International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 75 (1998) 115–120

Finite element analysis for buckling of pressure vessels with ellipsoidal

head
J.Z. Li, Y.H. Liu, Z.Z. Cen, B.Y. Xu
Department of Engineering Mechanics, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People’s Republic of China
Received 13 February 1998; accepted 11 March 1998

Abstract

In this paper, a finite element analysis is performed for buckling of the pressure vessels with ellipsoidal head subjected to uniform pressure.
According to the characteristic of deformation of the pressure vessel, it is divided into some identical substructures. The degrees of freedom
(DOFs) of joint nodes between the neighboring substructures are classified as master and slave ones. The stress and strain distributions of the
whole structure are obtained by solving the static equations for only one substructure by introducing the displacement constraints between
master and slave DOFs. The complex constraint method has been used to get the buckling load and mode for the whole structure by solving
the eigenvalue problem for only one substructure without introducing any additional approximation. Some numerical examples have been
given to illustrate the high efficiency and validity of this method. q 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

Keywords: buckling analysis; pressure vessel; complex constraint method; substructure

1. Introduction substructures by the angle f corresponding to a full buck-

Many engineering structures are axisymmetric, and can
be analyzed using axisymmetric elements to take full advan-
tage of their axisymmetric nature. However, if in some
cases, the structure and the load are all axisymmetric but
the deformation is rotationally periodical but not axisym-
metric exactly, it is necessary to analyze the whole structure.
If we can take full consideration of the advantage of the
structure and its deformation and use a proper simplified
analysis method, the number of degrees of freedom
(DOFs) of the structure introduced into the solving equation
will be significantly reduced.
Generally, in the buckling analysis, the prebuckling beha-
vior of the structure must be accurately analyzed first, and
then the buckling equation is solved as an eigenvalue
problem.
In the linear buckling analysis of cylinder shell and
pressure vessel with ellipsoidal head, Bushnell [1,2] per-
formed the linear and nonlinear prebuckling analysis with
axisymmetric elements and buckling analysis by expressing
eigenvectors as the summation of some harmonic terms.
Blachut and Galletly [3] carried out the buckling analysis
of the whole hemisphere with shell elements. Soric [4] ana-
lyzed the whole structure to get the buckling load and mode
of a torispherical shell, dividing the whole structure into
0308-0161/98/$19.00 q 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
PII: S0 30 8 -0 1 61 ( 98 ) 00 0 27 - 1
ling wave in the circumferential direction. However, in
order to obtain satisfying results, they used many elements
to analyze the whole structure and the analysis efficiency
was not very high.
In this paper, we first develop a method for the large
deformation elastic analysis of axisymmetric structure sub-
jected to axisymmetric loads to investigate the prebuckling
behavior. Then the formula of bifurcation buckling analysis
for such structures is presented using the complex constraint
method. Finally, buckling analyses of pressure vessels with
ellipsoidal head under uniform pressure are performed using
this method. In the following, it is assumed that the axisym-
metric vessel is divided into N identical substructures and
every substructure has J DOFs. Fig. 1 shows the geometry
of a torispherical shell and Fig. 2 shows a typical substruc-
ture of the whole shell.
2. Prebuckling analysis
The incremental form of the elastic equilibrium equation
for the prebuckling behavior of a structure may be derived
from the stationary condition of the total incremental poten-
tial energy using the total Lagrangian (T.L.) formulation [5].
The linearized equation for the computational model can be
116 J. Z. Li et al./International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 75 (1998) 115–120

Fig. 1. The geometry of torispherical shells.

