Computational & Technology Resources
an online resource for computational,
engineering & technology publications
Civil-Comp Proceedings
ISSN 1759-3433
CCP: 106
PROCEEDINGS OF THE TWELFTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPUTATIONAL STRUCTURES TECHNOLOGY
Edited by:
Paper 207

Toricones: Burst Pressures

J. Blachut1 and O. Ifayefunmi2

1School of Engineering, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom
2Faculty of Engineering Technology, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Malaysia

Full Bibliographic Reference for this paper
J. Blachut, O. Ifayefunmi, "Toricones: Burst Pressures", in , (Editors), "Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Computational Structures Technology", Civil-Comp Press, Stirlingshire, UK, Paper 207, 2014. doi:10.4203/ccp.106.207
Keywords: buckling, collapse, burst, external pressure, internal pressure, steel closures..

Summary
The paper describes burst pressures of eight mild steel toriconical shells of laboratory scale. This is both a theoretical (numerical) and experimental study. All test models were initially loaded by external pressure until they buckled/collapsed. The toricones were subsequently internally pressurised until burst. The details about the numerical process which simulates the two-stage loading profile, i.e., starting with buckling by external pressure being followed by re-loading using internal pressure for up to the burst, are given. The paper concentrates on numerical procedure which allows computation of the burst pressure using extensive plastic straining as a possible superior approach. It is argued that burst pressure based on the excessive plastic straining is closer to reality than the alternative approach based on plastic instability. The ratio of experimental burst pressure to the finite element computed values was found to be [(1.35, 0.96), (0.89, 0.92), (0.93, 0.90), (1.07, 0.95)] for four nominally identical pairs, respectively. Alternative approach to the estimation of burst pressure, based on plastic instability, gives the above ratio as [(0.79, 0.83), (0.77, 0.76), (0.74, 0.74), (0.74, 0.75)]. Hence the plastic instability based burst significantly, and consistently, overestimated experimental values. The proposed algorithm gave safe predictions for two cases (1.35, 1.07) and in the remaining six the predictions were on unsafe side (0.96, 0.89, 0.92, 0.93, 0.90, 0.95) but the disparity was not as bad as for the plastic instability approach.

purchase the full-text of this paper (price £20)

go to the previous paper
go to the next paper
return to the table of contents
return to the book description
purchase this book (price £65 +P&P)