External Pressure Loading of

Spiral Paper Tubes:

T. D. Gerhardt
Consultant Scientist,
Sonoco Products Company,
505D Science Dr.,
Madison, Wl 53711
Mem. ASME
Theory and Experiment
A closed-form elasticity solution is developed to predict stresses and strains in spiral
paper tubes loaded axisymmetrically. No assumptions are made on stress distri-
butions through the tube wall. Thus, the solution is valid for thick-walled tubes.
The validity of this solution is established by comparison with experimental results.
Measured strains in tubes subjected to external pressure showed remarkable agree-
ment with the elasticity solution. After experimental verification, the elasticity so-
lution is used to examine stress distributions in paper tubes loaded in external
pressure. In both paper and isotropic tubes, the hoop stress dominates the other
three stresses. However, the hoop stress distribution in paper tubes was radically
different from the isotropic case. In paper tubes: (1) hoop stress was concentrated
at the outer wall, especially for thicker tubes and (2) maximum hoop stress remained
constant as tube thickness was increased. These differences can be attributed to the
extremely small modulus in the radial direction of a paper tube. The hoop stress
distributions indicate that isotropic, thick-walled cylinder theory is inapplicable for
modeling paper tubes.

Introduction
Spirally wound paper tubes are fabricated by immersing
paperboard plies in an adhesive bath and then winding the
plies around a mandrel in a staggered fashion. The plies are
driven by a rubber belt so that the fabricated tube moves
circularly around the mandrel until a saw cuts it to the desired
length. Paperboard is a relatively orthotropic material (Mann
et al., 1980). However, after winding, the geometric axes of
the tube and the principal directions of the paper do not co-
incide. The tubes, therefore, are quite anisotropic in nature.
These tubes can also be quite thick: thickness to diameter ratios
of 1/5 are not unusual.
Spiral paper tubes are commonly used in industry as a struc-
ture for winding paper or film during production operations.
The winding is done under tension, subjecting tubes to external
radial pressure. Models to estimate stresses in paper during
this winding process have been developed (Yagoda, 1980; Alt-
mann, 1968). The stress distribution in wound paper is im-
portant for development of sound rolls suitable for shipping.
In the published literature, the tube's radial deformation under
radial pressure loading is required to model the paper-tube
interface. This deformation has never been treated correctly
since the tube has been assumed to be isotropic. In this paper,
an experimentally verified expression for radial deformation
is presented.
A closed-form elasticity solution is developed to predict
stresses and strains in spiral paper tubes loaded axisymmet-
rically. Paper is assumed to be a linear-elastic material. Al-
Contributed by the Materials Division for publication in the JOURNAL OF
ENGINEERING MATERIALS AND TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received by the Mate-
rials Division May 9, 1989.
though this is an approximation, linear-elastic results yield
insight into actual stress distributions. The solution does ac-
count for property differences in the principal directions of
the paper: the machine direction (MD), the cross machine
direction (CD), and the thickness direction (ZD). No assump-
tions are made on stress variations in the thickness direction.
Thus, the solution is valid for thick-walled tubes.
The validity of this solution is established by comparison
with experimental results. Paperboard laminates were fabri-
cated to determine necessary material properties. Spiral paper
tubes were fabricated from the same roll of paper used to make
the laminates. The tubes were subjected to external pressure
until failure. Finally, measured strain components are com-
pared to the elasticity solution.
After experimental verification, the elasticity solution is used
to examine stress distributions in paper tubes loaded in external
pressure.
Elasticity Solution
In this section, a closed form elasticity solution for spiral
paper tubes is derived. The solution is valid only for axisym-
metric loadings, i.e., loads that do not vary along the circum-
ference of the tube.
Coordinate Definition. Consider a spiral paper tube of
inner radius Rh outer radius R0, and length L as shown in
Figs. 1(a) and 1(b). The angular coordinate 8 locates position
along the circumferential or hoop direction. Variables r and
x are radial and axial coordinates as shown. The spiral angle
/3 is defined in Fig. 1(b) as the angle between the axial direction
of the tube and the machine direction (MD) of the paper.

