Int. J. lIlech. Sci. Pergamon Press. 1975. Vol. 17. pp. 525-544.

Printed in Great Britain

THE FAILURE OF TORISPHERICAL ENDS OF PRESSURE

VESSELS DUE TO INSTABILITY AND PLASTIC
DEFORMATION-AN EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
A. KIRK and S. S. GILL
Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, Division of Structural Engineering,
University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, Manchester, England

(Received 27 November 1974, and in revisedjorm 29 April 1975)

Summary-Twelve model pressure vessels with torispherical ends have been tested
under internal pressure to investigate failure by instability and plastic deformation.
The models covered combinations of three head heights and four thicknesses. All the
thicker specimens with internal diameter-thickness ratios of 53, 106 and 212 failed by
plastic deformation. The three thin specimens with an internal diameter-thickness ratio
of 530 failed by buckling of the torus due to the circumferential compressive stresses.
The experimental results for limit pressure and instability failure are compared with
theoretical values. The effect of change of geometry is significant particularly for the
larger head heights. For these specimens the experimental limit pressure is higher relative
to theoretical predictions than is the case for the smaller head heights. A simple approxi-
mate theory is presented for predicting the pressure at which buckling occurs in the
torus. The correlation of the new predictions with the experimental values is not good,
but the new predictions are lower than those previously published.

NOTATION S meridional distance from crown on either

b half wavelength of buckle inside or outside surface
D i internal diameter of cylinder shell thickness
E Young's modulus, taken as w radial displacement of shell
6·895 x 104 MN/m2 fe, fq, strain in circumferential and meridional
Hi internal head height directions (in Appendix)
k foundation stiffness force/unit radial de- Be, eq, strains in circumferential and meridional
flexion/unit meridional width of shell/unit directions
circumferential width of shell (in Appen- v Poisson's ratio
dix) 8 circumferential co-ordinate
_ !:i internal radius of sphere aa measured 0·2 per cent proof stress in A
N e, N q, membrane stress resultants in circumfer- direction
ential and meridional directions (in ab measured 0·2 per cent proof stress in B
Appendix) direction
N e, N q, membrane stress resultants in circum- a c measured 0·2 per cent proof stress in C
ferential and meridional directions direction
P internal pressure a y (ab + a c )/2 (see text and Table 2)
PLOP pressure at limit of proportionality from cP meridional co-ordinate (cP = 0 at axis of
pressure-strain plots revolution)
P y membrane yield strength of cylinder = cPo value of cP at sphere-torus junction
2tay/D i Other symbols are defined either on diagrams
PcJ'2 experimental limit pressure corresponding or where they occur in the text.
to 0·2 per cent permanent plastic strain
PcJ'4 pressure corresponding to 0'4% perma- INTRODUCTION
nent plastic strain
p* dimensionless limit pressure (theoretical) THERE IS a very large literature on the
pL dimensionless lower bound to limit structural behaviour of pressure vessel ends
pressure of which a selection, which is not compre-
pU dimensionless upper bound to limit hensive, is summarized below.
pressure
Three early papers were published by
plop PLOPfPy
P~'2 Po·2 / P y
Drucker and Shieldl - 3 on the limit analysis
ri internal radius of torus of shells of revolution including torispherical
525
526 A. KmK and S. S.
and toriconical ends using simplified yield
surfaces for a Tresca material. Gerdeen and
Hutula published analytical solutions for the
limit pressure of ellipsoidal heads,4 hemi-
spherical and toriconical heads5 using the
first approximation to the Ilyushin6 yield
surface for a von Mises material. Other
investigations on limit analysis have used
linear and non-linear programming tech-
niques, for example Gajewski and Lance, 7
Biron and Charleux8 for A.S.M.E. ellipsoidal
heads and Biron and Charleux 8 and Taylor
and Robinson9 for torispherical heads using
various shell yield criteria. Limit pressures
can also be found using elastic-plastic
analysis, for example in the work of CriSp10
and Simonen and Hunter,11 this latter paper
taking account of the effect of change of
geometry on the behaviour of ellipsoidal and
torispherical heads. Calladine12 presents a
novel and interesting analysis of the limit
pressure of torispherical ends leading to an
expression which gives results similar to
Shield and Drucker. 3 Experimental work
in the plastic deformation of torispherical
heads has been reported by Save13 and
Findlay et al. 14
The failure by buckling of a torispherical
end was reported by Fino and Schneider15
and theoretical investigations of this mode
of failure have been carried out by Mescall16
and Thurston and Holston17 and Rotundo
and Kraus. 18 Experimental investigations of
buckling have been made by Adachi and
Benicek,19 Kemper 20 and Stanley et al. 21
Galletly22 first pointed out the possibility of
buckling of pressure vessel heads and he
studied elastic analysis using influence co-
efficients. 23. 24 Many other elastic analyses
by computer have been carried out including
those by Crisp25 and Kraus,26 the latter
reference giving a very comprehensive series
of stress distributions for a wide range of
pressure vessel heads. An experimental
study of elastic stresses was made by Findlay
et al. 27 and photoelastic studies have been
made by Fessler and Stanley.28.29
Shakedown of ellipsoidal heads has been
studied theoretically by Fox et al. 30 and
shakedown of torispherical heads by CriSp31
whilst Findlay et al. 14 have carried out an
experimental investigation of shakedown.
A paper by Townley et al. 32 discusses the
application of Crisp's work31 to the design of
GILL
torispherical ends. Esztergar and Kraus 33
discuss the design significance of failure
modes for ellipsoidal heads and there is an
interpretive report on pressure vessel heads
by Cloud. 34
In the experimental investigation reported
here, model pressure vessels with torispheri-
cal ends covering three head heights and
four thicknesses were tested with particular
interest being focused on failure by plastic
deformation (experimental limit pressure)
for the thicker heads and failure by instability
(buckling of the torus) for the thinner heads.
EXPERIMENTAL WORK
Test specimens
At the start of this investigation it was known
that Stanley 21 was carrying out a comprehensive
experimental study of the strains and deformations
in very thin pressure vessel ends where buckling
failures were anticipated. Relatively large vessels
in stainless steel were to be used which intentionally
included typical geometrical imperfections which
arise in normal manufacture. It was decided to
manufacture model vessels with parameters very
close to those being tested by Stanley. The model
vessels were machined out of a solid bar by copy
turning to achieve geometrical accuracy. The
material used was an aluminium alloy (BS 1476
HE30 WP) whose load-strain curve is shown in
Fig. 1. This material is very suitable for experi-
mental investigations of limit pressure 36 • 37 because
the strain hardening is negligible and the low value
of Young's modulus is useful for the instability
studies. Table 1 gives the nominal dimensions of
the specimens (see Fig. 2) and the minimum
measured thickness in the torus. In general the
variation from the nominal thickness for all the
specimens was between + 0·025 and - 0·050 rnm.
80
_>0--
~xo----xo--)()
70
o2 % Proof stress
2402 MN/m 2
60
50
z
'"• 40 o Gouge I
8 30
..J
X Gouge 2
o 06 08 10 20
Strain, %
FIG. 1. Typical load-strain curve.
 Failure of toriRpherical ends of pressure vessels due to instability and plastic deformation 527

