ELASTIC SHAKEDOWN IN

PRESSURE VESSEL COMPONENTS

UNDER PROPORTIONAL AND NON-
PROPORTIONAL
LOADING
Dr Martin Muscat
Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Malta

Dr D.Mackenzie, Dr R.Hamilton, P. Makulsawatudom

Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Strathclyde
SUMMARY OF PRESENTATION

• Introduction – What is shakedown ?

• Achieving shakedown using EN13445/3 PV code
• A proposed method for Elastic shakedown loads -
Cases of proportional & non-proportional loading.
• Discussion
 What is shakedown ?

• A structure made of elastic-perfectly plastic material

subjected to cyclic loading exhibits an initial short-
term transient response followed by one of three
types of steady state response:
(1) Elastic shakedown
(2) Plastic shakedown
(3) Ratcheting
Elastic shakedown - Response is wholly elastic
after the initial transient
response.

Plastic shakedown - Reverse plasticity occurs

leading to low cycle fatigue.

Ratcheting - The plastic strain increases

incrementally with every
load cycle until incremental
plastic collapse eventually
occurs.
• Ratcheting should be avoided in structural
design.

• Plastic shakedown is acceptable but produces

plastic strain which must be addressed within a
fatigue analysis.

• A way to eliminate both problems is to design in

order to achieve elastic shakedown.
 Design methods in
BS EN13445/3
• Design by rule
– Follow a set of rules to calculate a thickness
• Design by analysis
– Elastic route (Annex C) uses a stress categorisation
procedure & appropriate design stress limits
– Direct route (Annex B) is based on inelastic analysis
& circumvents the stress categorisation procedure
 The Direct route
of Design by Analysis

• EN code design checks against different failure

modes:
– Excessive deformation
– Progressive plastic deformation
– Instability
– Fatigue
– Loss of static equilibrium
Some analysis requirements

• Elastic perfectly plastic material model

• Small deformation theory
• The check for preventing ratchetting requires the
von Mises yield criterion
Principles & Application rules

BS EN13445/3 gives a set of :

• Principles - which are general definitions
and requirements which must be satisfied in
a design check
• Application rules - are generally recognised
rules which follow the principles and
satisfy their requirements
• Principle

– The Principle for preventing progressive

plastic deformation is ‘For all relevant load
cases, on repeated application of specified
action cycles progressive plastic deformation
shall not occur’
• Application rules

– The shakedown rule, the principle is fulfilled if it can be shown

that the equivalent stress concentration free model shakes down
to elastic behaviour under the action cycles considered.

– The technical adaptation rule, the principle is fulfilled if it can be

shown that the maximum absolute value of the principal strain
does not exceed 5% under the action cycles considered.
 The technical adaptation rule

• The simplest and most accurate is to apply conventional

cyclic elastic-plastic analysis and examine the plastic
strain accumulation after each cycle:
A trial and error basis
Time consuming
Requires large computer power and storage

• Useful for complex load cycles involving more than one

load frequency
 The shakedown rule

• In EN13445/3 Zeman’s and Preiss’s deviatoric mapping of

stress state technique is given as an application tool for the
shakedown rule.
• The deviatoric map is based on Melan’s lower bound
shakedown theorem and may be used to evaluate shakedown
loads for structures subject to proportional loading.
• A major disadvantage of the deviatoric map is that it is
somewhat tedious to use.
 Preventing
progressive plastic deformation
New methods for calculating
elastic shakedown loads

Based on:
• Melan’s lower bound elastic shakedown theorem for cases
of proportional loading.
• Polizzotto’s lower bound elastic shakedown theorem for
cases of non-proportional loading.
• Non-linear finite element analysis.
 Melan’s theorem
Melan’s theorem states that for cases of proportional
loading elastic shakedown is achieved if:

|r |  y (1)

|r + e |  y or |s |  y (2)

where y is the yield stress.

e is the elastic stress field.
r is the residual stress field.
s is the shakedown stress field.
 The proposed method (proportional loading)

•Inelastic analyses are performed to obtain a number of shakedown stress

fields, si corresponding to a number of cyclic load levels.

•Corresponding elastic stress fields, ei are found by performing a single

elastic analysis and invoking proportionality.
•A self-equilibrating residual stress field, ri, is obtained for each load
level by using the superposition equation ri = si - ei.
•A lower bound to the elastic shakedown load is established by
examining the residual stress fields ri for each load level to establish the
highest load at which the calculated residual stress field satisfies the yield
condition.
•Iterations between the calculated lower bound and the limit load
are then used to systematically converge to a self equilibrating
residual stress field where the maximum residual stress is slightly
less than or equal to Y.

