Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Buckling of Free Pipe Under External Pressure
Buckling of Free Pipe Under External Pressure
2.1 Introduction
2.1.1 Plain Pipe vs. Stiffened Pipe
The choice of plain versus stiffened steel pipe for a tunnel liner is primarily not only a cost
issue, but also have to consider other issues such as the safety, constructability, and the
inspection/ maintenance. For instance, steel pipe with diameter to thickness ratios of more than
about 300 or thickness more than 45mm are usually not practical due to handling limitations.
On the other hand, the steel pipe must have the sufficient capacity to resist the internal pressure
and external pressure, while the external pressure is vulnerable to cause the buckling of pipe.
Generally, the steel pipe thickness designed for external pressure is usually much thicker than
that for internal pressure. In engineering practice, plain steel pipe has many advantages as
shown in followings,
Design and analysis are relatively simple and well understood.
Outer diameter of a plain steel pipe is less than a stiffened steel pipe; hence the excavated
tunnel diameter can be reduced.
Manufacture of a plain steel pipe is simpler, particularly for wall thickness less than about
20mm. The manufacture cost per unit length of stiffened steel pipe is generally higher than a
plain pipe with same thickness, considering the required stiffener welding work.
However, when the water tunnel is built in deep underground, the groundwater pressure is
relatively high and the structure design has to consider the bucking of steel pipe under external
pressure principally. In such case, the stiffened pipe is required considering its following
advantages,
Stiffened steel pipe can be designed lighter than a plain pipe.
Buckling mode of a stiffened pipe can be controlled, and the long steel pipe collapse can be
avoided if appropriately design.
Thinner pipe can be used, hence not only quantities of steel materials but also the welding
works are possibly reduced. In addition, the construction of deep water tunnel can become
possibility when the steel pipe rolling process is limited in thickness due to available
fabrication machinery and other restrained conditions.
- 19 -
Otherwise, the application of the external circular stiffeners usually called ring stiffener should
be considered when the thickness of a plain pipe designed for external pressure exceeds the
thickness required by internal pressure. Finally, the design should be carried out based on
economic considerations of the following three available options: a) increasing the thickness of
the pipe, b) adding external stiffeners to a pipe with thickness required for internal pressure, and
c) increasing the thickness of pipe and adding external stiffeners, and satisfy the design
requirement for the external pressure. In addition, the economic comparison between plain and
stiffened pipe must consider the extra cost of welding, tunnel excavation and backfill.
In the current study, the stiffened pipe is considered as the tunnel liner in principle considering
the safety and cost of the water tunnel built in urban deep underground. The stiffeners are
installed with a constant spacing on the steel pipe, and are welded with fillet welding around
and at the exterior of pipe. The stiffener is assumed having sufficient second moment of inertia
to avoid buckling of itself, since it is principally used to holding the pipe in a circular shape. As
the stiffener types, there are 4 common types as shown in Fig. 2.1, called tee bar, rolled channel
stiffener, rolled plate stiffener, and flat bar, respectively. Tee bar is theoretically the most
efficient as a stiffener, however the complicated fabrication is the vital shortcoming. Moreover,
the available reduction of cross section is limited because the failure of flange or web has to be
avoided. Rolled channel stiffener is also structural efficient, by which a greater spacing of
stiffener becomes possible because of its larger inertia moment and two connection points with
steel pipe. The problem of rolled channel stiffener is that there are no effective means to treat
the void created by stiffener. A rolled plate oriented parallel to the steel pipe cannot add the
second moment of inertia of steel pipe to resist buckling. It is therefore that the rolled plate is
not used as main stiffener, just used for reinforcing the connection of steel pipe. A flat bar
(Rolled or cut plate placed perpendicular to pipe) are the most commonly used stiffener due to
not only its easily manufacturing but having efficient second moment of inertia to improve the
capacity of buckling resistance. Accordingly, in this study, the flat bar is adopted as stiffener in
terms of the design and construction of stiffened pipe. The cross-section profile of a pipe
stiffened with flat bar is shown in Fig. 2.2, where the related notations about stiffened pipe are
shown1).
Steel pipe
a) Rolled tee
(Tee Bar)
b) Rolled channel
c) Rolled plate
d) Rolled /Cut plate
(Parallel to pipe)
(Perpendicular to pipe)
(Flat Bar)
Fig. 2.1 Typical stiffeners
- 20 -
tr
Effective cross-section
Neutral
axis
hr
t
Be = 1 . 56 Rt
R0
Rc
2S
(n 2 1) EI (n 2 1) E t
Pcr =
=
12 R
R3
(2.1a)
However, if the pipe is longitudinal restrained, Eq. (2.1a) should be modified by considering
the Poissons effect. The equation of critical pressure is then given by the following,
- 21 -
(n 2 1) E t (n 2 1) E ' t
Pcr =
=
12(1 v 2 ) R
12
R
(2.1b)
Where, the E=E/(1-v2) is often used in practice, commonly called effective elastic modulus.
As for a long free pipe, since the lowest critical pressure is always produced when the number
of wave n is equal to 2, the number of waves is commonly given 2. Thus the buckling equation
of a long pipe can be expressed by Eq. (2.2).
E' t
Pcr =
4 R
(2.2)
Moreover, the analytical solution using Eq. (2.2) is only valid for hydrostatic pressure with the
acting direction normal to pipe surface. For a conservative load maintaining their direction, the
denominator 4 in Eq. (2.2) should be replaced by 3.
Stiffened Pipe
As the ring-stiffened pipe is generally considered a stiffened cylindrical shell, the following
studies should be mentioned. The buckling of ring-stiffened cylindrical shells under external
pressure has been studied by the following researchers. Reis and Walker8) analyzed the local
buckling strength of ring-stiffened cylindrical shells by non-linear buckling analysis. Y.
Yamamoto9) studied the general instability of ring-stiffened cylindrical shells using experiments.
S. S. Seleim et al. 10), systemically studied the buckling behavior of ring-stiffened cylinders.
From the studies mentioned above, it is confirmed that the buckling behavior of ring-stiffened
cylindrical shells involves three types of failure: inter-ring shell buckling, general buckling, and
ring-stiffener stripping. Regarding buckling design, Charles P. Ellinas and William J. Supple11)
conducted a comprehensive investigation on buckling design for ring-stiffened cylinders.
Generally, the studies on buckling of stiffened pipe can be divided into two groups. One group
focused the buckling of the shell between adjacent stiffeners, while another group focused the
buckling of overall pipe. The two buckling forms are usually called general buckling and local
buckling, and their buckling forms are shown in Fig. 2.3, respectively. The representatives of
former group include Von Mises, Donnel, Southwell, Timoshenko, Flgger, Tokugawa, etc,
while the latter are represented by Kendrick12), Bryant13), etc..
In the research of former group, the stiffened pipe is simply assumed that the two ends of a
plain pipe are held in circular shape, and buckling occurs in a rotary-symmetric buckling with
sinusoidal wave. The related equations were derived by Southwell in 1913, Von Mises in 1914,
Timoshenko in 1938, Flgger in 1960, Tokugawa in 1961, Donnel in 1976. However, since the
Timoshenkos equation obtained by Von Mises firstly are usually used in engineering practice.
- 22 -
a) Initial shape
(Local buckling)
(General buckling)
Pcr =
Et
R
1
2
R
(n 2 1) n 2 + 1
Et 3
2n 2 1
2
n 1 +
+
2
12(1 2 ) R 3
R
n 2 + 1
S
(2.3)
n=
t2
R
3
S
12(1 2 ) R 2
(2.4)
When the spacing S in Eq. (2.3) is replaced by the length of a plain pipe L, the Von Mises
buckling equation can also be used for a finite long pipe.
