Advanced Finite Element Analysis in Structural Design

D Iosif
GHD Pty Ltd, Perth, Australia

ABSTRACT: This paper discusses the use of numerical methods (Finite Element Modelling ) in the civil and industrial design. The applications detailed herewith employ nonlinear analysis capabilities, structural dynamics and use various material models. Three representative studies are presented to illustrate the versatility of Finite Element Analysis (FEA) in solving problems associated with faults in structural design, design optimization and Standards/Code compliance.
1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Large Pipe Bends for Water Industry GHD has undertaken a number of Finite Element Analyses [7] on a range of large pipe segmented bends on behalf of a Water Authority Client. The aim of this study was to develop an alternative design methodology in the belief that current standards such as AS 4041 was producing uneconomical designs. The results of the study indicate that localised peak stresses approximately twice as much as the normal pipe hoop tension develop on the inside of the mitre cut joint (intrados). The major finding of this study was that the intrados stress was independent of the segment length, which is in disagreement with current Standards in Australia (AS 4041) and the United States (ANSI/AWWA C208). An alternative design methodology was proposed such that the peak stress on the inside of the mitre cut joint be limited to yield based on the Von Mises Criterion for combined stress. 1.2 Dubai Drydocks GHD was contracted to conduct FE analyses to investigate and assess the structural integrity of Dubai Drydocks Caissons and provide a more economical optimized re-design of the caissons walls. Complex analyses of Ultimate Loadcase Combinations concluded that a number of redundant walls can be removed without affecting the structural integrity of the Caissons and substantially reducing Clients repairs and maintenance costs. 1.3 Tank Vibration High vibration levels were observed and recorded on a spent surge liquor tank typical to Alumina Industry. Such vibrations are known to lead to catastrophic fatigue failures and therefore must be contained. GHD designed structural modifications to the tank based on the analysis of the natural frequencies of the tank and its internals, stress levels, mode shapes and participation factors. 2 TECHNICAL APPROACH AND FE MODELLING 2.1 Large Pipe Bends for Water Industry A literature review of relevant design models either currently or previously relevant to segmented pipe bends was undertaken as a preliminary phase. The key design codes and their approach to the design of mitre bends is essentially given by: AWWA C208 1996 [2] and 2001 [3]. These standards recommend dimensions only and do not address working pressures or admissible stress. Reference is made to AWWA M11 [4] for dealing with these parameters. An Official Note to C208 [1] was given which recommends the following relationship be used for R/D <2.5 (see Figure 1 for geometry) PD D A t= ( tan + ) ASa 3 2 2

where:

P = pressure A = segment length as in Figure 1 D = diameter Sa = admissible stress (0.5 x yield stress of material)

design methods. Figure 2a shows the Working Pressure vs. Segment Length A for a bend of OD 1400 and t=11 mm. This figure compares the above standards with the FEA analysis and the current Water Authority standard rating.

= segment angle as shown in Figure 1

Figure 1. FE model and terminology

For R/D = 2.5 and above, the bend can be treated as a straight pipe with admissible stress given by maximum admissible hoop stress. In terms of maximum admissible hoop stress, AWWA M11 [4] sets this limit to 0.5 x yield stress based on steady state pressure while ANSI/ASME B31.3 and AS 4041 sets this limit to a maximum of 0.67 x yield stress based on full working pressure. According to AWWA M11 [4] a safety factor of at least two to ultimate tensile stress is recommended for maximum working pressure. In other words a bend designed for Working Pressure WP should not reach UTS at pressure 2 x WP. AS 4041 - Appendix I nominates a safety factor on UTS of 2.35. AS4041-1998 Pressure Piping Clause 3.15.4.3 recommends multiple mitre bends angle of cut to be less than 22.5 and allowable working pressures to be the lesser calculated from two equations. Equation (1) is independent of the segment length and is the most limiting and generally to less than half of normal hoop stress. Equation (2) is based on the same parameter as C208 (1) above and is dependent on segment length A. In the light of the abovementioned Standards, calculations have been performed to plot various

Figures 2a, 2b, 2c: Standards recommendations The curves represented in Figure 2a, 2b and 2c show quite different allowable maximum working pressures depending on which method of analysis is used. In Figure 2a the plots show that for AS 4041, the equation 1 criteria in all cases set the maximum admissible pressure. This equation does not take into account the dimension A in the segmented bend.

