Sei sulla pagina 1di 6

SEC18: Proceedings of the 11th Structural Engineering Convention - 2018 Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India, December 19 - 21, 2018 Paper No. 2018102

COMPUTATIONAL ANALYSIS OF TYPICAL RC INTERMEDIATE CYLINDRICAL SHELL ROOF USING D-K-J & SCHORER'S THEORY

Ankhiparna Guha 1* , Anik Kumar Mal 2* , Bimalendu Ghosh 3

1 Student of M.Tech, Structural Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Bhubaneswar, INDIA E-mail: Ankhiparna1995@gmail.com 2 Graduate Trainee, Bentley Systems, Kolkata, INDIA E-mail: Aniklawrencian@gmail.com

3 Professor, Civil Engineering Department, Meghnad Saha Institute of technology, Kolkata, INDIA, E-mail: Bimolendu.ghosh@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

Thin shell structures can sustain large strength through its form. Cylindrical shell roof is one such example. In bending theory of cylindrical shell analysis, D-K-J's theory is used for short shells whose L:a ≤ 1.6(L= shell length, a=radius) and Schorer’s theory for shells whose L:a ≥ ∏ i.e. for long shells. But information on analysis of shells of L:a between 1.6 and ∏ is insufficient. In this paper, intermediate simply supported RC cylindrical shells of various L:a (1.8<L:a<3.2) ratios are analysed using the above mentioned theories. To have good comparison between two theories, transverse stress profiles of stress resultants, M θ , N θ , N x , N xθ are plotted. For quick and accurate calculation, computer programs are developed for both theories using Python programming language. It is observed that Schorer's theory gives higher absolute maximum value of stress resultants than D-K-J's theory. This study helps in concluding the suitability of the two theories intermediate cylindrical shell.

Keywords: Intermediate cylindrical shell, D-K-J's theory, Schorer's theory, L:a ratio, Transverse stress profile, Computer program

NOMENCLATURE

a=radius of cylindrical shell(m) d=thickness of cylindrical shell(m) L=span of cylindrical shell(m) M θ =transverse moment(kN-m/m) N θ =axial force in θ-direction(kN/m) N x =axial force in x-direction(kN/m) N xθ =shear force in x-direction(kN/m) N θ =axial force in θ-direction(kN/m) θ=semi-circular angle in degree

1. INTRODUCTION

Shells structures are the element that sustain load by virtue of its curved geometry than through its mass. This makes shell a very special structure as it can sustain considerable amount of load without any intermediate support. Thus, shell type roof become specially advantageous where continuous floor space is required without any interruption. Based on the curvature, a shell can be of different types. A

classification table is provided in IS 2210-1988 (Appendix A)[1]. One of the very common type of shell roof is cylindrical shell roof or sometimes known as barrel vault roof. The existence of barrel vault shell is there since as early as 1928 and one of early example will be the factory at Lydney, in

Gloucestershire.[2]

The analysis of shell can be done with different approach. First, there is membrane theory approach. Membrane theory is useful for understanding general behaviour of shell and for preliminary design of shell to determine overall thickness and dimensions. In this theory, it is assumed that the shell transmit load by direct stresses. However, this is always not the case, sometimes physical boundary conditions give rise to some more form of stresses. To include this effect, a bending theory approach is needed. In this approach, the exact relation that governs the general behaviour of shell are based upon the mathematical theory of elasticity. The expressions and equations obtained are

extremely complex. In order to solve them different investigators have approximated or simplified it in various ways that lead to different theories, namely Finsterwalder Theory, Schorer Theory, Dischinger Theory, Flugge Theory, D-K-J Theory. Two such popular theories are D-K-Js theory and Schorers Theory. These two theories are used or cited in some of the most widely accepted books of shell[3][4][5]. Generally, D-K-Js theory is very accurate for short shell and Schorers theory for long shell. Ramaswamy[3] have suggested to use D-K-Js theory for short shell upto L:a ≤ 1.6. This L:a ratio is also the division point of short shell and long shell classification as per ASCE Manual 31[6]. Schorers theory is applicable for L:a ≥ ∏. This limit is sometimes also considered as starting of long shell. In this paper, the shell of range 1.6≤ L:a≤∏ is terminalised as “intermediate. There have been very few attempt to investigate the shell falling in this range. As a result, there is not a very clear idea about the theories to be used for analysis of intermediateshell. Focusing on the above mentioned L:a ratio range, simply supported intermediate reinforced concrete shell without edge beam are analysed by above mentioned two theories. The analysis result obtained by both theories are compared so that the suitability of both theories in the range of 1.6≤ L:a<∏ can be suggested. Moe[7] compared the accuracy of different theories based on solution of their characteristic equation. Similar discussion on comparisons of theories can be found in text by Billington[5]. In this paper, the comparison is done is based on the final stress resultants obtained rather than just depending on the solution of the characteristic equations. This type of comparison gives a better overview from design perspective of shell. The analysis of shell roof using one of the bending theories is quite complicated and tedious. It is suggested to take a computation aid while solving such problems[8]. In this paper, computer programs developed for both D-K-Js theory and Schorers theory using Python, an opensource programming language. Lately, Python have gained lots of popularity in science and engineering community due to its high code-readability and plenty of open standard libraries. Ghebrelasie and Situ[8] concluded that these analytical solutions can be used safely and