In Japan, Tokugawa equation is also used in buckling design as shown following,
t
D0
2 4
Pcr =
2 n2 + 2
2
n 1+
2
t
2
+
2
3(1 ) D0
Where,
D0
0.5
D D
n = 1.63 0 0
S t
2S
- 23 -
2
n 4 2n 2 1
2 2
n + 2
2
n + 2
0.25
(2.5)
In the latter group, for the buckling of stiffened pipe, Kendrick and Bryant presented their
theoretical solutions using the energy approach in 1953, 1954 respectively, based on the
phenomenon of buckling deformation that stiffeners and shell distorts simultaneously when
buckling occurs. Kendrick and Bryants theoretical equations are given in Eq. (2.6) and Eq.
(2.7), respectively.
Pcr =
Ie (n2 1)2
Et
4
+
R (n2 + 2 2 1)(n2 + 2 )2
R3S
(2.6)
Pcr =
Ie (n2 1)2
4
Et
+
2
R (n2 + 2 2 1)(n2 + 2 )2
R0Rc S
(2.7)
- 24 -
(2.8a)
Where, is the applied load (axial load P or external pressure p) and c is the classical buckling
load. The amplitude of the buckling displacement normal to the shell w have been normalized
with respect to the shell thickness t, thus =w/t. Accordingly, if the post-buckling coefficient b
is negative, the equilibrium load falls following buckling and the buckling load of the real
structure s is expected to be imperfection-sensitive. In this case, the asymptotic relationship
between the buckling load of the imperfect shell and the imperfection amplitude * is
(1-s)3/2= 1.5(-3b) 0.5|*|s
- 25 -
(2.8b)
/c
/c
Bifurcation point
/c
Perfect shell
Perfect shell
Imperfect shell
Limit point
Imperfect shell
a) Stable post-buckling
b) Unstable post-buckling
- 26 -
buckling load can be estimated after every load increment. However, the BUCKLE
INCREMENT option should be used if a collapse load calculation is required at multiple
increments. The linear buckling load analysis is correct when one takes a very small load step in
increment zero, or makes sure the solution has converged before buckling load analysis (if
multiple increments are taken). Although the linear buckling (after increment zero) can be done
without using the LARGE DISP parameter, in which case the restriction on the load step size no
longer applies, the estimated bucking load should be used with caution, as it is not conservative
in predicting the actual collapse of structures. Generally, for a buckling problem that involves
material nonlinearity (for example, plasticity), the nonlinear problem must be solved
incrementally because a failure to converge in the iteration process or non-positive definite
stiffness can signal the plastic collapse during the analysis. Moreover, for extremely nonlinear
problems, since the BUCKLE option cannot produce accurate results, the history definition
option AUTO INCREMENT should be used to allow automatic load stepping in a quasi-static
fashion for both geometric large displacement and material (elastic-plastic) nonlinear problems.
By the option the elastic-plastic snap-through phenomena can be handled and the post-buckling
behavior of structures can be analyzed.
In the liner buckling analysis, the buckle option solves the following eigenvalue problem by
the inverse power sweep or Lanczos method using the following matrix formula.
[ K + i K G (u, u, )]i = 0
(2.9a)
Where, K is the stiffness matrix of structure, KG is assumed a linear function of the load
increment P to cause buckling.
The geometric stiffness KG used for the buckling load calculation is based on the stress and
displacement state change at the start of the last increment. However, the stress and strain states
are not updated during the buckling analysis. The buckling load Pcr is therefore estimated by:
Pcr = P0 + i P
(2.9b)
Where, for increments greater than 1, P0 is the load applied at the beginning of the increment
prior to the buckling analyses, and i is the ith mode value obtained by the power sweep or
Lanczos method. As the control tolerances, the maximum number of iterations and the
convergence tolerance can be inputted. For the inverse power sweep method, the power sweep
terminates when the difference between the eigenvalues in two consecutive sweeps divided by
the eigenvalue is less than the tolerance. The Lanczos method concludes when the normalized
difference between all eigenvalues satisfies the tolerance.
In the current study, the numerical analysis for investigation of buckling behavior is
conducted applying linear buckling analysis, considering the non-linear characteristics has little
- 27 -
influence on the elastic buckling of a perfect cylindrical under uniformly external pressure. As
the analysis result, the estimated critical load can be used to evaluate whether material
nonlinearities occurred before buckling. Moreover, the buckling mode should be plotted and
studied, by which whether the modeled mesh size is sufficient to describe the collapse mode can
be checked.
- 28 -
Local buckling
Pipe
Stiffener
Pipe
Stiffener
General buckling
Fig. 2.5 Local buckling and general buckling
However, in practice, an un-appropriate conception is prevailing until present that the buckling
between stiffeners will occur in a stiffened pipe with relatively heavy stiffeners, while general
buckling failure will occur in a stiffened pipe with the light stiffener. Actually, the buckling
failure type of stiffened pipe is determined not only by the flexural rigidity of stiffeners but the
spacing of stiffeners and the geometries of pipe. Buckling behavior of stiffened pipe with
respect to buckling type has been investigated by author using numerical analysis method,
where the uniformly stiffened pipe is focused, and the second moment of inertia referring the
flexural rigidity of stiffener is briefly named stiffness, since Youngs modulus is a constant22) 23).
- 29 -
Pipe geometries
model
R(m)
t(mm)
L(m)
Stiffener
variations
S(m) Ir(m4)
1.5
10
1.0
0.5
10
1.0
10
1.0
5.0
1.0
5.0
1.0
5.0
1.0
7.5
1.0
hr 0.4 t r
E
fy
(2.10)
1.50
hr/tr
17
Poissons
Ratio
Yield Stress
Yong's
Modulus
E(N/mm2)
2.1+E5
0.3
325
y (N/mm2)
shown in Fig.2.6
3500
12
Number of lobes n
II
Model1
Model2
Model3
10
II
II
I : General buckling
II: Local buckling
Model1
Model2
Model3
3000
2 2
Critical
pressure
Pcr (kN/m
) )
Buckling
Pressure
Pcr (kN/m
14
II
2500
I : General buckling
2000
I
II
1500
1000
II
500
I
0
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
4
Second
moment
inertia
of stiffeners
Ir(cm
) 4
Second moment
ofofarea
of ring
stiffeners
Ircm
a) Buckling waves
20
40
60
80
b) Critical pressure
- 30 -
100
4 4)
Second
of area
of ring
stiffenersIr(cm
Ir (cm
Secondmoment
moment
of inertia
of stiffeners
)
120
Fig.2.6 a) and b) show the buckling behavior with changing of the stiffness and spacing of ring
stiffeners. Where, the curves of the stiffness of ring stiffeners, Ir, versus the number of lobes, n,
and the critical external pressure, Pcr, are presented for different spacing of ring stiffeners.