144/Vol. 112, APRIL 1990 Transactions of the ASME

Copyright © 1990 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://materialstechnology.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
 All strains are independent of a; and (4) Shear strains ypa and
yPe are zero.
Assumption 1 is clearly an approximation since actual stress-
strain curves for paper are known to be nonlinear (Suhling,
1985). Assumptions 2 and 4 are based on assumed material
property and loading symmetry. Assumption 3 limits the ap-
plicability of the solution to tubes of fairly long length. Clearly,
the suitability of all assumptions can only be ascertained by
experimental-theoretical comparisons.
Governing Equations of Elasticity Theory. The strain-dis-
placement and equilibrium equations in cylindrical coordinates
are well known and are not repeated here. The stress-strain
relations in the tube coordinates (a, 8, p) are given by:
oa = g n ea + #12 eo + gn lea + Si4 e„ (2)
define: p = -E— where Rm = (R.+ R V2
H
m
°o = £12 e a + £22 £e + £23 70a + £24 eP (3)
Fig. 1(a) Side view
T8a = gl3 ea + #23 6fl + #33 76a + #34 «p (4)
oP = gn ta + gu ee + gu yga + #44 ep (5)
where e and y represent normal and shear (engineering) strains,
respectively.
The constants gy (i,j = 1 , 4 ) are determined by transforming
the paper properties in the MD, CD, and z directions /3 degrees
"A corresponding to the spiral angle (see Fig. 1(b)). Equations to
determine gy are available (Cook, 1974).
Sherrer (1967) published the following solution to the gov-
erning elasticity equations:
dellne: a s a Dn + b DnP+c D13p^-l' + dDup'„(-x-D (6)
0 c3 spiral angle oe = a D2X + b D22p+c D23 p^~»+d D.'TAP( - x - i ) (7)
Fig. 1(b) Top view
T8a aD3l + bD32p+i
= A 3 P(x~[) + d DM p ( - x - i ) (8)
°P = a D4l + b Dnp+ c £>43 p1^'l) + d DM p. ( - x - i ) (9)
Define dimensionless radial (p) and axial (a) coordinates by: where

Dji = gji + (gj2 + gJ4) X,

p = — and a = — (1)
K K
m m Dn = gj3 + (gj2 + 2 gj4) X2
where Rm is the mean tube radius, i.e., R„, = (R, + R0)/2.
The range of the radial variable p can be readily seen to be: DJ3 = gj2 + gj* X
(1 - 8) < p < (1 + 8) Dj4 = gjl - gj4 X
where 8 is tube thickness t divided by tube mean diameter, X[ = (#12 - guVigu - gll)
i.e.,
^2 = fej - 2gM)/(4gM - g21)
8 = t/(2Rm).
Assumptions. The following assumptions are made in the X = Vto/«44
derivation: (1) The material behavior is linear, elastic; (2) All withy = 1,4. Constants a, b, c, and d must be determined
displacements, strains, and stresses are independent of 6; (3) by satisfaction of prescribed loading conditions.

d,b,c,d = constants defined in equa- MD == machine direction of a = dimensionless axial tube

tions (18)-(21) paperboard coordinate
CD = cross machine direction of Po,Pi == external, internal pressure 0 = tube spiral angle; Fig. 1
paperboard tube loading 7 = shear strain component
Cj = constants defined in equa- Q --= axial tube load 8 = dimensionless tube thick-
tion (17); (/• = 1,4) r == radial tube coordinate ness; equation (1)
Dji = constants, equations Ri,Ro>Rm ' = inside, outside, and mean A = constant defined in equa-
(6)-(9);(i,y = 1 , 4 ) tube radius tion (24)
E = Young's modulus s -= torsional tube load € = normal strain component
= constants, equations (2)- u -= displacement in radial
gu
(5);(/,y = 1 , 4 ) direction
e = tube angular coordinate
\,\\,\2 = constants defined in equa-
Gj = constants defined in equa- V -= displacement in circumfer- tion (9)
tion (22); (/' = 1, 6) ential direction V = Poisson's ratio
Gl,2 = shear modulus w == displacement in axial p = dimensionless radial tube
K
J = constants defined in equa- direction coordinate
tion (23); (y = 1, 6) X == axial tube coordinate a = normal stress component
L = tube length ZD == z direction of paperboard T = shear stress component

Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology APRIL 1990, Vol. 112/145

