You are on page 1of 18

Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565

Buckling strength assessment of corrugated panels


in offshore structures
Hai-Hong Sun

, Jack Spencer
American Bureau of Shipping, 16855 Northchase Dr., Houston, TX 77060, USA
Received 1 July 2005; received in revised form 6 November 2005; accepted 8 December 2005
Abstract
There is an increasing trend of living quarters in offshore structures being constructed using
corrugated panels in order to save construction time and cost. Different from corrugated bulkheads
in ship structures, the corrugated panels used in the living quarters are designed in triangular or
trapezoidal prole with unequal anges and with a corrugation angle between 451 and 901. Industry
needs have prompted the American Bureau of Shipping to develop design recommendations for the
buckling strength assessment of these corrugated panels. This paper describes the main features and
the principles of the recommendations based on ABS experience, along with the technical
background. The modeling uncertainty associated with the recommended criteria has been
established by comparing the predictions with laboratory tests and nite element analysis results.
Two design examples are provided to demonstrate the application of the recommendations.
r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Corrugated panels; Buckling strength; Structural design criteria; Finite element analysis
1. Introduction
Corrugated panels are self-stiffened and are usually corrugated in one direction. They
may act as watertight bulkheads supported by stools in ship structures, or employed as
corrugated shear diaphragms in civil engineering structures when connected with fasteners.
Recently, these structures have been applied to construct the living quarters in offshore
structures due to their advantages of easy acquisition and low construction cost. The
ARTICLE IN PRESS
www.elsevier.com/locate/marstruc
0951-8339/$ - see front matter r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.marstruc.2005.12.002

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 281 877 6317; fax: +1 281 877 5820.
E-mail address: hsun@eagle.org (H.-H. Sun).
geometry and cross section of a corrugated panel are depicted in Figs. 1 and 2. The
corrugated panels are typically of triangular prole (a 0) or trapezoidal prole with
unequal anges (aab) and corrugation angle,f, between 451 and 901. The buckling
strength assessment criteria for corrugated bulkheads in ship rules [1], which have the
limits of corrugation angle greater than 571 and trapezoidal prole with equal anges
cannot be directly applied to the corrugated panels used in living quarters.
It has been recognized that the buckling failure modes of a stiffened panel can be
categorized at three levels, which are (1) local face/web plate buckling, (2) unit corrugation
buckling, and (3) entire corrugation buckling. Unlike stiffened at panels, corrugated
panels will collapse immediately upon reaching any one of these three buckling levels.
This paper describes the main features and the principles of the ABS recommendations
and presents the technical background. The modeling errors associated with the
recommended criteria have been established by comparing the predictions with laboratory
test and FE analysis results. Two design examples are provided to demonstrate the
application of the ABS recommendations.
2. Technical background
The pioneering work on the buckling strength of corrugated panels subjected to lateral
pressure was given by Caldwell [2]. He carried out an extensive theoretical and
ARTICLE IN PRESS
z
y
x
B
l
b
a
Fig. 1. Typical corrugated panel in living quarters.
z
0
t
t
c
a
d

b
z
y
s
Centroid
Fig. 2. Cross section prole.
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 549
experimental study to develop a rational design formula, which can be written as
s
EB
k
f
E
121 n
2

t
f
a
_ _
2
k
w
E
121 n
2

t
w
c
_ _
2
, (1)
where E and n are the elastic modulus and Poissons ratio; t
f
and t
w
are the thickness of the
ange and web plates; a and c are the width of the ange and web plates. k
f
and k
w
are the
buckling coefcients of ange and web of unit corrugation, respectively, as given in Fig. 3.
This equation was derived by replacing the web of width c by a reduced web of width gc
and treating the problem as one of uniform compression of both web and ange, where g is
the reduction factor determined by experiment.
Caldwell [2] also performed three series of tests: corrugated panels under four points
bending, single corrugations under four points bending, and corrugated panels under
lateral pressure. The corrugation angle of the test specimen was in the range from 41.51 to
61.91. These tests indicated that the formulae developed for simple loading conditions
could safely be applied to practical bulkhead problems, and therefore constitute a useful
basis for design. These tests also indicated that each trough of width s in a corrugated
bulkhead deforms similarly under a similar distribution of pressure, and so the behavior of
a single central corrugation can be taken as representative of the whole bulkhead, provided
that the end conditions of each trough are the same. In ABS SVR [1], the single central
corrugation is called a unit corrugation for clarity.
ABS SVR [1] adopted Caldwells equation to calculate the elastic bending buckling
stress of corrugated bulkheads and the buckling coefcient, k
f
, is analytically expressed by
k
f
7:65 0:26c=a
2