Fig.2.7 a) indicates that all models experience two buckling types with the increasing of
stiffeners stiffness. The first one is the general buckling with deformation of pipe and ring
stiffeners as one cylinder in the form of sinusoid waves. The second one is the local buckling
with deformation of the inter-stiffener shell in a form of diamond waves. The number of
buckling waves is not successive: it is less when in general buckling, and then becomes a
greater constant value when in local bucking. As the effect of spacing, with the spacing of ring
stiffeners decreasing, the number of
1500
Model6
MODEL6
Model9
MODEL9
Model2
MODEL1
900
600
t=5mm
0
0
500
2
CriticalPressure
pressure
Pcr (kN/m
Buckling
Pcr (kN/m
)
20
25
30
35
40
t=5mm
t=10mm
forms
L=3.0 m
L=6.0 m
L=9.0 m
Model6
Model7
Model8
400
2000
Model2
Model4
Model5
1500
300
1000
200
500
100
20
of
stiffeners,
and
the
the
stiffness
critical
of
ring
pressure
60
80
100
0
120
4
4
Secondmoment
moment ofof
area
of ring of
stiffeners
Ir (cm I)r(cm )
Second
inertia
stiffeners
40
- 31 -
15
a) Wall thickness
10
Ir(cm )
Second
moment of inertia of stiffeners
4
I
)
t=7.5mm
300
t=10mm
1200
Critical pressure
Pcr (kN/m2)2)
Pcr(kN/m
almost maintaining the maximum critical pressure of general buckling in local buckling.
However, from Fig.2.7 a), that the critical pressure and limit stiffness increase with the increase
of wall thickness can be observed. In terms of the length of stiffened pipe, as shown in Fig.2.7
b), the limit stiffness of ring stiffeners, is required to be larger with an increase of pipe length,
while the local buckling pressures are almost the same values, which are determined only by
inter-ring shells. Moreover, the influence of length change on the limit stiffness and critical
pressure becomes greater with the thickness increase.
Summary
From this study, the buckling behavior was clarified as shown in Fig.2.8. For an individual
stiffened pipe, with the increase of flexural rigidity of stiffener briefly named stiffness the
critical pressure increases in first phase of general buckling, while almost maintains constant in
second phase of local buckling. Furthermore, the buckling type is always general buckling
before the stiffener stiffness reaches the limit value, then turns to local buckling once exceeds
the limit value. Also, from Fig.2.8, a similar behavior is shown for pipe stiffened with a
different spacing. However, the changes in terms of limit stiffness of stiffeners and the critical
pressure due to the spacing change are expressed significantly. Generally the wider the spacing
is the smaller the limit stiffness of stiffeners, and the smaller the critical pressure. As the effects
of pipe dimensions, the length, radius, and wall-thickness of pipe affect the buckling behavior in
terms of the critical pressure and the limit stiffness of stiffeners. Generally, the limit stiffness
decreases with the increasing of the ratio of radius to thickness (R/t), as well as the critical
pressure. Similarly, with the increasing of length, the limit stiffness and critical pressure
decreases.
Pcr
P2Lcr
P1crL
Local buckling
S2
P cr :Critical pressure
S1
Pcr0
I 1Lr I 2Lr
L
r
Ir
- 32 -
- 33 -
is greater than 103, while can be reduced due to supporting of stiffeners in the case that Z is
smaller than 102. Furthermore, since the imperfection of stiffened pipe is still in the research
stage and there is not a practical solution until present, in the current study, the imperfection is
disregarded in theoretical analysis, however will be taken into account in stiffened pipe design
using safe factor. Otherwise, the material stress state is another important issue for buckling
analysis, because the elastic or inelastic buckling is determined by whether the stress level of
material is beyond the proportional limit or not. In [Buckling Design Specification]26) published
by JSCE, a simple formula as shown in Eq. (2.11) has been given to estimate the instability type
for a cylindrical shell. If Kc1.2, the buckling is elastic buckling, or inelastic buckling. For an
infinite long stiffened pipe, the buckling can always be considered elastic buckling generally
considering of the infinite long length.
Kc = (
2 R 3 / 4 Lf y 1 / 2
) (
)
t
2 RE
(2.11)
On the other hand, for the theoretical analysis, in the case that it is difficult to determine the
exact buckling load in complex structures using the Euler formula due to the difficulty in
organizing the constant stiffness matrix, the buckling load is often approximated using energy
conservation. This means that predicting buckling load is often referred to as the energy method
in structural analysis27), 28), 29). Therefore, in the current study, the theoretical equations based on
buckling behavior are discussed using the energy method disregarding the imperfection and
- 34 -
nonlinear of material, while the solution for buckling pressure uses the Ritz method30), which is
a variational method named after Walter Ritz, and one effective method for finding
approximations to the lowest energy eigenstate or ground state in mechanics.
2.3.2 Strains in Shell
The strains of pipe can be discussed
Middle surface
x xy
0
x
0
xy
Focused
lamina
surface,
Rx
O
yx y
Ry
0
x(y) ds
y0
z
Rx(y)
Focused
Rx(y) lamina
O
O
a)
the
x(y)
yx0
stretching
ds
Middle surface
b)
x = x0 z (
1
1
) = x0 0x z
'
Rx Rx
(2.12)
y = y0 z (
1
1
) = y0 0y z
'
Ry Ry
(2.13)
Where, x and y are strains of the lamina, x0 , y0 and x0 , y0 are strains and curvature
change of middle surface respectively, with respect to x and y directionsFurthermore, the shear
strain of focused lamina during bending of shell should be taken into account. Considering that
0
0
it is consisted of twisting of focused element xy
and the shearing strain in middle surface xy
,
xy = xy0 2 z 0
xy
(2.14)
From the equations discussed above, the strains of arbitrary point of pipe can be obtained,
upon the strain and curvature change of middle surface were given.
- 35 -
deformed
in
same
waves.
z R
w
u x
L
and
radial
Pipe
External pressure P
direction
respectively. Also, the detailed information of longitudinal cross section of stiffened pipe can be
referred to Fig. 2.2.
Stiffened pipes are reasonably considered to have orthotropic properties in most applications
because of the deformation of stiffened pipe resulted from interaction of bending behaviors of
ring beam and thin shells. In the current study, the stiffened pipe as orthotropic structure is
discussed through investigating the pipe and stiffeners respectively. However, out-of-plane
bending, torsional and warping strain of the stiffeners are disregarded because they are found
that their effects can be negligible for isotropic stiffened pipe in previous studies
12), 31)
, and are
(2.15)
Where,
: total potential energy of stiffened pipe
Vp: strain energy of pipe
Vs : strain energy of ring stiffeners
U : work done by external pressure during buckling
Strain Energy in Pipe
The general strain energy of a thin shell can be written as follows:
V =
1
[ x x + y y + z z + xy xy + xz xz + yz yz ]dxdydz
2
(2.16)
Where, the assumption for thin shells and the stress-strain relationships from Hock are
introduced as follows:
- 36 -
yz = xz = 0
(2.17a)
z = 0
(2.17b)
x =
E
( x + y )
1 2
(2.18a)
y =
E
( y + x )
1 2
(2.18b)
E
xy
2(1 + )
(2.18c)
xy =
Substituting Eqs. (2.18) into Eq. (2.16), the strain energy then can be written into Eq. (2.19),
V=
1 E
1
[ 2 +y2 + 2xy + (1) xy2 ]dxdydz
2 x
2 (1 )
2
(2.19)
Since the pipe is treated as the isotropic thin shells, substituting Eq. (2.12), Eq. (2.13) and Eq.