Downloaded From: http://materialstechnology.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Satisfaction of Boundary Conditions. The most general d = \Pi{D4XC2C3K3 + D43(l+8)^»CxC2K6
loading conditions that can be satisfied by the axisymmetric
solution are uniform: external pressure p0, internal pressure + D42(\ + 5)CXC3K5] -p0[D4{C2C3K3 + D43(\ -8)^~^CXC2K6
pit axial stress q, and torsional stress s. Mathematically, the +D42(\-S)CXC3K5] - s lD4lD42Dl3C3G6 + D4lD43D12C2Gx
following boundary conditions will be satisfied: -D42D43DUCXG3] + q{D4XD42D33C3G6 + D4XD43D32C2Gx
ap = p0 at p = (1 + <5) (10) -D42D43D3lCtG}}]/A (21)
ap = Pi at p = (1 - 6) (11) where:
G, = (l-8)^~l) - (l+5)<*-»
2ir \ l 6 aaPdp = 7T [(l+5)2-(l-8)2]q (12)
G2 = (l-8)^-l)-(l+6)<-*-l)
2TT j 1 6 T6aPdp = 7 r [ ( l + 5 ) 2 - ( l - 5 ) 2 ] s (13) G3 = ( l + 6 ) ( l - 5 ) a - ; ) - ( l - 5 ) ( l + 5 ) ( x " ; )

Substitution of the stress expressions into the boundary con- G4 = ( l + 5 ) ( l - 5 ) ( - ^ 1 ) - ( l - 5 ) ( l + 6 ) ( - x - | )

ditions yields_ four equations for the four unknowns G5 = (l + 5) < x - 1 »(l-5) ( -'>- 1 »-(l-5) < x - 1 ) (l+5) ( - x ^ 1 )
a, b, c, and d.
G6 s (i + 5 ) _ ( i - 5 ) = 2 5 (22)
a An + b D42 (1 +6) + ~c D43 (1 + 5)ix~l)
and:
+ dD,4(l+df~>--[) = p0 (14)
Kx = Di4D33 - DX3D34
a D4l + b D42 (1-5) + d D43 (1 -5)^~l)
K2 = Di4D32 - D12D34
+ dD44 (l-5)^~» = Pi (15) K3 = Di2D33 - Dl3D32
a Dn C, + b Dl2 C2 + c Dn C3 + d Dl4 C4 = q (16) K4 = DnD34 - DuD3l
a D3l Cx + b D32 C2 + c D33 C3 + d D34 C4 = s (17) Ks = AAi - DUD33
K6 = DnD32 - DX2D3X
where:
1+6 and:
{_{ s pdp = 2 5 A = KXD4XD42C3C4G6 + K2D4XD43C2C4GX
+ K3D4lD44C2C3G2 + K4D42D43C\C4G3
C2 - l^p'dp = (2 53 + 6 5)/3 + K5D42D44Ct C3G4 + KfPuPvd C2G5 (24)
a+1) (x+1)
C3 - j,J,M> = ^-^[d+5) -(l-5) ] Experimental Procedure
Experiments were conducted to ascertain the validity of the
Q - J J j V ^ P = ^~^[(l+S) ( - x + , ) -d-5) ( - x + 1 ) ] derived elasticity equations for paper tubes. Spiral paper tubes
were fabricated and tested under external radial pressure until
and failure. Paperboard laminates were fabricated and tested to
$ - q[(l+&? - (l-5)2]/2 determine necessary material properties.
2
i = s [ ( l + 5) - (l-5)2]/2 Laminate and Block Fabrication. Laminates were fabri-
cated by adhering sheets of a particular grade of Sonoco pa-
Sherrer (1967) did not present expressions for the constants perboard with the same adhesive used in tube fabrication. The