2
. (2)
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Caldwell Experiments
: k
f
: k
w
0
1.0 2.0
4
8
12
16
k
f
k
w
k
f
,

k
w
a/c
Fig. 3. Buckling coefcients.
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 550
The critical buckling stress is written by (JohnsonOstenfeld plasticity correction)
s
CB

s
EB
for s
EB
pP
r
s
0
;
s
0
1 P
r
1 P
r

s
0
s
EB
_ _
for s
EB
4P
r
s
0
;
_
_
_
(3)
where P
r
is the proportional linear elastic limit of the structure, and s
0
is the specied
minimum yield point.
A series of collapse tests on single corrugation models subjected to axial compression
and uniform water pressure was undertaken by Nagai [3] to examine the buckling behavior
of corrugated bulkheads under axial compression and hydrostatic pressure. He also
derived the buckling strength formulations based on a simplied effective web width
approach. The tests results agreed with the theoretical solutions.
Paik et al. [4] studied the collapse behavior of steel corrugated bulkheads. They
developed a simple analytical formulation for ultimate bending strength used in the design
of corrugated bulkheads under static lateral pressure, which is given by
M
u
s
0
A
f
g s
0
A
w
sin f
g
2
d
s
u
A
w
sin f
d g
2
d
s
u
A
f
d g, (4)
where A
f
and A
w
are the section area of corrugation ange and web plates, respectively; g
is the nal neutral axis at ultimate limit state; s
u
is the ultimate compressive stress of the
corrugation ange accounting for buckling. This formulation was based on the assumption
that the entire material in compression of the corrugation reaches its ultimate strength
while the material in tension is in full yielding. They carried out collapse tests on nine mild
steel corrugated panels having ve bays of corrugation. By comparing the theoretical
solution with the experimental results, the proposed formula was conrmed to be within
engineering accuracy.
Caldwells formula is widely accepted by various classication societies for the
assessment of corrugated bulkheads under lateral pressure. However, this formula is
limited to a trapezoidal prole with equal anges (i.e., a b). Caldwells formula should
be extended when corrugated panels with triangular (a 0) or trapezoidal prole with
unequal anges (aab) are analyzed, which is described in Section 4.
Bergmann and Reissner [5] calculated the buckling stress in shear of rectangular
corrugated panels, treating them as plates having different exural rigidities in two
perpendicular directions. They proposed the formula
t
E
4l
D
3=4
x
D
1=4
y
tl
2
, (5)
where D
x
and D
y
are the equivalent bending stiffness per unit length of the panel. l is a
multiplier dependent upon
y 2
D
x
D
y

1=2
D
xy
and j
B
l
D
y
D
x
_ _
1=2
. (6)
The dependence of l on y and j is given in tabulated form of curves by Timoshenko and
Gere [6]
Easley [7] discussed the formulas for the elastic buckling loads of light-gage corrugated
panels. He found that if D
x
is much larger than D
y
, and l/B is small, the coefcient 4l is
ARTICLE IN PRESS
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 551
approximately equal to 3:65p
2
. This formula is in fair agreement with his experimental
results and has also been veried by nite element analysis (FEA).
3. Design criteria
This section includes recommended design criteria for the corrugated panels.
3.1. Local plate buckling
The following limit state is recommended for the buckling strength assessment for
individual ange or web plate [8]:
s
x max
Zs
Cx
_ _
2