TABLE 1. SPECIMEN NOMINAL DIMENSIONS (mm)

Minimum
cPo thickness
Hpecimen H, r, L, D; (deg.) in torus

IA 24·05 2·540 10·16 135 135 27·33 2·54

2A 24·05 1·270 10·16 135 135 27·33 1·22
3A 24·05 0·635 10·16 135 135 27·33 0'64
4A 24·05 0·254 10·16 135 135 27·33 0·22
1B 27·18 2·540 15·24 135 135 25·86 2·54
2B 27·18 1·270 15·24 135 135 25·86 1·21
3B 27·18 0·635 15·24 135 135 25·86 0·63
4B 27·18 0·254 15·24 135 135 25·86 0·20
1C 32·08 2·540 22·86 135 135 23·44 2·54
2C 32·08 1·270 22·86 135 135 23·44 1·21
3C 32·08 0·635 22·86 135 135 23·44 0·56
4C 32·08 0·254 22·86 135 135 23·44 0·18

A detailed thickness survey of the 0·254 mm thick TABLE 2. O· 2 PER CENT PROOF STRESS FOR
specimens is given in ref. (35). MATERIAL (MNjm 2 )

Specimen A B C u lI = i(Ub+Uc)

lA, 2A, 2B 276 247 247 247

3A,4A 279 242 240 241
lB, 3B, 4B, 280 247 241 244
1C, 2C, 3C,
4C

The model vessels were machined from each billet

319 such that the properties of the material in the
torispherical end were more closely represented by
the tensile specimens in the Band C direction than
~ /-Rctory slldewire potentiometer

DImenSIons In mm
~I
'i~:i
:~:I

~JJ:'~'
:
FIG. 2. Test specimen.

Material properties
Z=:=~I!il'"
~--~---JI:
----
-------'
, I Ii Displacement
Three tensile specimens were cut in mutually jr:r-
orthogonal directions from a position in the billet
adjacent to the material for the corresponding
Centra! displacement ---.......

I,,,,d,,,,
I,oo,d"" '-. t[WiI:! 7 ; /~
transducers

model vessel. The A direction was the longitudinal ,,' ,'/ Jr'~~
axis of the billet and the Band C directions were
in the plane of the billet cross-section. Two L.....7-.;-t:=-~~! !~"-{r-{.}o, /
~'v
electrical resistance strain gauges were bonded
diametrically opposite to one another, parallel to
the axis of the tensile specimen. The load-strain
curve was obtained in an Instron machine using a
very low strain rate « 10 microstrainjmin). A
typical load-strain curve is shown in Fig. 1 from
which the 0·2% proof stress was found. It can be
seen from Fig. 1 that strain hardening is quite
small. The torispherical ends were made from
three billets of aluminium and the average values
of the 0·2 per cent proof stress for each billet and
its associated torispherical ends are given in
Table 2.
528 A. KIRK and S. S. GILL
the A direction and hence in evaluating P" for
each vessel the "yield" stress has been taken as
a" = (ab+ac)/2.
Test rig
The test rig is shown in Fig. 3 and was previously
used by Robinson. 36 The pressurizing medium was
oil and applied using a simple Enerpac hand pump.
A stop valve was inserted in the line between the
pump and the test rig. During the initial filling of
the specimen with oil, air was allowed to escape
from inside the torisphere through a tube co-axial
with the supply pipe which was tapped off at a
T-junction to a separate stop valve. The pressure
was measured with a pressure transducer and a
Budenberg pressure calibrator.
INSTRUMENTATION
( 1) Strain gauges
Tinsley Telcon Type 2/120/EC and Micro-
Measurement Type EA13·031 MH-120 were em-
ployed. These were bonded to the specimen using
W. Bean RTC epoxy resin adhesive cured for 1 hr
at 93°C. No protective coating was used for the
inside gauges because the pressurizing medium had
a high insulation resistance. However, the ends
of the inside cables were sealed with silicone rubber
to prevent any leakage between the wire and the
insulation. The strain measuring apparatus used
was a Peekel automatic digital strain gauge system
with punched tape output.
(2) Deflexion measurement
Mercer deflexion transducers Type 364 were used
and a typical layout is shown in Fig. 3.
(3) Detection of buckling of the torus
The method is shown in Fig. 3. A displacement
transducer (Electro-Mechanisms Type 100-M-L)
was fixed to an arm which could be rotated round
the circumference of the torus. Its position around
the circumference was determined with a rotary
slidewire potentiometer. The signals from the
displacement transducer and the potentiometer
were fed to an X-Y recorder and the development
of the buckles monitored as the experiment pro-
ceeded.
The displacement transducer was calibrated in
situ prior to the experiment using feeler gauges.
The angular position was calibrated from a series
of lines previously marked out on the specimen for
the strain gauge positions.
TEST PROCEDURE
Before testing each specimen the air-vent stop
tap was opened and oil pumped in until no air was
left. For each test a minimum of 10 pressure
increments was aimed for in the elastic range.
This was done by applying a small increment of
pressure and the highest strain gauge reading noted
and a suitable pressure increment then calculated.
For each increment of pressure, oil was pumped
until the Budenberg pressure calibrator piston
lifted at the predetermined pressure increment and
the stop valve on the test rig was closed.
Beyond the elastic limit some creep occurred
and it was necessary to wait until the creep rate
was below 10 microstrain/min before taking a
reading. Since no further oil was pumped into the
vessel during this time, the pressure fell. AIl strain
and deflexion readings plotted are the values taken
after creep had occurred at each load increment
and the reduced pressure at the end of the creep
is the value plotted.
RESULTS
Because of the effect of change of geometry it is
very difficult to define an experimental limit
pressure. The procedure used was to examine the
pressure--strain plots for every strain gauge and
find the lowest pressure corresponding to a
permanent plastic strain of 0·2 per cent for one of
the gauges. This has been defined as the experi-
mental limit pressure PO' 2' The definition is proba-
bly conservative but has been used previously.36, 37
In addition, all the pressure-strain plots for each
strain gauge were examined to find the lowest
pressure at the limit of proportionality for one of
the gauges and this pressure is defined as PLOp.
Table 3 gives values of PLOP and PO' 2 for all the
specimens. The dimensionless experimental values
ptop and pt'2 are also given. They are obtained by
dividing PLOP and PO' 2 by P y where P y is obtained
from the tensile test results for each specimen.
Table 3 gives the theoretical predictions of the
limit pressure due to Shield and Drucker3 (upper
and lower bounds), Calladine,12 Townley et al. 32 and
Taylor and Robinson,9 and also theoretical pre-
dictions due to Shield and Drucker taking account
of the change of geometry derived from the
experiments.
In Table 3, the values due to Shield and Drucker3
are upper and lower bounds based on an approxi-
mate yield surface which respectively circum-
scribes and inscribes the true surface for a Tresca
material and are dimensionless with respect to
2tall ID" the Tresca yield presslU'e for the cylinder.
The results due to Townley et al. 32 are based on
an elastic-plastic analysis using the von Mises
yield criterion but have been made dimensionless
with respect to 2tall /D" whereas the results in ref.
(32) are presented as dimensionless with respect to
4ta"N(3) D" the von Mises yield pressure for the
cylinder. The values due to Taylor and Robinson9
are based on optimizing, by non-linear program-
ming, a lower bound to the limit pressure using the
Ilyushin6 yield surface for a von Mises material
but are again made dimensionless with respect to
2tall /D, for comparability with the experimental
results. Calladine's results12 are based on the one
moment limited interaction surface for a Tresca
material.
The values due to Townley et al. 32 and Taylor
and Robinson9 are strictly comparable with each
other and show fair agreement except for specimen
2C where the value from ref. (32) is higher. This
may be due to the difficulty in reading accurately
from the published graphs or it may be that Taylor
 Failure of torispherical ends of pressure vessels due to instability and plastic deformation 529