(2.14) into Eq. (2.19), the strain energy of pipe then can be written as
Vp =
2
2
2
1 E
1
{ 0 + 2 x0 y0 + y0 + (1 ) xy0
2 x
2 (1 )
2
2 z[ x0 x0 + y0 + y0 y0 + x0 + (1 ) xy0 xy0 ]
(2.20)
+ z 2 [ x0 + 2 x0 y0 + y0 + 2 (1 ) xy0 ]} dxdydz
2
Integrating Eq. (2.20) with respect to t from -0.5t to 0.5t and rearranging the equation, the
strain energy of pipe is then expressed by bending strain energy (Vp1) and extensional strain
energy (Vp2) of pipe.
V p = V p1 + V p 2
Where
Vp1 =
2
Et3
[(x0 + y0 )2 2(1 )(x0 y0 xy0 )]dxdy
2
24(1 )
Vp2 =
2
2
2
Et
1
[ x0 + 2 x0 y0 + 20 + (1 ) xy0 ]dxdy
2
2(1 )
2
(2.21)
Vs =
EAr
2
2
y dxdy +
- 37 -
EI r0
y2dxdy
(2.22)
Since the stiffeners deformation is identical with shells strain for general buckling, the
curvature change is same as that of shell. In addition, the strains produced due to axial force is
relatively smaller than that due to bending deflection, the strains can be expressed using the
curvature change of shell. Thus, the strain energy of a stiffener can be written as Eq. (2.23),
where, Ir is expressed as Eq. (2.24), is defined as effective second moment of inertia.
EA h + t
EI 0
Vs = r ( r r ) 2 + r ( y0 ) 2 dxdy
2
2
2
EI
= r ( y0 ) 2 dxdy
2
(2.23)
I r = Ar ( hr + t ) 2 4 + I r0
(2.24)
Where,
Ar = dA = hr br
2
I r0 = t r hr 12
Moreover, since the pipe is stiffened uniformly, the number of stiffeners then can be computed
as L/S for a stiffened pipe. Accordingly, the strain energy of all stiffeners is obtained as shown
below,
Vs =
2
L EI r
y0 dy
S 2
(2.25)
Rd
Deflected
Ny
Ny
Initial
y Rd / 2
N y cos( y Rd / 2)
- 38 -
p
w
y Rd / 2
R
Ny
y Rd / 2
N y sin( y Rd / 2)
inextensional deformation of cylindrical shell, the work done by tangential force can be
disregarded, the work done by external pressure during buckling is therefore equal to that done
by perpendicular force. The Eq. (2.26) expresses the work done by external pressure for a
infinite element
N y sin( y Rd / 2) wdx
(2.26)
Moreover, since yRd/2 is very small and relative rotation angle y is identical to curvature
change of middle surface of pipe, the total works can be written as follows,
U =
R
N y y0 wddx
(2.27)
where
N y = pR
(2.28)
Substituting Eq. (2.28) into Eq. (2.27), the total works done by external pressure of stiffened
pip can be expressed as shown in Eq. (2.29).
U =
pR 2
2
0
y
wddx
(2.29)
pR 2
= U V p Vs =
2
0
y
wd dx
2
Et3
Et
2
02
x
+ 2 x0 y0 + 20 +
1
(1 ) xy0 2 ]dxdy L EI r
2
S 2
02
y
dy
(2.30)
As similar with other variational method, a trial wave function is required on the system in
Ritz method. The trial function should be selected to meet boundary conditions (and any other
physical constraints). Since the exact function is not known previously the trial function should
contain one or more adjustable parameters, which are varied to find a lowest energy
configuration. Where, the displacements in x, y and z direction denoted u, v and w respectively
are expressed by trial wave function as shown below, taking into account the support boundary
at two ends and the buckling deformations.
- 39 -
u = A sin n cos
mx
L
(2.31a)
v = B cos n sin
mx
L
(2.31b)
w = C sin n sin
mx
L
(2.31c)
where
AB and Cconstant factors of displacement u, v and w
mnumber of longitudinal buckling waves
nnumber of circumferential buckling waves
As for the strain-displacement relation, the equations can be given as follows according to
Flggers cylindrical shell theory:
u
x
(2.32a)
y0 =
1 v
(
w)
R
(2.32b)
xy0 =
v 1 u
+
x R
(2.32c)
x0 =
x0 =
2w
x 2
(2.32d)
y0 =
1 2w
(
+ w)
R 2 2
(2.32e)
xy0 =
1 2 w v
+ )
(
R x x
(2.32f)
Additionally dy= Rd, substituting it and Eqs. (2.32) into Eq. (2.30) and integrating, the total
potential energy of stiffened pipe can be written as following equation.
2 2
Et
1
1 2
2 2 2
2
2 (1 ) m
A
m
(
1
)
n
B
Arn2 + n2
4R 1
2
2
tl
2
1 2
I r (n 2 1)
2
1 2
t2
2
2 2
2
p(n 1) +
m + n 1 +
Ar (1 +
C
) + 1
2
2
Et
tl
Ar R
12 R
1 2 r
(1 + )mnAB 2n1 +
A BC 2 mAC
tl
(2.33)
- 40 -
can be obtained by substituting equations (2.31b and c) into Eq. (2.32b). Omitting the smaller
terms and rearranging, the total potential energy of stiffened pipe can be briefly written as Eq.
(2.34).
L Et 2 2 2 1
A m + (1 )n2 + AC[(1 )m ]
2
4R 1
2
1 2
2
t2
1 2 I r (n 2 1) 2 (1 )m 2 2
2 2
2
)+
p(n2 1) +
m
n
1
C 2
+
12R2
tS
R2
2n 2
Et
where =
(2.34)
R
L
=0
A
(2.35a)
=0
C
(2.35b)
Substituting Eq. (2.34) into Eq. (2.35), the simultaneous equations Eq. (2.36) are obtained.
A 2m2 2 + (1 )n 2 (1 )mC = 0
) (
(2.36a)
2
2
t 2
2
1 2 I r (n2 1) (1 )m2 2 pR(1 ) 2
2 2
2
(n 1) (1 )mA = 0
2C 2 m + n 1 +
+
2
2
Et
tS
R
2n
12R
(2.36b)
The two equations can be satisfied by putting A and C equal to zero, which corresponds to a
uniformly compressed circular form of equilibrium of shell. However a buckled form of
equilibrium becomes possible only if Eq. (2.36) yields for A and C solutions different from zero;
this requires the determinant of these equations becomes zero. In this manner the equation for
determining the critical load is obtained. The equation has the matrix form as follows.
- 41 -
X 11
X 12
X 21
X 22
=0
(2.37)
X 11 = 2m 2 2 + (1 )n 2
X 12 = X 21 = (1 )m
) (
(2.38a)
(2.38b)
2 2
2
2
t 2
2
1 2 I r (n2 1) + (1 )m pR(1 ) (n2 1)
2 2
2
X 22 = 2
m + n 1 +
2
Et
2n2
tS
R2
12R
(2.38c)
Substituting Eq. (2.38) into Eq. (2.37) and solving, the following equation can be obtained,
2
2
2
t 2
2 1 Ir (n 1)
(1)m22 pR(1 2 ) 2
(1 )2 m2 2
2 2
2
(2.39)
2 2 m + n 1 +
+
(
n
1
)
=
2 2
2
tS
R2
2n2
Et
12R
2m + (1 )n
After omitting the small terms which have very little effect on the magnitude of the critical
pressure, the critical pressure can be obtained in which the potential energy becomes the
smallest. Where, the longitudinal waves is assumed as m=1. The critical pressure equation can
be rewritten after rearranging,
PcrG =
(2.40)
However, the circumferential waves (n) is demanded when computes the critical pressure. The
minimum energy principle is applied to find the number of circumferential waves. Assuming
< 1 and n>2 and substituting into Eq. (2.40), the Eq. (2.40) can be simplified as follows,
PcrG =
Et
t 2n2
I r n2 4
+
+
R 12(1 2 ) R 2 tR 2 S n 6
(2.41)
To obtain the smallest critical pressure, the Eq. (2.41) should satisfy the Eq. (2.42).