a, b, c, and d, but rather solved equations (14)-(17) numer- adhesive was applied with a wire wound rod. A vacuum plate
ically. I was able to derive the closed-form expressions for was used to hold the plies in place while the adhesive was
these constants that follow. drawn down. Each laminate was put in a press after each 5
plies. The laminate remained in the press about 15 minutes.
a = \pi[D41(l+b)CiC4Kl-D4i(l+8fK-l)C1C4K1 The process was repeated until a thickness of approximately
-D 4 4 (l +5) ( ~^ l) C 2 C 3 K 3 ] -p0{D42(l-&)C3C4Kl 0.64 cm (0.25 in.) was attained. The laminates were cut to 5.08
cm (2 in.) by 10.5 cm (4.125 in.) "plates" in both MD and
-D43(\ -5)^^C2C4K2-D44(\ -5)^~»C2C3K3} CD orientations. The compression "block" specimens con-
- s [D42D43D{4C4G3 + D4lD44Dl2C2G5-D42D44DnC3G4} sisted of five plates laminated together. The approximate block
+ q{D42D43D34C4G3+D43D44D32C2G, dimensions were 2.85 cm (1.12 in.) by 5.08 cm by 10.5 cm.
This geometry was sufficient to prevent specimen buckling
-D42D44D33C3G4}]/A (18) before compression failure.
b = [-Pi {D4lC3C4K{+D4i(\+S)^-»C\C4K4 Tube Fabrication and Geometry. Spiral tubes were fab-
+ J D 44 (l+5)(^- 1 >C 1 C 3 /: 5 ) + p0[D4XC3C4Kx ricated from the same roll of paper as the laminates. The tubes
+ D43(l-5)^-i)ClC4K4 + D44(l-S)i-*-])ClC3K5} had an inside diameter of 9.416 cm (3.707 in.) with a wall
thickness of 0.551 cm (0.217 in.). The angle between MD of
+ s {D4lD43DuC4Gl-D4lD44Di3C3G2 + D43D44DnC\G5} the paper and the tube axis, i.e., /3 in Fig. 1(b), was approx-
+ q\D4,D44D33C3G2-D4XD43D34C4Gx imately 63 deg. The tubes were conditioned before testing at
23°C and 50 percent RH. Tube moisture content was measured
-D43D44D3XCXG,\VA (19) after testing and found to be 8.3 percent.
c = \Pi{D4{C2C4K2 + D42(\+b)CxC4K4
Strain Gage Installation Procedure. In general, the man-
-DM(l +&y-*-»ClC2K6} -Po{D4XC2C4K2 + D42(\-b)CxC4K4 ufacture's recommended procedures were followed for strain
-Z» 44 (l - S y ^ - D C . Q ^ ) + s {D4lD42Dl4C4G6 gage installation. Several modifications, however, were made
to minimize any reenforcing effects of the gage on paper: (1)
+D4lD44DX2C2G2 -D42D44DX,C,G4} - q [D4XD42D34C4G6
a minimum amount of adhesive was used and (2) bondable
+ D4XD44D32C2G2-D42D44D31CXG4}]/A (20) terminals were not used; instead, 0.018 cm (0.007 in.) diameter