The two upper curves are based on AWWA C208 M11 and AS 4041 equation 3.15.4.3(2). These relationships include in their formulation: segment length A and the dependency on bend radius R ie (R=f(A)). Three distinct diameter bends were analysed for various segment length A including: FEA model 1: OD 1400, t=11mm, A=400 mm FEA model 2: OD 1400, t=11mm, A=1050 mm FEA model 3: OD 1400, t=11mm, A=725 mm FEA model 4: OD 1000, t=8mm, A=300 mm FEA model 5: OD 1000, t=8mm, A=600 mm FEA model 6: OD 1000, t=8mm, A=900 mm FEA model 7: OD 500, t=5mm, A=200 mm FEA model 8: OD 500, t=5mm, A=400 mm FEA model 9: OD 500, t=8mm, A=600 mm These nine models were analysed for a wide range of internal working pressures (WPs). Since some WPs produced stress above the yield point of the material, the non-linear module of AbaqusTM was used. The following material properties were assigned to the models: Youngs modulus 210,000 MPa Poissons ratio 0.29 For OD 1000 and OD 500 bends: Yield stress =300 MPa with strain hardening to UTS 410 MPa For OD 1400: Yield stress 250 MPa with strain hardening to UTS 410 MPa The models consist of shell elements with 6 degrees of freedom and five integration (Gauss) points across thickness. The FE models were built with pipe legs of approximately 10 times the diameter of the bend and were constrained as shown in Figure 1. 2.2 Dubai Drydocks Effects associated with the rebar/concrete interface, such as bond slip and dowel action, are modeled approximately by introducing some tension stiffening into the concrete modeling to simulate load transfer across cracks through the rebar. The postfailure behavior for direct straining across cracks is modeled with the TENSION STIFFENING option, which allows the user to define the strainsoftening behavior for cracked concrete. This is achieved by specifying a postfailure stress-strain relation or by applying a fracture energy cracking criterion. Postfailure stress-strain relation Specification of strain softening behavior in reinforced concrete generally means specifying the postfailure stress as a function of strain across the crack. The tension stiffening effect depends on such factors as the density of reinforcement, the quality of

the bond between the rebar and the concrete, the relative size of the concrete aggregate compared to the rebar diameter, and the mesh. A reasonable starting point for relatively heavily reinforced concrete modeled with a fairly detailed mesh is to assume that the strain softening after failure reduces the stress linearly to zero at a total strain of about 10 times the strain at failure. The strain at failure in standard concretes is typically 10-4, which suggests that tension stiffening that reduces the stress to zero at a total strain of about 103 is reasonable.

The choice of tension stiffening parameters is important in ABAQUS/Standard since, generally, more tension stiffening makes it easier to obtain numerical solutions. Too little tension stiffening will cause the local cracking failure in the concrete to introduce temporarily unstable behavior in the overall response of the model. Few practical designs exhibit such behavior, so that the presence of this type of response in the analysis model usually indicates that the tension stiffening is unreasonably low.

Figure 3: Tension stiffening model As the concrete cracks, its shear stiffness is diminished. This effect is defined with the SHEAR RETENTION option by specifying the reduction in the shear modulus as a function of the opening strain across the crack. A number of two caisson types are presented in this paper as seen in figures 6 and 7. The complexity of the rebar reinforcement is illustrated in Figure 5. This is to our knowledge, the first full 3D Finite Element analysis attempted in the world for the modeling of large dry-dock Caissons which takes into consideration all aspects of steel-concrete interaction under combined loading. The primary loads were as follows: 1. Earth Pressure 2. Internal Water Pressure 3. External Water Force a. One Side (i.e. dock empty) b. Both sides