and Robinson's lower bound is not optimum for
the higher head heights.
Figs. 4-15 show plots of hoop and meridional
strain against position along the meridian for all
the specimens. The results for the 2·54 mm thick
specimen are taken from ref. (38). For the 2·54 and
1·27 mm thick specimens only external gauges
were used but these results showed the need for
both external and internal gauges which were used
on the 0'635 and 0·254 mm thick specimens. On
these figures three curves are shown at three
different pressures PLOP' PO' 2 and higher pressure
corresponding to a permanent plastic·strain of
about 0·4 per cent (Po.,) the purpose being to show
the development and any redistribution of strain
with increasing pressure. For 4A, 4B and 4C,
which failed by buckling, the strain gauge readings
became erratic, and no values are plotted at Po."
and for specimen 4C, external strain isopressures
are only shown for PLOP' In these isopressure plots
the experimental points are joined by straight lines
and no attempt has been made to fit a curve and

TABLE 3. EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL LIMIT PRESSURES

Shield and
Drucker
Shield Taylor with effects
and and of change of
Drucker Townley Robinson Calladine geometry
Specimen pL pu p* p* p* pL pu

lA 0·55 0·68 0·65 0·67 0·68 0·60 0'70

2A 0·43 0·52 0·53 0·51 0·52 0·52 0·62
3A 0·34 0·42 (1) 0·39 0·40 0·38 0·47
4A 0·25 0·32 (1) 0·29 0·31 0·30 0·37
lB 0·61 0·72 0·72 0·75 0·77 0·70 0·80
2B 0·50 0·60 0·60 0·61 0·60 0·59 0·69
3B 0·40 0·49 (1) 0·50 0·49 0·45 0·55
4B 0·32 0·40 (1) 0·39 0·40 0·35 0·44
lC 0·74 0·84 0·94 0·90 0·93 0·86 0,96
2C 0·64 0·76 0·92 0'76 0·77 0·83 0'93
3C 0·54 0·65 (1) 0·66 0'66 0·68 0'78
4C 0·45 0·56 (1) 0·53 0·58 0·45 0'56
(No change)
(2)

(1) Not available for these parameters.

(2) For specimen 4C the effect of change of geometry is calculted at PLOP'
(3) P O' lS for 4C was the maximum determinable experimental limit-pressure corresponding to a
0·13 per cent permanent plastic strain.
(4) Not available due to buckling.
38
530 A. KIRK and S. S. GILL

10
sphere Torus Cylind« Sphere Torus Cylinder
0·8 - -
06 - -
0-4 - -
02 l=:~'.::=:-::a:.. .~=-':'::8 -
s
I~~"
fft S
c 0
0;; -~I I Do
.~
09 01 02 03 ,~05 .a 0·7 08 09
en.
-02 I-
, "",,01
I ~ -
-04 I- t;1 'If
-
-0'6 I- -
External External
-0,8 meridional I- hoop
strains strains
I I I I . I I
-1-0
I Position of gauge
..L .g
,from which 2 was found

FIG. 4. Specimen IA strain distributions.

10
Sphere Torus Cylinder Sphere Torus Cylinder

08

06

04

.c
~

0 01 02 0,3
Dc
09
S

'E x
en -20

-0'4
V
-06
External External
-08 meridional hoop
strains strains

-1'0
--~OP ----~2 -'-~4 ~ Position of gauge
from which ~ 2 was found

FIG. 5. Specimen IB strain distributions.

 Failure of torispherical ends of pressure vessels due to instability and plastic defonnation 531

10
Sphere Torus Cylinder
08
\
06 \
04

02
~
c
e 0
Ui
-02

-04

-06
External External
-0,8 meridional hoop
strains strains

-10
--~OP - - - - ~2 _ . - ~4 I Position of gouge
....Sl.- from wh Ich ~ 2 was found

FIG. 6. Specimen Ie strain distributions.

10,-------------------,
Sphere Torus Cylinder

09

External External
-08 meridional hoop
strains strains

-10 L
' -- -- - J
l ' '--------''_
_----..ll_
_--..ll.._
_--..ll.._ - L -'

--~OP ----~2-·-~4

FIG. 7. Specimen 2A strain distributions.