Substituting Eq. (2.41) into Eq. (2.42), the equation of wave to get critical pressure can be
obtained as shown in Eq. (2.43).
PcrG
=0
n
3 4
n=
K
8
where
K=
t2
I
+ 2r
2
2
12(1 ) R
tR S
- 42 -
(2.42)
(2.43)
The local buckling is the buckling type in which, the stiffeners remains its initial circular
shape while the inter-stiffener steel plate deforms with several waves around pipe and a wave
along pipe. Hence the theoretical buckling can be investigated only considering the
inter-stiffener pipe. The corresponding expression of potential energy can be obtained from Eq.
(2.34) by omitting the terms related to stiffeners and replacing the overall length by spacing of
stiffener.
S Et 2 2 2 1
A m + (1 )n2 + AC[(1 )m ]
2
4R 1
2
(1 )m 2 2
1 2
2
t2
2 2
2
+
p(n 2 1) +
m
n
1
C 2
+
2n 2
12 R 2
Et
(2.44)
In the same way, the equation of critical pressure can be obtained using the minimum principle
of potential energy and omitting the small terms, as written in Eq. (2.45).
PcrL =
4
Et t 2 ( 2 + n2 1)2
+
2
(n2 1)R 12(1 2 )R2
2 + n2
(2.45)
In the same way, the equation to find the number of circumferential waves can be obtained.
n=8
3 4
K
(2.46)
where
K=
t2
12(1 2 ) R 2
R
S
- 43 -
From the above discussion, that the stiffened pipe has two buckling types and the critical
pressure equations of two buckling forms vary from each other has been confirmed. It is
therefore, the critical pressure of stiffened pipe should be calculated with respect to the
corresponding buckling type. In this study, the two-stage method is presented by which, the
critical pressure can be obtained through two stages of judging the buckling type and estimating
critical pressure.
As the first stage, the buckling type is judged using the critical pressure equations derived
above. The procedure is given by followings, 1) estimate all the respective critical pressure with
the corresponding theoretical equations (Eq. (2.40) and Eq. (2.45)) in terms of general buckling
and local buckling; 2) compare the two estimated critical pressure and judge the buckling type.
If the critical pressure of general buckling is greater than that of local buckling, the local
buckling occurs first is judged, or the general buckling, based on the buckling behavior of
stiffened pipe. It therefore the bucking type of the stiffened pipe can be determined. In the
second stage, the critical pressure of the stiffened pipe can be estimated by using critical
pressure of judged buckling type. As the result, the accurate and practical critical pressure can
be estimated by the two-stage method for any stiffened pipe.
However, since the study is conducted based on the assumption of elastic buckling, the
identification of elastic buckling should be carried out. The work can be done through checking
the stress of pipe under critical pressure which is given by Eq. (2.47), where cr is the critical
stressfy the yield strength. If cr<fy ,it can be judged that the buckling of stiffened pipe is elastic
buckling.
cr =
RPcr
t
(2.47)
To simplify the identifying work, the limit pressure of elastic buckling (PL ) is introduced and
used to judge buckling state by comparing with the critical pressure. Where, the limit pressure
of elastic buckling (PL ) is the acting external pressure when the critical stress is equal to
yielding strength, and its magnitude can be calculated by Eq. (2.48)Accordingly, the elastic
buckling can also be judged if the critical pressure is smaller than the limit pressure.
PL =
tf y
R
(2.48)
Furthermore, although the stiffener should be taken into account for general buckling, the
judgment method presented above is adopted for all buckling forms disregarding the reinforcing
effects of stiffeners, because the share of axial force by stiffeners is relatively smaller
comparing with that by pipe for a stiffened pipe subjected to uniform external pressure.
- 44 -
Stiffener
Models
are
many
previous
experimental
Aluminum
spacing
Height
thickness
pipe
S(mm)
hr(mm)
tr(mm)
(Al-6061 )
Model1
49.28
7.37
3.56
Model2,9
222.25
17.27
8.64
Model3,10
63.50
8.38
4.06
Model4
148.08
13.46
6.60
Model5
74.17
9.14
4.57
Model6
111.25
11.43
5.59
Model 7,8
88.90
9.91
5.08
Radius:
R=128mm
Length:
L=889mm
thickness:
t=2mm
Poison
Yield strength
E (N/mm2)
y (N/mm2)
6.9E4
0.33
276
Modus
The two-stage method is examined in terms of judgment of buckling types and critical pressure.
All the experimental models shown in Table 2.3 are investigated by two-stage method. First, the
buckling type of respective model is judged and examined through comparing with the
experimental result. Then, the critical pressure corresponding to the judged buckling type is
used and compared with the experimental result. The analytical buckling type and critical
pressure are summarized as shown in Table 2.5 for all models, as well as the corresponding
experimental results including buckling types, critical pressure and collapse pressure. Where,
- 45 -
the experimental critical pressure is ideal pre-buckling pressure of perfect structure estimated by
Southwell method by plotting measured pressure to displacement curve of geometrically
imperfect model, while the collapse pressure is the measured pressure when the testing model
collapses. Moreover, from Table 2.5, that all the model buckles in elastic buckling can be found
because the critical pressure of all models is smaller than limit pressure of elastic buckling PL
(4.31 N/mm2 ). The same result was also given by judging the strains obtained from the
experiment, which all of them are less than yield strain.
The bucking types judged by two-stage method are identical to experimental results for
almost models except model7. The model7 and model8 have the same dimensions and material
properties, however, the buckling types vary each other with general buckling in model7 and
local buckling in model 8. The complex buckling phenomenon was explained in the referring
article, that the model7,8 failed in one of the two possible types (primary type) but their
behavior and ultimate collapse was influenced by the presence of the other type (secondary
type). The interaction role played by the secondary buckling type in buckling behavior was
found to affect the buckling type and deformation pattern but not the buckling pressure. It is
therefore more reasonable only to investigate buckling pressure for such case. As the feature of
respective buckling type, it can be indicated by the failure deformation. For those buckling
which failed by the shell instability form (local buckling), the collapse was always confined to
one bay only. Other bays were either not affected by the excessive deformations at the collapse
bay or developed a different pattern of deformation at collapse. Such behavior characterized the
localized nature of the shell instability form. On the other hand, for the models failed in the
general buckling, the deformation patterns of all the bays were forced to reshapes into the same
final buckling pattern. This characterizes the overall nature of the general buckling type.
As the buckling critical pressure, the errors of theoretical values obtained by two-stage
method are 529 and 524, while those calculated by Kendricks equations in
Table 2.5 Comparison between analytical and experimental results ( unit: N/mm2 )
Buckling forms Judgment
Theoretical results
Local
PLcr
1.30
2.04
2.87
3.81
1.30
Type
Critical
Pcr
1.30
2.04
2.87
Waves
n
6
7
8
Collap
Pu
1.57
2.26
3.26
Critical
Pe
1.61
2.36
3.6
Waves
n
6
8
8
Type
Model2
Model4
Model6
Model7
Model9
General
PGcr
8.77
5.4
4.14
3.4
8.77
L.
