Discussion
Stresses and Deflections of Three-
Dimensional Pipe Bends1
A. E. R. DE JONGE.2 The authors have added another method
of calculating pipe lines to the already large number of such solu-
tions existing. The basic idea of their solution is to replace the
elastic problem by a simpler inertia problem. The approach they
are using is by way of an analogy between translations and rota-
tions of a solid body on the one hand, and moments and forces
acting 011 the body on the other hand.
Their basic idea of replacing the elastic problem by an inertia
problem is not new. In fact, it forms the basis of the theory of
the ellipse of elasticity in the case of plane problems, and of the
ellipsoid of elasticity in the case of problems in space, to which
the writer has drawn attention at previous A.S.M.E. meetings.3'4
The ellipse of elasticity is the ellipse of inertia of an elastic two-
dimensional body, and the ellipsoid of elasticity is the ellipsoid of
inertia of an elastic three-dimensional body (or, respectively, of
plane pipe lines and pipe lines in space). Generally speaking, this
•seems to be the simplest approach.
In order to carry out the analogy, the authors found it necessary
to make the simplifying assumption that the flexibilities in torsion
and bending be the same. This involves an error of about 23 per
cent in the torsion flexibility. By assuming this flexibility to be
the same as the flexibilities in bending, it is considered to be, by
this amount, larger than it actually is. In most cases, the error is
on the safe side, although this depends on the layout of the pipe
line as a whole. In view of the fact that our present theories of
pipe flexure, particularly of bends, show large discrepancies of 25
per cent and more where torsion is involved, this assumption may
not be as serious as it appears at first sight. This point has not
been brought out by the authors.
In discussing the analogy further, the authors state that great
simplification occurs when the axes of reference are chosen so as to
coincide with the axes of inertia. They draw attention to the fact
that, in general, this problem requires the solution of an equation
of the third degree. This has previously been stated by the
writer in a discussion6 in connection with the location of the axes
of the ellipsoid of elasticity (ellipsoid of inertia).
At first glance, the authors' solution appears to be exceedingly
simple. It has to be kept in mind, however, that they have con-
tracted the equations for the three coordinate axes into one vec-
tor equation by making use of vector analysis. The simplicity is,
thus, only apparent. Besides, they have chosen very simple
examples, in which the pipe lines are composed of straight pipes
only, without bends.
In the case of the third example, the layout of the pipe line is
symmetrical with respect to the "elastic center" (center of gravity
1 B y H . Poritsky and H . D . Snively, published in the M a r c h , 1940,
issue o f t h e JOURNAL OF APPLIED MECHANICS, T r a n s . A . S . M . E . , v o l .
62, 1940, p. A-17.
2 A d j u n c t Professor, Polytechnic Institute of B r o o k l y n , B r o o k l y n ,
N. Y . Mem. A.S.M.E.
3 "Graphical M e t h o d s for Least-Square P r o b l e m s , " b y E . O.
Waters, discussion b y A. E . R . de Jonge, Trans. A . S . M . E . , vol. 51,
1929, paper A P M - 5 1 - 1 8 , p. 210.
4 "Frictional Resistance and Flexibility of Seamless-Tube Fittings
Used in Pipe W e l d i n g , " b y S. Crocker and Arthur M e C u t e h a n , dis-
cussion b y A . E . R . de Jonge, Trans. A . S . M . E . , vol. 53, 1931, paper
FSP-51-17. p. 234.
5 Reference. 4 p. 235.
Copyright © 1941 by ASME
of the pipe line if the latter has a mass /3 = 1 / E l per unit of
length). The temperature reactions at the ends must pass
through the elastic center but, generally, their line of action does
not lie in the plane defined by the two end points of the pipe line
and the elastic center. In general, the line of action of these
forces is the conjugate diameter to the plane which passes through
the elastic center and is perpendicular to the line joining the ends
of the pipe line. In the particular case of the authors' third
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/appliedmechanics/article-pdf/8/1/A43/6744076/a42_1.pdf by guest on 05 September 2021
example, in which the pipe line is symmetrical with respect to the
elastic center, the conjugate diameter lies in the plane through
the end points of the pipe line and the elastic center. Thus, the
reaction moments lie in this plane and are of equal magnitude.
It was, therefore, only necessary to determine the three reactions
at the free end of the pipe line and the magnitude of this moment at
the end points, i.e., altogether four unknowns.
All intermediate calculations, particularly those of the moments
of inertia and of the elastic center, have been omitted and only the
results are stated. This makes the solution appear particularly
