Buckling Analysis of a Submarine with Hull Imperfections

by

Harvey C. Lee
A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of MASTER OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Approved: _________________________________________ Dr. Ernesto Gutierrez-Miravete, Thesis Adviser

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Hartford, Connecticut April, 2007

 Copyright 2007 by Harvey C. Lee All Rights Reserved

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ V LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................VI ACKNOWLEDGMENT.................................................................................................VII ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................. VIII 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 PROBLEM STATEMENT ................................................................................ 1 PURPOSE .......................................................................................................... 2 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................. 2 EXPECTED RESULTS ..................................................................................... 3

2. SUBMARINE DESIGN .............................................................................................. 5 3. EIGENVALUE BUCKLING ANALYSIS OF THE MAIN CYLINDRICAL SECTION..................................................................................................................... 7 4. NONLINEAR LARGE DISPLACEMENT STATIC BUCKLING ANALYSIS OF THE MAIN CYLINDRICAL SECTION WITH HULL OUT-OF-ROUNDNESS .. 10 5. BUCKLING ANALYSIS OF THE SUBMARINE................................................... 14 6. PLASTICITY EFFECTS ........................................................................................... 23 7. CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................ 29 7.1 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................. 29

8. REFERENCES........................................................................................................... 31 9. APPENDIX A MATERIAL PROPERTIES........................................................... 32 10. APPENDIX B MAIN CYLINDRICAL SECTION ANSYS MACRO.................. 34 11. APPENDIX C SUBMARINE ANSYS MACRO................................................... 38 12. APPENDIX D MAIN CYLINDRICAL SECTION EIGENVALUE BUCKLING RESULTS .................................................................................................................. 48 13. APPENDIX E - MAIN CYLINDRICAL SECTION NONLINEAR BUCKLING RESULTS .................................................................................................................. 51 14. APPENDIX F SUBMARINE EIGENVALUE BUCKLING RESULTS............... 53 iii

15. APPENDIX G - SUBMARINE NONLINEAR BUCKLING RESULTS................. 56 16. APPENDIX H - SUBMARINE NONLINEAR BUCKLING RESULTS WITH PLASTICITY............................................................................................................. 64

iv

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Main Cylindrical Section Eigenvalue Buckling Results.................................... 8 Table 2 Nonlinear Buckling results for the main cylindrical section ........................... 11 Table 3 Eigenvalue Buckling results of submarine ...................................................... 15 Table 4 - Nonlinear Buckling results for the submarine.................................................. 18 Table 5 - Submarine depth capability vs. hull out-of-roundness .................................... 21 Table 6 Submarine buckling results.............................................................................. 25 Table 7 - Submarine depth capability vs. hull out-of-roundness with plasticity ............. 28

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - Submarine Design Configuration and Dimensions.......................................... 6 Figure 2 FEA model of main cylindrical section with boundary conditions .................. 8 Figure 3 Convergence of main cylindrical section Eigenvalue Buckling results ........... 9 Figure 4 Buckled mode shape of 2 nodal diameters of main cylindrical section ........... 9 Figure 5 Definition of out-of-roundness ....................................................................... 10 Figure 6 Nonlinear Buckling of main cylindrical section with 4 OOR ...................... 11 Figure 7 Southwell Plot for the main cylindrical section with 4 OOR ....................... 12 Figure 8 Comparison of ANSYS and Southwell method in determining the critical buckling pressure of the main cylindrical section as a function of OOR ................ 13 Figure 9 FEA model of submarine with boundary conditions...................................... 14 Figure 10 - Convergence of submarine Eigenvalue Buckling results.............................. 15 Figure 11 Submarine buckled mode shape of 2 nodal diameters ................................. 16 Figure 12 Buckled mode shape of main cylindrical section with internal stiffeners .... 17 Figure 13 Main cylindrical section OOR of 4 with eccentricities shown ................... 17 Figure 14 - Nonlinear Buckling of submarine with 1 OOR........................................... 18 Figure 15 - Southwell Plot for the submarine with 1 OOR............................................ 19 Figure 16 - Comparison of ANSYS and Southwell method in determining the critical buckling pressure of the submarine as a function of OOR ...................................... 20 Figure 17 Graph of Bernoullis equation plotting ocean pressure against depth.......... 21 Figure 18 - Submarine depth capability vs. hull out-of-roundness.................................. 22 Figure 19 Hull stresses for 4 OOR .............................................................................. 23 Figure 20 Internal stiffener stresses in main cylindrical section for 4 OOR............... 23 Figure 21 Bilinear True Stress-Strain Curve for AISI 4340 Steel ................................ 24 Figure 22 Multilinear Isotropic Hardening curve for AISI 4340 Steel......................... 25 Figure 23 Submarine buckling strength as a function of out-of-roundness .................. 26 Figure 24 Buckled mode shape for 4 OOR with elastic-plastic material.................... 26 Figure 25 Hull stresses for 4 OOR with elastic-plastic material................................. 27 Figure 26 - Equivalent plastic strain of internal stiffeners for 4 OOR ......................... 27 Figure 27 - Submarine depth capability vs. hull out-of-roundness (Final Summary) ..... 28 vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
To my loving wife Jennifer whos very patience and unwavering support has encouraged me to bring this paper to its final completion.

vii

ABSTRACT
The design of submarines for deep sea exploration has many challenges. The greatest challenge is its buckling strength against the

crushing pressures of the ocean depth. The problem lies in the fact that there are no theoretical solutions for such complex geometry. To further complicate the problem, the out-of-roundness of the cylindrical hull due to manufacturing tolerances must also be considered. To overcome these issues, Finite Element Analysis will be used to determine the crushing depth of a given submarine design once its buckling strength has been found.

viii

1. Introduction
Use this template to type the text of your thesis, using the various heading styles provided. If your thesis is short and you want it all in one file, you may type all your chapters in one file. If your thesis is long, you will want to put each chapter in a separate file. Start a new file for each chapter, using this template. The chapter numbering and page numbering will start with 1 in each file, but when you assemble the chapters at the end, the numbering will be sequential. When creating your chapters, it is essential to use the heading styles provided by this template!

1.1 Problem Statement

The problem with deep sea exploration is designing a submarine with a sufficiently high buckling strength in order to withstand the crushing pressures of the ocean depth. However, determining its buckling strength is far from trivial. As a result, Finite Element Analysis will be required since there are no theoretical solutions to such complex geometry and its inherent imperfections due to manufacturing limitations. Many methods are utilized in industry and information to its validation are usually proprietary. This paper provides general methods to this endeavor and will show the advantages and disadvantages of each. No amount of analysis or sophistication thereof should ever replace testing. Unfortunately, it is not possible to perform non-destructive testing to determine the submarines buckling strength since it is a catastrophic failure mode. Smaller scale models would have to be devised that can be readily sacrificed without substantial impact to cost. 1

1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this study is several folds, all related to determining the critical buckling pressure or buckling strength of the submarine using Finite Element Analysis (FEA). First is to understand the effects of mesh density on the accuracy of the solution. Second is to understand the relationship, differences and advantages and disadvantages between an Eigenvalue Buckling analysis and a Nonlinear Large Displacement Static Buckling analysis. Lastly is to understand the effects of plasticity if the stresses in the hull and internal stiffeners exceed the yield strength of the material.

