OFFSHORE TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE 6200 North Central Expressway Dallas, Texas 75206
M.
S.
Plastic
Consideration
on
Strength
of
Tubular
Punching
Joints
Shear
By
Lee, A. P. Cheng~ Amoco International Oil
U.
Co.,
ofWi searls in
C.
T.
Sun,
Purdue U., and R.
Y.
Lai.
THIS PAPER IS SUBJECT TO CORRECTION
©Copyright 1976 Offshore Technology Conference on behalf of the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc. (Society of Mining Engineers, The Metallurgical Society and Society of Petroleum Engineers), American Association of Petroleum Geologists, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, American Society of Civil Engineers, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Institute of Electrical and Electronics En~ gineers, Marine Technology Society, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, and Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers. This paper was prepared for presentation at the Eighth Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Tex., May 36, 1976. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. Such use of an abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper is presented.
.
ABSTRACT 
derived from the correlation of the 

axial load 
test data. 
This generally 

An for calculating alternative 
procedure the is punching presented shear 
results the in a conservative design when stress is predominant. bending 

strength of a 
tubular joint. The 
This 
paper presents 
an improvement 

development is based on the fully plastic consideration of the, chord 
factor· for 
bending 
to the current 

allowable punching 
shear equation 

member. Both 
inplane and 
outof 
The 
development is 
based on the fully 

plane bending moments are 
considered 
plastic consideration of the chord. 

in the formulation. The 
results 
Also 
presented 
is 
a 
punching shear 

indicate that, tions of loads, 
for the certain combina_ proposed approach 
equation which combines the axial 

stress with both the inplane and 

yields joint design compared to a more rati()nal and 
economical the current 
outofplane bending moments. Design 

curves and 
a sample 
problem are 

API 
approach. 
presented for 
the 
users who desire 
to 

INTRODUCTION 
apply the proposed 
procedure to check 

their joint designs. 

An structure tubular joint design is t4e punching shear requirements r§com important criterion for offshore 
EQUATIONS Calculated Punching Shear DERIVATION Stress 

mended by 
the 
API (1). 
The current 

calculated punching shear equation is basically a combination of the axial  
A typical shown in "Y" Fig. 
connection 1. All the joint is joint 

stress and 
the maximum bending 
geometrical 
notations defined by 

stresses, with no distinction between inplane and outofplane bending 
API 
RP2A are followed. The right 

hand 
rectangular Cartesian coordinate 

stresses. 
As 
a result, 
the calcu 
system is used with 
the xaxis along 

lated punching shear stress is under 
the chord member center line and the_ 

estimated under 
some loading condi 
yplane coinciding with the chord 

tions. On 
the 
other hand, 
the current 
brace plane. 
The 
brace member is 

allowable punching shear equation is 

References 
and 
illustrations at end 

of paper. 

260
PLASTIC
CONSIDERATION
ON
PUNCHING
STRENGTH
OF
TUBULAR JOINTS
SHEAR
OTe
2641
Substituting
Eqs.
(5)
and
a Llwzllx
LI.LI’I
(9) into
UJI
.Iu.DuhfiK
LJULLWLD
is a tedious
job to calculate
_{U}_{}_{L}_{}_{G}
_{.}_{4}_{0}_{%}
these
Eq. (12) results 
in 
numbers. However, the following 

discussions may help those who are 

interested in preparing numerical 

~ = sine h(e,A,B) 
l(e,A,B) 
(13) 
‘data for design. 
Taking advantage 
with
l(e,A,B) 

or 

~=L 

4ai 

It 
follows 
_{A}_{,}
_{m}
_{a}_{n}_{d}
of the fact that the joint punching shear capacity is not affected by the bending moment’s sign, we assume Mfi and M: both to be positive. _{T}_{h}_{i}_{s}
assumpt~onr together with the engi
= 
^{1} 
neering properties of material, 
lead 

2E(cose) 
‘ 
to 
the following restriction 
on 
A and 

^{B}^{:} 

+ 
3~iC0S$(l+m2tan2@) 

tan26F(cos0) 
+(2sec28) 
E(cose) 

sinBsinA>O; 
COSACOSB20 
(16) 

and 

f(e,A,B) 
l(O,A,B) 
(14) 

.1 
< A ~ ~; 
BAs?r 
(17) 

2 
2. 