simple.
In the case where bends are included in the pipe line, the solu-
tion becomes much more involved, and it would be interesting if
the authors would give the solution of such a problem.
The authors have, then, considered the case of unequal flexi-
bilities, i.e., the case without simplifying assumptions, and have
derived the principal equation for it. It is to be regretted that,
for this case too, they have not given an example for a pipe line
with bends, for such an example would have shown clearly the
complicated nature of the entire problem.
It might be stated that the complications in this problem arise
solely from the difficulty of referring, in a simple manner, the line
of action of the reactions at the ends of the pipe line to the setup
of the latter. The problem is just as complicated geometrically
as it is analytically and, until a simple way is found for defining
the location of this reaction with respect to the pipe line, there is
little hope that a simple solution for the problem of calculating
three-dimensional pipe lines will be found.
A R T H U R MCCOTCHAN.6 This new approach is welcomed by all
those who have struggled with the problem of simplifying piping-
flexibility calculations. The formulas developed for the three-
dimensional pipe line with all runs of equal length are much sim-
pler than any but precalculated chart solutions. If it is possible
for the authors to give similar formulas for the case in which each
run is of different length, it would be of much more general useful-
ness. Since the greater flexibility of the portions subjected to
torsion is neglected, the accuracy of the results probably will be
less than given by precalculated chart solutions based on the
graphoanalytical method. For a precalculated chart solution of
three-plane structures, reference may be made to a manual7 which
has been published and to charts.8
D. B. ROSSHEIM9 AND A. R. C. MARKL. 1 0 The authors have
6 Engineer, Engineering Division, T h e D e t r o i t Edison Co., Detroit,
Mich. Mem. A.S.M.E.
' " P i p i n g Design M a n u a l , " published b y Pittsburgh Piping and
E q u i p m e n t C o m p a n y , Pittsburgh, Pa.
8 "Flex-Anal C h a r t s , " published b y Power Piping Division,
B l a w - K n o x C o m p a n y , Pittsburgh, Pa., 1940.
9 Mechanical Engineer, T h e M . W . Kellogg C o m p a n y , Jersey
City, N . J. M e m . A . S . M . E .
10 Assistant Mechanical Engineer, T h e M . W . Kellogg C o m p a n y ,
Jersey City, N. J.
-42
 DISCUSSION
presented an unusual approach to the solution of pipe lines in
space, in that it makes use of a dynamic analogy, where the aver-
age structural or piping engineer would probably prefer the
column analogy with which he is more familiar.
The use of vector analysis yields surprisingly simple mathe-
matical expressions. For practical application, however, it ap-
pears necessary to resolve the vectors into components. While
it is not apparent from the paper, the user will find that the
computation of the location of the center of gravity and the mo-
ments and products of inertia, work which must be performed at
some stage in any method, will consume a large proportion of the
time involved in the solution of the average problem. Some ad-
vantage is secured by the introduction of the center of gravity as
the origin of the coordinate system which reduces the number of
simultaneous equations from 6 to 3 for the space problem. Lo-
cating the origin at the center of gravity has been employed by
various authors in the solution of one-plane problems, but has not
applied to multiplane problems in the past due to the dissimilar
flexibilities of curved pipe in the plane of the pipe and at right
angles thereto.
In the last two sections the authors point out the additional
complexity in cases of unequal flexibilities and further advise
dropping the dynamic analogy for intermediate loading. There-
fore the method would appear to be limited to space lines with
two points of anchorage or restraint where the added flexibility of
curved members can be neglected without too great a loss in
accuracy.
AUTHORS' CLOSURE
The authors regret that they were unfamiliar with Mr. de
Jonge's discussions. Mr. de Jonge mentions the ellipse and ellip-
soid of elasticity in discussions of papers whose titles hardly indi-
cate subject matter relevant to the present problem; hence, it
did not occur to the authors to examine the papers and their
discussions. While a statement of the problem could be made
through the medium of a proper ellipsoid, the authors believe
that the average engineer is more familiar with rigid-body dy-
namic concepts than with such geometric concepts as the conju-
gate diameter of an ellipsoid. Similarly, it is of comparatively
small practical interest to the designing engineer to know that
the general elastic problem of a bent pipe line with three unequal
flexibilities is equivalent to a proper geometrical construction