1.3 Methodology
The commercial code ANSYS will be used to conduct all finite element analyses. All finite element models will be generated with Shell 181 elements. This element is based on the Reissner/Mindlin thick shell theory which includes bending, membrane and transverse shear effects. This theory is suitable in modeling the thick hull of the

submarine and its associated internal stiffeners. The first stage is to calibrate the analysis by modeling just the cylindrical section of the submarine without internal stiffeners and simply supporting it at its ends. An Eigenvalue Buckling analysis will then be conducted with several iterations of mesh refinement until the solution converges to the theoretical critical buckling pressure to within 5% error. This type of analysis predicts the theoretical buckling strength of an ideal linear elastic structure. The second stage is to take the model with the mesh density that converged to the theoretical critical buckling pressure and conduct a Nonlinear Large Displacement Static Buckling analysis with several iterations of various prescribed out-of-roundness or ovalization. A perfect hull would be perfectly cylindrical. But in reality it will be imperfect, having a certain amount of out-of-roundness governed by manufacturing tolerances and capability. The Southwell plot will be used to determine the critical buckling pressure from the Nonlinear analysis. The third stage is to apply the methods from Stages 1 and 2 to the submarine. Once the critical buckling pressures have been found based on the various prescribed 2

out-of-roundness of the hull, the crushing depth capability of the submarine will then be calculated as a function of hull out-of-roundness. It is predicted that as the prescribed hull out-of-roundness increases, the buckling strength decreases. The fourth and final stage is to analyze the hull and internal stiffener stresses at the critical buckling pressure to determine if they have exceeded the yield strength of the material. (To be technically accurate, the stresses should be compared against the proportional limit of the material since the onset of plasticity occurs from this point. However, for the purposes of this study and because most material data does not list the proportional limit, the yield strength will be used instead.) If not, then the analysis is complete. If so, then the method in Stage 2 will be re-executed but with elastic-plastic material properties.

1.4 Expected Results

It is expected that the Eigenvalue Buckling solution will produce the highest value since it assumes an ideal geometry of the submarine with no imperfections. This will be a solid baseline and reference point with which to compare the Nonlinear results to, which takes into account the imperfections or out-of-roundness in our particular case. It is anticipated that the buckling strength of the submarine behaves adversely as the outof-roundness increases. Furthermore, with plasticity considered, it should be no surprise that the stiffness of the material drops considerably beyond the yield point, thus leading to an even further reduction in buckling strength. The solutions from the Eigenvalue, the Nonlinear Elastic and the Nonlinear Elastic-Plastic will be compared and the effects on the ocean depth capability of the submarine will be shown.

2. Submarine Design
Our deep sea exploration submarine was designed with the intent to have a maximum crew capacity of 12 and a depth capability of 4 to 5 miles. The general layout would be similar to a military submarine but on a much smaller scale. To support the crew and all the necessary controls and instrumentation, the mean hull diameter was set at 12 ft. The main cylindrical section was divided into the fwd, mid and rear

compartments which are the control room, the research and analysis room and the engine room, respectively. Sonars and fwd ballast tanks are situated in the nose of the

submarine whereas the propulsion system and aft ballast tanks are mounted inside the conical tail section. Two vertical and two horizontal fins that are welded onto the tail provide stability and maneuverability. The fwd and aft bulkheads separate the nose and tail section from the main compartments. Internals stiffeners welded onto the hull provide additional strength for the submarine. A very strong material is required if our submarine is to withstand the crushing pressures of the ocean floor. As a result, AISI 4340 Steel, oil quenched at 845C and tempered at 425C, was selected. Although its tensile strength is higher at lower

temperatures, which is typical of the ocean floor environment, room temperature properties were conservatively used for additional safety margin. With the general layout defined and material selected, some preliminary analyses were required in order to size the hull thickness as well as the internal stiffeners. A finite element model was created and an Eigenvalue Buckling Analysis was conducted to determine the critical buckling pressure (Pcrit). The critical buckling pressure was then used to back calculate the depth capability using Bernoullis equation (Eqn 1).

P = Po + gh
where P = Critical Buckling Pressure Po = Atmospheric Pressure = Density of Seawater 5

(Eqn 1)

g = Gravitational Acceleration h = Ocean Depth

Several iterations were performed until reasonable sizes for the hull and internal stiffeners were determined such that the 4 to 5 mile depth capability of the submarine can be achieved. (A thickness of 1 ft. was prescribed for the bulkheads and remained constant through each iteration) The final dimensions of our deep sea exploration submarine structure as a finite element model is shown in Figure 1 below. Preliminary analysis shows that its buckling strength is 11,219 psi, yielding a maximum ocean depth capability of 4.9 miles.

Figure 1 - Submarine Design Configuration and Dimensions

3. Eigenvalue Buckling Analysis of the Main Cylindrical Section

The first stage was to calibrate the analysis by modeling just the main cylindrical section of the submarine without internal stiffeners and simply supporting it at its ends. Flugge [9] derives the theoretical solution for such a cylinder (Eqn 2).

Pcrit

Et r (1 - 2)

(1 - 2 )4 + k [(2+ m2) - 2 (6 + 34 m 2 + (4 - )2 m4 + m ) + 2 (2 - ) 2 m 2 + m4 ] m2(2 + m2) 2- m2(32+ m2)

(Eqn 2)

where

E = Modulus of Elasticity r = Mean hull radius t = Hull thickness = Poissons ratio m = Nodal diameters
2 r & k= t = 12 r 2 l

With the dimensions and material properties of our submarine section, the minimum critical buckling pressure or buckling strength was calculated to be 4,097 psi with a 2 nodal diameter mode shape (m = 2). The FEA model, shown in Figure 2, was set up in the global cylindrical coordinate system and an external reference pressure of 12,000 psi was applied. An Eigenvalue Buckling analysis was then conducted with several iterations of mesh refinement until the solution converged to the theoretical solution with an error of 0.09%. The results are shown in Table 1 and Figure 3 plots the convergence to the exact solution. Also, the buckled mode shape was found to be 2 nodal diameters (Figure 4), confirming Flugges theoretical equation. As a result, the FEA model of the main cylindrical section of our submarine has been calibrated.

Esize 6 5 4 3 2 1

DOF 336 480 720 1248 2280 8880

Pcrit (psi) 5,442 5,356 4,555 4,319 4,211 4,093

Flugge (psi) 4,097 4,097 4,097 4,097 4,097 4,097

Error 32.82% 30.73% 11.17% 5.41% 2.78% 0.09%

Table 1 Main Cylindrical Section Eigenvalue Buckling Results

Isometric View

Side View Front View Figure 2 FEA model of main cylindrical section with boundary conditions

Cylindrical Hull Section Eigenbuckling Results

6,000 5,000 4,000 Pcrit (psi) 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 0 2000 4000 DOF 6000 8000 10000

Figure 3 Convergence of main cylindrical section Eigenvalue Buckling results

Figure 4 Buckled mode shape of 2 nodal diameters of main cylindrical section 9

4. Nonlinear Large Displacement Static Buckling Analysis of the Main Cylindrical Section with Hull Out-of-Roundness
The next step was to take the main cylindrical section, with the mesh density that converged to the theoretical solution, and conduct a Nonlinear Large Displacement Static Buckling analysis with several iterations of various prescribed out-of-roundness or ovalization in our particular case. Out-of-roundness (OOR) is best defined by the following figure.
e