L.
L.
1.21
1.11
1.14
1.24
1.16
1.25
3.40
1.30
2
6
2.94
1.36
4.06
1.36*
8
6
L.
L.
0.86
1.05
1.19
1.05
Model1
Model3
Model5
Model8
Model10
2.35
2.7
3.08
3.4
2.7
8.70
6.08
4.87
3.81
6.08
G.
G.
G.
G.
G.
2.35
2.70
3.08
3.40
2.70
2
2
2
2
2
3.03
2.83
3.19
3.52
3.12
3.03
2.96
3.28
3.58
3.17
3
3
3
3
3
G.
G.
G.
G.
G.
1.29
1.05
1.04
1.04
1.16
1.29
1.10
1.06
1.05
1.17
Model
L.
L.
L.
G.
L.
Experimental results
*:Model9, the collapse pressure is used for critical pressure due the experiment failure
- 46 -
Error
Pe
Pu
Pcr
Pcr
Seleims article are 1233 and 1927 less than corresponding experimental results
for general buckling and local buckling, respectively. It is therefore some more valid to use the
two-stage method for investigating the buckling of stiffened pipe, especially under the condition
of known buckling types if use the two-stage method. Moreover, the Kendricks equation is
well known of use for general buckling, the application for local buckling is not demonstrated
well although used in the study of Seleim et al.. Furthermore, as the most interest to engineering
practice, the theoretical pressure is always less than experimental value. This means the
influence of imperfection is so little that can be ignored. The explanation can be considered as
follows: the influence of imperfection on a stiffened pipe is far different from a plain thin wall
pipe because the buckling resistance capacity is determined not only by the pipe shell but also
the stiffeners for stiffened pipe; in addition, the interaction of pipe shell and stiffeners may
reduce the influence of imperfection; otherwise, the theoretical critical pressure may be
underestimated due to the modeling with shell and beam element for pipe and stiffeners
respectively and disregarding the effect of interaction between pipe and stiffeners in theoretical
analysis. In Tennysons study, the same results that the theoretical critical pressure is 15% less
than experimental value has been mentioned. Accordingly, it should be correct to consider that
the effect is greater due to interaction of stiffeners and pipe than imperfection in practical
buckling behaviors of stiffened pipe under lateral pressure.
From the above studies, it was verified that the two-stage method is rather valid solution for
analysis of stiffened pipe buckling, because not only the buckling type but also the more
accurate critical pressure can be predicted. Furthermore, since the two-stage method always
gives conservative critical pressure, the stiffened pipe may also be designed safely when apply
this method.
Comparison between Two-stage Method and Existing Buckling Equations
As discussed above, the buckling theory of stiffened pipe has been studied by Tokugawa,
Timoshenko, Bryant and Kendrick, and the corresponding solution equations have been given.
However, the validation of all the theories for an arbitrary stiffened pipe should be examined. In
this study, the examinations are carried out through comparing theoretical results with
experimental results and the analytical results by two-stage method for all test models, in terms
of the number of buckling waves and critical pressure. The comparison results with respect to
the number of buckling waves and the critical pressure are shown in Figs. 2.12, 2.13, 2.14, 2.15
and 2.16, respectively. Where, the number of buckling waves and theoretical pressures are
calculated using the respective buckling equations presented previously.
- 47 -
Two-stage method
Timoshenko
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Kendrick
Tokugawa
Btyant
Experiment
Local buckling
mo
General buckling
mo
mo
mo
mo
mo
mo
mo
mo
mo
de
de
de
de
de
de
de
de
de
de
l10
l8
l5
l3
l1
l9
l7
l6
l4
l2
9.0
8.0
Two-stage method
Kendrick
Experimental critical pressure
Experimental collapse pressure
7.0
10.0
General buckling
Local buckling
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
Critical/Collapse pressureN/mm 2
Critical/Collapse pressureN/mm 2
10.0
0.0
mo
d
e l2
mo
d
e l4
mo
d
e l6
mo
de
l7
mo
d
e l9
mo
mo
mo
mo
mo
de
de
de
de
de
l1
l3
l5
l8
l10
- 48 -
9.0
Two-stage method
Byant
Experimental critical pressure
Experimental collapse pressure
8.0
Local buckling
7.0
General buckling
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
mo
d
e l2
mo
d
e l4
mo
d
e l6
mo
d
e l7
mo
d
e l9
mo
d
e l1
mo
d
e l3
mo
d
e l5
mo
d
e l8
mo
d
e l1
9.0
8.0
7.0
Two-stage method
Tokugawa
Experimental critical pressure
Experimental collapse pressure
Local buckling
10.0
Critical/Collapse pressureN/mm 2
Critical/Collapse pressureN/mm 2
10.0
General buckling
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
9.0
8.0
Two-stage method
Timoshenko
Experimental critical pressure
Experimental collapse pressure
Local buckling
7.0
General buckling
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
mo
mo
mo
mo
mo
mo
mo
mo
mo
mo
de
de
de
de
de
de
de
de
de
de
l2
l6
l4
l7
l9
l1
l5
l10
l3
l8
mo
d
e l2
mo
d
e l4
mo
d
e l6
mo
d
e l7
mo
d
e l9
mo
d
e l1
mo
d
e l3
mo
d
e l5
mo
d
e l8
The implication is tested by the subsequently calculated critical pressure. As shown in Figs.
2.13 and 2.14, the experimental results generally are coincident with Bryant and Kendricks
critical pressure in general buckling, however there is great difference existing in local buckling.
Inversely, as shown in Fig. 2.15 and 2.16, the critical pressure from Tokogawa and
Timoshenkos equations agrees well with the experimental results in local buckling while
disagrees with those in general buckling. However, with respect to difference between the
existing buckling theories, there is little difference between Tokogawa and Timoshenkos
critical pressure in general buckling, while Bryants solution presents more conservational
critical pressure than Kendricks in general buckling. On the other hand, only the critical
pressures estimated by tow-stage method are satisfied with experimental results in all general
and local buckling.
Consequently, it is more rational and reasonable to consider that the buckling theories of
Tokugawa and Timoshenko are only suitable for local buckling and those of Kendrick and
Bryant are suitable for general buckling. While for an arbitrary stiffened pipe with buckling type
unknown previously, the critical pressure should be estimated using the two-stage method.
- 49 -
mo
d
e l1
The two-stage method is a very useful and rational tool to solve the problem of stiffened pipe
buckling under external pressure has been confirmed from the above discussion. However, as
for the bucking design, the theoretical analysis of buckling behavior is required in many cases
other than the buckling critical pressure. Until present, the investigation of buckling behavior
can only be carried out using the numerical analysis (FEM) or experiment because there is no a
reliable analytical solution. Since the investigation for the buckling behavios of pipe usually
requires much time and cost, no matter using numerical analysis or experiments, the theoretical
solution should be discussed. In the following paragraph, an effective and simple theoretical
analysis method using two-stage method will be presented, and be examined by conventional
methods of numerical analysis. Meanwhile, the more detailed description on buckling behavior
will also be given. Where, the testing models used in former paragraphs, are adopted in the
analytical models with respect to the numerical and theoretical analyses.