connected with a six-dimensional ellipsoid.
The assumption that the flexibility in torsion is equal to the
common flexibility in bending, as pointed out by Mr. de Jonge,
involves an error of 23 per cent in the torsional flexibility. Since
the displacements in three-dimensional pipe lines are clue to both
bending and torsion, it is clear that the error in the final result
will be appreciably less than 23 per cent and if one roughly di-
vides the displacements equally between bending and torsion,
the error may amount to only 8 per cent. It was suggested that
the common flexibility be taken equal to the bending flexibility,
thus stiffening the structure and making the calculated stresses
larger than those actually occurring. This was done for safety's
sake, but, of course, one may assume a common flexibility lying,
say, one third of the way between the bending and the tor-
sional flexibilities, and obtain an answer which is more nearly
correct.
The examples were chosen in the order of increasing complex-
ity: Starting with what is perhaps the simplest imaginable case,
a cantilever, proceeding to a two-dimensional bend, and ending
with a three-dimensional case. It is clear from the third example
in the paper that any problem in the thermal expansion of a pipe
with built-in ends leads to three simultaneous equations of the
same form as in the third example, namely, to
A-43
D, = FXIX - FyIxy - FJ„
D„ = — F , 4 , + F,It - FJ„ [15]
D. = ~FJX, - FyIv, + FJ,
where I x , I xv , . . . are the moments and products of inertia of the
fictitious mass distribution fi about axes parallel to the coordinate
axes passing through the center of gravity of the mass distribu-
tion. It is readily shown by means of the dynamical analogy that
Equations [15] also apply to the case where one end of the pipe is
free, that is, unable to carry a moment, provided that now I x ,
I x y , . . . are moments and products of inertia relative to axes
passing through the free end. In the general case in which both
linear displacements Dx, Dv, Dz and angular displacements <px,
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/appliedmechanics/article-pdf/8/1/A43/6744076/a42_1.pdf by guest on 05 September 2021
<PV, <pt of one end relative to the other one are specified, the follow-
ing equations are readily deduced by means of the dynamical
analogy
F)x — fyZ2 + <p,yi = IJ<\ — IX„FV — IxtF, I
Dy — <p& + = —IxyFx + IyFy — IX2F, | . . . [16]
Dt — <p,yt + •fi.x, = —IX!FX — I,„Fy + IJ<\ )
where l x , I x y , . . . refer once more to axes through the center of
gravity, and Xi, yi, z-i are the coordinates of the end point Pi rela-
tive to these axes.
While the authors sincerely believe that the vector-analysis
approach through the dynamical analogy, once mastered, leads
to the various equations such as Equations [15], [16] in the sim-
plest possible manner, they in no way intended to give the im-
pression that all computation is completely avoided. From the
designer's point of view, Equations [15] are of great practical
advantage over other available methods. Compared with avail-
able graphical methods they reduce the time required for solving
a complicated bend by as much as 75 per cent (say from 4 days
to 1 day). As compared with application of Castigliano's theo-
rem, they are also very much simpler and avoid many annoy-
ing integrations by replacing them by the calculation of I x ,
I x y , . . . . The authors do not wish, however, to leave the im-
pression that the calculation of the products and moments of
inertia, I x , l x y , . . . can be avoided by means of any analogy or
by utilizing any vector analysis or ellipsoid schemes. Nor is
there any royal road for avoiding the solution of the three simul-
taneous equations. In the third example this calculation was
omitted because it was believed that the calculation of the prod-
ucts and moments of inertia is a straightforward procedure
which will not hold up any designer and on which copious expla-
nation is quite unnecessary. However, a further example showing
the calculation in greater detail may be of interest. A literal ex-
ample will be given since it is easier to follow.
Consider a three-dimensional pipe bend consisting of three
mutually perpendicular segments, as shown in Fig. 5, of lengths
a, 6, a, respectively. This is slightly more general than the
sample shown in Fig. 4, of the paper and the calculation will be
purposely indicated in minute detail so as to leave no point unex-
plained. With the coordinate axes chosen as shown in Fig. 5
and the flexibility assumed constant, it is most convenient to
locate the center of gravity by first finding the center of gravity
of each segment (at its mid-point) and, concentrating the total
fictitious mass of each segment at its center of gravity, find the
center of gravity of the three resulting point masses:
Segment Length Coordinates of e.g.
AB a (a/2, —6/2, 0)
BC b (0, 0, 0)
CD a (0, 6/2, a/2)
A-44 JOURNAL OF APPLIED MECHANICS MARCH, 1941