532 A. KIRK and S. S. GILL

',0
Sphere Torus Cylinder

08 1\
/ \\
.
06
J/A., ,
04
/"rf
./ \\~ r:'.-o--.
02 :..-.-£/
---::::Y ,\'\, tr-O"--~
:..e
0 ,.
\
s
0;;
.s" 0
~
in
-02
Sphere Torus Cylmder

-04

-06
External External
-08 meridional hoop
strains strains

-1'0
- - ~OP - - - - ~2 _ . - ~ 4 .1. Position of gouge
from which ~ 2 was found

FIG. 8. Specimen 2B strain distributions.

!
I·O,--,.--,,:-,...-'..--r----r---...--...--.,.--.,.--..,
Sphere Torus

0·8
.
/

02
:..e s
0
0;;
c 0 1--.,L---L--'~~lL.......lw...---!o'---l_-,..L.-~OL9
'e... ~
en I
-0'2

-0,4 t
~\ if
I
·0'6 \\{\ J.'f
External External
\'h-cli
-08 meridional
strains w hoop
strains

-1'0

.1. Positiol1 of gouge

from which Poz was found

FIG. 9. Specimen 20 strain distributions.

 Failure of torispherical ends of pressure vessels due to instability and plastic deformation 533

06 Sphere Torus Cylmder

Sphere Torus Cylinder

04

02
;fi.
c: 0
E
en
-02
External External
-04 meridional hoop
strains strains

-06

06 I
I Sphere Torus Cylmder I

04 I- -
02 - 0--.--<> -
;fi. s ~~-- =a=--'=1h...
p----o s
C D; ~ I I Ij;x~ I 0;
0
~ 01 02 09 01 02
03~~ ,f 07 08 09
en
-02 Sphere - 1, x-1- -
-04
Internal
meridional - ~\/? Internal
hoop
strains V I
strQlns
I I I I I
-06
-L Position of gauge from
which ~2 was found

FIG. 10. Specimen 3A strain distributions.

06
Sphere Torus C linder

04

02
;fi. S S
c
~ 0.
0
.~
CylH'lder
Ul
-02
External External
-04 meridional hoop
strams strains

-06

-'-~4
06
Sphere Torus Cylinder

04

.
~

C
02

0
---==::..~~"'--::o

01 02 03
0,-
09
S _:.-=--===a:-:..
0-1
x
=::-..: __ S
OJ

'e Sphere
02 03 09
U;
-02

Internal Internal
-04 meridIOnal hoop
strains strains

-06
-L Position of gouge from
which f6 2 was found
FIG. II. Specimen 3B strain distributions.
534 A. KIRK and S. S. GILL

06
Sphere Torus Cylinder

04

~
0

c
-2
iii
-02
External External
-04 meridional hoop
strains strains

-06

06
Sphere Torus Cylinder

04

02
::t
0

.l;; 0
c
J:
III
-02
Internal Internal
-04 meridional hoop
strains strains

-06
I Position of gauge from
-SL- which P was found
02
FIG. 12. Specimen 3C strain distributions.
06
Sphere Torus Cylinder

04

02
0~
s
0;,
c: 0
'e
Vi
-02
External External
-04 meridional hoop
strains strains
-06
-P
Lap --- ~2
06
Sphere Torus Cylinder

04 f- -

.
~

c
02

~:;r;=::;t;~~~~--\--:~#--:b---;;I;D,
s
I-

o----o---~~
I I
i ".....~.,.--c
I
-
s
D.I
£
Ul
0
01 02
Sphere
09 01 02 03 ....;,~x 05
\~
If, 06 07 08 09

-02 f- ~ x'
,V, -
Internal , I Internal
-04 meridional r- '\ ~ hoop
strains V· strOins

-06 I I I I I I
I Position of gauge from
-.i- which ~2 was found

FIG. 13. Specimen 4A strain distributions.

 Failure of torispherical ends of pressure vessels due to instability and plastic deformation 535
06
Sphere Torus cylinder

04

02
S

·
:.e
c·
]
0
_----0---- _ _ _ _ _0 - _ _
--0--- __ ~ ~

Vl Sphere
-02
External External
-04 meridional hoop
stroms stroms

06
--~op
06
Sphere Torus Cylinder
04

02
;;e ______ s
Di
o----~--c

.E- 0
e 0'1 0·2 03 04 09
-+- Sphere
Vl
-02
Internal Internal
-04 meridional hoop
strains strains

-06
I Position of gouge from
-.iL- which /6'2 was found
FIG. 14. Specimen 4B strain distributions.
06
I I I I I I I I
Sphere Torus Cylinder
0·4 f- -

, ,~~
0·2 f- -
·"e
:.e
c· 0
x
I
:
I I \ 0

(\; Sphere I Torus Cylinder

-02 - -
External External
- meridional
strolns
hoop
strOins
'1 I I I I I
-06

Sphere Torus Cylinder

f- -
.,p--a
P-------c, (r- -
•:.ec I ~'I'.. , /, I
~ 01 02 03 \~4 0-5 07 0·8 O·g
Vl
-02 f- \ ,lo~
\::-""./')'f'r:t' -
Internal "'V.... Internal
-04 meridional f- hoop
strains

-06'------J'----'---I.---I.--1.--1.------' I I , I I I
strains

I Position of gauge from

....:SL.- which ~ 13was found

FIG. 15. Specimen 4C strain distributions.

536 A. KIRK and S. S. GILL

hence imply interpolation between the experi-
mental points. The isopressure plots are not, in
fact, plotted for the exact value PLOP' PO' 2 and
.Pg'4 but for the nearest pressure at which the
readings were taken. This avoided interpolation
and in no way affects the arguments in the dis-
cussion which follows. These figures also show by
an arrow-head, the position of the strain gauge
from which .Pg'2 was found.
Fig. 16 shows, for specimen 2A, a typical series
of pressure-hoop strain plots for individual gauges
along the meridian which may be compared with
the corresponding isopressure plots and illustrate
how PLOP and .Pg'2 were chosen. Similar plots of
all the strain gauges for all specimens have been
made but are not presented here.
Figs. 17 and 18 show plots for all the specimens
of the radial deflexion of the specimen along the

35

18

OJ

.....E
z
~
30
~

'""
20
['"
"0
10 E
2
oS
0
06
Strain, %
FIG. 16. Specimen 2A external hoop strains.