s
y max
Zs
Cy
_ _
2

t
Zt
C
_ _
2
p1, (7)
where s
xmax
and s
ymax
are the maximum compressive stresses in corrugation and transverse
directions, respectively; t is the in-plane shear stress; s
Cx
and s
Cy
are the critical buckling
stresses in corrugation and transverse directions; and t
C
is the critical buckling stress for
edge shear. The critical buckling stresses are provided in Appendix A. Z is the allowable
strength utilization factor, which are dened based on load conditions representing all
operation modes of offshore structures. Two primary load conditions to be considered in
offshore structures are [9,10]:
(i) Normal operations: Stresses due to operating environmental loading combined with
dead and maximum live loads appropriate to the function and operations of the
structure. For this loading condition, the allowable strength utilization factor is taken
as 0.6.
(ii) Severe storm: Stresses due to design environmental loading combined with dead and
live loads appropriate to the function and operations of the structure during the design
environmental condition. For this loading condition, the allowable strength utilization
factor is taken as 0.8.
3.2. Unit corrugation buckling
The limit state recommended for unit corrugation is given by [8]
s
a
Zs
CA

C
m
s
b
Zs
CB
1 s
a
=Zs
EC

p1, (8)
where s
a
is the axial compressive stress of the unit corrugation; C
m
is the bending moment
factor determined by rational analysis, which may be taken as 1.5 for a panel whose ends
are simply supported; Z is the allowable strength utilization factor as dened in Section 3.1;
and s
b
is the bending stress along the unit corrugation due to lateral pressure, which is
calculated by
For the lateral pressure applied toward the upper ange as shown in Fig. 4, Case 1
s
b
M
b
=SM
a
, (9.1)
ARTICLE IN PRESS
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 552
For the lateral pressure applied toward the lower ange as shown in Fig. 4, Case 2
s
b
M
b
=SM
b
. (9.2)
The calculated bending moment, M
b
is obtained by
M
b

q
u
q

2
_ _
sl
2
=12 (10)
SM
a
and SM
b
are the sectional modulus of upper ange and lower ange of unit
corrugation. q
u
and q
l
are the lateral pressure at the two ends of the corrugation. s
CA
is
the critical buckling stress of the unit corrugation under uniaxial compression, which is
calculated by
s
CA

s
EA
for s
EA
pP
r
s
Cx
;
s
0
1 P
r
1 P
r

s
Cx
s
EA
_ _
for s
EA
4P
r
s
Cx
;
_
_
_
(10.1)
where P
r
is the proportional linear elastic limit of the structure and s
C(A)
is the critical local
plate buckling stress in corrugation direction, which is taken as the lesser of local web buckling
stress and ange buckling stress. s
EA
is the Eulers buckling stress as provided in Appendix B.
s
C(B)
is the critical buckling stress of the unit corrugation under lateral pressure, which
is obtained from Eq. (3). In order to assess the buckling strength of the corrugated panels
with the triangular prole and unequal anges, Caldwells formula (1) for elastic bending
buckling stress is extended, which is given by
For lateral pressure applied toward the upper ange as shown in Fig. 4, Case 1
s
EB
k
ca
E
121 n
2

t
a
_ _
2
. (11.1)
ARTICLE IN PRESS
c
Pressure
a
b
Pressure
a
b
Case 1
Case 2
c
Fig. 4. Lateral pressure direction.
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 553
For lateral pressure applied toward the lower ange as shown in Fig. 4, Case 2
s
EB
k
cb
E
121 n
2

t
b
_ _
2
, (11.2)
where
k
ca
7:65 0:26c=a
2

2
and k
cb
7:65 0:26c=b
2

2
. (12)
3.3. Entire corrugated panel buckling
The following limit state is recommended for the buckling strength assessment for entire
corrugated panels:
s
x
Zs
Gx
_ _
2

s
y
Zs
Gy
_ _
2

t
Zt
G
_ _
2
p1, (13)
where s
x
and s
y
are the calculated average compressive stresses in the corrugation and
transverse directions, respectively; t is the in-plane shear stress; s
Gx
and s
Gy
are the overall
critical buckling stresses in the corrugation and transverse directions, respectively, as given
in Appendix C; Z is the allowable strength utilization factor as dened in Section 3.1; and
t
G
is the overall critical buckling stress for edge shear as calculated by
t
G