Theoretical Analysis by Two-stage Method
The buckling behavior is discussed from the following three aspects: a) buckling behavior with
changing of the second moment of inertia of stiffeners with respect to a particular spacing, b)
buckling behavior with changes in the spacing of stiffeners, and, c) influence of the geometry of
cylindrical shells. Accordingly, the analysis of buckling behavior using two-stage method can
be carried out as follows: 1) increase the rigid stiffness of stiffeners and calculate the
corresponding buckling critical pressure using two-stage method; 2) repeat step 1) with respect
to the constant pipe with a alterative spacing of stiffeners; and, 3) repeat step 1) with respect to a
alterative pipe with a constant spacing of stiffeners. Thus, the buckling behavior of any an
arbitrary stiffened pipe can be obtained in terms of the relation of critical pressure to second
moment of inertia of stiffener.
Numerical Analysis by Finite Element Method
The numerical analysis is carried out using FEM software MSC.Marc. In the current study,
the investigation of buckling behavior is conducted by applying linear buckling analysis,
considering the non-linear characteristics has little influence on the elastic buckling of a perfect
cylindrical under uniformly external pressure.
As for the modeling of stiffened pipe, considering the interaction between pipe and stiffeners is
mainly due to transverse shear, the stiffener and pipe are modeled using bilinear thick-shell
element, which is a four-node, thick-shell element with global displacements and rotations as
degrees of freedom. Bilinear interpolation is used for the coordinates, displacements and the
rotations. The membrane strains are obtained from the displacement field; and the curvatures are
- 50 -
from the rotation field. The transverse shear strains are calculated at the middle of the edges and
interpolated to the integration points. In this way, a very efficient and simple element is
obtained which exhibits correct behavior in the limiting case of thin shells. The element can be
used in curved shell analysis as well as in the analysis of complicated plate structures. For the
latter case, the element is easy to use since connections between intersecting plates can be
modeled without tying. Due to its simple formulation comparing to the standard higher order
shell elements, it is less expensive and, therefore, very attractive in nonlinear analysis. The
element is not very sensitive to distortion, particularly if the corner nodes lie in the same plane.
All constitutive relations can be used with this element.
Verification of Buckling Behavior
The buckling behaviors of all models are simulated using theoretical and numerical analysis,
which are shown in Figs.2.17~2.23, respectively. Meanwhile, the experimental results are also
given in the corresponding figure. In addition, the limit stiffness of stiffener and the buckling
deformation profile of respective model are also shown in these figures. Otherwise, to illustrate
the buckling deformation type and counting method of the number of buckling waves, the
buckling deformation are demonstrated in Fig. 2.24, in terms of 3D view and plan view, where
the bucking deformation of a general buckling and two patterns of local buckling are shown.
The deformed location varies with the spacing of stiffeners; generally for large spacing the
buckling deforms all inter-stiffener shells of overall stiffened pipe, while inter-stiffener shell at
the end of stiffened pipe deforms for narrow spacing. As the number of buckling waves, it is
equivalent to the number of outer wave peaks for general buckling and pattern 1 of the local
buckling, half of number of outer wave peaks for pattern 2 of the local buckling.
Figures 2.17~2.23 indicate that all the buckling behavior obtained by two-stage method agree
well with the corresponding numerical analysis results. The buckling behavior expresses the
feature that the buckling type changes from general buckling to local buckling when the
stiffness of stiffeners reaches the limit stiffness; the critical pressure increases with the increase
of stiffeners stiffness in general buckling, while maintains the maximum critical pressure of
general buckling in local buckling. In addition, that the experimental results of buckling type
and critical pressure are satisfied well by corresponding numerical and theoretical analysis
results is illustrated except model7. It is therefore easy to consider that an arbitrary stiffened
pipe can be estimated in terms of the buckling type and critical pressure if the buckling behavior
is known. However, it may be noted that there is a little difference between numerical and
theoretical analysis in local buckling. The critical pressure obtained from numerical analysis has
a trend of increasing with the enlargement of stiffener. The reason may be considered that the
supports at two ends of inter-stiffener shell become stronger and the spacing decrease with the
increase of stiffness of stiffeners.
- 51 -
Theoretica
Numerical
10.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
Experimenta
l
2
2
Critical pressure
P c r (N/mm
)
(N/mm
)
2
)
Critical(N/mm
pressure P c r (N/mm
)
L.B. domain
L.B.
G.B.
G.B. domain
697
0
3899
4.0
L.B.
G.B.
3.0
G.B.
domain
1123
0
3278
2 I
r (mm
Theoretica
l
0.2
Experimenta
l
L.B.
G.B.
G.B. domain
1597
0.0
1000
2000
2970
3000
4000
5000
2
2
Critical(N/mm
pressure P c r (N/mm
)
)
Theoretica
l
Experimenta
l
L.B.
G.B.
G.B.
domain
1980
6000
4.0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6678
6000
7000
8000
Numerical
Theoretica
l
Experimenta
l
3.5
3.0
L.B. domain
2.5
2.0
1.5
G.B. domain
1.0
0.5
2500
0.0
0
1000
2000
L.B.
G.B.
3589
3000
4000
5000
4
4
Moment
)
2(mm
)
of inertia of stiffener I r (mm
Theoretica
l
7500
L.B. domain
Numerical
5000
Numerical
2.8
2.5
2.3
2.0
1.8
1.5
1.3
1.0
0.8
0.5
0.3
0.0
4
2(mm
)
Moment
(mm
)
ofinertia
of
stiffener
2 I r
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2500
17604
(N/mm )
3.0
2.0
949
0.0
L.B. domain
0.4
L.B.
4 )
Moment
ofinertia
I r (mm
)
2(mm
ofstiffener
2
5.0
4.0
G.B.
G.B. domain
2
2
Critical (N/mm
pressure P c r (N/mm
)
)
Numerical
1.0
0.6
8000
0.8
5.0
0.0
L.B.
domain
1.0
L.B. domain
6.0
1.0
1.2
4
Moment
inertia
of stiffener
r (mm
2Ir(mm
of
2 I
) )
Theoretica
l
Experimenta
l
7.0
2.0
1.4
2
2
Critical(N/mm
pressure P c r (N/mm
)
)
2
2
Critical(N/mm
pressure P c r (N/mm
)
)
Numerical
Theoretica
l
Experimenta
l
1.6
Numerical
1.8
Experimenta
l
L.B. domain
G.B.
L.B.
G.B.
domain
2204
0
1000
2000
2622
3000
4000
5000
n=3
n=10
n=8
6000
4
))
Moment
(mm
2(mm
ofinertia
of
stiffener
2 I r
As the special case that the same model as model 7, 8 buckled in two bucking types in
experiment, its explanation can be found in the buckling behavior. As shown in Fig. 2.23, the
second moment of inertia of stiffeners for model7, 8 is 2204mm4, almost equivalent to
2622mm4, the limit stiffness of stiffeners. This means the stiffening condition is just near to the
boundary of local buckling and general buckling. In fact, the interesting phenomenon also
induces an important issue for buckling of stiffened pipe. For stiffened pipe, there exists a
crossing range of buckling types in which the stiffened pipe failed in one of the two potential
buckling types. The range is defined with respective of the stiffness of stiffeners, named
crossing range. Actually, the existence of crossing range is not only indicted in the referring
experiments but also in the experimental results shown in DNV35)BS550036) and ASME37)
CodeHowever, in theoretical analysis using two-staged method the buckling type is always
determined as that having smaller critical pressure of general buckling between local buckling.