SEC18: Paper No. 2018102

independently for assessing the accuracy of result obtained by Finite Element Analysis. Engineering community can use these programs for both long shell and short shell analysis. As design industry is getting more dependent on the software packages, designers can gain further confidence on their calculation by verifying the results with these programs. The comparison between two theories presented in this paper will also help to choose the right theory for corresponding shell parameters.

2. ANALYSIS

2.1 Mathematical Background of The

Theories

An infinitesimal cylindrical shell element as per bending theory approach have following stress resultants as shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2. A detailed derivation of the theories will not be discussed here. The formulation and the method of solution of the theories can be found in many standard texts[3][4][5]. Both D-K-Js Theory and Schorers Theory involve a 8th order partial differential equation which have respective 8th degree algebraic characteristic equations. Deduction of final stress resultants are based on these solution(roots) of the characteristic equations. The characteristic equations of the theories are as follow:

( m 2 2 κ) 4 +4=0

ρ

2

ρ 2 )

( m

4

+4=0

(1)

(2)

1 and 2 are the characteristic equations of D-K- Js theory and Schorers theory respectively. Where, ρ and κ are Aas-Jacobsons parameter.

12π 6 a 4 l 4 d 2

2

ρ= 8

κ =( π a )

ρ l

(3)

(4)

2.2 Python Program

SEC18: Paper No. 2018102

constant and radius(a) is varied as per the L:a ratio chosen. Analysis is done for L:a ratios1.8,

Python is opensource, high-level programming

2….3.2.

language is which is becoming very popular among science and engineer community. The program developed for both theories, are capable of calculating stress resultants M θ , N θ , N x , N xθ and produce the transverse stress profile for a simply supported cylindrical shell without edge beam under axis-symmetric uniform load type for user defined span, radius, thickness,

Span(L) = 25m Thickness(d) = 0.08m Semi-circular angle(θ) = 40 Dead load = 25 x 0.08=2 kN/m 2 Live load = 1.25 kN/m 2 Youngs Modulus of concrete = 25 x 10 6 kN/m 2

semicircular angle and load. The results obtained from the programs have been verified

4.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

 

with examples solved in standard texts[3][4]. The programs are aimed to eliminate the

4.1.

Graphs

complicated and tedious process involved with

4.1.1

Stress

Resultant

Variation

For

analysis of shell by bending theories and to obtain results as accurate as possible.

Different L:a Ratio

 
as accurate as possible. Different L:a Ratio   Fig.1 Fig.2 3. PROBLEM STATEMENT Simply supported

Fig.1

accurate as possible. Different L:a Ratio   Fig.1 Fig.2 3. PROBLEM STATEMENT Simply supported cylindrical

Fig.2

3. PROBLEM STATEMENT

Simply supported cylindrical shell without edge-beam is analysed under uniform load is analysed by both theories for various L:a ratios in range 1.8≤ L:a<3.2. The variation of stress resultants in longitudinal direction have the nature of sine or cosine. The stress-resultants are calculated at those cross-sections where they attain maximum value. The span(L) is kept

are calculated at those cross-sections where they attain maximum value. The span(L) is kept Fig.3 Fig.4

Fig.3

are calculated at those cross-sections where they attain maximum value. The span(L) is kept Fig.3 Fig.4

Fig.4

Fig.5 Fig.6 4.1.2 Transverse Stress Profiles Fig. 7 SEC18: Paper No. 2018102 Fig.8 Fig.9 Fig.