Eg: If OOR = 4 then e = 2

Figure 5 Definition of out-of-roundness An out-of-roundness of 1, 2, 3 and 4 were considered for all nonlinear analyses conducted throughout this report. This geometric imperfection was created by using the eigenvectors or nodal displacements, from the previously run Eigenvalue Buckling analysis, with a scale factor to update the nodal coordinates of the Nonlinear model. As an example, if we were to run an analysis with an OOR of 3, the updated nodal coordinates in our Nonlinear model would have the same contour plot as that shown in Figure 4, except that the displacement scale range of 1 ft. to 1 ft. would run from 0.125 ft. to 0.125 ft. instead. Here, the scale factor would be the eccentricity (e), having the value of (3/12)/2 or 0.125. Another advantage in using this method is that there is consistency in the OOR angle, which is desirable. The OOR angle is defined as the maximum or minimum eccentricity circumferential location with respect to the horizontal or vertical axis. For our case, the OOR angle is 45 degrees. 10

The main cylindrical section FEA model that converged to the theoretical solution had a uniform mesh density based on an element size of 1 (See Table 1). The boundary conditions of simply supported ends and a reference pressure of 12,000 psi were maintained. A Nonlinear Large Displacement Static Buckling analysis was then conducted for all four prescribed out-of-roundness using very small incremental load steps. The results are shown in the table below and compared against the Eigenvalue solution which assumes perfect geometry with zero out-of-roundness.
OOR (in.) 0 1 2 3 4 ANSYS (psi) 4,093 3,591 3,324 3,117 2,898 Southwell (psi) 4,093 4,000 3,894 3,711 3,619

Eigenvalue

Table 2 Nonlinear Buckling results for the main cylindrical section ANSYS fails to converge at these final buckling pressures for its respective OOR, which signifies that the hoop stiffness of the cylinder approaches zero and can no longer carry an more load. Figure 6 below shows the final buckled shape for the 4 outof-roundness condition. To reiterate, these displacement scales are in feet.

Figure 6 Nonlinear Buckling of main cylindrical section with 4 OOR 11

Southwell plots were generated for each OOR case using the peak nodal deflection (In Figure 6, the peak nodal deflection would be 0.657806 ft.) This is possible because the load and deflection history in the Nonlinear analysis were recorded. Figure 7 below shows the Southwell plot for the 4 out-of-roundness condition. A linear trendline, shown in red, was fitted through the points and its equation and R2 value given. In the Southwell method, the inverse slope of this trendline is the critical

buckling pressure. For an OOR of 4, Pcrit was calculated to be 3,619 psi.

Southwell Plot
OOR = 4"

3.00E-04 Defl / Pressure (in. / psi) 2.50E-04 2.00E-04 1.50E-04 1.00E-04 5.00E-05 0.00E+00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Deflection (in.) 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 y = 0.0002763x + 0.0000447 2 R = 0.9989078

Figure 7 Southwell Plot for the main cylindrical section with 4 OOR It was interesting to observe that for each and every one of the cases analyzed, the Southwell method consistently calculated the critical buckling pressure much greater than that of ANSYS. Figure 8 shows this comparison. Also, the trend appears to show that the differences widen as the out-of-roundness increases. Nevertheless, the overall results are in agreement to what was expected, which is the fact that hull imperfections reduce the buckling capability of the pressure vessel. In the case of the highest out-ofroundness analyzed, the buckling strength was knocked down by 11.7% (Southwell) and by as much as 29.3% (ANSYS) with respect to the theoretical solution. It must be reclarified that in Figure 8, which is a graphical plot of Table 2, the critical buckling pressure for the out-of-roundness of 0 is based on the Eigenvalue Buckling analysis. 12

Critical Buckling Pressure vs. OOR

4500

4000 Critical Buckling Pressure (psi)

3500

ANSYS Southwell

3000

2500 0 1 2 OOR (in.) 3 4 5

Figure 8 Comparison of ANSYS and Southwell method in determining the critical buckling pressure of the main cylindrical section as a function of OOR

13

5. Buckling Analysis of the Submarine

With the main cylindrical section FEA model calibrated and the effects of out-ofroundness known, the buckling analysis of our deep exploration submarine can begin. First, an Eigenvalue Buckling analysis was conducted with several iterations of mesh refinement until the solution converged to within an error of 5% with respect to the final iteration. Figure 9 shows the FEA model of the submarine with a reference hydrostatic pressure of 12,000 psi applied and the center node of the aft bulkhead grounded to prevent rigid body motion.

All DOF = 0

Figure 9 FEA model of submarine with boundary conditions Each iteration generated the buckling factor (BF) and when multiplied by the reference hydrostatic pressure, the critical buckling pressure (Pcrit) was determined. The submarine FEA model converged to a critical buckling pressure of 11,219 psi. Its uniform mesh density is based on an element size of 1, generating a DOF (degree of

14

freedom) of 28,200. The results are shown in Table 3. Figure 10 plots the convergence of the solution and Figure 11 shows the final buckled shape of 2 nodal diameters.

Esize 6 5 4 3 2 1

DOF 1,032 2,760 3,000 3,384 7,512 28,200

Pcrit (psi) 23,855 12,924 12,905 12,508 11,678 11,219

Error 112.62% 15.19% 15.02% 11.48% 4.09% 0.00%

Table 3 Eigenvalue Buckling results of submarine

Submarine Eigenbuckling Results

30000 25000 Pcrit (psi) 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 0 10000 DOF 20000 30000

Figure 10 - Convergence of submarine Eigenvalue Buckling results

The next step was to perform the Nonlinear Large Displacement Static Buckling analysis using the converged FEA model of the submarine. The method used to create the geometric imperfection of the hull is similar to what was done for the main cylindrical section as described in Chapter 4, but with internal stiffeners. Therefore, the 15

main cylindrical section of the submarine with internal stiffeners were isolated, everything else being deleted, and an Eigenvalue Buckling analysis was conducted. Again, the ends were simply supported and a reference pressure of 12,000 psi was applied. Figure 12 shows the buckled mode shape.

Figure 11 Submarine buckled mode shape of 2 nodal diameters The nonlinear models nodal coordinates were updated using the nodal displacements from the buckling analysis with a scale factor applied. This simulated the desired preconditioned out-of-roundness effect. Different scale factors were used for the 1, 2, 3 and 4 out-of-roundness conditions analyzed. Figure 13 shows a scale factor of (4/12)/2 or 0.166667 used to preset the main cylindrical section with an OOR of 4. Eccentricities (e) are also shown. The OOR angle of 45 degrees was consistent with the buckled mode shape of the full submarine (See Figure 11).

16

Figure 12 Buckled mode shape of main cylindrical section with internal stiffeners

- 0.166667

+ 0.166667

+ 0.166667

- 0.166667

Figure 13 Main cylindrical section OOR of 4 with eccentricities shown 17

A Nonlinear Large Displacement Static Buckling analysis was then conducted for all four out-of-roundness conditions using very small incremental load steps. The results are shown in Table 4 below and compared against the Eigenvalue solution which assumes perfect geometry with zero out-of-roundness.

