formulation follows
Mindlin/Reissner, which does account for shear behavior. Thick-plate formulation has no effect upon
membrane (in-plane) behavior, only plate-bending (out-of-plane) behavior.

Shear deformation tends to be important when shell thickness is greater than

approximately 1/5 to 1/10 of the span of plate-bending curvature. Shearing may also become
significant in locations of bending-stress concentrations, which occur near sudden changes in
thickness or support conditions, and near openings or re-entrant corners. Thick-plate formulation is
best for such applications.

Thick-plate formulation is also recommended in general because it tends to be more accurate,

though slightly stiffer, even for thin-plate bending problems in which shear deformation is truly
negligible. However, the accuracy of thick-plate formulation is sensitive to mesh distortion and large
aspect ratios, and therefore should not be used in such cases when shear deformation is known to
be small.

In general, the contribution of shear deformation becomes significant when ratio between the span of
plate-bending curvature and thickness is approximately 20:1 or 10:1. The formulation itself is
adequate for ratio down to 5:1 or 4:1. In that this ratio is dependent upon the projected span of
curvature, shell thickness may be greater than the actual plan dimensions of a shell object.

Stiffness for pure-bending deformation

The statement that thick shells tend to be stiffer than thin shells applies only to the bending
components of shells, and to models in which meshing is too coarse.

When meshing adequately captures bending deformation, thick-shell elements are more flexible
because of the additional shear deformation that is not captured through thin-shell formulation.
Given pure-bending deformation, however, the thin-shell element is slightly more accurate, therefore
the thick-shell element may be stiffer for coarser meshes. This effect diminishes as the mesh is
refined.

Stresses may be of greater concern than deflections. When shear deformation is expected to be
important, we recommend the thick-shell element because it will better capture the stress distribution.
This is the case not only for thicker shells, but also for regions near openings and other geometric
discontinuities in which transverse shear deformation develops.