TEAM 2008, Oct.

6-9, 2008, Istanbul, Turkey

Calculation of Thermal Stresses for a 7000 DWT Oil Tanker
Serdal zelik
1)*
, Selma Ergin
2)
and Ahmet Ergin
3)
e-mail: serdal.ozcelik@tr.bureauveritas.com
1)
Mr., Surveyor, Turkish Plan Approval Office, Hull Depertment, Bureau Veritas, Maltepe, 34854,
Istanbul, Turkey
e-mail: ergina@itu.edu.tr
2)
Professor, Faculty of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Istanbul Technical University, Maslak,
34469, Istanbul, Turkey
e-mail: ergin@itu.edu.tr
3)
Professor, Faculty of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Istanbul Technical University, Maslak,
34469, Istanbul, Turkey
e-mail: ergina@itu.edu.tr


Abstract
This paper presents a thermal stress analysis for a 7000 DWT oil tanker using finite element method. The analysis
was carried out for a cargo temperature of 90 C by using a commercial finite element software, ANSYS. The
classification societies ignore the thermally induced stresses when the cargo temperature is within certain limits.
This limit temperature is 90 C according to the BV rules. The finite element structural model represents three cargo
tanks about the midship. For the thermal analysis, the cargo tanks are idealized by using shell elements. The stresses
induced within the structure are calculated for a load case consisting of structural and thermal loads. A separate
stress analysis was also performed only for structural loads, exluding thermal loads. The results of these two
analyses were compared to find out the effect of thermal stresses on the stress resultants within the ship structure at
the limit temperature of 90C.


Keyword: Thermal stresses, finite element, oil tanker, cargo tanks.


1. INTRODUCTION

The thermal loads are created within the tank structures of tankers carrying cargo at high temperatures. The
former asphalt tankers were carrying their cargoes at moderate temperatures of about 160C to 180C. Some new
types of cargoes request a much higher temperatures of 230C to 250C which makes the temperature problem more
stringent (BV, 2006). The material characteristics such as yield stress, Youngs modulus, etc vary under the
temperature effects. The temperature has also influence on the allowable stresses and buckling stresses.
Furthermore, the thermal loads may be calculated based on the heating capacity, specific heat coefficient,
coefficient for heat conduction and assumptions on the air stationary/not stationary inside compartments. The
thermal stresses are generally calculated by using a finite element method.
Teng and Gu (2003) analyzed the transit temperature field and thermal stresses of hold structures of a single
side shell and double bottom vessel. Two finite element models were defined respectively for transit temperature
field and thermal stresses analysis of the hold structure. The calculations were performed by using ABAQUS. They
compared the FE results with a simplified analytical method, and concluded that the simplified analytical methods
could be used for the temperature distribution of hold structures in the preliminary design phase.
This paper presents a thermal stress analysis for a 7000 DWT oil tanker using finite element method. The
analysis was carried out for a cargo temperature of 90 C by using a commercial finite element software, ANSYS.
The classification societies ignore the thermally induced stresses when the cargo temperature is within certain
limits. This limit temperature is 90 C according to the BV rules. The finite element structural model represents
three cargo tanks about the midship. For the thermal analysis, the cargo tanks are idealized by using shell elements.
The stresses induced within the structure are calculated for a load case consisting of structural and thermal loads. A
separate stress analysis was also performed only for structural loads, exluding thermal loads. The results of these
two analyses were compared to find out the effect of thermal stresses on the stress resultants within the ship
structure at the limit temperature of 90C.

2. MATHEMATICAL MODEL

For homogenous isotropic materials, a change in temperature produces uniform linear strain in every direction.
Therefore, when a plate with free edges is heated uniformly, there are produced normal strains but no thermal
stresses, as seen blow (Ugural, 1999);

0
0
1
( ) ( ( ) )
1
( ) ( ( ) )
1
2(1 )
x x y
y y x
xy xy
T z T
E
T z T
E
E
c o uo o
c o uo o
u t
= +
= +
= +
(1)

where
x
,
y
and
xy
denote the normal stresses in the x- and y- directions and the xy shear stress, respectively. E is the
Youngs modulus, the Poisson ratio, and is the thermal expansivity. T(z) represents the temperature as a function
of the z coordinate (normal to the mid-plane of plate), and T
0
is the reference temperature.
T (z), assuming a linear variation of the temperature gradient, can be expressed as follows;