OOR (in.) 0 1 2 3 4

ANSYS (psi) 11,219 9,796 8,450 7,950 6,950

Southwell (psi) 11,219 10,132 10,111 10,417 10,537

Eigenvalue

Table 4 - Nonlinear Buckling results for the submarine ANSYS fails to converge at these final buckling pressures for its respective OOR, which signifies that the hoop stiffness of the cylinder approaches zero and can no longer carry an more load. Figure 14 shows the final buckled shape for the 1 out-ofroundness condition.

Figure 14 - Nonlinear Buckling of submarine with 1 OOR

18

Southwell plots were generated for each OOR case using the peak nodal deflection. This is possible because the load and deflection history in the Nonlinear analysis were recorded. Figure 15 shows the Southwell plot for the 1 out-of-roundness

Southwell Plot
OOR = 1"

3.00E-05 Defl / Pressure (in. / psi) 2.50E-05 2.00E-05 1.50E-05 1.00E-05 5.00E-06 0.00E+00 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 Deflection (in.) 0.2 0.25 0.3 y = 0.0000987x + 0.0000012 R2 = 0.9972790

Figure 15 - Southwell Plot for the submarine with 1 OOR condition. A linear trendline, shown in red, was fitted through the points and its

equation and R2 value given. In the Southwell method, the inverse slope of this trendline is the critical buckling pressure. For an OOR of 1, Pcrit was calculated to be 10,132 psi. The buckling strength of the submarine calculated from the Southwell plots for each case (See Table 4) were found to be inconsistent and erroneous. The trend shows that as the out-of-roundness increases from 2 to 4 the buckling strength becomes relatively level with a slight increase, which of course is not possible. Figure 16 shows the trend against that of ANSYS. Because the Southwell method was found to be incorrect in this particular study, the buckling strength determined by ANSYS was used from this point forward. It must be reclarified that in Figure 16, which is a graphical plot

19

of Table 4, the critical buckling pressure for the out-of-roundness of 0 is based on the Eigenvalue Buckling analysis.

Pritical vs. OOR

12000 10000 Pcritical (psi) 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 0 1 2 OOR (in.) 3 4 5 ANSYS Southwell

Figure 16 - Comparison of ANSYS and Southwell method in determining the critical buckling pressure of the submarine as a function of OOR With Pcrit found, the ocean depth capability of the submarine can be calculated using Bernoullis equation (Eqn 1). Figure 17 is a graph of this equation where the ocean pressure is plotted against depth. From this graph, the relationship between critical buckling pressure and ocean depth capability was created and is shown in Eqn 3.

Pcrit = 2289(depth) + 14.696

(Eqn 3)

From this equation the ocean depth capability of our deep exploration submarine was then calculated as a function of out-of-roundness. The results are shown in Table 5 and Figure 18.

20

OOR (in.) 0 1 2 3 4

ANSYS Pcrit (psi) 11,219 9,796 8,450 7,950 6,950

Depth Capability 4.9 4.3 3.7 3.5 3.0

miles miles miles miles miles

Table 5 - Submarine depth capability vs. hull out-of-roundness

Pressure of Ocean Water at Depth

25000 20000 18327 Pressure (psi) 15000 10000 6882 5000 2304 0 0 14.7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Depth (mi) 4593 16038 13749 11460 9171 22905 20616

Figure 17 Graph of Bernoullis equation plotting ocean pressure against depth

21

Submarine Depth Capabilty vs Hull OOR

6.0 Ocean Depth (mi) 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Hull OOR (in.)

Figure 18 - Submarine depth capability vs. hull out-of-roundness

22

6. Plasticity Effects
The Nonlinear Large Displacement Static Buckling analysis that was performed in the previous chapter assumed perfectly elastic material behavior. Unfortunately, what was found was that the stresses in the hull and internal stiffeners exceeded the materials yield strength of 214 ksi (See Figures 19 & 20), rendering the submarines buckling

Figure 19 Hull stresses for 4 OOR

Figure 20 Internal stiffener stresses in main cylindrical section for 4 OOR 23

strength inaccurate. As a result, the Nonlinear Large Displacement Static Buckling analysis was re-executed using elastic-plastic material properties. These properties were simulated by generating a bilinear true stress-strain curve (Figure 21) based on the materials yield strength, ultimate tensile strength, elastic modulus and percent elongation at break, which was assumed as the strain at ultimate. Furthermore, because these properties are from the engineering stress-strain curve, corrections were made to create the true stress-strain curve. The relation between engineering and true stress and strain is given by the following:

True = ln (1 + Eng) True = Eng (1 + Eng)

Bilinear True Stress-Strain Curve 300000 250000 Stress (psi) 200000 150000 100000 50000 0 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 Strain (in./in.)
Figure 21 Bilinear True Stress-Strain Curve for AISI 4340 Steel

(Eqn 4)

(Eqn 5)

To analyze for plasticity in ANSYS, the multilinear isotropic hardening (MISO) rule was used (Figure 22). Brown [3] recommends this option for proportional loading and large strain applications of metal plasticity.

24

Figure 22 Multilinear Isotropic Hardening curve for AISI 4340 Steel The results from the Nonlinear Large Displacement Static Buckling analysis with elastic-plastic material properties for the four out-of-roundness conditions are shown in Table 6 below and its graph in Figure 23. They are compared against the Eigenvalue

Buckling solution as well as the previous Nonlinear elastic solutions.

ANSYS Nonlinear Large Displacement Static OOR (in.) Elastic (psi) Elastic-Plastic (psi) 0 11,219 11,219 1 9,796 8,262 2 8,450 7,166 3 7,950 6,330 4 6,950 5,724
Table 6 Submarine buckling results

Eigenvalue

From the table, it can be clearly seen how plasticity effects reduce the submarines buckling strength even further, due primarily to the tangent modulus once the yield strain has been exceeded. Furthermore, when plasticity is considered, the stresses yield off and redistribute over a larger area of the submarine. Figure 24 shows 25

the buckled mode shape and Figure 25 shows the dramatic difference in stress compared to that in Figure 19. Both figures are for an out-of-roundness of 4.

Pcritical vs. OOR

12000 10000 Pcritical (psi) 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 OOR (in.) ANSYS - Elastic ANSYS - Elastic-Plastic

Figure 23 Submarine buckling strength as a function of out-of-roundness

Figure 24 Buckled mode shape for 4 OOR with elastic-plastic material 26

Figure 25 Hull stresses for 4 OOR with elastic-plastic material The majority of the backing strength against buckling are attributed to the internal stiffeners in the main cylindrical section. Once they yield, their hoop stiffness that provides ring stability begins to decline. Figure 26 shows how the high plastic strains due to bending are concentrated at four local regions in the internal stiffeners as expected.