that 
q actually 
depends 
on 

_{@} _{o}_{n}_{l}_{y}_{.} 
Once 
the 
A 
and B values are obtained, 
APPLICATION
the improvement
culated
from
Eq.
factor
(13)
rI can
be
and tables
cal
or
curves of rIvalues for different A;, m and 0 can be prepared.
If more exact punching shear stress calculations are needed, Equation (1) _{s}_{h}_{o}_{u}_{l}_{d} _{b}_{e} _{u}_{s}_{e}_{d} _{i}_{n} _{l}_{i}_{e}_{u} _{o}_{f} _{t}_{h}_{e}
equation shown
_{H}_{o}_{w}_{e}_{v}_{e}_{r}_{;} _{t}_{h}_{e} _{a}_{n}_{g}_{l}_{e} _{@} _{i}_{n} _{E}_{q}_{u}_{”}_{a}_{t}_{i}_{o}_{n}_{} _{(}_{1}_{)} values at e = 900 for all inter
has to be determined from Equation _{(}_{2}_{)} _{b}_{e}_{f}_{o}_{r}_{e} _{t}_{h}_{e} _{c}_{a}_{l}_{c}_{u}_{l}_{a}_{t}_{i}_{o}_{n} _{c}_{a}_{n}
Since n becomes the minimum
constant Ai and 900, it will be
section angles.
for
m when 0 approaches conservative to use
It is also observe~
of the moment
_{o}_{n}_{_}_{A}_{P}_{I}_{R}_{P}_{2}_{A}_{_}_{,} _{p}_{a}_{g}_{e} _{1}_{7}_{.}
that the orientation
is
_{p}_{r}_{o}_{c}_{e}_{e}_{d}_{.} 
_{V}_{a}_{l}_{u}_{e}_{s} _{o}_{f} _{@} _{v}_{s}_{.} _{m}_{o}_{m}_{e}_{n}_{t} 

_{r}_{a}_{t}_{i}_{o}_{s} 
_{m} _{f}_{o}_{r} _{s}_{e}_{v}_{e}_{r}_{a}_{l} _{i}_{n}_{t}_{e}_{r}_{s}_{e}_{c}_{t}_{i}_{o}_{n} 

angles 
0 are plotted 
in Fig. 3. 
Also 

_{t}_{h}_{e} _{c}_{u}_{r}_{v}_{e} _{f}_{o}_{r} _{k}_{c} _{v}_{s}_{.} 
_{0} _{i}_{s} _{a}_{d}_{d}_{e}_{d} 
_{t}_{o} 

the current API RP2A Fig. 
2.221 
and 

is shown ‘in Fig. 4. 
Note 
that the 
immaterial to q for this particular
intersection <angle.
Thus, by setting
^{M}^{O}
^{=}
^{0}
^{a}^{n}^{d}
^{M}^{L}
^{z} iv and noting
B = A,
Equations 
(10) and 
(13) are reduced 
to 
kc value is considerably lower than
the kb value
for a chosen
e.
As for
the allowable 
punching 
shear 
in 
the 

chord 
wall, 
the authors 
propose 
to 
incorporate
_{t}_{h}_{e}
_{t}_{o}
the improvement
_{c}_{u}_{r}_{r}_{e}_{n}_{t}
API RP2A Eq.
factor
~
(23),i.e. ,
A=—, 
sinA 
?I’+2A 

and 
:5
A
~
O
_{(}_{1}_{8}_{)}
‘P
= QQ~Qf
—
_{.}
Fy
9Y.7
(plus 1/3 increase
_{w}_{h}_{e}_{r}_{e} _{a}_{p}_{p}_{l}_{i}_{c}_{a}_{b}_{l}_{e}_{)}
(15)
Thereis an obstacle to be overcome
before ~ ca’n be evaluated,
to determine the plastic zone between
A and B as shown
ously,
from Eqs.
Since the equations are cotipled, it
which is
_{O}_{“}_{b}_{v}_{i}_{}
in Fig. 2.
A and B can be determined
(10) and.(n)
numerically.
n = (I+4A)(1+2Ay)
(19)
The transcendental Equation (18) can.
easily be solved by numerical method.
The curve of improvement
pseudo moment/axial load ratio X is
shown in Fig.
curve,
between the resultant moment M and
factor n vs.
(5).
When using the
A should be taken as the ratio
the axial
load P, i.e.,
_{b}_{%}
and M = ~(Mi)2+(M0)2
(20)
_{O}_{T}_{C}
_{2}_{6}_{4}_{1}
M. S. LEE, A. P. CHENG,
C. T. SUN, AND R. Y. LAI
26
EXAMPLE 
=1.36X 
^{5}^{0} 