Residual stress (obtained by superposition) v.s. Applied

load

900

800

700

600 Lower bound

Residual Stress

500

400
Yield stress
300

200

100
Upper bound
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Applied load
 Advantages of the proposed
method (proportional loading)
• Accurate for calculating elastic shakedown loads when compared
to full elasto plastic cyclic analysis
• Relatively easy to apply
• Automatic - most of the analysis is done by the computer
• Eliminates the need for low cycle fatigue analysis
 Polizzotto’s theorem

Polizzotto’s theorem states that for a steady/cyclic

load given by
P(t) = Pc(t) + Po
elastic shakedown is achieved if:
|pt|  y where pt = |c(t) + s| (1)

y is the yield stress

pt is the post transient stress field
c(t) is the elastic stress response to Pc(t)
s is a time independent stress field in equilibrium with Po
 The proposed method (Non-proportional
loading)

• Inelastic analyses are

performed to obtain a
number of time P2
independent stress fields,
P1
s corresponding to a
number of cyclic load
levels. t1 t 2 t3 t4 t5
 The time independent stress field
• A stable time independent stress field is not always
obtained after the first cycle of loading.
• This depends on the geometry and on the loading
cycle.
• It is recommended that a check is made to
determine whether the time independent stress field
used for the analysis has stabilised or not.
• A stable time independent stress field was always
obtained in less than 10 load/unload cycles
 The proposed method …
•Corresponding elastic stress fields c, are found by performing a single
elastic analysis and invoking proportionality.

•The post transient stress fields pt, are obtained for each load level by
using the superposition equation pt = s + c.

•A lower bound to the elastic shakedown load is established by

examining the post transient stress fields pt for each load level to
establish the highest load at which pt satisfies the yield condition.
•A typical graph showing the normalised post transient stress field
for each load level is shown below.

Normalised post transient stress field (obtained by

superposition) v.s. Applied load

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2
 p t / Y
Normalised post 1
transient stress
field 0.8
Lower bound
0.6
Lower bound
0.4

0.2 Yield stress

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Upper bound
Applied load Pi
Advantages of the proposed method
(non-proportional loading)

• Can be used for non-proportional loading

• Accurate for calculating elastic shakedown loads
• Relatively easy to apply
• Automatic - most of the analysis done by the computer
• Eliminates the need for low cycle fatigue analysis
 Thick cylinder with offset cross-holes

Rb

Blend Detail

b
a

11.2mm

Rc

Cylinder Geometry Finite element mesh

 Elastic plastic response of plain cylinder and
cylinder with offset cross-hole
PA 3
PY,Cyl 2.5
Plain Cylinder
Cyclic • The applied pressure PA is
2`
Plasticity
normalised w.r.t. the yield
1.5
Elastic shakedown pressure of a corresponding plain
re
1
des i gn pressu cylinder.
Max.
0.5 • The figures show the boundary
0
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 between the elastic shakedown
PA
3
Circular crosshole region and cyclic plasticity.
PY,Cyl 2.5
• The lower bound shakedown
2

1.5
Cyclic Plasticity
loads calculated by the proposed
essure
1
Max. de
sign pr method were verified by
0.5
performing full cyclic plastic
Elastic shakedown
0
analysis.
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
b/a
 Nozzle/Cylinder intersection

In plane steady moment acting on nozzle = 711.1Nm

Cyclic internal pressure
Young’s Modulus = 210.125GPa
Yield stress (Shell & weld) = 234MPa
Yield stress (Nozzle) = 343MPa
 Result
380
• 10 load/unload cycles used to obtain
360

340
the time independent stress field.
• Elastic shakedown pressure is
Max. post transient stress

320

300

280
calculated to be 19MPa.
260 • Full elastic-plastic cyclic analysis
240
gives a result of 19.2MPa.
220

200
• The deviatoric mapping of stress
180
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
state technique gives a result of
Applied cyclic pressure
17.65MPa.
Max. post transient stress - nozzle Max. post transient stress - shell/weld
• Elastic compensation gives a result
Maximum post transient stress of 13.75MPa.
v.s.Cyclic pressure
 Some Comments

 The full nonlinear analysis (100 cycles) took 7 hours on a

Pentium III dual 1GHz Xeon processor having 1GB
RAM.

The non-linear superposition method took 1 hour to

finish.
Therefore the proposed method can reduce the design
time considerably.
 CONCLUSIONS
• The proposed methods can be fully automated
with little intervention from the side of the
analyst.
• The methods proposed here are well suited to
be used as elastic shakedown load calculation
tools in the new BS EN 13445/3 Annex B to
satisfy the principle which prevents ratchetting.