TABLE 4. BUCKLE POSITIONS AND PRESSURES

Specimen 4A Specimen 4B Spcemen 40

Position round Position round Position round

Pressure circumference Pressure circumference Pressure circumference
(MN/m 2) (deg 8) (MN/m 2 ) (deg 8) (MN/m 2 ) (deg 8)

0·241 275 0·378 205 0'758 83

Pressure at which the first buckle was detected
on the rotating displacement transducer
0·379 275* 0·413 205 0·862 83
0'414 40 0·448 123 0'862 168
0·448 185 0'483 40 0'862 20
0·482 240* 0·517 180 0'896 315
0·482 3 0·517 270 0·931 258
0'517 110 0·517 325 0·965 129
0'517 355 0·552 85 1·069 273
0'586 72 0·655 300 1·172 52
0'620 146 0·655 8 1·206 196
0'620 213 0·724 235 1·241 353
0·689 290 0'827 148
0·861 66

* Inward buckle.
 Failure of torispherical ends of pressure vessels due to instability and plastic deformation 537

meridian. They are plotted at PLOP and P O' 2 except in Fig. 19. A photograph of specimens 4A, 4B and
for specimen 4C where they are only plotted for 4C after test is shown in Fig. 20.
PLOP' For specimen 4B only, at a pressure of
For specimens 4A, 4B and 4C, which failed by 0·378 MN1m 2 the pressure was reduced slightly but
buckling of the torus, the buckles did not all form the buckle (although very small at this pressure)
at the same time. Table 4 shows the sequence of did not disappear thus showing that the buckle
the formation of the buckles as the pressure in- was plastic and not elastic.
creased, the angular position round the circum-
ference, fJ, being from an arbitrary datum used TABLE 5. GEOMETRY AT P O' 2
with the rotary displacement transducer (see Fig.
(19)). The buckles developed fairly quickly but ri Li
the later buckles (as the pressure increased) formed Hi
Specimen (rom) (mm) (mm)
with a definite "snap". All buckles formed in an
outward direction except the two on specimen 4A lA 13·3 133 26'0
marked with an asterisk in Table 4. The first line 2A 16·2 135 27·7
of Table 4 also shows the pressure at which 3A 13·6 135 26·3
buckling was first detected. Because of the high 4A 13·4 138 25'8
sensitivity of the measuring device for detecting IE 19·7 130 30·7
the buckles, it was possible to note an incipient 2B 20·2 130 31·4
buckle before it was visible by eye. Fig. 19 shows 3B 16·5 128 28·6
plots of radial deflexion round the circumference 4B 16·3 131 28·3
of the torus for specimen 4B and the development lC 24·3 121 34·4
of the buckles at various pressures. The first 2C 28·3 124 37·2
detection of the first buckle is shown on Fig. 19 by 3C 24·8 122 34·3
the arrows. The half wavelength of a buckle was
measured from these plots and the average
4C 22·9 135 32'1 *
measured values are given in Table 5. There was
a small variation in the wavelength as can be seen * At PLOP'

Sphere Torus Cylinder Sphere TOfUS cylll'lder ... .... 0

150 I- - Sphere \ Torus Cylinder
\
\
E 100
~-~o..
- \
E
co 050 -
--" \
\ -
~
~ o
r-~~ ~
I-t':-~'"" s I----JI..----J~~~---'_+_s
q;,r 50 50
-050
I I I 1
Specimen IA Specimen IB Specimen IC

150 -
Sphere Torus Cyhoder

-
Sphere TOfUS Cylinder --
Sphere ..... "? Torus Cylmder
:>---0-. __" --o.. __ ~

100 -
\
- ,,
E
E
\
\
,,
£10 050 ~-x........1
Gl
-
't
o
o 1 I ~ 1jd11
02 04 ~/ 08

-050 I 1 Ii, I
Specimen 2A Specimen 2B SpecllTlen 2C
--p ---p
LOP 02

FIG. 17. Distributions of radial deflexion at PLOP and P O' 2 '

538 A. KmK and S. S. GILL

Sphere Torus Cylinder Torus Cylinder Torus Cylinder

150

/·00
E
E --0---0,.
C 050
:2u
"
.!!
~
0 0 S
D-
-050
Specimen 3A Specimen 3B Specimen 3C

Sphere Torus Cylmder Sphere Torus Cylinder Torus Cylinder

150r- -
~ I 00 I- -
.... ----'"
I-
' ... - ----'\
x_""-
~
o I I ~ II a::::I1! s
02
- 04 \.<1 08 0.
I '
-050
I I ~I I
Specimen 4A Specimen 48 Specimen 4C
-~op ---- ~.2
FIG. 18. Distributions of radial deflexion at PLOP and PO•2 '

Angukr position, deg

~3O 270 2/0 ISO 90 30 330 270 210 ISO 90 30 330 270 210 ISO 90 30

o
I
-025 -=::::::::: ~8 ..........
-0,50 '\ ,r 4i3KNim2
KN

"'- r /
E
E -0,75 I 861KNAn2

~ -1,00
.! -1'25
-8 44SKN/m2
In iii
,
f\
-/·50 III
'E Ai
1 -1,75
- I-Vobvelenglh 2b
-2'00

-2·25
FIG. 19. Development of the buckles in specimen 4B.

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS point of the knuckle with tension on the inner

With a very large number of strain and deflexion surface. The effect of change of geometry, particu-
readings on each of 12 specimens, it is impossible larly the increase in the knuckle radius as the
to draw attention to all the features of the results. deformation increases, is of major importance.
The general pattern of behaviour of torispherical The following general points about the behaviour
ends under internal pressure is well understood. are noteworthy.
The spherical end is pushed outwards and the
knuckle is pulled inwards with compressive hoop Radial dejlexion and the effect of change of geometry
stresses. Peak bending moments in the meridional In the isopressure plots of the radial deflexion of
direction occur in the region of the sphere-knuckle the vessels, Figs. 17 and 18, it may be seen that for
junction and knuckle-cylinder junction which are all specimens one position of zero deflexion is in
tensile on the outer surface and at about the mid- the torus. The other point of zero deflexion is in
f. p.
f. 538
p. 538
 ~
~
g,
.,....
...o

f.
e.
~
g,
TABLE 6. BUCKLING RESULTS
]
Shield and '"'"
Experi- Drucker Thurston and Holston [ref. (17)] Appendix ~
mental [ref. (3)] (experi-

Specimen
buckling
pressure
(MNjm 2 )
(MNjm 2 )