expressed as
KU ¼ 0t þ Dt Q ¹ t0 F (1)
where K ¼ t0 KL0 þ t0 KL1 þ t0 KNL , t0 KL0 is the linear-elastic
stiffness matrix, t0 KL1 is called the initial-displacement stiff-
ness matrix introduced by considering the displacement at
time t, t0 KNL is called the stress stiffness matrix introduced
by considering the stress at time t, U is the displacement
increment from t to t þ Dt, and t0 F is the vector of internal
forces at time t. Here t has no general meaning of time but
the meaning of a load level tQ. The suffix ‘0’ in Eq. (1) Fig. 2. A typical substructure of a torispherical shell.
means the variable is calculated depending on the deforma-
in the cylindrical coordinates of the whole structure.
tion of the structure at time ‘0’.
The first row of Eq. (3) can be written as
The stiffness matrix for the jth substructure can be
expressed as,    
2 3 K(N) (1) (2) (1) (N)
11 þ K11 þ K11 U1 þ K1N þ K1N UN
0 0 0 0  
6 7
6 ] : : : 7 þ K(1) (2)
12 þ K12 U2 ¼ P1 ð4Þ
6 7
6 7
60 … K (j) (j) … 07
6 (j ¹ 1)(j ¹ 1) K(j ¹ 1)j 0 7
6 7 In cylindrical coordination, because the substructures are all
(j) 6 … (j) (j) (j) … 7
K ¼6 0 Kj(j ¹ 1) Kjj Kj(j þ 1) 07 identical, every substructure has the same
6 7
0 KL0 , 0 KL1 and 0 KNL , then the same K, so
t t t
6 7
60 … 0 (j) (j)
K(j þ 1)j K(j þ 1)(j þ 1) … 07
6 7
6 7 K(j) (1)
6 : : : ] 7 11 ¼ K(N þ 2 ¹ j)(N þ 2 ¹ j) for j ¼ 2, ::: N
4 5
0 0 0 0 and hence
(2)
The size of every submatrix is J 3 J. In the above matrix, K(N) (1) (2) (1)
11 þ K11 þ K11 ¼ K22 þ K11 þ KNN
(1) (1)
(5)
(j)
Kjj represents the interaction between the J DOFs in the jth
substructure, and the N ¹ 1 triads of submatrices The corresponding connection terms between substructures
(j) (j) (j) are also identical, so
Kij , Kji , Kii represent the interaction between the ith
and jth substructures.
Assembling the stiffness matrix of every substructure, we K(j) (1)
1j ¼ K(N þ 2 ¹ j)1 for j ¼ 2, N (6)
get the elastic equilibrium equation for the whole structure
2 (N) 38 98 9
K11 þ K(1) (2)
K(1) (2) … K(1) (N)
> U1 > > P1 >
11 þ K11 12 þ K12 1N þ K1N > > > >
6 7>> >
> >
> >
>
6 (2) (1) (1) (2) (3) … 7 >
< >
= >
< >
=
6 K21 þ K21 K22 þ K22 þ K22 0 7 U 2 P 2
6 7 (3)
6 : : … 7>> : >
> >
> : >
>
4 ] 5>> >
> >
> >
>
> >
;> >
(N) (1) … (N ¹ 1) (N) (1) : :
P
;
K þK
N1 N1 0 K þK þK
NN NN
U NNN N

where U1 , U2 , …, UN are the displacement vectors and Because the load which every substructure is subjected to is
P1 , P2 , …, PN are the load vectors for every substructure identical in the cylindrical coordination
 J. Z. Li et al./International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 75 (1998) 115–120 117

written as
h i
K(1) (1) (1) T (1)
11 þ K22 þ K12 L þ L K21 U1 ¼ P1 (12)

Because Eq. (1) is nonlinear, some iteration solution meth-

ods can be introduced. The stiffness matrix needs to be
formed many times and Eq. (12) needs to be formed and
solved many times, so the reduction of number of DOFs in
Fig. 3. DOFs of a typical substructure. Eq. (12) may improve the efficiency greatly.

