OFFSHORE TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE

6200 North Central Expressway

Dallas, Texas 75206
Plastic Consideration on Punching Shear
Strength of Tubular Joints
By
M. S. Lee, A. P. h e n g ~ Amoco International Oil Co., C. T. Sun, Purdue U., and R. Y. Lai.
U-. of--Wi searlsin
THIS PAPER IS SUBJECT TO CORRECTION
Copyright 1976
Offshore Technology Conference on behalf of the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum
Engineers, Inc. (Society of Mining Engineers, The Metallurgical Society and Society of Petroleum Engineers),
American Association of Petroleum Geologists, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, American Society
of Civil Engineers, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Institute of Electrical and Electronics n ~
gineers, Marine Technology Society, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, and Society of Naval Architects
and Marine Engineers. .
This paper was prepared for presentation at the Eighth Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston,
Tex., May 3-6, 1976. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations
may not be copied. Such use of an abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by
whom the paper is presented.
ABSTRACT
An alternative procedure is presented
for calculating the punching shear
strength of a tubular joint. The
development is based on the fully
plastic consideration of the, chord
member. Both in-plane and out-of-
plane bending moments are considered
in the formulation. The results
indicate that, for certain combina-_
tions of loads, the proposed approach
yields a more rati()nal and economical
joint design compared to the current
API approach.
INTRODUCTION
An important criterion for offshore
structure- tubular joint design is t4e
punching shear requirements rcom-
mended by the API (1). The current
calculated punching shear equation is
basically a combination of the axial -
stress and the maximum bending
stresses, with no distinction between
in-plane and out-of-plane bending
stresses. As a result, the calcu-
lated punching shear stress is under-
estimated under some loading condi-
tions. On the other hand, the current
allowable punching shear equation is
References and illustrations at end
of paper.
derived from the correlation of the
axial load test data. This generally
results in a conservative design when
the bending stress is predominant.
This paper presents an improvement
factor for bending to the current
allowable punching shear equation._
The development is based on the fully
plastic consideration of the chord.
Also presented is a punching shear
equation which combines the axial
stress with both the in-plane and
out-of-plane bending moments. Design
curves and a sample problem are
presented for the users who desire to
apply the proposed procedure to check
their joint designs.
EQUATIONS DERIVATION
Calculated Punching Shear Stress
A typical "Y" connection joint is
shown in Fig. 1. All the joint
geometrical notations defined by
API RP2A are followed. The right-
hand rectangular Cartesian coordinate
system is used with the x-axis along
the chord member center line and the_
y-plane coinciding with the chord-
brace plane. The brace member is
260
PLASTIC CONSIDERATION ON PUNCHING SHEAR
STRENGTH OF TUBULAR JOINTS OTe 2641
(2)
X tan
2
e F(cos8)+(2-sec
2
8) E(COS8)]
-tan
2
8 F(cos8)+(1+sec
2
8) E(cos8)
carrying an axial_ P, an Jll- _
plane bending moment M
l
and an out-
of-plane bending moment MO. The
punching shear joint can be
approximated by superimposing the
axial stress to bending stresses;
namely,
tan-
1
[
.1
m sine
(1 )
with
brace axial stress
brace
bending stress
brace maxj.rr1llm__out-Clf__ plane
bending stress
angle at the point of ellipse
where maximum punching shear
occurs
and
where
m
Observe that is a function of force
ratio m and geometry 8. For a given
joint geometry and brace member
forces (stresses), Equations (1) and
(2) constitute the formulae for cal-
culating the maximum punching shear.
Ultimate Punching Shear Capacity
Fully Plastic Analysis
In a normal elastic analysis, the
maximum allowable loads for a joint
shown on Figure 1 must satisfy the
condition
2
. (cos8)
'TfSln8
+ (2-sec
2
e) E(cosB)]
v
p
+
P
e
sin8
2tdE(cos8)
i _. 2
3Me Sln e casp

sin8 SincP
k
c
-,.-_4,-'--;:- -[-tan
2
eF(Cos8)--
3'Tfsin8 -
with
(3)
where F and E are complete elliptical
integrals of the first kind and
second kind, respectively. Note that
k
a
, kb and k
c

length and section factors for- a--
noncircular intersection curve.