t
E
for t
E
pP
r
t
0
;
t
0
1 P
r
1 P
r

t
0
t
E
_ _
for t
E
4P
r
t
0
;
_
_
_
(14)
t
E
is the overall elastic buckling stress, as determined as follows (Easley [7])
t
E
3:65p
2
D
3=4
x
D
1=4
y
tl
2
, (15)
where D
x
and D
y
are dened in Appendix C.
4. Calibration
The calibration approach is provided in this subsection, and the accuracy for
determining buckling strength predictions obtained from the application of the above
criteria is established by comparing its results against an extensive database of tests and
also from the results of FEA. In the FEA, the boundary conditions are assumed as simply
supported.
4.1. Axial compression
One of three types of failure modes (local plate buckling, column buckling of unit
corrugation and overall corrugated panel buckling) may occur for a corrugated panel
subjected to single axial compression.
Local buckling of ange and web plates may not be a critical failure mode if the section
of a corrugated panel is compact, as dened in Appendix B. By the review of existing
design of corrugated panels in ships and offshore structures, it is found that most
ARTICLE IN PRESS
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 554
corrugated panel sections are not compact and, consequently, the local buckling may be
more crucial than column buckling and overall buckling, and should be considered in the
buckling strength assessment.
Column buckling or overall buckling may occur for corrugated panels with shallow
trough (small d, as specied in Fig. 2). A deep trough in thin plating is more efcient than a
shallow trough of equal section modulus in resisting column buckling or overall buckling.
Therefore, the most efcient way to increase the column buckling or overall buckling
strength is to increase the trough depth.
Due to the lack of sufcient experimental data, FEAs of the buckling strength for 40
actual corrugated panels were conducted. Fig. 5 compares the solutions of buckling
strength with the nite element results and test results by Paik et al. [4], where the allowable
strength utilization factor is excluded. In the analysis, the least critical buckling stress of
s
Cx
, s
CA
and s
Gx
as given in Section 3 is used to compare with that from FEA. The mean
and COV of modeling uncertainty are 1.11 and 8.35%, respectively.
4.2. Lateral pressure
Experiments and numerical analyses [2,4] demonstrate that corrugated panels subjected
to lateral pressure exhibit bending collapse due to local buckling of the compressed ange
and part of web in the 1/3 middle region of the corrugation span, as shown in Fig. 6.
Caldwell [2] pointed out that there are two ways to reach maximum economy of material in
corrugated panel design:
(i) The corrugation angle should be as large as possible, e.g., a rectangular trough prole
is more efcient than a trapezoidal or triangle prole of equal section modulus.
(ii) A deep trough in thin plating is more efcient than a shallow trough of equal section
modulus.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Test & FEA,
x
/
0
A
B
S

P
r
e
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
,

x
/

0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
FEA
Test
Fig. 5. Comparison of corrugated panels in axial compression.
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 555
Fig. 7 compares the solutions of buckling strength with the experimental results and
FEA results available for 30 Caldwells and Paiks test models and 18 FE models, where
the allowable strength utilization factor is excluded. The predicted critical buckling stress,
s
CB
, as given in Section 3.2 is conservative and the mean and COV of modeling
uncertainty are 1.13 and 17.64%, respectively. The collapse mode from the present FEA is
fairly consistent with the existing knowledge.
4.3. Edge shear
A corrugated panel subjected to single edge shear exhibits overall buckling when it fails
as shown in Fig. 8. Edge shear stress is the most signicant load effect that the corrugated
panel used in living quarters should resist.
Fig. 9 presents the comparison of recommended solutions of buckling strength with the
experimental results and FEA results for Easleys models [7], where the allowable strength
utilization factor is excluded. The FE models are constructed with the same overall length
and width of the actual test specimens. The recommended formula (14) produces the mean
and COV of modeling uncertainty of 1.10 and 12.62%, respectively. All models exhibit
overall shear buckling failure, and statement (ii) in Section 4.2 from Caldwell [2] is also
applicable for the corrugation panel subjected to edge shear based on the model
experiments and FEA results.
4.4. Combined axial compression and edge shear
Corrugated panels used in living quarters of offshore structures should be designed to
mainly withstand combined axial compression and edge shear. The normal transverse
stress should be negligibly small, because the panel stiffness in the transverse direction is
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Fig. 6. Collapse mode of a corrugated panel in lateral pressure.
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 556
very small. It is widely accepted that a corrugated panel can be treated as plates having
different exural rigidities in two perpendicular directions; and the buckling limit states for
the local and entire panels can be expressed as spherical interaction surfaces from the
design point of view [8,11], as described in Sections 3.1 and 3.3. Other forms of interaction
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Fig. 8. Collapse mode of a corrugated panel in edge shear.
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Test & FEA, MPa
A
B
S