Figure 26 - Equivalent plastic strain of internal stiffeners for 4 OOR 27

The ocean depth capability of the submarine with plasticity considered was recalculated using Equation 3. The final results are shown in Table 7 and Figure 27 comparing the Eigenvalue, Nonlinear Elastic and Nonlinear Elastic-Plastic solutions. It must be reclarified that in Figure 27, which is a graphical plot of Table 6, the critical buckling pressure for the out-of-roundness of 0 is based on the Eigenvalue Buckling analysis

ANSYS - Elastic-Plastic OOR (in.) Pcrit (psi) 0 11,219 1 8,262 2 7,166 3 6,330 4 5,724

Depth Capabilty 4.9 3.6 3.1 2.8 2.5

miles miles miles miles miles

Table 7 - Submarine depth capability vs. hull out-of-roundness with plasticity

Submarine Ocean Depth Capability vs. Hull OOR

6.0 5.0 Ocean Depth (mi) 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Hull OOR (in.) ANSYS - Elastic ANSYS - Elastic-Plastic

Figure 27 - Submarine depth capability vs. hull out-of-roundness (Final Summary)

28

7. Conclusions

7.1 Recommendations

29

30

8. References
[1] Warren C. Young and Richard Budynas, Roark's Formulas for Stress and Strain, 7th Edition, McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 2002. [2] R. Cook, D. Malkus, M. Plesha and R. Witt, Concepts and Applications of Finite Element Analysis, 4th Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002. [3] K. Brown, Advanced ANSYS Topics, V5.5, CAEA, Inc., 1998. [4] H. Schmidt, Stability of Steel Shell Structures General Report, Journal of Constructional Steel Research 55 (2000) 159 181. [5] F.B. Sealy, J.O. Smith, Advanced Mechanics of Materials, 2nd Edition, Wiley & Sons, 1952. [6] W. L. Ko, Accuracies of Southwell and Force/Stiffness Methods in the Prediction of Buckling Strength of Hypersonic Aircraft Wing Tubular Panels, NASA Technical Memorandum 88295, Nov 1987. [7] G. Forasassi, R. Lo Frano, Buckling of Imperfect Thin Cylindrical Shell Under

Lateral Pressure, Journal of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering, Vol 18, Issue 1-2, Sept Oct 2006. [8] E. Ventsel, T. Krauthammer, Thin Plates and Shells Theory, Analysis, and

Applications, Mercel Dekker, Inc., 2001. [9] W. Flugge, Stresses in Shells, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1960.

31

9. Appendix A Material Properties

AISI 4340 Steel, oil quenched 845C, 425C (800F) temper, tested at 25C (77F)

Date: 2/10/2007 2:21:07 PM

KeyWords: alloy steels, UNS G43400, AMS 5331, AMS 6359, AMS 6414, AMS 6415, ASTM A322, ASTM A331, ASTM A505, ASTM A519, ASTM A547, ASTM A646, MIL SPEC MIL-S-16974, B.S. 817 M 40 (UK), SAE J404, SAE J412, SAE J770, DIN 1.6565, JIS SNCM 8, IS 1570 40Ni2Cr1Mo28, IS 1570 40NiCr1Mo15 SubCat: Low Alloy Steel, AISI 4000 Series Steel, Medium Carbon Steel, Metal, Ferrous Metal Component Carbon, C Chromium, Cr Iron, Fe Manganese, Mn Molybdenum, Mo Nickel, Ni Phosphorous, P Sulfur, S Silicon, Si Properties Physical Density, g/cc Mechanical Tensile Strength, Ultimate, MPa Tensile Strength, Yield, MPa Elongation at Break, % Reduction of Area, % Modulus of Elasticity, GPa Bulk Modulus, GPa Poissons Ratio Machinability, % Shear Modulus, GPa Electrical Electrical Resistivity, ohm-cm Electrical Resistivity at Elevated Temperature, ohm-cm Electrical Resistivity at Elevated Temperature, ohm-cm Electrical Resistivity at Elevated Temperature, ohm-cm Thermal CTE, linear 20C, m/m-C CTE, linear 20C, m/m-C CTE, linear 250C, m/m-C CTE, linear 250C, m/m-C CTE, linear 500C, m/m-C CTE, linear 500C, m/m-C CTE, linear 500C, m/m-C Specific Heat Capacity, J/g-C Thermal Conductivity, W/m-K Value Min 0.37 0.7 Max 0.43 0.9

96 0.7 0.2 1.83 0.035 0.04 0.23 Metric Value 7.85 English Value 0.284 0.3

Min --

Max --

Comment density is in lb/in^3 for english units

1595 1475 12 46 212 140 0.3 50 81.5

231 214 12 46 30700 20300 0.3 50 11800

----------

----------

all stresses are in ksi for english units

Typical for steel. Calculated annealed and cold drawn. Based on 100% machinability for AISI 1212 steel. Estimated from elastic modulus

2.48E-05 5.52E-05 7.97E-05 2.98E-05

-----

-----

-----

12.7 12.3 13.7 12.6 13.7 13.9 14.5 0.475 44.5

----------

----------

----------

specimen oil hardened, 600C (1110F) temper specimen oil hardened, 600C (1110F) temper specimen oil hardened, 600C (1110F) temper 1.88% Ni, normalized, tempered 1.88% Ni, normalized and tempered 1.90% Ni, quenched, tempered specimen oil hardened, 600C (1110F) temper Typical 4000 series steel Typical steel

32

AISI 4340 Steel, oil quenched 845C, 425C (800F) temper, tested at -195C

Date: 2/10/2007 2:27:56 PM

KeyWords: alloy steels, UNS G43400, AMS 5331, AMS 6359, AMS 6414, AMS 6415, ASTM A322, ASTM A331, ASTM A505, ASTM A519, ASTM A547, ASTM A646, MIL SPEC MIL-S-16974, B.S. 817 M 40 (UK), SAE J404, SAE J412, SAE J770, DIN 1.6565, JIS SNCM 8, IS 1570 40Ni2Cr1Mo28, IS 1570 40NiCr1Mo15 SubCat: Low Alloy Steel, AISI 4000 Series Steel, Medium Carbon Steel, Metal, Ferrous Metal Component Carbon, C Chromium, Cr Iron, Fe Manganese, Mn Molybdenum, Mo Nickel, Ni Phosphorous, P Sulfur, S Silicon, Si Properties Physical Density, g/cc Mechanical Tensile Strength, Ultimate, MPa Tensile Strength, Yield, MPa Elongation at Break, % Reduction of Area, % Modulus of Elasticity, GPa Bulk Modulus, GPa Poissons Ratio Machinability, % Shear Modulus, GPa Electrical Electrical Resistivity, ohm-cm Electrical Resistivity at Elevated Temperature, ohm-cm Electrical Resistivity at Elevated Temperature, ohm-cm Electrical Resistivity at Elevated Temperature, ohm-cm Thermal CTE, linear 20C, m/m-C CTE, linear 250C, m/m-C CTE, linear 500C, m/m-C CTE, linear 500C, m/m-C Specific Heat Capacity, J/g-C Thermal Conductivity, W/m-K Value Min 0.37 0.7 Max 0.43 0.9

96 0.7 0.2 1.83 0.035 0.04 0.23 Metric Value 7.85 English Value 0.284 0.3

Min --

Max Comment -- density is in lb/in^3 for english units

1985 1840 4 11 213 140 0.3 50 82

288 267 4 11 30900 20300 0.3 50 11900

----------

----------

all stresses are in ksi for english units

Typical for steel. Calculated annealed and cold drawn. Based on 100% machinability for AISI 1212 steel. Estimated from elastic modulus

2.48E-05 2.98E-05 5.52E-05 7.97E-05

2.48E-05 2.98E-05 5.52E-05 7.97E-05

-----

-----

10.4 12.6 13.7 13.9 0.475 44.5

-------

-------

specimen oil hardened, 630C (1110F) temper 1.88% Ni, normalized, tempered 1.88% Ni, normalized and tempered 1.90% Ni, quenched, tempered Typical 4000 series steel Typical steel