Thus, Equation (1) giYE!s a conserva-
tive result in An inspection
of k
a
and kb values indicates that
they agree_with API
RP2A, Fig. 2.22-1. Taking the
diff-erenEiationof Equation (1) with
respect to yields the equation for
determining the angle where p is
maximum; i. e. ,
d = 2rb
where Pe, and Mg are maximum loads
for axial force, in-plane bending
moment and out-of-plane bending
moment, respectively, in elastic
analysis. And vp is the maximum
ultimate punching shear stress. By
introducing the parameter
(4)
GTC 2641 M. S. LEE, A. P. CHENG, C. T. SUN, AND R. Y. LAI
261
and
Equation (3) can be rewritten as
Vptd f
1f
+
A
I 2 .. 2
1-cos 8sin w dW
sin8 B
Vptd
-- h(8,A,B) . (9)
sin8
tan
2
S F (cos8) +(2-sec
2
8) E (cos8)
Vptd ![ 1
si n
2
e 2B(cos8)
. 2 2 J (1+m tan p)
+
P
e
(5)
The above quantity is the maximum
axial load the brace can carry
for a given .. and m. The correspond-
ing maximum bending moments are
with
f(8,A,B)
(6)
Following the conventional approach
for plastic design as outlined by
AISC(2), the stress diagram for an
intersection at the chord-brace con-
nection is idealized as shown in Fig.
2. The axial load P p is assumed to
be supported entirely by a centrally
located portion of the total cross-
section area and the bending moment
is resisted by the rest of the area.
Furthermore, the entire section is
stressed to the level corresponding
to the ultimate shear stress.
The bending moments and the axial
load in the brace shown by Fig. 2 can
be easily evaluated. We obtain
+ [sin-
1
(cos8sinB)
- sin-
1
(cosSsinA) ]
g(8,A,B)
cos8
h(B,A,B) E(1f+A,cos8) - E(B,cos8)
2V t fB X ds
P A
... Or-
Note the values of A and Bare
related to A and m by
f(8,A,B)/4sin8h(8,A,B)
(1 0)
and
f(8,A,B)/sinSg(S,A,B) (11) m
The increase in the load-carrying
capacity due to plastification can be
represented by the "improvement
factor" n, i.e.,
(8) g(8,A,B)
4sin8
2
Vptd-- f
B
sinw/1-cos
2
8sin
2
w dw
2sin8 A
V td
2
P
P
p
M
i
MO
n
---E.. = ---E.
... (12 )
P
e
M
i
M
O
e e
a -L-lwzllx LI.LII UJI .Iu.DuhfiK LJULLWLD U-L-G .40%
Substituting Eqs. (5) and (9) into
is a tedious job to calculate these
Eq. (12) results in numbers. However, the following
discussions may help those who are
interested in preparing numerical
~ = sine h(e,A,B) l-(e,A,B) ...(13) data for design. Taking advantage
of the f act that the joint punching
shear capacity is not affected by
with the bending moments sign, we assume
Mfi and M: both to be positive. This
assumpt~onr together with the engi-
l(e,A,B) =
1
neering properties of material, lead
2E(cose) to the following restriction on A and
3~iC0S$(l+m2tan2@)
B:
+
tan26F(cos0) +(2-sec28) E(cose)
sinB-sinA>O; COSA-COSB20 . . . (16)
or
and
~=L
f(e,A,B) l(O,A,B) . ..(14)
.1 < A ~ ~; B-As?r 4ai
2- 2.
. . . (17)
It follows that q actually depends on
A, m and @ only. Once the A and B values are obtained,
the improvement factor rI can be cal-
culated from Eq. (13) and tables or
APPLICATION curves of rIvalues for different A;,
.. .. ..
m and 0 can be prepared.
If more exact punching shear stress
calculations are needed, Equation (1) Since n becomes the minimum for
should be used in lieu of the constant Ai and m when 0 approaches
equation..shown on_APIRP2A_, page 17. 900, it will be conservative to use
However; the angle @ in Equation- (1) values at e = 900 for all inter-
has to be determined from Equation section angles. It is also observe~
(2) before the calculation can that the orientation of the moment is
proceed. Values of @ vs. moment immaterial to q for this particular
ratios m for several intersection intersection <angle. Thus, by setting
angles 0 are plotted in Fig. 3. Also
MO = 0 and ML z
iv and noting B = -A,
the curve for kc vs. 0 is added to Equations (10) and (13) are reduced
the current API RP2A Fig. 2.22-1 and to
is shown in Fig. 4. Note that the
kc value is considerably lower than
the kb value for a chosen e. As for
-sinA
A=, -:5 A ~ O (18)
the allowable punching shear in the
. . .
