Simplified monotonic moment–curvature relation considering fixed-end rotation and axial force effect

2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyo-Gyoung Kwak ◽  
Sun-Pil Kim
Keyword(s):  
2012 ◽  
Vol 22 (18) ◽  
pp. 1390-1403
Author(s):  
Ali Hadidi ◽  
Bahman Farahmand Azar ◽  
Hossein Khosravi
Keyword(s):  

2012 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 299-312
Author(s):  
B. Farahmand Azar ◽  
A. Hadidi ◽  
H. Khosravi

Author(s):  
Nelson Szilard Galgoul ◽  
Andre´ Luiz Lupinacci Massa ◽  
Cla´udia Albergaria Claro

The design of rigid submarine pipelines has been the object of extensive research work over the last few years, where the most relevant issues include upheaval and lateral buckling problems. Both of these problems systematically associate temperature and pressure loads, where the treatment of the first is obvious, while the latter have always been a matter of discussion. In 1974 Palmer and Baldry [1] presented a theoretical-experimental contribution, in which they have set a pattern that has been followed ever since. Another similar and well known paper was published by Sparks in 1983 [7], who only present a physical interpretation of this same theory. Most of the present day industry codes define an effective axial force, according to which, fixed end pipelines will be under compression due to internal pressure. The starting point of the discussion presented in [1] was that internal pressure produces a lateral force, which is numerically equal to the pressure times internal cross-sectional area times the pipeline curvature: q=p.Ai.d2y/dx2(1) This equation is demonstrated further ahead in this paper. Palmer and Baldry then based their arguments on the traditional equation of the pinned column buckling problem, studied by Euler [2]: EId4y/dx4+Pd2y/dx2=0(2) for which the well known solution is: P=π2EI/L2(3) and on the associated problem studied by Timoshenko [3], which adds a distributed lateral load q to the same problem: EId4y/dx4+Pd2y/dx2=q(4) Replacing q with the lateral pressure given above, they were able to have their own problem fall back onto the Euler solution: EId4y/dx4+Pd2y/dx2=p.Ai.d2y/dx2P-pAi=π2EI/L2(5) After correcting for the Poisson effect they were able to determine the new critical axial force caused by the pressure. Unfortunately, however, the arguments set forth in [1] have been misunderstood. The fact that both axial force and lateral force multiply curvature does not make them forces of the same nature. Being able to add them has solved a mathematical equation, but still hasn’t converted the lateral force to axial. The authors wish to prove that [1] presents no more than a tool, which can be used in the analysis of global buckling problems of pipelines subject to both temperature and pressure. It will be shown, however, that this pressure will not produce an axial force, as now-a-days prescribed conservatively in many pipeline codes, which is even used for stress checking.


2001 ◽  
Vol 7 (1s) ◽  
pp. 89-92
Author(s):  
E.A. Ermolenko ◽  
◽  
Yu.V. Kamenchuk ◽  

PCI Journal ◽  
1966 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-94
Author(s):  
Duryl M. Bailey ◽  
Phil M. Ferguson

2020 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-144
Author(s):  
Marius-Vasile Pop

This paper presents a method to find the severity of a crack for cantilever beams that can be used to estimate the frequency drop due to the crack. The severity is found for the crack located at the location where the biggest curvature (or bending moment) is achieved. Because the fixing condition does not permit a symmetrical deformation around the crack, the apparent severity is smaller as the real one. The latter is found by the estimated value of the trend-line at the fixed end, it being constructed on points that consider the crack position (equidistant points in the proximity of the fixed end) and the resulted deflections.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document