146/Vol. 112, APRIL 1990 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://materialstechnology.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


• Relief valve * 1
Fig. 2
— - specimen 1
••• specimen 2
equation (25)
<S> - 1 6
Q Q
-24
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1
MD Strain (percent cm./cm.)
Fig. 3 Stress-strain curve in MD
polyurethane coated wires were soldered directly to the gages.
Rosette strain gages were mounted on the compression blocks
and on the inside and outside diameters of two tubes. Hydraulic
pressure and strain outputs were recorded electronically at 2
times/s. All output was measured until tube failure.
Radial Compression Test Procedure. Two paper tubes were
radially loaded using hydraulic fluid pressure in a closed cavity
(see Fig. 2). A plastic film was wrapped around each tube to
prevent tube and fluid contact. Fluid leakage through the outer
ply gap was prevented by winding a rubber band into the gap.
" O " rings were used to seal the clearance around the tube
ends and the steel plates.
We planned on testing both tubes with a pump rpm of 2.5.
However, tube 1 was inadvertently tested at 5.2 rpm. A pump
rpm of 2.5 corresponds to a strain rate of approximately 2.0
x 10~4 cm/cm/s in the hoop direction of the tube.
Measured Laminate Properties
The laminate blocks were tested under uniaxial compression
to determine Young's moduli and Poisson's ratios in the plane
of the sheet. Although paperboard's stress-strain response dif-
fers in tension and compression, the initial moduli are equal
(Suhling, 1985). Moreover, the considered tube loading sub-
jects the paperboard to inplane compression. Laminate plates
of varying thicknesses were compressed to estimate the thick-
ness direction modulus. Finally, the in-plane shear modulus
was estimated from published empirical equations.
Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology
Downloaded From: http://materialstechnology.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Relief valve +2
Hydraulic cavity test
specimen 1
specimen 2
equation ( 2 5 )
O
1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0
CD Strain (percent c m . / c m . )
Fig. 4 Stress-strain curve in MD
Compressive Stress-Strain Behavior. Both machine direc-
tion (MD) and cross machine direction (CD) compressive stress-
strain curves were determined using the block specimens pre-
viously described. The blocks were conditioned at 23 "C and
50 percent RH. Strains were measured with rosette strain gages.
Strain output from gages on opposite faces of each specimen
was averaged to minimize bending effects. The Instron head
movement chosen was 0.13 cm/min (0.05 in./min). This cor-
responds to an average strain rate in the specimen of approx-
imately 2.02 x 10~ 4 cm/cm/s. Compression tests were
conducted in both MD and CD configurations, with two rep-
lications for each test.
The dashed lines on Figs. 3 and 4 are the experimental results
in the MD and CD, respectively. Each dashed line represents
averaged strain for a single specimen. Suhling (1985) proposed
the following functional relationship between stress and strain
in paperboard:
a = Cx tanh (C2e) + C3e (25)
where C[t C2, and C3 are constants. (These constants will differ
in the MD and CD.) In this study, we determined these con-
stants from stress-strain data using a nonlinear regression rou-
tine. The computed constants are listed in Table 1, where the
units for a is MPa and for e is percent cm/cm. Using the
calculated constants for each direction, equation (25) was plot-
ted as a solid line on Figs. 3 and 4. Clearly, this function
models the experimental data quite accurately.
Figures 3 and 4 and equation (25) indicate that stress-strain
APRIL 1990, Vol. 112/147
 Table 1 Compressive stress-strain behavior of paperboard
laminates
C, (MPa) C2 C3 (MPa) E"»(MPa)
MD 24.96 2.93 -0.765 7240
CD 11.65 1.91 1.648 2386
'"'Young's modulus; 1 MPa = 145 psi

response of the laminates is quite nonlinear. For nonlinear

materials, Young's modulus (E) should be interpreted as the
slope of the tangent to the stress-strain curve through the -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6
origin. Making such a measurement with a straight edge on MD—CD Strains (percent cm./cm.)
the stress-strain curve is highly subjective. However, E can be
Fig. 5 Strains on outer tube surface
readily calculated from equation (25) by differentiation with
respect to e. This computation results in the following equation:
E C,C2 + C, (26) 2100- —t H—H 1—,_,—,—) 1 1 . 1 — , _ , 1- ) 1 -. » 1 H-

md cd 'md.cd
The values of the moduli were computed from equation (26) ^1800-
and are presented in Table 1. Note that the MD modulus is CL ' "* s .
v.
' •
• \
\ ' "
r
/ -:
much higher than the CD modulus. This, of course, can be ^>1500- \ '• \ i- / • ' - • ' "

attributed to the greater alignment of fibers in the MD. Q) \ '.\ ': / ' '
3 1200-
<o
\ \ r.
In-Plane Poisson's Ratios. Poisson's ratios (c,y) in the plane to M ''
5? 900 -
of the sheet were determined by measuring strain perpendicular CL M ' /f
to load during the uniaxial compression tests. We define vtJ as ."o 600 - >\ 1 /' • • • Tube 1
x> Hi / Tube 2
the (transverse) strain in they direction caused by a unit strain D
IX 300- V
(axial) in the i direction. For the laminates, we found: / Elasticity So!u lion '

x12 = 0.387 0 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — L-,—i—,—t—i—i—i—l—i—i—i—l—i-