?I+2A
chord wall, the authors propose to
incorporate the improvement factor ~ and
to the current API RP2A Eq. (23),i.e. ,
Fy
n = (I+4A)(1+2A y) (19)
P
(plus 1/3 increase
...
= QQ~Qf
.
9Y.7
The transcendental Equation (18) can.
where applicable) ...(15) easily be solved by numerical method.
The curve of improvement factor n vs.
pseudo moment/axial load ratio X is
There--is an obstacle to be overcome shown in Fig. (5). When using the
before ~ can be evaluated, which is
curve, A should be taken as the ratio
to determine the plastic zone between
between the resultant moment M and
A and B as shown in Fig. 2. Obvi- the axial load P, i.e.,
ously, A and B can be determined
from Eqs. (10) and.(n) numerically.
Since the equations are cotipled, it
b% and M = ~(Mi)2+(M0)2 ...(20)
OTC 2641 M. S. LEE, A. P. CHENG, C. T. SUN, AND R. Y. LAI 26
EXAMPLE
Given
1. Chord Member Can Section
64.750.D. X 1.125 W.T.
Stress in can section: 15.14 ksi
2. Brace Member
28o.D. X .5(IW.T.
P=391.21 kip, fa=9.06 ksi.
Mi=3523.36 kip-in, f~=12.08 ksi.
M0=2475.46 kip-in, f~=8.48 ksi.
3. Intersection Angle
0 = 430
4. Material Yield Strength
= 50 ksi
Since m = ~ = 1.42, we obtain from
Equation (2) or from Fig. (3) that
4
= 40.20. Furthermore, from Fig.(4)
we have
ka = 1.24, kb = 1.64, kc = 1.37.
Using Eq. (1) we obtain
Vp = * (sin 43~
.
.0s 40.20 ;~sin 40.2~-
+ 12.08
1.64 1.37
= 5.83 ksi vs. 5.58 ksi by API
equation.. __
thus from Fig.(5) we obtain rI= 1.36.
Therefore, the allowable punching
shear is
Vp = qQ6Qf
Fy
.9y7
. . .. (15)
=1.36X
50
.9 X 28.28-7
= 1.36 X 5.35
= 7.28 ksi (since Q~=Qf=l)
vs. 5.35 ksi in the API equation.
CONCLUSION
An alternative procedure has been
presented for calculating the punch-
ing shear stress of a tubular joint.
The procedure was developed by
considering the effect of both the
in-plane and out-of-plane bending
moments and the full plastification
of the chord member. The use of. the
proposed approach will generally
yield a more economical joint design
compared to the present API method.
The sample problem demonstrates that
the use of the proposed procedure .
increased the allowable punching
shear stress by 36%. On the other
hand, the example also shows that
the present API code somewhat under-
estimates the calculated punching
shear stress. This is typical in
conventional jacket design where the
outofplane bending moments are
usually less than the in-plane bend-
ing moments.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to express their
gratitude to Amoco International Oil
Company for permission to present
this paper. Special recognition is
extended to Edmond R. Genois and
Rudolph A. Hall of Petro-Marine
Engineering, Inc., for their contri-
bution in conducting this study.
Special thanks to Denise Bellon for
typing and editing the manuscript.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1.
2.
Recommended Practice for Planning,
Designing, and Constructing Fixed
Offshore Platform, API RP2A,
Sixth Edition, January 1975.
plastic Design Steel, American
Institute of Steel Construction,
1959.
b
7)
*)
)-
Y
Loc ation Of
Y Max. Calc ulated Vp -
/
1
tb
Z-=7
. x
@=+
(
J
Fi g. 1
l =+
1111111 ::1111111111
+
Full Plastific etion
II
1111111 ::111111
Axial Loed
>
+
+
Plastic Bending
dlsin 0
~~ ,
I
Plastic Bending
(11111 ::1111111
+
&daI Loed _
II
11111111 ::11111111
+ Full Plw@ic ation
Fi g. 2
+
4.0
4.!
3.0
3.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.01
I I I I I I ! I ! I I I I I I I I I
o
w 60
0
~o
o
o
Fi g. 4
1.5
1.4
1.3
T
1.2
1.1
1. 0
2
A
I.5
I.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
Fig. 5