P1 ¼ P2 ¼ … ¼ PN (7)
and hence 3. Equation of buckling analysis
U1 ¼ U2 ¼ … ¼ UN (8) Bifurcation buckling is a quite different equilibrium path
Now U2 to UN can be eliminated from Eq. (4) by using from the prebuckling pattern, but the buckling load depends
Eq. (7) Eq. (8). Substituting Eq. (5) Eq. (6) into Eq. (4), on the prebuckling equilibrium path.
one has In the prebuckling equilibrium Eq. (1), we can assume
h    that when the load is increased to tQ, the bifurcation point is
K(1)
NN þ K (1)
11 þ K (1)
22 þ K (1)
12 þ K (1)
N1 reached. That means in Eq. (1),
  t þ Dt
þ K(1) (1) Q ¼ tQ
1N þ K21 ÿU1 ¼ P1 ð9Þ
so
This is a linearized equation containing only the J DOFs in
t þ Dt
substructure 1, and it is not coupled with any DOFs in other Q ¹ t0 F ¼ 0
substructures. but
Because in Eq. (9)
UÞ0
K(1)
1j ¼ K(1)
j1 for j ¼ 2, … N Hence, Eq. (1) becomes
ÿt t t


0 KL0 þ 0 KL1 þ 0 KNL U ¼ 0 (13)
the stiffness matrix of Eq. (9) is real and symmetric. We can
solve Eq. (9) with any computer program that can solve In the elastic bifurcation buckling analysis of a structure, a
regular elastic static problem. reference load level Q r is introduced and it is assumed that
In Cartesian coordination, Eq. (9) can be written as the critical load Q c can be expressed as
h    Qc ¼ lQr (14)
K(1) (1) (1) (1) (1)
NN þ K11 þ K22 þ K12 L þ LKN1
so
 
þ K(1) T T (1)
1N L þ L K21 ÿU1 ¼ P1 ð10Þ c
0 KL0 ¼ t0 KL0 ¼ 00 KL0
c
where L is the transfer matrix from substructure j to sub- 0 KL1 ¼ lr0 KL1
structure j þ 1, and L can be written as c
2 3 0 KNL ¼ lr0 KNL
l 2 3 Hence, Eq. (13) becomes an eigenvalue one
6 7 cos J ¹ sin J 0
t ÿr

6 l 7 6 7
6 7 r
L¼6 7 and l ¼ 6
4 sin J cos J 075
0 KL0 þ l 0 KL1 þ 0 KNL U ¼ 0 (15)
6 ] 7
4 5 and can be written as
0 0 1
l  ÿ

KL0 ¹ l ¹ KL1 ¹ KNL U ¼ 0 (16)
(11)
In some cases, some diagonal terms in matrix -(K L1 þ K NL)
It can be assumed that all the nodes on the interface ‘1–N’ are nonpositive and we need to make some changes in Eq.
between first and Nth substructures belong to substructure 1 (16) as follows
and all the nodes on the interface ‘1–2’ between first and  ÿ

second substructures belong to substructure 2, as in Fig. 3. l KL0 þ KL1 þ KNL ¹ ðl ¹ 1ÞKL0 U ¼ 0
The DOFs of the nodes on the interface ‘1–N’ are defined as or
master ones and the DOFs of the nodes on the interface ‘1– ÿ

2’ are defined as slave ones. In this case, Eq. (10) can be KL0 þ KL1 þ KNL ¹ QKL0 U ¼ 0 (17)
118 J. Z. Li et al./International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 75 (1998) 115–120

Fig. 4. The geometry of a hemi-ellipsoidal deme.