Fig.5

Fig.5 Fig.6 4.1.2 Transverse Stress Profiles Fig. 7 SEC18: Paper No. 2018102 Fig.8 Fig.9 Fig. 10

Fig.6

4.1.2 Transverse Stress Profiles

Fig.5 Fig.6 4.1.2 Transverse Stress Profiles Fig. 7 SEC18: Paper No. 2018102 Fig.8 Fig.9 Fig. 10

Fig. 7

SEC18: Paper No. 2018102

Fig.5 Fig.6 4.1.2 Transverse Stress Profiles Fig. 7 SEC18: Paper No. 2018102 Fig.8 Fig.9 Fig. 10

Fig.8

Fig.5 Fig.6 4.1.2 Transverse Stress Profiles Fig. 7 SEC18: Paper No. 2018102 Fig.8 Fig.9 Fig. 10

Fig.9

Fig.5 Fig.6 4.1.2 Transverse Stress Profiles Fig. 7 SEC18: Paper No. 2018102 Fig.8 Fig.9 Fig. 10

Fig. 10

Fig.11 Fig. 12 Fig. 13 SEC18: Paper No. 2018102 4.2. Fig. 14 Discussion In case

Fig.11

Fig.11 Fig. 12 Fig. 13 SEC18: Paper No. 2018102 4.2. Fig. 14 Discussion In case of

Fig. 12

Fig.11 Fig. 12 Fig. 13 SEC18: Paper No. 2018102 4.2. Fig. 14 Discussion In case of

Fig. 13

SEC18: Paper No. 2018102

Fig.11 Fig. 12 Fig. 13 SEC18: Paper No. 2018102 4.2. Fig. 14 Discussion In case of

4.2.

Fig. 14

Discussion

In case of N x , N θ and N xθ it has been observed that the rate of change of these stress resultants with respect to L:a is higher for Schorers theory than D-K-Js Theory. Though the values obtained in both the theories shows good convergence towards each other at higher L:a

ratios.(Fig:4,5,6)

The only difference between the characteristic equations(1,2) of two theories is the absence of ‘κ’(4) in Schorers theory. The value of 'κ' tend to decrease with increase in L:a ratios. As a result, the value of ktends to be zero for higher L:a ratio. This behaviour of kcan be one explanation for the convergence of two theories with increase in L:a. For M θ, the value generated is very low compared to other stress resultants as there is no edge beam. Due to which the values near edge region is close to zero. The pattern of values obtained is bit irregular compared to other stress

resultants.(Fig.3,4,5,6)

The results obtained by both the theories for lower L:a ratios are little inconsistent with each other. The transverse stress profile diagrams of L:a ratio 1.8 also suggests the same(Fig. 10,11,12,14). As Lis kept constant, with decrease in L:a ratio the radius, aincreases, thus the curvature of the shell decreases. As a result of which, the plate action will become more dominant than the membrane action which may be a reason for this difference in values of two theories at lower L:a ratio. However, with increase in L:a ratios it is observed that the difference between values of the stress resultants obtained by both the theories reduces significantly. The transverse

SH5 | P a g e

stress profiles obtained at L:a ratio 3.2 also shows a very good close resemblance with each other(see Fig. 7,8.9,10).

5.

CONCLUSION

From the forgoing analysis it can be concluded that both the D-K-Js theory and Schorers theory are acceptable for L:a ratios having range of 1.6 to 3.2, as the difference between the results obtained in both the theories are quite small and at higher L:a ratios the values are almost similar. However, for lower L:a ratio, specially below L:a=2.6, Schorers theory gives a bit conservative value. Lower L:a ratio with L constant means more of a plate action which may be a reason for more difference in the values of some stress resultants. Hence, for safer design approach Schorers theory can be a better choice. The python programs for the analytical analysis of cylindrical shell roof, based on some well-established theories can be used for quick, easy and accurate calculation of stress resultants for a wide range of L:a ratios. Designers can also verify their results obtained in other software packages with the values obtained in the Python program to gain further confidence in their calculation.

REFERENCES

[1] IS: 2210-1988, Criteria for the Design of Reinforced Concrete Shell Structures and Folded Plates, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

[2] Blumfield,

Cyril

Vernon.

"The

Development And Use Of Barrel Vault Shell Concrete. Structural & Building Engineering Division." The Institution of Civil Engineers Engineering Division Papers, Vol 6, no. 6 ,1948, pp. 1-26.

[3] Ramaswamy,

and

Construction of Concrete Shell Roofs . New Delhi: CBS Publisher & Distributor. 1986, pp. 89-186.

G.

S.,

Design

[4] Gibson, J. E., Thin Shells: Computing and Theory, First Edition, Pergamon Press, 1980, pp. 75-105

[5] Billington, D. P., Thin shell concrete structures, Second Edition, McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, pp.184-217

SEC18: Paper No. 2018102

[6] ASCE Manual of Engineering Practice No. 31, Thin Shell Concrete Structures, ASCE, New-york, 1952

[7] Moe, Johannes., "On the theory of cylindrical shells: explicit solution of the characteristic equation, and discussion of the accuracy of various shell theories", Mémoires de l'Association Internationale des Ponts et Charpentes, Vol. 13, 1953

[8] Ghebreselasie, Hanibal Muruts; Situ, Yuting, Structural Analysis of Thin Concrete Shells, Mater thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway, 2015