Accordingly, the conservative critical pressure can be ensured in crossing range
On the other hand, another interesting phenomenon that there are two buckling patterns
existing in local bucking was confirmed through the numerical analysis. One of buckling
patterns is that only buckled at the end of stiffened pipe, namely end local buckling, while the
other happens in overall stiffened pipe, namely overall local buckling. Moreover, the buckling
pattern is related to the ratio of spacing to radius S/R, generally end local buckling for S/R1 ,
overall local buckling for S/R>1. This can be found by focusing on the deformation profile
shown in Figs.2.17 ~24. Model1, Model310Model5 and Model78 , whose ratio of spacing
to radius S/R is less than 1, occurred end local buckling, while the other models with S/R greater
than 1 buckled in overall buckling. The reason has been given by Charles as that stresses
distributed in supported ends of pipe reaches plasticity and induced a plastic buckling. The
additional explanation can be considered that for stiffened pipe with wider spacing the critical
pressure of local buckling was smaller and the local buckling was elastic buckling, then overall
local buckling happened.
The buckling behavior analysis using two-stage method is confirmed in terms of validation
and an efficient method for buckling study. In addition, the details on the buckling behavior of
stiffened pipe have been investigated and discussed. As a result, the buckling behavior
simulation can provide the accurate analysis of any stiffened pipes, with respect to not only the
buckling types and critical pressure but also the various buckling phenomenon.
- 53 -
References
1) Berti, D., Stutzman, R., Lindquist, E., and Eshghipour, M.: Buckling of steel tunnel liner
under external pressure, J. Energy Engng., Vol. 124, No.3, pp. 5589, 1998.
2) Von Mises, R. Der kritische Aubendruck zylindrischer Rohre (The critical external pressure
of cylindrical tubes). VDI-Zeitschrift, Vol. 58, pp.750755,1914 [in German].
3) Donnell, L. H.: Beams, plates and shells, McGraw-Hill, NewYork, 1976.
4) Southwell, R. V.: On the general theory of elastic stability, Philosophical Trans., 213A,
pp.187-244, 1913.
5) Timoshenko, S. and Gere, J.: Theory of Elastic Stability, McGraw Hill, New York, 1961.
6) Flgge, W.: Stress in Shells, pp.208-218,407-432, Springer-Verlag, OHG., Berlin, 1960.
7) Tokugawa, T.: Model experiments on the elastic stability of closed and cross- stiffened
circular cylinders under uniform external pressure, Proc. of the World Engineering
Congress, Tokyo, No.651, pp. 249-79, 1929.
8) Reis, A. J. and Walker, A. C.: Local buckling strength of ring stiffened cylindrical shells
under external pressureApplied Ocean ResearchVol.5, Iss. 2, Pages 56-62, 1983.
9) Yamamot, .: Study on general bucking of stiffened cylindrical shells under external
pressure, Jour. of the Society of Naval Architects of JapanVol. 113pp.95-105, 1968.
10) Seleim, S.S. and Roorda, J.: Buckling behavior of ring- stiffened cylinders: experimental
study, Thin -Walled Struct., Vol. 4, Issue 3, pp.203-222, 1986.
11) Ellinas, C. P. and Supple, J.: Buckling Design of Ring-Stiffened Cylinders, Jour. of
Waterway, Port, Coastal and Ocean Engineering, Vol.110, Issue 4, pp. 413-431, 1984.
12) Kendrick, S.: The buckling under external pressure of circular cylindrical shells with evenly
spaced equal strength circular ring frames Part I, NCRE Rep. R211, 1953.
13) Bryant, A.R.: Hydrostatic Pressure Buckling of a Ring-stiffened Tube, Naval Construction
Research Establishment, Rep. R306, 1954.
14) Donnell, L. H.: Stability of thin-walled tubes under torsion, NACA Rep. No. 479, 1933.
15) Yamaki, N.: Elastic Stability of Circular Cylindrical Shells, pp.10-15, pp.56-79,
North-Holland, 1984.
16) Koiter, W. T.: On the stability of elastic stability for thin shells, Proc. of Symp. on the theory
of shells to honor Lloyd Hamilton Donnell, Univ. Houston, pp.187-227, 1967.
17) Arbocz, J.: Shell stability analysis: theory and practice, Proc. of Symp. on Collapse the
buckling of structures in theory and practice, London, pp.43-74, Univ. Cambridge Press,
1983.
18) Thompson, J.M.T. and Hunt, G.W.: On the buckling and imperfection-sensitivity of arches
with and without prestress, International Journal of Solids and Structures, Vol.19, Issue 5,
Pages 445-459, 1983.
- 54 -
19) Tennyson, R.C.: The effect of shape imperfections and stiffening on the buckling of circular
cylinders, Proc. of Symp. Buckling of Structure, Univ. Harvard, pp.251-273, SpringerVerlag , 1976.
20) Marc Analysis Research Corp.: Msc.Marc 2005, Volume A, Volume BMarc Analysis
Research Corp. , 2005.
21) Baker, E. H., Kovalevesky, L. and Rish, F. L.: Structural Analysis of Shell, pp. 306-323,
McGraw-Hill, 1972
22) Wang, J. H.Watanabe, A. and Koizumi, A.: study on the buckling behavior and design
of ring-stiffened pipes under external pressure for water pipeline constructed in deep
underground, Journal of Tunnel Engineering, JSCEVol.16pp.133-1432006.
23) Wang, J.H., Koizumi, A. and Watanabe, A.: On Buckling of Inner Steel Pipe under External
Pressure for Water Supply Lines Constructed in Shield-driven Tunnel, Proceedings of the
tenth East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering & Construction (EASEC-10),
Bangkok, Thailand, Vol.4, pp. 341-356, Aug. 3-5, 2006.
24) Wang, J. H. and Koizumi, A.: Theoretical study on buckling of deep water pipeline under
external hydrostatic pressure, JSCE Journals, Division AVol.64No.3, pp.588-6022008.
25) Goncalvers, P. B. and Batista, R. C.: Buckling and sensitivity estimates for ring-stiffened
cylinders under external pressure, Int. J. Mech. Sci., Vol.27, No.1 pp. 1-11, 1985.
26) JSCE: Buckling Design Guideline, JSCE Pub. 2005
27) Tian, J., Wang, C.M. and Swaddiwudhipong, S. : Elastic buckling analysis of
ring-stiffened cylindrical shells under general pressure loading via Ritz method, Thin-Walled
Struct., Vol. 35, pp.1-24, 1999.
28) Kempner, D. J., Misoves, A.P. and Herzner, F. C.: Ring-stiffened orthotropic circular
cylindrical shell under hydrostatic pressure, Jour. Ocean Engng., Vol. 1, pp.575-595, 1970.
29) Sridharan, S.: Collapse analysis of ring-stiffened cylinders using ring elements, Jour.
Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, Vol.123, No.4, pp.367-375, 1997.
30) Ritz, W.: Ueber eine neue Methode zur Lsung gewisser Variationsprobleme der
mathematischen Physik, J. Reine Angew, Math., 135, pp. 161, 1908.
31) Voce, S. J.: Buckling under external hydrostatic pressure of orthotropic cylindrical shells
with evenly spaced equal strength circular ring frames, Jour. Ocean Engng., Vol.1,
pp.521-534, 1969.
32) Yamamoto, Y., Homma, Y. and Oshima, K.: General Instability of Ring-Stiffened
Cylindrical Shells Under External Pressure, Mar. Struct., Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 133-149,
1989.
33) Frieze, P.A.: The experimental Response of Flat-Bar stiffeners in cylinders under External
pressure, Jour. Marine Struct., Vol.7, pp.213-230, 1994.
- 55 -
- 56 -