.9 X 28.287 

Given 

= 5.35 1.36 X 

1. Chord Member Can Section 

64.75’’0.D. X 1.125 W.T. 
ksi = (since 7.28 
Q~=Qf=l) 

Stress in can section: 
15.14 ksi 

vs. 5.35 
ksi 
in 
the 
API 
equation. 
2. Brace Member
28’’o.D. X .5(IW.T.
P=391.21 kip, fa=9.06 ksi.
Mi=3523.36 kipin, f~=12.08 ksi.
M0=2475.46 kipin, f~=8.48 ksi.
_{3}_{.}
Intersection Angle
0 = 430
4. Material Yield Strength
= 50 ksi
Since m = ~
=
1.42,
we obtain from
Equation _{4} = 40.20. we have
(2) or from Fig. Furthermore,
(3) that
from Fig.(4)
ka = 1.24, kb = 1.64, kc = 1.37.
Using Eq. 
(1) we obtain 

_{V}_{p} 
_{=} 
* 
(sin 43°~” 

. 

+ 
12.08 

— 
.0s 
40.20 ;”~”sin 
40.2~”” 

1.64 
1.37 

= 
5.83 
ksi 
vs. 
5.58 
ksi 
by 
API 

equation 

thus from Fig.(5) 
we obtain rI = 1.36. 
Therefore, the allowable punching
shear is
Vp
= qQ6Qf
^{F}^{y}
.9y”7
.
(15)
CONCLUSION
An alternative procedure has been presented for calculating the punch ing shear stress of a tubular joint. The procedure was developed by considering the effect of both the inplane and outofplane bending moments and the full plastification of the chord member. The use of. the proposed approach will generally yield a more economical joint design compared to the present API method. The sample problem demonstrates that the use of the proposed procedure . increased the allowable punching shear stress by 36%. On the other
hand, the example
also shows that
the present API code somewhat under
estimates the calculated punching
_{s}_{h}_{e}_{a}_{r} _{s}_{t}_{r}_{e}_{s}_{s}_{.}
conventional jacket design where the out–of–plane bending moments are usually less than the inplane bend
This is typical
in
ing moments.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to express their gratitude to Amoco International Oil Company for permission to present _{t}_{h}_{i}_{s} _{p}_{a}_{p}_{e}_{r}_{.} Special recognition is extended to Edmond R. Genois and _{R}_{u}_{d}_{o}_{l}_{p}_{h} _{A}_{.} Hall of PetroMarine Engineering, Inc., for their contri bution in conducting this study. Special thanks to Denise Bellon for typing and editing the manuscript.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. 
“Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing, and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platform,” API RP2A, Sixth Edition, January 1975. 
2. 
“plastic Design Steel,” American 
Institute of Steel Construction,
1959.
^{/}
(
*)
b
7)
Location Of
Y Max. Calculated Vp
^{1}
J
Fig.
1
.x
Z=7
@=+

“
tb
^{l}^{’}^{=}^{+}
>
1111111::1111111111 ^{+}
Full Plastificetion
II
1111111::111111
Axial Loed
+
^{+} Plastic Bending
‘~~
dlsin 0
I
(11111::1111111 +
11111111::11111111 +
Fig.
2
Plastic Bending
,
&daI Loed
II
_
Full Plw@ication
) Y
+
^{4}^{.}^{0}
^{3}^{.}^{0}
^{2}^{.}^{0}
1.01
o
w
^{I}
^{I}
^{I}
^{I}
I
I
60”
!
I
Fig.
!
o
4
I
I
I
^{~}^{o}
I
I
_{I}
_{I}
_{I}
_{I}
o“
4.!
3.0
2.0
1.0
0
I.5 

1.5 

I.4 

1.4 

1.3 
1.3 

T 

1.2 
1.2 

1.1 
1.1 

1.0 
1.0 
Fig.
2
5
A
Molto più che documenti.
Scopri tutto ciò che Scribd ha da offrire, inclusi libri e audiolibri dei maggiori editori.
Annulla in qualsiasi momento.