33

10. Appendix B Main Cylindrical Section ANSYS Macro

!This macro recreates the main cylindrical section without stiffeners !and runs an Eigenvalue Buckling Analysis with an element size of 1 for !the first 7 modes ! !Author: Harvey C. Lee !Date created: March 17, 2007 ! !Directions: Create this macro and call it !create_cylinder&run_eigenbuckling.mac. Then launch ANSYS and in the !command prompt, type create_cylinder&run_eigenbuckling ! /COM,ANSYS RELEASE 10.0A1 UP20060105 12:46:41 03/14/2007 !* !* /NOPR /PMETH,OFF,0 KEYW,PR_SET,1 KEYW,PR_STRUC,1 KEYW,PR_THERM,0 KEYW,PR_FLUID,0 KEYW,PR_MULTI,0 /GO !* /COM, /COM,Preferences for GUI filtering have been set to display: /COM, Structural !* /PREP7 !* ET,1,SHELL181 !* KEYOPT,1,1,0 KEYOPT,1,3,2 KEYOPT,1,8,0 KEYOPT,1,9,0 KEYOPT,1,10,0 !* R,1,4/12, , , , , , RMORE, , , , , , , !* MPREAD,'matprop','mp',' ' csys,0 K,1,0,0,0, K,2,0,0,12, K,3,0,0,24, K,4,0,0,36, K,5,0,6,0, kplot LSTR, 1, 2 LSTR, 2, 3 LSTR, 3, 4 !

34

FLST,2,1,3,ORDE,1 FITEM,2,5 FLST,8,2,3 FITEM,8,1 FITEM,8,2 LROTAT,P51X, , , , , ,P51X, ! FLST,2,4,4,ORDE,2 FITEM,2,4 FITEM,2,-7 ADRAG,P51X, , , , , , ! FLST,2,4,4,ORDE,4 FITEM,2,8 FITEM,2,11 FITEM,2,13 FITEM,2,15 ADRAG,P51X, , , , , , ! FLST,2,4,4,ORDE,4 FITEM,2,16 FITEM,2,19 FITEM,2,21 FITEM,2,23 ADRAG,P51X, , , , , , ! /REPLOT ! /SOLU FLST,2,8,4,ORDE,6 FITEM,2,4 FITEM,2,-7 FITEM,2,24 FITEM,2,27 FITEM,2,29 FITEM,2,31 !* /GO DL,P51X, ,UX,0 FLST,2,8,4,ORDE,6 FITEM,2,4 FITEM,2,-7 FITEM,2,24 FITEM,2,27 FITEM,2,29 FITEM,2,31 !* /GO DL,P51X, ,UY,0 FLST,2,2,3,ORDE,2 FITEM,2,6 FITEM,2,8 !* /GO DK,P51X, ,0, ,1,UZ, , , , , !

,360,4,

35

FLST,2,2,3,ORDE,2 FITEM,2,18 FITEM,2,20 !* /GO DK,P51X, ,0, ,1,UZ, , , , , , ! /VIEW,1,,,-1 /ANG,1 /REP,FAST /prep7 /TITLE,Cylindrical Hull Section (Esize = 1) !* TYPE, 1 MAT, 1 REAL, 1 ESYS, 0 ! esize,1 !* amesh,all csys,1 nrotat,all sfe,all,2,pres,,12000,,, /SOLU SBCTRAN ! /DIST, 1, 27.1280083138 /FOC, 1, -4.93790132953 , 4.04348334897 /VIEW, 1, -0.446499709800 , 0.488816565998 /ANG, 1, 0.415875984041 /DIST,1,0.924021086472,1 ! /PSF,PRES,NORM,2,0,1 /PBF,TEMP, ,1 /PIC,DEFA, ,1 /PSYMB,CS,0 /PSYMB,NDIR,0 /PSYMB,ESYS,0 /PSYMB,LDIV,0 /PSYMB,LDIR,0 /PSYMB,ADIR,0 /PSYMB,ECON,0 /PSYMB,XNODE,0 /PSYMB,DOT,1 /PSYMB,PCONV, /PSYMB,LAYR,0 /PSYMB,FBCS,0 !* /PBC,ALL,,1 /PBC,NFOR,,0 /PBC,NMOM,,0 /PBC,RFOR,,0 /PBC,RMOM,,0 /PBC,PATH,,0 !*

, 16.2225589785 , -0.749464057814

36

/AUTO,1 /REP,FAST ! eplot /replot FINISH ! Run the Eigenvalue Buckling Analysis for the first 7 modes /SOL !* allsel ANTYPE,0 pstres,on solve !* FINISH /SOLUTION ANTYPE,1 BUCOPT,LANB,7,0,0 MXPAND,7,0,100000,1,0.001, solve FINISH /POST1 allsel eplot SET,FIRST rsys,1 /contour,0,12 plnsol,u,x,0,1 /ANG,1 /REP,FAST /DIST,1,1.37174211248,1 /STAT,GLOBAL FINISH

37

11. Appendix C Submarine ANSYS Macro

!This macro recreates the submarine and runs an Eigenvalue Buckling !Analysis with an element size of 1 for the first 7 modes of which the !2nd mode (2ND) is of interest ! !Author: Harvey C. Lee !Date created: March 17, 2007 ! !Directions: Create this macro and call it !create_sub&run_eigenbuckling.mac. Then launch ANSYS and in the command !prompt, type create_sub&run_eigenbuckling ! /COM,ANSYS RELEASE 10.0A1 UP20060105 12:46:41 03/14/2007 !* !* /NOPR /PMETH,OFF,0 KEYW,PR_SET,1 KEYW,PR_STRUC,1 KEYW,PR_THERM,0 KEYW,PR_FLUID,0 KEYW,PR_MULTI,0 /GO !* /COM, /COM,Preferences for GUI filtering have been set to display: /COM, Structural !* /PREP7 !* ET,1,SHELL181 !* KEYOPT,1,1,0 KEYOPT,1,3,2 KEYOPT,1,8,0 KEYOPT,1,9,0 KEYOPT,1,10,0 !* R,1,4/12, , , , , , R,2,6/12, , , , , , R,3,1, , , , , , RMORE, , , , , , , !* MPREAD,'matprop','mp',' ' csys,0 K,1,0,0,0, K,2,0,0,12, K,3,0,0,24, K,4,0,0,36, K,5,0,6,0, kplot LSTR, 1, 2 LSTR, 2, 3

38

LSTR, 3, 4 ! FLST,2,1,3,ORDE,1 FITEM,2,5 FLST,8,2,3 FITEM,8,1 FITEM,8,2 LROTAT,P51X, , , , , ,P51X, ! FLST,2,4,4,ORDE,2 FITEM,2,4 FITEM,2,-7 ADRAG,P51X, , , , , , ! FLST,2,4,4,ORDE,4 FITEM,2,8 FITEM,2,11 FITEM,2,13 FITEM,2,15 ADRAG,P51X, , , , , , ! FLST,2,4,4,ORDE,4 FITEM,2,16 FITEM,2,19 FITEM,2,21 FITEM,2,23 ADRAG,P51X, , , , , , ! /VIEW,1,,,-1 /ANG,1 /REP,FAST /replot ! ! ! /PREP7 csys,1 LSTR, 5, 1 LSTR, 1, 7 LSTR, 1, 8 LSTR, 1, 6 LSTR, 17, 4 LSTR, 4, 19 LSTR, 4, 20 LSTR, 4, 18 ! FLST,3,2,3,ORDE,2 FITEM,3,9 FITEM,3,13 KGEN,2,P51X, , ,-1, , , ,0 LSTR, 9, 21 LSTR, 13, 22 ! ADRAG, 40, , , , , , ADRAG, 42, , , , , , ADRAG, 45, , , , , ,