This leads to the center of gravity (2a + 6), placed at the center of gravity (x, y, z) given by Equa-
tions [17], possesses the moments and products of inertia
x = a 2 /2(2a + 6), y = 0, 2 = a 2 /2(2a + 6 ) . . . . [ 1 7 ]
To find / x , / , „ , . . . , it is convenient to calculate first the
moments and products of inertia of each segment about axes \4(2o + by 2(2ra + h)' 4(2a + 6)'
0,
4(2a rVb?0)- [21]

through its own center of gravity parallel to the coordinate

Subtracting [21] from [20] there results for I x , Iu
axes; in the order (I x , /„, I,; I x y , I X! , IU1) these quantities are
given per unit /9 by ^5a4 + 4a3b + 12a262 + 8 ab3 + b* 10a4 + 8 a3b
12 (2a + b) 12 (2a + b)
a3 a3
AB 0, —; o, o, o 5a4 + 4a36 + 12a262 + 8ab3 + b a?b a4 a2&\
12' 12
12(2 a + b) 4 ' ~ 4(2a + &)' T /
b3 b3

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/appliedmechanics/article-pdf/8/1/A43/6744076/a42_1.pdf by guest on 05 September 2021

BC 0, 0, 0, 0 [18] ....[22]
12' 12
In ease the stresses are due to temperature expansion the dis-
a3 a3 placements Dx, Dv, Dz can be taken as respectively equal to
CD 0 0, 0, 0
12' 1~2'
Dx = — kTa, D, = + kTb, Dz = + kTa [23]
Next one finds the moments and products of inertia about the co-
ordinate axes themselves. This may be done by finding the where T is the temperature rise and k the coefficient of expansion.
contribution to these moments and products of inertia of each Equations [15] now may be completed with the coefficients
[21] and the displacements [23] as follows
y
5a4 +1 4a3b +' 12a262 +1 8a63 +1 64 f J a 6 p„ +
2

12(2a + 6) 4 " +
kTa
F.=
4 (2a + 6) P

a'b , 10a4
+ 8a3b a2b kTb
— Fx -\ Fy F, = [24]
4 x 12 (2a + b) ' 4 f)

a*b
4 (2a + b) ' 4
5a4 + 4o36 + 12a262 + 8a63 + 64 p kTa
12 (2a + 6) ' ~ 0
If the pipe bend in question involves circular arcs the calcula-
tion may be somewhat more complicated, but the complications
lie only in the determination of the moments and products of
inertia—a straightforward and perfectly clear computational
FIO. 5 THREE-DIMENSIONAL PIPE BEND WITH THREE MUTUALLY
PERPENDICULAR SEGMENTS
problem.
In the oral discussion following the presentation of the paper
individual segment AB, BC, CD. By applying the theorems at Philadelphia and in Messrs. Rossheim and Markl's written
stated in the paper regarding products and moments of inertia, discussion, surprise was expressed as to how the six components
it will be found that to obtain the products and moments of which one generally assumes for the reactions at one end of the
inertia of each one of the segments AB, BC, CD about the co- pipe are reduced to three components, say in the case where there
ordinate axes, it is necessary to add to each one of the quantities is no rotation between the ends of the pipe, thus reducing the
in the array [18] the following quantities, respectively problem from six to three degrees of freedom. By way of ex-
planation it may be pointed out that the term "degrees of free-
b2 a2 + 62 a& „ „ dom" is essentially equivalent to "degrees of ignorance," or more
AB - a - , 0, 0 correctly it is a mathematical measure of the number of un-
4
knowns. As soon as information on some variables is available,
BC 0, 0, 0; 0, 0, 0 ] [19] say by integration for a proper problem, or by the introduction of
a2 + 62 ab relations between the variables through constraints, the number
CD 0, 0, a - of degrees of freedom is correspondingly reduced. In the present
0
4T > A
47 '
instance this reduction is based on the proof that the reactions
It is now possible to find the moments and products of inertia existing across any section of the beam are equivalent to a single
about coordinate axes of the fictitious distribution of all three force placed at the center of gravity of the fictitious mass distri-
segments by adding all the quantities occurring in the same bution. The proof of this fact is carried out by means of the
columns of both [18] and [19], There results dynamical analogy by identifying the total relative angular dis-
placement with the moment of momentum and showing from the
vanishing of the latter that the rigid displacement is equivalent
4a' + 6oh2 + b3 2a3 4a3 + 6a&2 + b3 a26 a*b\
[20] to a rotation about an axis through its center of gravity. This
12 ' T'~ 12 ' T' ' T / " conclusion enables one to reduce the six unknown variables to
three. A similar reduction in the degree of indeterminacy can be
With the moments and products of inertia about the coordinate
effected say in case of a closed ring subject to any load by noting
axes thus determined, it is necessary to transfer them to axes
that its change of curvature vanishes on the average.
through the center of gravity x, y, z. Now the total mass M =