Fig. 5. Buckling mode of a hemi-ellipsoidal dome under external pressure.
where
Eq. (20) into Eq. (19) and picking out the first row of
l¹1 1 Eq. (19), we have
Q¼ or l ¼
l 1¹Q nh i
Eq. (17) can be written as K(N) þ K (1)
þ K (2)
K (1)
þ K (2)
0 …0 K(1) þ K(N)
11 11 11 12 12 1N 1N
h io
(K ¹ QM)U ¼ 0 (18) ¹ Q M11(N)
þ M(1) þ M (2)
M (1)
þ M (2)
0 …0 M(1) þ M(N)
11 11 12 12 1N 1N
8 (1) 9
here K ¼ KL0 þ KL1 þ K NL and M ¼ K L0. K can be called >
> z > >
>
> >
>
the total stiffness matrix and M is the linear elastic stiffness >
> >
matrix. <z >
(2) =
¼0 ð19Þ
Because the structure is axisymmetrical, every >
> : >
>
>
> >
>
substructure has the same M. If the load is also axisym- >
> >
metrical, every substructure has the same pre-buckling : (N) >
;
z
stress and strain distribution, so every substructure has the
same K L1 and K NL, then the same K. The matrices K and M z (2) to z (N) can be eliminated from Eq. (22) by using Eq. (21).
for the jth substructure have the same expression, as in Since all the substructures are identical and every
Eq. (2). substructure has the same pre-buckling strain and stress
The eigenvalue Eq. (18) of an axisymmetric structure can distribution, Eq. (22) can be written as
be treated as that of a rotationally periodic structure. For nh 
such an eigenvalue problem of rotationally periodic struc- K(1)
NN þ K (1)
11 þ K (1) (1) imJ
22 þ K12 e þ K(1)1N e
imJ
þ K(1)
N1 e
imJ
ture, Thomas [6] demonstrated that complex eigenvalue i h 
equation þ K(1) 21 e
imJ
¹ Q M(1) (1) (1)
NN þ M11 þ M22 þ M12 e
(1) imJ

io
(K ¹ QM){z} ¼ 0 (19)
þ M(1) 1N e
imJ
þ M(1)N1 e
imJ
þ M(1)
21 e
imJ
z(1) ¼ 0 ð23Þ
has the same eigenvalues as real eigenvalue Eq. (18), and
n T oT Eq. (23) is an eigenvalue one containing only the J DOFs in
fzg ¼ z(1) z(2) z(3) … z(N)
T T T
(20) substructure 1, and it is not coupled with any DOFs in other
substructures. The total stiffness matrix and linear stiffness
  matrix in Eq. (23) are both Hermitian ones. It can therefore
z(j) ¼ eimJ z(j ¹ 1) m ¼ 1, 2, …, N (21)
be solved to give J eigenvalues Q and associated eigen-
here {z} ¼ {u} þ i{u}. {u} and {u} are a pair of orthogonal vectors {z (1)}, and Eq. (21) can then be used to generate
and normalized eigenvectors for Eq. (18) with the same eigen- the J eigenvectors {z} which act on the whole structure.
values. The eigenvector {z} is complex, and the associated ortho-
Assembling the total stiffness matrix K and linear elastic gonal pairs of real eigenvectors, {u} and {u}, can be
matrix M for the whole structure in Eq. (19), substituting obtained from the real and imaginary parts of {z}.