and j»2i = 0.120 .
According to orthotropic elasticity theory, the four constants
E 1; E 2 , vl2, and v2\ are not independent (Halpin, 1984), but
should be related by the equation:
vn/Ex = i> 21 /E 2 .
Using the constants we measured, the left side is 5.346 x
10" 5 (Mpa - 1 ) while the right side is 5.029 x 10~5 (MPa" 1 ).
These values differ by only 6 percent, indicating that the lam-
inates responded in a fairly orthotropic manner. The measured
in-plane shear strains also reflected an orthotropic response.
For a uniaxial compression test, shear strains in the 1-2 di-
rection are zero for orthotropic materials but nonzero for
anisotropic materials. The shear strains we measured were
negligible. Thus, in spite of the wide variation of fiber ori-
entation expected in a paper sheet, the paper laminates behaved
as a nonlinear orthotropic material. This observation must be
limited to the scale of measurement, the strain gage length.
On a fiber scale, the response would be anisotropic.
Out-of-Plane Poisson's Ratios. The out-of-plane Pois-
son's ratios vn and p23, relate to strain in the thickness direction
of the paper from loadings in the plane of the sheet. We
attempted to measure these properties using strain gages on
the laminate blocks. From the results of the output, however,
it was evident that the gages excessively reinforced the laminate.
Mann et al. (1980) measured these material properties for milk
carton stock using ultrasound. They found:
vi3 = 1.52
and c23 = 1.84 .
The values of these material constants have little bearing on
calculation of hoop strain. However, predictions of axial strain
will be somewhat affected. As an approximation, we used these
values for the paper laminates.
In-Plane Shear Modulus. The in-plane shear modulus G12
relates shear stress to shear strain in the MD-CD plane. We
estimated the shear modulus of the paper laminates. Suhling
(1985) compared three different empirical formulas proposed
-0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
MD-CD Strains (percent cm./cm.)
Fig. 6 Strains on inner tube surface
in the literature for such estimates. He recommended the equa-
tion (Campbell, 1961):
1 l+Vv
1 + C21
(27)
G)2
since its prediction differed from a measured paperboard shear
modulus by only 5 percent. Substituting the measured values
into equation (27) yields: G12 = 1510 MPa (0.219 X 106 psi).
It should be emphasized that G12 is, in fact, an independent
property and equation (27) is only an estimate.
Thickness Direction Modulus. To estimate Ez, we com-
pressed laminate plates of three different thicknesses (0.244,
0.563, and 1.11 cm) flatwise. Such an experiment can only
estimate Bz since load-deflection data cannot reliably measure
a modulus. However, the measured Ez was approximately the
same value for all three tests, namely: E, = 37.9 MPa (0.0055
x 10 6 psi).
Note that the in-plane moduli for the laminates are much
larger than Ez. The ratios of in-plane moduli to Ez are 190 and
62, for the MD and CD, respectively. These ratios are con-
sistent with published values for other papers. Mann, et al.
(1980) reported ratios of 190 and 89 for milk carton stock in
the MD and CD, respectively. These differences indicate that
the paper fibers are primarily oriented in the plane of the sheet.
Comparison of Experiment and Theory
As diseussed previously, E[ and E 2 are tangent moduli, i.e.,
slope of the tangents to measured stress-strain curves at the
origin. Therefore, perfect agreement of tube strains would be
characterized by the theoretical lines being tangent to the ex-
perimental lines at the origin.
From measured laminate properties, spiral angle, and tube
geometry, constants a, b, c, and d were computed from
equations (18)-(21). Expressions for strain components in terms
of these constants were published by Sherrer (1967):

148/Vol.112,APRIL1990 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://materialstechnology.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 u-
6 = 0.30 ^6 = 0 . 1 5 ~ — - - ^ - < 5 == 0.30
u U
^ 9 _ ^ 0 *— °
^•6 = O.KT" ~~~-.
3-
-
6 = 0.10 _A« = 0075 —-
6- .-
Elasticity Solution: Equation (7) . -9
*<s = 0.05
° Thick-Walled Cylinder Solution
9- 6 = 0.05
J
— Elasticity Solution : Equation (7)

?-
Inner Radial Position Outer Inner Outer
Radius Radial Position Radius
Radius Radius
Fig. 7 Hoop stress distributions: isotropic properties Fig. 8 Hoop stress distributions: paper properties spiral angle /S = 54