LB UB
cPo
(deg.) 2r,jD, 10 3 (tjr,) 106 PerjE
Buckling
pressure
(MNjm 2 )
2 -J(kEt3 j12)
(MNjm)
N 8 jP
(m)
Buckling
pressure
(MNjm 2 )
b
(mm)
mental)
±0·25
(mm)
1
§'
co
4A 0·241 0·228 0·292 27·33 0·151 23 21·7 1·49 0·275 0·217 1·27 2·59 2·5 <:t-
o
4B 0·378 0·295 0·368 25·86 0·226 16·6 19·4 1·34 0·186 0·144 1·30 3·15 3·0
4C 0·758 0·415 0·516 23·44 0·340 H·l 38 2·61 0·127 0·076 1·67 3·81 3·8 S'
~

~.,..
'<I

[
1g-
o

O'

~
g'
<:ll
~
co
540 A. KIRK and S. S. GILL

the torus for specimens 1C and 2C but for all the the upper and lower bound values of the dimension-
other specimens is in the cylinder. (Note that for less limit pressure from ref. (13) calculated for the
4C, the deflexions are only given at PLOP') new geometry which may be compared with
In order to assess the effect ofchange ofgeometry, the corresponding values in the same table for
the original profile of each test specimen was drawn the original geometry.
four times full size. On this diagram, the radial It is interesting to note figures similar to Fig. 21
deflexions at PO' 2 from Figs. 17 and 18 were plotted in Ref. (11) where deformations are found theoreti-
to the same scale. Between the points on the cally.
meridian of zero radial deflexion a circular arc was Examination of the isopressure distributions of
fitted to approximate as closely as possible to the strain shows a number of examples of the effect of
new radius of the torus. Similarly, a circular arc change of geometry on the redistribution of strain.
corresponding to the new sphere radius was fitted Note, for example, for specimen 2B on Fig. 8 how
through the experimental points for the radial the meridional strain at BjDo = 0·52 starts com-
deflexion for the sphere to join the new torus radius. pressive and becomes tensile with increasing
pressure.

Zero deflection
Position at which -Po'2 was measured
For the specimens with external gauges only,
-Po'2 was obtained from the highest measured strain
which was in the meridional direction in the torus
and sphere, respectively, for specimens 1A and 1B
\ and in the hoop direction in the torus for specimens
, \
\
1C, 2A, 2B and 2C. For the specimens with internal
and external gauges, PO' 2 was obtained from the
"
.'
........... ,
\
\\ anginal torus
highest measured strain which was on the inside
~ '\ / centre surface in the meridional direction in the torus for
'\~ all specimens 3A, 3B, 3C, 4A, 4B and 4C. Obviously
.................... , ,
\, \............
\ Centre of torus due it is essential to have strain gauges on the inside
. . _'*'_
................... \ \ /to change of
'\\. .......
geometry
surface for a satisfactory evaluation of an experi-
mental limit pressure and it is interesting to note
,,
' \ , ..............
that PO' 2 for specimens 3A, 3B and 3C based on
external strain measurements was from hoop
FIG. 21. Method used to determine change of strains in the torus as for specimens 1C, 2A, 2B
geometry effects. and 2C. It was not possible to evaluate PO' 2 from
the external gauges of specimens 4A, 4B and 4C
due to buckling.
The method is illustrated in Fig. 21, and Table 5
gives the new values of sphere and torus radius, Comparison of pt'2 with theoretical predictions
and head height. Clearly the method is very A comparison of pt'2 with theoretical predictions
approximate, but the values may be compared can be made from Table 3 and Fig. 22. In every
with the original values in Table 1. Table 3 gives specimen the value of pt'2 is greater than or equal

4A IA 4B IB
I 2 ,---LI--r-''---r---l-,---,-----,I ,-LI---r-!----.--'--r----r----,I

10

08
p*

02

o 25 o

UB ~ Shield and Drucker UB - - - - Shield and Drucker o p' from outside x {J* from insIde
LB Onglnol geometry LB----Geometry ot ~2 02 stroln gouges 02 strain gouges