Table 1
Buckling pressure (MPa) for hemi-ellipsoidal domes

Experiment VMC CCC QQC This paper

Buckling pressure 0.364 0.323 (8) 0.321 (7) 0.321 (7) 0.329 (7)
Error to experimental – 11.3% 11.8% 11.8% 9.6%
result
 J. Z. Li et al./International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 75 (1998) 115–120
Fig. 6. Axisymmetrically deformed torispherical shell under internal
pressure.
4. Numerical examples
4.1. Elastic buckling of a thin-walled dome under uniform
external pressure
A thin-walled dome made of solid urethane plastic (SUP)
is shown in Fig. 4. SUP has the following properties:
Young’s modulus ¼ 2.89 3 10 9 Pa, Poisson’s ratio ¼ 0.3.
Ross [7] did some experiments and numerical analyses to
obtain the elastic buckling load and mode of the dome. He
used three kinds of shell elements, VMC, CCC, QQC, to
perform the numerical analysis. In this paper, we divide the
whole dome into 40 identical substructures and use 16-node
relative degree-of-freedom shell elements and the complex
constraint method presented above to obtain the elastic
buckling load and mode. The buckling loads of this paper
and Ross’ reference are given in Table 1. The buckling
mode of this paper is shown in Fig. 5. The numbers of
Fig. 7. Buckling mode of a torispherical shell under internal pressure.
119
circumferential waves of the buckling mode of this paper
and of Ross are listed in the brackets of Table 1.
Table 1 and Fig. 5 show that the results of this paper are in
good agreement with that of Ross.
4.2. Buckling of a torispherical shell subjected to internal
pressure
The pressure vessel shown in Fig. 1 is made of steel with
the Young’s modulus E ¼ 210 GPa and the Poisson’s ratio
n ¼ 0.3. The radius and thickness of the sphere shell are
2.5m and 0.0015m, the radius and thickness of the annular
shell are 0.15 m and 0.003 m; the cylinder is 2 m high and
0.003 m thick.
The shell is divided into 40, 50 and 60 identical substruc-
tures, respectively. Sixteen-node relative degree-of-freedom
shell elements are used in the prebuckling and buckling
analysis of this pressure vessel with variable thickness.
The axisymmetrically deformed head under internal
pressure is shown in Fig. 6. The computed elastic buckling
loads is 0.054 MPa. The first buckling mode of the whole
structure is shown in Fig. 7.
We also carried out an experiment on the same vessel to
investigate the characteristic of its deformation and buck-
ling in the Strength Laboratory of Tsinghua University. The
buckling pressure of experiment is 0.056 MPa. Due to Soric
[4], the buckling of this kind of shell under internal pressure
is insensitive to initial geometric imperfection, hence the
experimental buckling load is reliable. We can see by
the comparison that the finite element result shows good
agreement with that obtained by the experiment.
5. Conclusions
In this paper, a simplified elastic stability analysis method
for axisymmetric pressure vessel with ellipsoidal head
under uniform pressure has been presented without introdu-
cing any additional approximation. The prebuckling
behavior of the structure is obtained by analyzing only
one substructure and the buckling problem is solved as a
complex eigenvalue one by the complex constraint method.
The operation of the method is performed on a single sub-
structure throughout. Numerical examples compared with
known solutions and experimental data indicate that this
method is practical and efficient.
In the pre-buckling analysis, if the whole structure is
divided into N substructures, the number of the total equa-
tions and the width of half-band of the stiffness matrix will
be reduced to 1/N of those for the whole structure with the
same mesh. The requirement for the hard disk capacity of
the computer will be reduced to 1/N 2 and the analysis time
will be reduced greatly. For the same reason, the time for
eigenvalue problem analysis will also be reduced remark-
ably despite the higher complexity of the complex eigen-
value problem.
120 J. Z. Li et al./International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 75 (1998) 115–120
References
[1] Bushnell D. Computerized analysis of shells—governing equations.
Computers and Structures, 1984;18(3):471–536.
[2] Bushnell D. Computerized buckling analysis of shells. The Hague:
Martinus Nijhoff, 1985.
[3] Blachut J, Galletly GD. Buckling strength of imperfect hemispheres.
Thin-Walled Structures, 1995;23:1–20.
[4] Soric J. Imperfection sensitivity of internally-pressurized torispherical
shells. Thin-Walled Structures; 23: 57–66.
[5] Wang Xucheng, Shao Ming. Basic theory and numerical methods of
finite element method, 2th ed. Tsinghua University Press, 1997.
[6] Thomas DL. Dynamics of rotationally periodic structures. Int. J.
Numer. Meth. Engng., 1979;14:81–102.
[7] Ross CTF. Vibration and elastic instability of thin-walled domes
under uniform external pressure. Thin-Walled Structures,
1996;26(3):159–177.