4. Deck Surcharge
5. Hauling-in (one side)

a. Position 1 (one end of caisson) Force perpendicular to hauling in beam toward edge b. Position 2 (Central) Force perpendicular to hauling in beam toward edge c. Position 3 (opposite end of caisson to Position 1) Force perpendicular to hauling in beam toward edge
d. Central Force along hauling in

beam, up page direction 6. Crane load 7. Ship load 8. 150 T Bollard load a. 150 T force applied perpendicular to cope beam towards edge b. 150 T force applied along cope beam, down page direction 9. 250 T Bollard a. Each bollard, 250 T force applied perpendicular to hauling in beam, away from edge b. Each bollard, 250 T force applied at 45 degrees to hauling in beam, away from edge, up page direction. c. Each bollard, 83 T force applied perpendicular the hauling in beam, towards edge d. Each bollard, 83 T force applied along hauling in beam, up page direction 10. Capstan a. 25 T applied perpendicular to hauling in beam, towards edge b. 25 T applied perpendicular to hauling in beam, away from edge c. 25 T applied along hauling in beam up page direction.
11.Fender Load

Figure 4: Solid model

Figure 5: Detail showing reinforcement (rebars) in walls and bollard

Figure 6: Finite Element model of Caissons 1-1 (1). Rebars were modeled as embedded elements.

The vibration experienced by the tank shell below 8 Hz suggests the existence of forced vibration. When the level of the liquid inside the tank is at 14 m, the first natural frequency of the tank shell in the absence of attached baffles is just above 8 Hz. Baffles normal modes start from as low as 2 Hz. The baffles can therefore be excited at f >2 Hz and reach resonance if forcing frequency is the same with any of the baffles natural frequency. As baffles natural frequencies between 2 and 8 Hz are numerous and closely spaced, with large participating effective mass, the resonance of the baffles becomes possible.

Figure 7: Finite Element model of Caisson 1-1(4). Interaction rebar-concrete modeled.

2.3 Tank Vibration This project aimed at developing structural modifications to the tank structure (Figure 8) in order to contain tanks strong shell vibrations below 8 Hz.

We can therefore assume that the forced vibration that excites tanks shell below 7-8 Hz can occur: a) Internally: via the baffles which start to vibrate under a forcing harmonic load F=F0sin(t) produced by the liquid intake-discharge, sloshing or air pressure pulses b) Externally: via the piping system attached to the external shell of the tank vibrating at forcing frequencies. c) as a combination of both The immediate aim was to shift baffles natural frequencies to higher values as currently they are free to vibrate at frequencies as low as 2 Hz with modes very closely spaced in frequency domain, large modal participation factors and effective mass. According to the Clients vibration measurements of the tank shell, large frequency peaks were recorded at frequencies below 7 Hz.

3 RESULTS 3.1 Large Pipe Bends for Water Industry The results of the nine FEA models are summarised as follows: The peak stress occurs over a narrow bond of the inside joint of the mitre cut, termed the intrados. The peak stress is approximately double the normal hoop stress. The development of stress at the intrados is independent of the segment length A, for A greater than 0.25OD. Therefore an increase in segment length would not result in any economies. As the stress at the intrados indicates localised outward deformation under pipe pressure it is not surprising that

Figure 8: Finite Element model of the tank and its internals (deflected shape) At this point it is worth mentioning the following:

extending the segment length has no effect at the intrados. Stress at intrados was found to be dependent of A only for values of A<0.25OD The FEA results differ from the ANSI/AWWA C208 Technical Note and AS4041 3.15.4.3 Equation 2 where allowable stresses are dependent on the Segment Length A as well as diameter, thickness, mitre cut angle and working pressure. The existing requirements in WA on segmented bends is slightly under designed for OD1400 (figure 2a) but conservative for OD1000 and OD500 (figures 2b and 2c) if the Von Mises Criterion is adopted.