P
r
e
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
,

M
P
a
Test
FEA
Fig. 7. Comparison of corrugated panels in lateral pressure.
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 557
surfaces as discussed in Galambos [12] and Paik and Thayambali [13] are not adopted due
to their inconsistency in dealing with uniform axial compression or in-plane bending
combined with edge shear.
Fig. 10 presents verications for local plate buckling in a corrugated panel by comparing
the local buckling limit state with the FEA results, in which the allowable strength
utilization factor is excluded. It can be seen that the recommended limit state in Section 3.1
gives very reasonable predictions.
Fig. 11 presents verications for the overall buckling of corrugated panels with two
different types of proles that are used in living quarters by comparing the overall buckling
limit state with the FEA results, in which the allowable strength utilization factor is
excluded. It can be seen that the recommended limit state in Section 3.3 provides
conservative predictions compared to the FEA results.
4.5. Combined axial compression and lateral pressure
In addition to considering combined axial compression and edge shear, the load
combination of axial compression and lateral pressure is also important in the buckling
strength assessment of corrugated panels used in living quarters. It is well recognized that
the buckling strength of corrugated panels in such a load combination can be calculated by
a beam-column buckling limit state, as described in Section 3.2, in which the local buckling
effect due to axial compression is incorporated in the case where the section is non-
compact.
Fig. 12 demonstrates the verication by comparing the beam-column buckling limit
state with the FEA results, in which the allowable strength utilization factor is excluded. It
can be seen that the recommended limit state provides very reasonable predictions.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0
5
10
15
20
0 5 10 15 20
Test & FEA, MPa
A
B
S

P
r
e
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
,

M
P
a
Test
FEA
Fig. 9. Comparison of corrugated panels subjected in edge shear.
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 558
5. Design examples
Two design examples are provided based on the above design criteria, which are taken
from two living quarters on offshore platforms. The stresses in the buckling strength
assessment are obtained from the general structural analysis computer system (SACS) [14].
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
Local Buckling, Eq. (7)
FEA
= 15, = 1.48

x
/
Cx
Fig. 10. Local buckling interaction.
Profile-I
Profile-II
Overall Buckling, Eq. (13)
FEA-Profile-I
FEA-Profile-II
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.6
0.8
0.8
1.0
1.0
1.2
1.2
1.4
1.4

x
/
Cx
Fig. 11. Overall buckling interaction.
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 559
SACS is a comprehensive design and analysis package used to the offshore and civil
structure design industries.
5.1. Corrugated panel with triangular prole
Fig. 13 shows the sectional geometry of the panel with triangular prole. The total
height and breadth are 3.35 m and 4.88 m, respectively. The modulus of elasticity and
minimum yield point are 2.1 10
5
MPa and 248 MPa, respectively.
The maximum membrane stresses from SACS in the operational condition are
s
x
16:55 MPa; s
y
0 MPa; t 30:34 MPa:
The wind velocity in the operational condition is 76 km/h and the wind pressure is
5.36 10
4
MPa.
Based on the above design criteria, the buckling assessment results are given in Table 1.
The corrugation panel satises all design criteria and therefore the design is acceptable.
5.2. Corrugated panel with trapezoidal prole
Fig. 14 shows the sectional geometry of the panel with trapezoidal prole. The total
height and breadth are 3.05 m and 4.27 m, respectively. The modulus of elasticity and
minimum yield point are 2.1 10
5
MPa and 248 MPa, respectively.
The maximum membrane stresses from SACS in the severe storm condition are
s
x
68:95 MPa; s
y
0 MPa and t 86:87 MPa:
The wind velocity in the severe storm condition is 185 km/h and the wind pressure is
2.15 10
3
MPa.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
C
m

b
/

C
(
B
)

a
/
C
(A)
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.6 0.8
0.8
1.0
1.0 1.2
1.2
Beam-Column Buckling, Eq. (8)
FEA
Fig. 12. Beam-column buckling interaction.
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 560
Based on the above design criteria, the buckling assessment results for the design are
given in Table 2. As shown in the Original column of the unity check, the corrugation
panel does not satisfy buckling criteria for unit corrugation and the entire corrugated
panel. The panel must be redesigned.
As mentioned before, the most efcient way to increase the buckling strength of
corrugated panels is to increase the trough depth. In this example, if the trough depth is
increased to 96 mm, the buckling assessment results are shown in the last column, Table 2.
It can be seen that the redesign is acceptable.
6. Conclusions
There is an increasing demand for living quarters built of corrugated panels in offshore
structures, which led the American Bureau of Shipping to develop design recommenda-
tions for buckling strength assessment. This paper describes the main features and the
principles of the recommendations based on ABS experience, which includes buckling
ARTICLE IN PRESS
508mm
7
6
m
m