o Pressure for 1st buckle

P,
FIG. 22. Comparison of theoretical and experimental limit pressures.
 Failure of torispherical ends of pressure vessels due to instability and plastic deformation
to the upper bound p U from Shield and Drucker 3
based on the original geometry (for specimen 4B
the values are the same, Le. P~'2 = pU = 0·40. The
value of P~'2 might be low since the strain gauge
from which it was deduced was on the first buckle).
Fig. 22 clearly shows that it would have been useful
to have strain gauges on the inside surface of the
thicker specimens. This might have given values
of P~'2 less than pU for the specimens with
ri = 10·16 mm.
It is also evident from Fig. 22 that the effect of
change of geometry (discussed earlier) is more
pronounced for the specimens with larger head
heights and that even allowing for this change of
geometry the experimental values of P~'2 are still
higher than the predictions from Shield and
Drucker using the specimen geometry at PO' 2 '
Savel3 reports experiments on torispherical ends
in which he defines experimental limit pressure as
the point at which a tangent to the elastic portion
of the load-deformation curve intersects a tangent
to the plastic portion of the curve. The results are
based on deformation, not strain measurements,
and Save reports no influence of change of geometry.
This significant difference from the present results
is probably due to the definition of experimental
limit pressure.
Di8tribution of meridional 8train8
Consider now the general pattern of meridional
strains. For the 2'54, 1·27 and 0·635 mm thick
specimens, the external meridional strain about the
middle of the torus is compressive for the low
torus radius (1O'16mm), slightly compressive for
the medium torus radius (15,24 mm) but is tensile
almost everywhere for the specimens with the
large torus radius (22,86 mm) and for all the
0·254 mm thick specimens. The distribution of
external meridional strain along the meridian
shows a noticeable double peak for specimens lC,
2C, 3C, 4A, 4B and 4C, the effect being similar but
less pronounced for specimens 2B and 3B but
there is no such effect for lA, 2A and 3A. A
similar effect has been noted by Stanley 21 and is
apparent for some parameters in the meridional
stress distribution given by Kraus. 26
The internal meridional strain distributions call
for little comment showing high peak tensile stress
in the torus regions as might be expected. There is
a compressive strain near the top of the cylinder
for specimens 3A and 4A, a smaller compressive
strain for 3B and 4B and almost zero strain at the
corresponding point for 3C and 4C.
Di8tribution of hoop 8train8
The distribution of hoop strains shows clearly
that for specimens with a small torus radius the
top of the cylinder is in compression like the torus
whereas for specimens with the large torus radius,
the changeover from hoop tension to hoop com· com-
pression occurs almost exactly at the tangent line
(top of cylinder). In the sphere, the point of
changeover from tensile to compressive hoop
strain occurs at a nearly constant position on the
meridian for the small torus radius, but for the
541
large radius and thicker specimens (2B, 2C and
IC) some redistribution occurs with increasing
pressure.
Specimen8 failing by buckling in the toru8
At first sight the buckles at the end of the test
(see photograph, Fig. (20)) appear to be uniformly
spaced round the circumference, but closer exami-
nation shows that the pitch is not uniform and the
sequence of formation does not suggest such a
regular pattern. It appears that the elastic
buckling mode is of a very short wavelength round
the circumference and that as the pressure and
hence the value of N e increases, one buckle becomes
plastic and rapidly develops a large amplitude in
the radial direction. Further buckles develop as
the pressure and N e are further increased. The
wide pressure range over which buckles develop
again suggests the influence of change of geometry.
The short wavelength behaviour is similar to that
of the behaviour of a strut on an elastic foundation
and a rather simple analysis of the problem on these
lines is given in the Appendix.
Table 6 gives the upper and lower bound limit
pressures predicted by Shield and Drucker, 3 the
buckling pressures predicted by Thurston and
Holston l7 and the predictions of the theory given
in the Appendix for the buckling pressure and the
half wavelength of the buckles.
vVith reference to the Thurston and Holston
values, the relevant parameters are given in the
table, but since ref. (17) only gives results for a
very limited range of parameters, interpolation is
extremely difficult and rather unreliable. In esti.
mating the value of the buckling pressure, the
buckling pressures deduced from ref. (17) by the
authors of refs. (20) and (21) have been used for
guidance in interpolation but the values in Table 6
can only be considered as approximate.
In using the method given in the Appendix, the
maximum value of N 9 in the torus in the linear
elastic range was deduced from the experimental
strain gauge readings on the inside and outside
surfaces making allowance for the variation in
thickness. The value of NefP is given in Table 6.
Because of the spacing of the strain gauges, the
value of N e may not be the true maximum. The
value of 2~(kEt3/12) varies with cP (by at most
8 per cent) and the value in the table is the lowest
value which occurs at cP = cPo.
It may be worthwhile to obtain the position and
value of the maximum value of N e from an accurate
theoretical elastic analysis but it seems likely that
the predicted buckling pressure, although lower
than those of ref. (17), would still be higher than
the experimental values. As discussed by Kemper 20
the predictions of a plastic limit pressure analysis 3
are much closer to the actual buckling pressure
than any elastic prediction, and this is confirmed
by the values in Table 6 and Fig. 22. t The reason
t The buckling pressure for 4C is considerably
higher than the Shield and Drucker prediction.
This effect has also been noted earlier for the values
of P~'2'
542 A. KmK and S. S. GILL
TABLE 7. VALUES OF STRESSES AND STRESS RESULTANTS AT BUCKLING PRESSURE
Ne ae
Specimen SID (MN/m) (MN/m 2 )
4A 0·50 -0·0522 -226·1
4B 0·49 -0·0545 -231,0
4C 0·45 -0·0578 -238·6
is probably that at the experimental buckling
pressure the structure is near its limit pressure and
the stress resultants are near to yield and that the
buckling is a plastic and not an elastic phenomenon.
In this connexion, Table 7 gives the values of
N e, N", and the corresponding membrane stresses
aa and a", at the initial buckling pressure. They may
be compared with the values of au from the tensile
tests. What is of interest in Table 7 is that for all
three specimens, ae has almost the same value at
the initial buckling pressure, but the relation
between (a",-ae) and au does not correlate with
yielding according to the Tresca yield criterion.
It is also of interest to compare the measured
wavelengths of the buckles (see Fig. (19)) with the
theoretical predictions of the Appendix, see Table
6. Although there is some variation in the wave·
length of the buckles the agreement between the
average value and the theory is not unreasonable.
Further work on even thinner heads would be
appropriate and useful.
CONCLUSIONS
For the specimens failing by plastic defor-
mation the general pattern of behaviour is
as expected with the spherical end pushed
outwards and the knuckle pulled inwards
with compressive hoop stresses.
The values of the experimental limit
pressure, P:'2' are generally higher than the
upper bounds predicted by Shield and
Drucker3 especially for the higher head
heights where the effect ofchange ofgeometry
is a major feature of the results. If inside
gauges had been used on the thicker speci-
mens with the smaller head heights, experi-
mental values of limit pressure slightly
lower than p U due to Shield and Drucker
might have been obtained.
For the specimens failing by buckling of
the torus the failure pressure is much lower
than the predicted values either by pre-
viously published theory 17 or the theory
presented here. Plastic limit pressure results
give a better prediction of the buckling
pressure (except for a large head height) but
further work using the theory given in the
N", a", a",-ae ay
(MN/m) (MN/m 2 ) (MN/m 2 ) (MN/m2 )
0·0107 46·5 272·6 241
0·0166 70·3 301·3 244
0·0271 112·3 350·9 244
Appendix in association with values of No in
the torus from a full theoretical elastic
analysis would be worthwhile associated with
a comprehensive series of tests on thin heads
such as the three tests reported here.
Acknowledgements-This work was carried out in
the Structural Engineering Division, University of
Manchester Institute of Science and Technology.
The authors wish to thank Mr. J. Davie who
carried out three of the tests and Dr. T. E. Taylor
who provided the theoretical values of the limit
pressures using a computer program which he
developed in the Division. They also wish to thank
Professor A. A. Wells, Queen's University, Belfast,
for drawing their attention to the similarity of the
buckling behaviour of the torus to that of a beam
on elastic foundation.
REFERENCES
1. R. T. SHIELD and D. C. DRUCKER, Proc. third
U.S. Natn. Congo Appl. Mech. A.S.M.E.,
pp. 665-672 (1958).
2. D. C. DRUCKER and R. T. SHIELD, J. appl.
Mech. 26, 61 (1959).
3. R. T. SHIELD and D. C. DRUCKER, J. appl.
Meeh. 28, 292 (1961).
4. J. C. GERDEEN and D. N. HUTULA, ASME,
J. Engng IndU8t. B92, 797 (1970).
5. J. C. GERDEEN and D. N. HUTULA, W.R.C.
Bulletin No. 163 (1971).
6. A. A. ILYUSHIN, Plasticity (in Russian),
Gostekhizdat, Moscow (1948); Plastieite (in
French), Eyrolles, Paris (1956).
7. R. R. GAJEWSKI and R. H. LANCE, J. Engng
IndU8t. 91, 636 (1969).
8. A. BmON and G. CHARLEUX, Int. J. mech. Sci.
14, 25 (1972).
9. T. E. TAYLOR and M. ROBINSON, U.M.I.S.T.
(Internal Report) (1971).
10. R. J. CRISP, C.E.G.B. Report RD/B/Nl113
(1968).
11. F. A. SIMONEN and D. T. HUNTER, W.R.C.
Bulletin No. 163 (1971).
12. C. R. CALLADINE, First Int. Conf. on Pressure
Vessel Technology, Delft (1969).
13. M. SAVE, C.R.I.F. Report MT21. (1966).
14. G. E. FINDLAY, D. G. MOFFAT and P. STANLEY,
J. Strain Anal. 6, 147 (1971).
15. A. FINO and R. W. SCHNEIDER, W.R.C.
Bulletin No. 69 (1961).
 Failure of torispherical ends of pressure vessels due to instability and plastic deformation 543