ea = a (28)
eg = a\i + bXjp + cp^-l) + dp(-*-» (29) value on the inside radius. Surprisingly, we will find that none
of these statements are true for spiral paper tubes.
Yto = b p (30)
Hoop Stress in Paper Tubes. Theoretical stresses in paper
ep = a \ , + 2b\ip + cXp(x-')-d\p<-x-1) (31)
tubes were computed from the derived elasticity solution. The
The rosette output allows strains determination in any di- previously presented properties were assumed for the analysis.
rection of the (6,<x) plane. We compared strains in the MD Analysis indicated that hoop stress <*o dominates all other stress
and CD directions of the paper since paper strength is known components. As expected, shear stress TBa was zero for spiral
in these directions. angles of 0 deg and 90 deg and nonzero for others. This is
The MD-CD experimental and theoretical strains are com- explained by the orthotropic tube response at those two spiral
pared in Figs. 5 and 6. For strains on the outer tube surface angles.
(Fig. 5), the agreement is remarkable. The theoretical predic- The dependence of hoop stress on dimensionless thickness
tions are tangent to all three measured strain curves at the 5 is examined in Fig. 8. Dimensionless thickness S is varied
origin. The agreement is also excellent for Ymd,cd and emd on from 0.05 to 0.30 corresponding to relatively thin to relatively
the inner tube surface (Fig. 6). For the CD strain, ecd, the thick tubes. A common spiral angle, /3 = 54 deg, was assumed
agreement is excellent for tube 1 and fairly good for tube 2. for the analysis.
The strain data in Figs. 5 and 6 is plotted until tube failure. It is of interest to compare hoop stress distributions in Figs.
The measured strains are nonlinear at high pressures as ex- 7 and 8. The differences are quite significant. The maximum
pected from the stress-strain curves in Figs. 3 and 4. However, hoop stress in the paper tube occurs on the outer radius. The
at strains less than 1/3 of the ultimate tube pressure, the ex- hoop stress in paper tubes is not constant across the thickness.
perimental results are quite linear and in close agreement with In fact, a stress concentration occurs at the outer wall, espe-
the elasticity solution. Thus, for short term loadings, the elas- cially in thicker tubes. These tendences differ totally from the
ticity solution can estimate accurate strains for pressures at isotropic results.
least as high as 1/3 of the ultimate strength of the tube. However, a more profound observation is that the maximum
It should be noted that the radial deformation, u, is equal hoop stress does not decrease with increasing tube thickness
to pRmee from the strain-displacement equations. Thus, an in paper tubes. This is a significant finding since the design of
experimentally verified expression for u is available from equa- isotropic tubes is based on stress decreases with increasing
tions (18)-(25) and equation (29). This finding should be useful thickness. In paper tubes the unusual behavior is explained by
in the development of improved solutions for stresses in wound the large differences in the 8 and r direction moduli. For is-
paper rolls. otropic tubes, sufficient r direction modulus exists to convert
radial pressure into hoop stresses. For paper tubes, with the
r direction modulus 80-200 times less than in the 6 direction,
Stresses in Radially Loaded Tubes it is evident that this load carrying mechanism is disrupted.
In this section, the experimentally validated elasticity so-
lution is used to analyze stress distributions in paper tubes. Summary and Conclusions
These stress results are contrasted with results from isotropic
tubes. A closed-form elasticity solution for spiral paper tubes is
presented. No assumptions are made on stress distributions
Hoop Stress in Isotropic Tubes. In Fig. 7, the elasticity through the tube wall. Thus, the solution is valid for thick-
solution is compared to the standard thick-walled, isotropic walled tubes.
solution (Seely and Smith, 1955) for three different thickness Paperboard laminates exhibited nonlinear stress-strain be-
ratios 5 corresponding to thin (5 = 0.05), moderate (5 = 0.10), havior but were surprisingly orthotropic. Measured strains in
and thick tubes (5 = 0.30). The properties assumed for the tubes subjected to external pressure showed remarkable agree-
elasticity solution approximate an isotropic material, i.e., X = ment with the elasticity solution. An experimentally verified
0.999 rather than 1. (Exact isotropic properties can not be used equation for radial deformation is presented. This equation
since the elasticity solution is not valid when g22 = £44.) It is should have application in the development of improved so-
evident that the hoop stresses ae computed by the two methods lutions for the problem of stresses in wound paper rolls.
are identical. Isotropic results indicate that the tube converts applied radial
Examination of Fig. 7 indicates certain tendencies about the pressure into compressive hoop stress which is highly depen-
hoop stress distribution in radially loaded isotropic tubes. dent on tube thickness. In paper tubes, the hoop stress also
Namely, the hoop stress: (1) is fairly constant across tube dominates the other three stresses. However, the hoop stress
thickness, (2) has a maximum value that decreases with in- distribution was radically different from the isotropic case.
creasing wall thickness, and (3) attains the greatest (absolute) The stress was no longer constant across the tube wall. Instead,

Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology APRIL1990, Vol. 112/149