90

4.8mm
Wind pressure
Fig. 13. Geometry of triangular corrugation.
Table 1
Buckling assessment results for the corrugated panel with triangular prole
Design criteria Unity check
Flange buckling 0.48
Web buckling 0.38
Unit corrugation buckling 0.46
Entire corrugation buckling 0.65
Maximum 0.65
394mm
5
1
.
8
m
m
67.6mm
Wind pressure
203mm
4.76mm
102mm
Fig. 14. Geometry of unequal anged corrugation.
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 561
strength assessment for all relevant failure modes. The technical background of the
recommendations is provided and the modeling uncertainty is established by comparing
the proposed design criteria with extensive laboratory tests and FE analysis results.
The recommended criteria are applicable for corrugated panels with triangular prole or
unequal-anges trapezoidal prole subjected to axial compression, shear and lateral
pressure and their combinations. The comparisons to laboratory tests and FE analysis
demonstrate that the recommendations have suitable conservatisms for the buckling
strength assessment. Two design examples were provided to demonstrate the application of
the design criteria.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to express their appreciation and gratitude to the management of the
American Bureau of Shipping. Special thanks Pao-Lin Tan and Kuan-Tao Chang for their
technical reviews. The authors are indebted to Jana Palfy and Jim Speed for editing the
manuscript.
Appendix A. Critical buckling stresses of local panels
The critical buckling stresses, s
Ci
i x; y and t
C
, for ange and web plates may be
obtained from the following equations, with respect to uniaxial compression, bending and
edge shear, respectively.
s
Ci

s
Ei
for s
Ei
pP
r
s
0
;
s
0
1 P
r
1 P
r

s
0
s
Ei
_ _
for s
Ei
4P
r
s
0
:
_
_
_
t
C

t
E
for t
E
pP
r
t
0
;
t
0
1 P
r
1 P
r

t
0
t
E
_ _
for t
E
4P
r
t
0
;
_
_
_
where P
r
is the proportional linear elastic limit of the structure, which may be taken as 0.6
for steel, s
Ei
the elastic buckling stress k
s
p
2
E
121n
2

t
s
_ _
2
_ _
.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Table 2
Buckling assessment results for the corrugated panel with trapezoidal prole
Buckling mode Unity check
Original Improved
Flange buckling 0.91 0.91
Web buckling 0.84 0.85
Unit corrugation buckling 1.61 0.57
Entire corrugation buckling 1.44 0.97
Maximum 1.61 0.97
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 562
For loading applied along the short edge of the plating (long plate):
k
s

8:4
k1:1
for 0pkp1;
7:6 6:4k 10k
2
for 1pko0:
_
For loading applied along the long edge of the plating (wide plate):
k
s

1:0875 1
1
a
2
_ _
2
18
1
a
2
_ _
1 k 24
1
a
2
for ko
1
3
and 1pap2;
1:0875 1
1
a
2
_ _
2
9
1
a
_ _
1 k 12
1
a
for ko
1
3
and a42;
1
1
a
2
_ _
2
1:675 0:675k for kX
1
3
:
_

_
For edge shear
k
s
4:0
s
l
_ _
2
5:34
_ _
,
where a is the aspect ratio ( l/s), k the ratio of edge stresses, which can be varied from 1
(pure bending) to +1 (pure compression) ( s
i min
=s
i max
), s
0
the specied minimum yield
point of plate, t
0
the shear strength of plate ( s
0
=

3
p
), E the modulus of elasticity, n the
Poissons ratio, 0.3 for steel, l the length of long plate edge, s the length of short plate edge,
and t the thickness of plate.
Appendix B. Critical buckling stress of unit corrugation
A cross section is compact if the web and ange plates satisfy the following requirement
[1,8]:
a
t
;
b
t
;
c
t
p1:5