( )
2
t b t b
AV
T T T T
T z z
h
T
T z
h
+
= +
A
= +
(2)

For the case where the plate bends without change in length of the middle surface, the governing differential
equation for the bending of a rectangular plate due to lateral pressure and thermal loads is given below [4];


4 2
1
(1 )
T
p
w M
D D u
V = V

(3)
where

/ 2
0
/ 2
3
( ( ) )
( )
12
h
T
h
M E T z T z dz
T h
E
h
o
o

=
}
A
=
(4)

where p and D represent the lateral pressure and flexural rigidity of the plate, respectively. w denotes the
displacement in the z-direction. h is the thickness of plate. It is noted from Eq.(4) that the bending of a rectangular
plate depends only on temperature difference between the top and bottom faces of the plate structure. The reference
temperature does not have an influence on the bending moment.
Eq.(4) considers only the bending of plate due to thermal loads and lateral pressure. However, the thermal
stretching occurs besides the thermal bending. This may be represented by the following differential equations;


4 2
2 2
4 2
2 2
1
( )
1 (1 )
1
( )
1 (1 )
T
T
Eh
u N
x
Eh
v N
y
u u
u u
c
V = V
c
c
V = V
c
(5)

where

/ 2
0 0
/ 2
( ( ) ) ( )
h
T AV
h
N E T z T dz E T T h o o

= =
}
(6)


3. NUMERICAL RESULTS

A thermal stress analysis is carried out for a 7000 DWT oil tanker using a commercial finite element software
(ANSYS [5]). The analysis is performed for a cargo temperature of 90 C by using the finite element method. The
classification societies ignore the thermally induced stresses when the cargo temperature is within certain limits.
This limit temperature is 90 C according to the BV rules. The finite element structural model represents three cargo
tanks about the midship, as seen in Fig.1. For the thermal analysis, the cargo tanks are idealized by using shell
elements. The stresses induced within the structure are calculated for a load case consisting of structural and
thermal loads. A separate stress analysis was also performed only for structural loads, exluding thermal loads. The
results of these two analyses were compared to find out the effect of thermal stresses on the stress resultants within
the ship structure at the limit temperature of 90C.


Fig.1 Mid-ship region cargo tanks of 7000 DWT oil tanker.

The finite element model consists of all the longitudinal and transverse structural elements. These include the
inner and outer shell, double bottom floor, girder systems, transverse and vertical web frames, stringers, and
transverse and longitudinal bulkhead structures. All plates and stiffeners including web frames are also modeled.
Four-noded shell elements are used in the discretization of the hull module considered. The model has six cargo
tanks and the hatched tanks seen in Fig.2 are assumed fully loaded. The finite element model is shown in Fig.3.


Fig.2 Cargo tanks.

The structural model was discritized by using SHELL131 elements in ANSYS finite element program. This
element is a 3-D layered shell element having in-plane and through-thickness thermal conduction capability. The
element has four corner nodes with up to 32 temperature degrees of freedom at each node. The conducting shell
element is applicable to 3-D, steady-state or transient thermal analysis.
The following properies are assumed for cargo and external environment: air-temperature = -15C; sea water
temperature = 0 C; cargo temperature = 90 C. It is assumed that the structural surfaces have the same temperature
with the medium they are in contact with. A steady-state thermal solution was obtained, and after that a structural
shell element, SHELL63, was adopted in order to model thermal bending and stretching. At the ends of the structural
model all the nodes are rigidly linked to an independent point at the neutral axis. The calculations were performed
for three different loading conditions: (i) thermal loads only (exluding local and hull girder loads), load case I; (ii)
local and hull girder loads only (excluding thermal loads), load case II; (iii) thermal loads together with local and
hull girder loads, load case III.



Fig.3 Finite element model: a) a perspective view; b) front view; c) side view; d) top view.