,360,4,

8 11 13

39

ADRAG, 48, , , , , , ADRAG, 41, , , , , , ADRAG, 54, , , , , , ADRAG, 57, , , , , , ADRAG, 60, , , , , , ! FLST,2,3,4 FITEM,2,32 FITEM,2,7 FITEM,2,34 AL,P51X FLST,2,3,4 FITEM,2,34 FITEM,2,6 FITEM,2,33 AL,P51X FLST,2,3,4 FITEM,2,33 FITEM,2,5 FITEM,2,35 AL,P51X FLST,2,3,4 FITEM,2,35 FITEM,2,4 FITEM,2,32 AL,P51X FLST,2,3,4 FITEM,2,36 FITEM,2,31 FITEM,2,38 AL,P51X FLST,2,3,4 FITEM,2,38 FITEM,2,29 FITEM,2,37 AL,P51X FLST,2,3,4 FITEM,2,37 FITEM,2,27 FITEM,2,39 AL,P51X FLST,2,3,4 FITEM,2,39 FITEM,2,24 FITEM,2,36 AL,P51X aplot ! FLST,3,1,3,ORDE,1 FITEM,3,4 KGEN,2,P51X, , , , ,8, ,1 kplott,,,,,,,,,1 FLST,3,1,3,ORDE,1 FITEM,3,39 KGEN,2,P51X, , , , ,8, ,1 kplott,,,,,,,,,1

15 16 19 21 23

40

LSTR, 4, LSTR, 39, /replot lplot ! FLST,3,1,3,ORDE,1 FITEM,3,40 KGEN,2,P51X, , ,2, FLST,3,1,3,ORDE,1 FITEM,3,40 ! LSTR, 40, FLST,2,1,4,ORDE,1 FITEM,2,68 FLST,8,2,3 FITEM,8,39 FITEM,8,40 AROTAT,P51X, , , , ! FLST,3,1,3,ORDE,1 FITEM,3,39 KGEN,2,P51X, , ,4, FLST,2,1,3,ORDE,1 FITEM,2,45 FLST,8,2,3 FITEM,8,4 FITEM,8,39 LROTAT,P51X, , , , ! LSTR, 17, LSTR, 46, LSTR, 20, LSTR, 45, LSTR, 19, LSTR, 48, LSTR, 18, LSTR, 47, /replot FLST,2,4,4 FITEM,2,31 FITEM,2,82 FITEM,2,76 FITEM,2,80 AL,P51X FLST,2,4,4 FITEM,2,81 FITEM,2,76 FITEM,2,83 FITEM,2,72 AL,P51X FLST,2,4,4 FITEM,2,24 FITEM,2,80 FITEM,2,77 FITEM,2,86 AL,P51X

39 40

, , ,1

41

, ,P51X, ,360,4,

, , ,1

, ,P51X, ,360,4, 46 42 45 41 48 44 47 43

41

FLST,2,4,4 FITEM,2,77 FITEM,2,81 FITEM,2,73 FITEM,2,87 AL,P51X FLST,2,4,4 FITEM,2,82 FITEM,2,29 FITEM,2,84 FITEM,2,79 AL,P51X FLST,2,4,4 FITEM,2,79 FITEM,2,85 FITEM,2,75 FITEM,2,83 AL,P51X FLST,2,4,4 FITEM,2,86 FITEM,2,27 FITEM,2,84 FITEM,2,78 AL,P51X FLST,2,4,4 FITEM,2,87 FITEM,2,78 FITEM,2,85 FITEM,2,74 AL,P51X ! FLST,3,1,3,ORDE,1 FITEM,3,46 KGEN,2,P51X, , ,-1, , , ,1 LSTR, 46, 49 ADRAG, 88, , , , , , ADRAG, 89, , , , , , ADRAG, 92, , , , , , ADRAG, 95, , , , , , ! FLST,3,4,3,ORDE,2 FITEM,3,41 FITEM,3,-44 KGEN,2,P51X, , ,6, , , ,1 kplott,,,,,,,,,1 ! FLST,3,4,3,ORDE,2 FITEM,3,58 FITEM,3,-61 KGEN,2,P51X, , , , ,-3, ,1 LSTR, 59, 63 LSTR, 58, 62 LSTR, 61, 65 LSTR, 60, 64 lplot LSTR, 42, 59

77 78 79 76

42

LSTR, 41, 58 LSTR, 44, 61 LSTR, 43, 60 LSTR, 63, 46 LSTR, 62, 45 LSTR, 65, 48 LSTR, 64, 47 NUMMRG,KP,.001,.001, ,LOW /replot FLST,2,4,4 FITEM,2,105 FITEM,2,101 FITEM,2,109 FITEM,2,81 AL,P51X FLST,2,4,4 FITEM,2,106 FITEM,2,102 FITEM,2,110 FITEM,2,83 AL,P51X FLST,2,4,4 FITEM,2,107 FITEM,2,103 FITEM,2,111 FITEM,2,85 AL,P51X FLST,2,4,4 FITEM,2,108 FITEM,2,104 FITEM,2,112 FITEM,2,87 AL,P51X aplot ! FLST,3,1,3,ORDE,1 FITEM,3,1 KGEN,2,P51X, , , , ,-9, ,1 kplott,,,,,,,,,1 LSTR, 1, 23 ! csys,0 ! Create Nose K,next,0,5.963,-1 K,next,0,5.850,-2 K,next,0,5.657,-3 K,next,0,5.375,-4 K,next,0,4.989,-5 K,next,0,4.472,-6 K,next,0,3.771,-7 K,next,0,3.317,-7.5 K,next,0,2.749,-8 K,next,0,2.398,-8.25 K,next,0,1.972,-8.5 K,next,0,1.404,-8.75 K,next,0,1.258,-8.8

43

K,next,0,1.091,-8.85 K,next,0,0.892,-8.9 K,next,0,0.632,-8.95 K,next,0,0.000,-9 ! FLST,3,18,3 FITEM,3,5 FITEM,3,25 FITEM,3,27 FITEM,3,29 FITEM,3,30 FITEM,3,31 FITEM,3,33 FITEM,3,35 FITEM,3,37 FITEM,3,38 FITEM,3,50 FITEM,3,52 FITEM,3,54 FITEM,3,56 FITEM,3,57 FITEM,3,66 FITEM,3,67 FITEM,3,68 BSPLIN, ,P51X /replot ! FLST,2,1,4,ORDE,1 FITEM,2,46 FLST,8,2,3 FITEM,8,1 FITEM,8,23 AROTAT,P51X, , , , , ,P51X, ,360,4, ! NUMMRG,KP,0.001,0.001, ,LOW lplott ! FLST,5,28,5,ORDE,6 FITEM,5,1 FITEM,5,-12 FITEM,5,33 FITEM,5,-40 FITEM,5,45 FITEM,5,-52 ASEL,R, , ,P51X lsla ksll ! cm,externalshell.a,area ! Define area attributes FLST,5,8,5,ORDE,2 FITEM,5,21 FITEM,5,-28 CM,_Y,AREA ASEL, , , ,P51X CM,_Y1,AREA