Downloaded From: http://materialstechnology.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 a stress concentration occurred at the outer wall, especially for References
thicker tubes. But the most p r o f o u n d difference was that the Altmann, H. C , "Formulas for Computing the Stresses in Center-Wound
maximum hoop stress remained constant as tube thickness was Rolls," Tappi, Vol. 51, No. 4, 1968, pp. 176-179.
increased. These differences can be attributed to the extremely Campbell, J. G., "The In-Plane Elastic Constants of Paper," Australian
/0
small modulus in the radial direction of a paper tube. Clearly, "™fl' %Aw"* Scie ce
" < ™- "• *?• 3 - "^'.f™ 356 - 3 "- / . w,
, , ,. ., . ... . . . , . , „ , Cook, R. D., Concepts and Applications of Finite Element Analysis, Wiley,
the hoop stress distributions indicate that isotropic, thick-walled N,Y„ 1974, pp. 211-214.
cylinder theory is inapplicable for modeling paper tubes. Halpin, J. C , Primer on Composite Materials: Analysis, Technomic Pub-
lishing Co, Lancaster, Pa., 1984.
Mann, R. W., Baum, O. A., and Habeger, C. C , "Determination of All
Nine Orthotropic Elastic Constants for Machine-Made Paper," Tappi, Vol. 63,
No. 2, 1980, pp. 163-166.
Acknowledgments Seely, F. B. and Smith, J. O., Advanced Strength of Materials, Wiley, N.Y.,
1955, pp. 295-307.
The author would like to t h a n k M . D . Case and R. D . Hayes Sherrer, R. E., "Filament-Wound Cylinders with Axial-Symmetric Loads,"
for collecting experimental data, J. F. Whitehead for devel- Journal of Composite Materials, vol. 1, 1967, pp. 344-355.
oping d a t a acquisition software, B. W o o d for fabricating lam- „ S"h,inS>. J- C., "Constitutive Relations and Failure Predictions for Nonlinear
. . w w , - , , . ! J .-. Tr i r •i • 1 »<.• Orthotropic Media, Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1985.
mates, M. McCarthy and C. Katz for assistance in plotting Yagodaj H p ^ ..Resolution of a Core Problem in Wound Rolls/ . ASME
the figures. Journal of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 47, 1980, pp. 847-854.

CALL FOR PAPERS

A Conference on
High Temperature Constitutive Modeling:
Theory and Application
To be Held at the
1991 ASME Winter Annual Meeting
Atlanta, Georgia
December 1-6, 1991
A conference of about forty papers is being planned by the AMD-MD Joint Committee on Constitutive Equations. The
proceedings of this conference will be bound as an ASME volume, and made available at the time of the meeting. The major
topics proposed for discussion at this conference are:
• Theoretical developments in high temperature constitutive modeling; e.g., theories of creep, viscoplasticity,
mesomechanics, and/or homogenization with consideration of history, temperature, strain rate, aging, and/or en-
vironmental effects.
• Experimental studies in high temperature deformation behavior; e.g., critical experiments (theory dependent), and ex-
periments that focus on non-isothermal, multiaxial, nonproportional, aging and/or environmental effects.
• Numerical implementation and computational procedures; e.g., stability, integration algorithms, optimization, and
model-parameter identification procedures.
• Materials of interest include:
—metals, alloys, intermetallics, and ceramics,
—polycrystalline, directionally solidified, and single crystal, and
—particulate, fibrous, and laminate composites.
The conference should have good representation from academics, government agencies, and industries alike, with good in-
ternational participation expected.
Abstract(s) of about 200 to 500 words are due by June 30, 1990. Paper(s) of about 6 to 12 published pages are due for
review by February 15, 1991, and in final form for publication by June 15, 1991.
Send abstracts and papers to either coorganizer of this conference, viz.
Dr. A. D. Freed Dr. K. P. Walker
Mail Stop 49-7 Engineering Science Software, Inc.
NASA—Lewis Research Center P65 Log Road
Cleveland, OH 44135 Smithfield, RI 02917
Phone: (216) 433-3262 Phone: (401) 231-3182
FAX: (216) 433-8000 FAX: (401) 231-2361
Conference registration will be handled by the ASME, 345 East 47 Street, New York, NY 10017, phone: (212) 705-7696.

150/Vol. 112, APRIL 1990 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://materialstechnology.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use