A steady-state thermal analysis was carried out, and the results are presented in Fig.3. As seen in Fig.3 (b), (c)
and (d), the temperature gradients are high in the inner-bottom and side shells. The deck structures, above the loaded
tank, have almost the same temperature with the cargo temperature. These temperature and their gradients were used
in the structural strength analysis.
The calculated stresses are presented in terms of von Mises stresses. The predicted stresses are high at the end of
the model as seen in Table 1. The nodes at the both ends are linked rigidly to an independent node and this rigid
extension prevents deformation at the ends. On the other hand, the hull girder loads are applied at the end of the
structural model. As a result, the stresses in the vicinity of the ends are not considered, and those stresses within the
center cargo tank region are presented in Table 1. The average and maximum von Mises stresses are presented in
Table 1. The load case 1 actually does not represent real life loading conditions because thermal stresses always
occur with stresses resulted from structural loads. However, the results of this load case are given to gain an
intuition.
Table 1. Maximum and average von Mises stresses in structural model (MPa).

Port Side
Load
Cases
Bottom
Plating
Bilge Plating Side Shell
Plating
Deck Plating Inner Bottom
Plating
Inner Hull
Plating
Max Av Max Av Max Av Max Av Max Av Max Av
I 172 123 339 182 271 147 176 91 379 200 182 104
II 201 108 139 89 148 74 179 123 247 125 267 137
III 280 184 424 255 317 174 254 131 370 189 361 182
Starboard Side
Load
Cases
Bottom
Plating
Bilge Plating Side Shell
Plating
Deck Plating Inner Bottom
Plating
Inner Hull
Plating
Max Av Max Av Max Av Max Av Max Av Max Av
I 127 74 283 145 213 109 166 86 357 181 162 102
II 193 104 131 84 132 66 184 115 230 116 204 103
III 256 146 375 203 277 139 269 145 366 148 252 129



(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)


Fig.3 Temperature distribution. (a) full model; (b) double side structure; (c) a typical frame; (d) double bottom.

In practice, the thermal effects are generally ignored and they hardly affect stress levels within the structure, up
to a cargo temperature of 90 C. For a AH 36 Grade steel with the yield stress of 305 MPa, all the scantlings can be
assumed as acceptable for the load case II. However, this is not valid for the load case III. For the load case III, the
maximum stresses are much higher than the limit value. On the other hand, it can be seen from Table 1 that the
stresses at the port side are greater than those at the starboard side, due to the loaded tanks seen in Fig.2. From a
comparison of the stresses for the load cases II and III, it can be seen that the stresses for the load case III are
generally 25% - 40% higher than those for the load case II. The stresses of the bilge and side shell plating are much
more influenced from the thermal loads. The increases in the maximum stresses are about 67% for the bilge plating,
and 53% for the side shell plating. The von Mises stress distributions are also presented in Figs. 4 and 5 for a section
about the center cargo tank region, respectively for the load cases II and III.

4. CONCLUSIONS

In this study, a thermal stress analysis for a 7000 DWT oil tanker was performed using finite element method.
The analysis was carried out for a cargo temperature of 90 C by using a commercial finite element software,
ANSYS. The finite element structural model represents three cargo tanks about the midship. For the thermal
analysis, the cargo tanks are idealized by using shell elements. The stresses induced within the structure are
calculated for a load case consisting of structural and thermal loads. A separate stress analysis was also performed
only for structural loads, exluding thermal loads. The results of these two analyses were compared to find out the
effect of thermal stresses on the stress resultants within the ship structure at the limit temperature of 90C.




Fig.4 The von Mises stress distribution for load case II.



Fig.5 The von Mises stress distribution for load case III.
For the cargo tank structure considered, the thermal loads mostly affect the bilge plating and side shell
plating. The thermally induced stresses may be important and they should be taken into account together
with the structural loads.

REFERENCES


[1] BV, Asphalt Carriers, Senior Hull Training, December (2006)
[2] Teng, X.-Q., Gu, Y.-N., Transit temperature field and thermal stresses of hold structures of single side shell and
double bottom vessels, Journal of Ship Mechanics 7 (2003) 51-60.
[3] Ugural, A.C., Stresses in Plates and Shells, McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (1999).
[4] Jawad, M.H., Design of Plate and Shell Structures, ASME Publications, New York (2004).
[5] ANSYS, Release 10 Documentation (2008).