E
s
0
_
where a, b, c and t are dened in Fig. 2.
The critical buckling stress for a unit corrugation may be obtained from the following
equation:
s
CA

s
EC
for s
EC
pP
r
s
F
;
s
F
1 P
r
1 P
r

s
F
s
EC
_ _
for s
EC
4P
r
s
F
;
_
_
_
where s
EC
is the elastic buckling stress, N/cm
2
(kgf/cm
2
, lbf/in
2
) p
2
Er
2
=l
2
, r the radius
of gyration of area A of unit corrugation

I
y
=A
_ _ _
, E the modulus of elasticity, A, I
y
the
area and moment of inertia of unit corrugation, P
r
the proportional linear elastic limit of
the structure, which may be taken as 0.6 for steel, s
0
the specied minimum yield point,
s
Cx
the critical local buckling stress, as specied in Appendix A, l the length of unit
corrugation, and
s
F

s
0
if the cross section is compact;
s
Cx
if the cross section is noncompact:
_
ARTICLE IN PRESS
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 563
Appendix C. Critical buckling stress of entire corrugated panels
The critical buckling stress s
Gi
i x; y for entire corrugated panels may be obtained
from the following equation:
s
Gi

s
Ei
for s
Ei
pP
r
s
0
;
s
0
1 P
r
1 P
r

s
0
s
Ei
_ _
for s
Ei
4P
r
s
0
;
_
_
_
where
s
Ex

k
x
p
2
D
x
D
y

1=2
t
x
B
2
,
s
Ey

k
y
p
2
D
x
D
y

1=2
tl
2
,
k
x

4 for l=BX1;
1
f
2
x
f
2
x
for l=Bo1;
_
k
y

4 for B=lX1;
1
f
2
y
f
2
y
for B=Lo1;
_
_
_
l, B length and width of corrugated panel,
t
x
equivalent thickness of the corrugation in the corrugation direction the
st A
sx
=s,
t thickness of the corrugation,
f
x
(l/B)(D
y
/D
x
)
1/4
,
f
y
(B/l)(D
x
/D
y
)
1/4
,
D
x
EI
y
/s,
D
y
s/(a+b+2c)Et
3
/12(1n
2
),
I
y
moment of inertia of unit corrugation,
A
sx
2ct sin f,
a, b, c width of anges and web plating, respectively, as dened in Fig. 2,
s width of unit corrugation, as dened in Fig. 2,
E modulus of elasticity,
n Poissons ratio, 0.3 for steel,
s
0
specied minimum yield point of the material.
References
[1] ABS. Rules for building and classing steel vessels, 2005.
[2] Caldwell JB. The strength of corrugated plating for ships bulkheads. Trans RINA 1955;97:495522.
[3] Nagai T. On the buckling phenomena of corrugated bulkheads. J Naval Archit Japan 1964;116:507.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 564
[4] Paik JK, Thayamballi AK, Chun MS. Theoretical and experimental study on ultimate strength of corrugated
bulkheads. J Ship Res 1997;41:30117.
[5] Bergmann VS, Reissner H. Neuere probleme aus der ugzeugstatik. Z Flugtech Mororluftsch 1929:20.
[6] Timoshenko SP, Gere JN. Theory of elastic stability, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co; 1961.
[7] Easley JT. Buckling formulas for corrugated metal shear diaphragms. J Struct Div ASCE 1975;101:140317.
[8] ABS. Guide for buckling and ultimate strength assessment for offshore structures, 2004.
[9] ABS. Rules for building and classing offshore installations, 1997.
[10] ABS. Guide for building and classing oating production installations, 2004.
[11] American Petroleum Institute. API bulletin 2V, Design of at plate structures, 2nd ed., 2000.
[12] Galambos TV. Guide to stability design criteria for metal structures, 5th ed. New York: Wiley; 1998.
[13] Paik JK, Thayamballi AK. Ultimate limit state design of steel-plated structures. New York: Wiley; 2003.
[14] EDI. Structural analysis computer system (SACS). Engineering Dynamics, Inc., 2005.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
H.-H. Sun, J. Spencer / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 548565 565

You might also like