44

CMSEL,S,_Y !* CMSEL,S,_Y1 AATT, 1, 3, 1, CMSEL,S,_Y CMDELE,_Y CMDELE,_Y1 !* Define area attributes FLST,5,16,5,ORDE,6 FITEM,5,13 FITEM,5,-20 FITEM,5,29 FITEM,5,-32 FITEM,5,41 FITEM,5,-44 CM,_Y,AREA ASEL, , , ,P51X CM,_Y1,AREA CMSEL,S,_Y !* CMSEL,S,_Y1 AATT, 1, 2, 1, CMSEL,S,_Y CMDELE,_Y CMDELE,_Y1 ! Define area attributes cmsel,s,externalshell.a lsla ksll aplot FLST,5,28,5,ORDE,6 FITEM,5,1 FITEM,5,-12 FITEM,5,33 FITEM,5,-40 FITEM,5,45 FITEM,5,-52 CM,_Y,AREA ASEL, , , ,P51X CM,_Y1,AREA CMSEL,S,_Y !* CMSEL,S,_Y1 AATT, 1, 1, 1, CMSEL,S,_Y CMDELE,_Y CMDELE,_Y1 ! Create mesh allsel,all ESIZE,1 MSHKEY,1 amesh,all !* Reverse area normals asel,s,,,21 asel,a,,,25 asel,a,,,29

0,

0,

0,

45

asel,a,,,30 asel,a,,,31 asel,a,,,32 asel,a,,,39 asel,a,,,40 asel,a,,,47 asel,a,,,48 lsla ksll esla nsle AREVERSE,all ! FINISH /SOL FLST,2,1,3,ORDE,1 FITEM,2,40 !* /GO DK,P51X, ,0, ,1,ALL, , , , , , FINISH /PREP7 allsel csys,1 nrotat,all ! FLST,5,28,5,ORDE,6 FITEM,5,1 FITEM,5,-12 FITEM,5,29 FITEM,5,-40 FITEM,5,49 FITEM,5,-52 ASEL,R, , ,P51X esla nsle eplot ! cm,externalshell.e,elements ! sfe,all,2,pres,,12000,,, ! FINISH ! Run the Eigenvalue Buckling Analysis for the first 7 modes /SOL !* allsel ANTYPE,0 pstres,on solve !* FINISH /SOLUTION ANTYPE,1 BUCOPT,LANB,7,0,0 MXPAND,7,0,100000,1,0.001,

46

solve FINISH /POST1 allsel eplot SET,FIRST SET,NEXT rsys,1 /contour,0,12 plnsol,u,x,0,1 /ANG,1 /REP,FAST /DIST,1,1.37174211248,1 /DIST, 1, 27.1280083138 /FOC, 1, -4.93790132953 /VIEW, 1, -0.446499709800 /ANG, 1, 0.415875984041 /DIST,1,0.924021086472,1 /REP,FAST /STAT,GLOBAL FINISH

, ,

4.04348334897 0.488816565998

, 16.2225589785 , -0.749464057814

47

12. Appendix D Main Cylindrical Section Eigenvalue Buckling Results

Buckled mode shape for Element size = 6 (DOF = 336)

Buckled mode shape for Element size = 5 (DOF = 480) 48

Buckled mode shape for Element size = 4 (DOF = 720)

Buckled mode shape for Element size = 3 (DOF = 1248) 49

Buckled mode shape for Element size = 2 (DOF = 2280)

50

13. Appendix E - Main Cylindrical Section Nonlinear Buckling Results

Buckled mode shape for OOR = 1

Buckled mode shape for OOR = 2

51

Buckled mode shape for OOR = 3

Buckled mode shape for OOR = 4

52

14. Appendix F Submarine Eigenvalue Buckling Results

Buckled mode shape for Element size = 2 (DOF = 7,512)

Buckled mode shape for Element size = 3 (DOF = 3,384)

53

Buckled mode shape for Element size = 4 (DOF = 3,000)

Buckled mode shape for Element size = 5 (DOF = 2,760)

54

Buckled mode shape for Element size = 6 (DOF = 1,032)

55

15. Appendix G - Submarine Nonlinear Buckling Results

Buckled mode shape for OOR = 1

Hull stresses for OOR = 1

56

Internal stiffener stresses for OOR = 1

Buckled mode shape for OOR = 2

57

Hull stresses for OOR = 2

Internal stiffener stresses for OOR = 2

58

Buckled mode shape for OOR = 3

Hull stresses for OOR = 3

59

Internal stiffener stresses for OOR = 3

Buckled mode shape for OOR = 4

60

Hull stresses for OOR = 4

Internal stiffener stresses for OOR = 4

61

Southwell Plot
OOR = 1"

3.00E-05 Defl / Pressure (in. / psi) 2.50E-05 2.00E-05 1.50E-05 1.00E-05 5.00E-06 0.00E+00 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 Deflection (in.) 0.2 0.25 0.3 y = 0.0000987x + 0.0000012 R2 = 0.9972790

Southwell Plot for OOR = 1 (Pcrit = 10,132 psi)

Southwell Plot
OOR = 2"

3.00E-05 Defl / Pressure (in. / psi) 2.50E-05 2.00E-05 1.50E-05 1.00E-05 5.00E-06 0.00E+00 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 Deflection (in.) y = 0.0000989x + 0.0000046 R2 = 0.9978519

Southwell Plot for OOR = 2 (Pcrit = 10,111 psi)

62

Southwell Plot
OOR = 3"

3.50E-05 Defl / Pressure (in. / psi) 3.00E-05 2.50E-05 2.00E-05 1.50E-05 1.00E-05 5.00E-06 0.00E+00 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 Deflection (in.) 0.2 0.25 0.3 y = 0.0000960x + 0.0000081 R2 = 0.9992345

Southwell Plot for OOR = 3 (Pcrit = 10,417 psi)

Southwell Plot
OOR = 4"

4.00E-05 Defl / Pressure (in. / psi) 3.50E-05 3.00E-05 2.50E-05 2.00E-05 1.50E-05 1.00E-05 5.00E-06 0.00E+00 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 Deflection (in.) y = 0.0000949x + 0.0000116 R2 = 0.9996126

Southwell Plot for OOR = 4 (Pcrit = 10,537 psi)

63

16. Appendix H - Submarine Nonlinear Buckling Results with Plasticity

Buckled mode shape for OOR = 1

Hull stresses for OOR = 1

64

Internal stiffener strains for OOR = 1

Buckled mode shape for OOR = 2

65

Hull stresses for OOR = 2

Internal stiffener strains for OOR 2

66

Buckled mode shape for OOR = 3

Hull stresses for OOR = 3

67

Internal stiffener strains for OOR = 3

Buckled mode shape for OOR = 4

68

Hull stresses for OOR = 4

Internal stiffener strains for OOR = 4

69