16. J. MESCALL, N.A.S.A. TN D-1510. Collected Assume points on the torus undergo a small
papers on instability of shell structures, p. 671 radially outward displacement w (independent of
(1962). 8). For notation see Fig. 23.
17. G. A. THURSTON and A. A. HOLSTON, N.A.S.A.
CR-540 (1966).
18. P. ROTUNDO and H. KRAUS, A.S.M.E. Paper t
68-WA/PVP-12 (1968).
19. J. ADACHI and M. BENICEK, Expl Meek. 4, 217
(1964).
20. M. J. KEMPER, Oonf. on Vessels under Buckling
Oonditions, 1. Meek. E., Dec. (1972).
21. P. STANLEY, T. D. CAMPBELL and D. COOPER,
University of Nottingham Report (1973).
22. G. D. GALLETLY, Trans. AS~'l1E Ser. B, 81,
No.1 (1959).
23. G. D. GALLETLY, ASME Ser. B, 82, 60 (1960).
24. G. D. GALLETLY, ASME Ser. B, 82,259 (1960).
25. R. J. CRISP, C.E.G.B. Report RD/B/NI005
(1968).
26. H. KRAUS, W.R.C. Bulletin No. 129 (1968).
27. G. E. FINDLAY, D. G. MOFFAT and P. STANLEY,
J. Strain Anal. 3, 214 (1968).
28. H. FESSLER and P. STANLEY, J. Strain Anal. 1,
69 (1965).
29. H. FESSLER and P. STANLEY, J. Strain Anal. 1,
89 (1966).
30. J. D. Fox, H. KRAUS and R. K. PENNY, Proe.
I.Meek.E. 186, 431 (1972).
31. R. J. CRISP, Nucl. Engng Design 11, 457 (1970).
32. C. H. A. TOWNLEY, G. E. FINDLAY, A. M.
GOODMAN and P. STANLEY, Proe. I. Meek. E. FIG. 23. Torisphere geometry.
185, 869 (1971).
33. E. P. ESZTERGAR and H. KRAUS, A.8.M.E.
J. Engng Indust. B92, 805 (1970).
34. R. L. CLOUD, W.R.C. Bulletin No. 119 (1967). Then the strains caused by this displacement are:
35. A. KIRK, M.Sc. Thesis, Faculty of Technology,
University of Manchester (1975). fe = w/r2 ,
36. M. ROBINSON, A. KIRK and S. S. GILL, Int. J. fq, = wlr,
meek. Sci. 13, 41 (1971).
37. F. ERBATUR, A. KIRK and S. S. GILL, Int. J. where r 2 is the principal radius of circumferential
Pressure Vessels and Piping 1, 93 (1973). curvature of the torus = r + (R - r) cosec cP'
38. J. DAVIE, M.Sc. diss., U.M.I.S.T., Manchester By Hooke's law, these strains cause membrane
(1973). forces
39. S. P. TIMOSHENKO and J. M. GERE, Theory of
Elastic Stability, 2nd eOO., p. 94. McGraw-Hill,
New York.
-
N e = --1
Et _ _
2 (fe+Vfq,) = - 12 -+-
Etw (1 V) ,
V -V r2 r

-
Nq, =
Et
- 12 (fq,+Vfe) =
Etw
- 12
(1-+-.
V)
-V -V r r2

By considering equilibrium and resolving radially

APPENDIX inwards these membrane forces cause a radially
BUCKLING OF THE TORUS REGION OF A inward force per unit area of shell
TORISPHERICAL END UNDER INTERNAL
PRESSURE
The theoretical study of the instability of shells
is very complex and the very simple analysis given
below based on the behaviour of a strut on an Etw (1
= - -2 -+-+-2
2v 1)
elastic foundation makes no pretence to theoretical I-v r~ rr 2 r '

rigour. It is a crude engineering approximation

which gives results of some interest in relation to
the experimental results. The analysis is elastic,
whereas as noted in the paper the stresses are
effectively near the yield stress when buckling
occurs.
This may be looked on as a "restoring force"
arising from the radial displacement wand hence
a circumferential strip of the torus of unit width
(subject to a compressive force due to the vessel
internal pressure) may be considered as a strut on
544 A, KIRK and S, S, GILL

an elastic f01Uldation of stiffness theoretical elastic analysis of the shell and could be
calculated for the value of cp where N 9 is maximum.
2
Et (r +2vrr
k = y-----2 2 2
i
2 +r )1.'
.orce/unIt
' rad'laI d'18- For the calculation of the values given in Table 6
- V r r2 placement the maximum value of N 9 for unit internal pressure
/unit circumferential and its position have been found from the measured
width of shell strains in the elastic range in the experiments:
/unit meridional N 9 = [Et/2(I-v 2 )][(e90 +e9j) +v(eq,o +eq,j)]
width of shell.
per unit pressure,
For a strut on an elastic foundation the buckling
load is given by P = 2 ~(kEl) 39 and the buckles where the suffices 0 and i refer to the outside and
have a half wave length = 7T 4 ~(El/k). For a unit inside surfaces of the shell. In the calculations, t
width of shell 1 = t 3 /12(1-v 2 ), but it has been has been taken as the measured local thickness
taken as t 3 /12 in view of the very approximate and not the nominal thickness at each point.
nature of the analysis. The buckling pressure is then given by
Note that because r 2 is a function of cp, the value Per = 2 ~(kEl/N9)'
of k varies round the torus but it turns out that
the variation is fairly small (about 8 per cent at In the paper a comparison is also made of the
most). The value of N 9 in terms of the vessel wavelength of the buckles with the theoretical
internal pressure could be found from a full value.