Figure 9: Von Mises stress OD100 A300mm

Figures 9-11 present the results of the FEA of a 1000OD bend, A300mm (6a) and A900mm (6b). The Von Mises stress of 300 MPa is reached the same WP = 2.0 MPa regardless the dimension of segment A. This shows that the bends in this class are capable of sustaining a higher internal pressure than the one current in WA where the standard design specifies WP = 1.8 MPa (figure 2b) and substantially higher (32%-38% higher) than the WP of recommended by AS 4041 and AWWA M11. The old practice based on the Standards was to increase segment A in order to allow an increase in internal pressure. This procedure has been now abandoned in the light of recent results. Figure 6c shows the complex deformation pattern in the bend under internal pressure magnifies 500 times.

Figure 10: Von Mises stress OD1000 A900mm

Figure 11: Deformation pattern (x500 times)

3.2 Dubai Drydocks Some of the displaced patterns for the two caissons are presented in Figures 12 and 13. Figure 12 shows the displaced pattern under three primary loads namely Earth Pressure, Internal Water pressure and deck surcharge while Figure 13 shows

the deformation pattern of Caisson 1.1-(4) under Ultimate Load Combinations LC_A= 1.4 x (L1 + L2 + L3a) + 1.6 x (L6 + L9a + L10b) + 2.0 x L11 where loads L# are the primary loads defined in Section 2.2

end of the removal step. The forces are ramped down gradually to ensure that element removal has a smooth effect on the model. No further element calculations are performed for elements being removed, starting from the beginning of the step in which they are removed. The simulation of the Ultimate State loadcases showed that the removal of certain walls may affect the structural integrity of caissons while the removal of others is perfectly safe. The walls were remodeled in such a manner to allow compliance with Standards.

Figure 12: Caisson 1-1(1). Displaced pattern under Loads 1+2+4

Figure 14: LC_A. Maximum principal stress 3.3 Tank Vibration 3.3.1 As-Is Tank Tank analysis filled to 14 metres and all internals present. The Von Mises stress levels obtained as a result of hydrostatic pressure and self weight are below admissible stress levels. Maximum stress in the tank shell is around 80 MPa; higher values are predicted around the bottom nozzles. The dynamic analysis of the tank predicts natural frequencies which are very closely spaced. At low frequencies between 2 and 8 Hz, the baffles tend to vibrate excessively due to a high number of closely spaced normal modes. Tanks shell also vibrates in the areas adjacent to baffles. The baffles vibrate either independently (<5 Hz, Figure 15) or simultaneously all three or in pairs of two (>5-7 Hz). At frequencies above 8 Hz tanks shell vibrate all around its circumference which suggests that the vibration in the shell is not controlled only by the baffles. These results agree very well with the results described derived in previous work when the baffles were removed to independently derive the natural frequencies of the tanks shell.

Figure 13: Caisson 1-1(4). Displaced pattern under Ultimate Loadcase Combination The maximum tensile stress in concrete for LC_A is localized over a small area as shown in Figure 14. The concrete relies on reinforcement in the areas where the tensile stress is larger than 3MPa. Based on maintenance and operational consideration, certain walls in the caissons were to be removed and the existing walls remodeled. In the analysis, just prior to the removal step, the FEA code stores the forces/fluxes that the region to be removed is exerting on the remaining part of the model at the nodes on the boundary between them. These forces are ramped down to zero during the removal step; therefore, the effect of the removed region on the rest of the model is completely absent only at the

Tank analysis filled to 5 metres and all internals present. As in the previous case it is predicted that at low frequencies (below 5 Hz), the baffles have the largest vibration amplitudes. Tanks shell vibrates around and in line with the baffles. At frequencies above 5 Hz (see Figues 16) the shell vibrates quite independently (of the baffles) around its circumference as baffles continue to display large mode shapes. Tank analysis filled to 14 metres and no baffles. The objective of this analysis was to derive the natural frequencies of the shell in the absence of the baffles as in previous two analyses it was difficult to ascertain how the tanks shell behaves without being excited by the baffles. The first natural frequency of the tank is at 7.8 Hz and occurs in the roof only. This correlates accurately with the natural frequency of the roof measured by the Client. There are no natural frequencies of tank shell below 7.8 Hz. Tanks shell natural frequencies occur above 8 Hz and are not as closely spaced as in previous two cases. Modal participation factors are high which shows that tanks shell can be excited between 8-10 Hz independent of the baffles vibration. This is a very important result which suggests that both the baffles and tank shell should be stiffened. 3.3.2 Stiffened Tank A new stiffening system was proposed and subsequently implemented in order to reduce baffles vibration and shown in Figure 17a,b,c. tank shell stiffeners: The shell of the tank was stiffened at elevations 9000mm, 13000mm, 14500mm, 16250mm and 17750 mm. The stiffening system comprised of 100x100x6 L profiles radially welded to the tank shell through the use of 60 plates (250x150x10). In doing this the radial space between two consecutive plates is 583 mm which is less that the minimum recorded width of a vibration amplitude. baffles stiffeners through the use of a rectangular plates 550x1250x12 welded on the passive side of the baffles, spaced at 1100 mm from one another mm connecting the baffles with the tank shell

Liquid level 14 m The advantage of the proposed design is that the tank and its baffles do not have any natural frequency under 5.5 Hz. The baffles first natural frequency is at 5.5 Hz, followed by 6.5 and 6.8 Hz. All these 3 modes are localised in nature (occur at the baffles edge close to the tank wall and between two consecutive existing stiffeners) and unless excitation force (of a nature unknown to us) is extremely strong, resonance of the baffles and subsequent vibration of the shell will be non-existent. From the measurements taken by Client, forcing frequencies above 7 Hz induce relatively low levels of vibration (relatively low peaks) so that stiffening the baffles using connecting plates was found to be a feasible solution. However, the baffles and adjacent tank shell have two normal modes at 7.2 and 9 Hz which can be excited. If these two are not excited, the next dangerous frequency is at 9.6 Hz, usually too high to produce considerable vibration in the tank shell. Indeed, subsequent measurements taken over a period of one year did nor record any vibrations on the stiffened tank. The absence of tanks shell circular rings (stiffeners) is reflected in some loss of structural stiffness. If only the baffles are stiffened, the baffles and tank shell can vibrate strongly starting from f = 6 Hz whereas in the presence of the circular rings the shell can vibrate more predominantly after 9 Hz if excited by forcing frequency. Liquid level 7 m For a 7 metres liquid level the baffles vibrate and can easily be excited at values as low as 6 Hz despite stiffening the shell and baffles. The tank shell vibrates freely with the baffles if forcing frequency is present and resonance of the tank shell at around 7 Hz can easily be reached. From the structural dynamic point of view it is not recommended to run the tank with a liquid level well below 14 m. In practice, the level of liquid is not allowed below 14 m level with running pump.

Figure 15: Localised natural frequency of baffles

Figure 16: Natural frequency of the tank shell at 5 Hz when tank is emptied to 5 m liquid level. Figure 17 (a,b,c): Structural modifications to the baffles and tanks shell. 3.4 References
1. American Water Works Association, Official Note

Addendum to ANSI/AWWA C208 83 Standard for Dimensions for Fabricated Steel Water Pipe Fittings 2. ANSI/AWWA C208-96 AWWA Standard for Dimensions for Fabricated Steel Water Pipe Fittings 3. ANSI/AWWA C208-01 AWWA Standard for Dimensions for Fabricated Steel Water Pipe Fittings 4. AWWA M11 Manual of Water Supply Practices. Steel Pipe A Guide for Design and Installation

5. AS 4041. Pressure Piping ASME B31.3 1996 Edition. Process Piping 6. API Recommended Practice 1111 Limit State Design 7. AbaqusTM version 6.4.1: ABAQUS Inc. 3.5 Conclusions Finite Element Modeling constitutes a valuable tool in the design and analysis of various structures to Standard requirements. The usefulness of FEA extends to exploring new design alternatives and evaluating multiple design approaches that entail complex loading, nonlinear materials and complex geometries. The FEA programs can concentrate on that handful of crucial variables adjusting them up to find an optimum solution. The future The next step beyond design optimization is behavioral modelling. As the software explores multiple combinations it organises the results in a tree-like structure of cause-and-effect relationship. Major variables are represented as big branches while sub-branches show the options available using various parameters. Such design approach can be databased and overall design can be revised almost instantly.