Stresses in Spherical Shells Due to Local Loadings!

Robert Kao 2 and Nicholas Perron&

The m a x i m u m stresses are obtained for a spherical shell that is lifted or towed by a cable or any
mechanical power hoist. In view o f t h e highlylocalized nature o f t h e m a x i m u m stress induced in a
spherical shell due to local loading, the nonlinear (large deflection) shallow-shell theory is adopted
for the analysis. A nonlinear relaxation technique in conjunction with finite difference approxima-
tions is introduced for the numerical integration. Results obtained here are presented in the
graphic form that may be readily used by engineers in practical design.

Introduction postbuckling behavior of clamped shallo)v spherical shells under

M E C H A N I C A L CABLE SYSTEMS have long been used for various
purposes such as undersea search and survey, salvage recovery,
towing and mooring of buoys and ships, and helicopter recovery.
In the technological development a fundamental understanding
is required of the static and dynamic behavior of both cables and
towed vehicles or structures.
While many investigations [l, 2] 4 on improvement of the design
of cables have been made to insure adequate cable strength at
minimum size, weight, and cost, the present study is aimed at
examining local stresses in a spherical shell structure which is
towed or lifted via the cable by a helicopter or any mechanical
power hoist.
In view of the local nature of stresses in a spherical shell under
local loading one can focus attention on a small portion, or a
spherical cap as it is sometimes called, and deal thereby with a
simpler mathematical problem. Therefore, nonlinear shell
theory is employed in this paper to predict stresses in a spherical
vessel under local loading.
Bijlaard, in his numerous reports [3, 4, 5], made use of linear
shallow-shell theory for the computation of stresses in a spherical
vessel as a result of a radial load acting on a pipe. Incidental
to the validity of Bijlaard's data for design purposes, however,
engineers sometimes had difficulty in interpreting or properly
applyillg Iris work. To diminish this inconvenience, Wiehman
et ah [6] proposed some necessary changes of Bijlaard's work that
would be toward the conservative (or "safe") side, and sum-
marized them in a "cookbook" form to facilitate its use by design
engineers.
A few pertinent references can also be cited. Reissner [7]
employed a nonlinear shallow-shell theory to determine stresses
and deflection fields for some specific shell geometries. Ashwell
[8] considered a thi,l elastic spherical shell loaded by an inwardly
pointing load. He separated the sphere into two regions, each of
which undergoes small deflection: the outer region and the
inner or dimple region, which is assumed to have an equal but
reversed curvature. I n this way he attempted to describe the
large-deflection nonlinear behavior of the shell in terms of two
sets of Reissner-type small-deflection linear equations. Penning
and Thurston [9] conducted an experimental and theoretical
study on shallow spherical caps under concentrated load. Fitch
and Budiansky [10] investigated the elastic buckling and initial
axisymmetric load.
In the following section the governing equations are presented
and the solution method is also briefly discussed. This is fol-
lowed by a preliminary example that involves utilizing the gen-
eral program setup to solve a problem whose solution exists in the
literature [9]. In the "numerical results" section, we obtain a
number of solutions associated with a specific small-load-area
parameter fog different geometries of spherical caps in order to
verify the assumption of the highly localized maximum-stress
phenomenon. We then procede with two arbitrarily chosen
shell geometries to obtain the maximum stresses for different load
levels and load area parameters. The results are presented in
graphical form. A discussion and conclusion are presented in the
final section.
Governing equations
As mentioned in the l)receding section, the (axisymmetric)
nonlinear shallow spherical shell theory is utilized in this paper to
predict the behavior of a complete shell under local loading.
The geometry of the clamped spherical cap is shown in Fig. 1, in
which R denotes the radius of the base and H is the rise at the
center; P is the total load distributed over a circular area of
radius r0; ~ and g are displacement components along normal
and tangential directions, respectively.
The general two-dimensional governing differential equations
have been presented in reference [11]. In view of the axisym-
metric nature of the problem considered here , we need only
consider the situation along a generic radius (or spoke line) ; the
circumferential displacement components ~ vanish, as well as all
derivatives with respect to the circumferential coordinate 0 in
the general equations.
Hence, two equilibrium equations along tangential and normal
directions can be readily written as follows:
u' u X= w' w'w" 1 -- v w '= 0 (la)
u" q- x x= (1 q- v) ~ q- q- 2 x -
V4w-- 12V~w - - - -T/b
w -2t - v u' - - - -??7,
w 24 - 1 2- ~/)v2
-- -- u'+--- 2 w + w '2

I This work was supported in part by the Department of Navy __12 ( 1 - v) W. (U, - - xu q- 21 w ' 2 ) - - 4X4
rags(x) p = 0 (lb)
under IJrojeet THEMIS Grant 893, N000 14-68-A-0506.
2 l~esearch Assistant Professor, Department of Civil and Me-
chanical Engineering, The Catholic University of America, Wash- where u and w are dimensionless tangential and normal deflec-
ington, D. C. tions, respectively,
a Adjunct Professor of Mechanics, The Catholic University of
America; also, Director of Structural lVIechanics Program, Office
of Naval Research, Arlington, Virginia. V=() = (),, + ( 1 ) ( ) , , x 0 = r 0 / a
4 Numbers in brackets designate References at end of paper.
Manuscript received at SNAME Headquarters February 28,
1972. Revised manuscript received April 18, 1972. and

MARCH 1973 19

P /
/P=PR,E
IJ= ro/#-RS-
Fig. 1 G e o m e t r y and notation for c l a m p e d shallow spherical shell
1, Ixl < zo
s(z) =
O, I~1 > xo
Pertinent nondimensionalterms are given in equations (2) :
x = r/a m 4 = 12(1 - ,2)
R = a2/2H qcr = 4 E M / R 2m2
X2 = m~a:/Rh p = q/q~
u = a~/h ~ w = ~/h
( )' = (b/bx) ( ) q = - - P/Trro 2
U = ro/~/~t P* = PR/EM
where E is the elastic modulus, , is Poisson's ratio, and qcr is the
classical critical buckling pressure of a complete spherical shell.
Boundary conditions at the outer portion of the spherical cap
are assumed to be clamped. These are enumerated as follows:
u(1) = w(1) = w'(1) = 0. Due to symmetry at the apex, we
also have u(O) = w ' (O) = O.
Equations (1) are not only lengthy but also highly nonlinear in
w, the major variable; the solution to such a set of equations is
indeed a formidable task. The solution plan is to superpose a
finite-difference mesh on the one-dimensional shell domain,
replace nonlinear differential equations [equations (1) ] by a set of
two nonlinear algebraic finite-difference equations, and solve the
resulting set of equations by the nonlinear relaxation method.
Details of the nonlinear relaxation technique will not be dis-
cussed here. Descriptions of the techniques are given in refer-
ences [11] and [12].
Preliminary example
Before proceeding to the large computer production run, it is
felt advisable to solve a problem whose solution exists in the
literature; this test case is used to assess the validity of equations
utilized and the general computer program developed. The
check problem, so to speak, chosen here is a clamped spherical
cap with geometry parameter X = 5 under inward load P dis-
tribtited over a small area of radius r0 as shown in Fig. 1 (except
that the direction of load has been reversed).
In numerical computation, the shell domain (0 < x < 1) is
divided into 16 evenly meshed spacings with the first nodal
point occurring one-half mesh space from the center, and the
nonlinear relaxation technique is introduced to solve the resulting
algebraic equations.
Two different cases of load area are treated: one is with r o / a
= 1/8.25 and the other r o / a = 1/16.5. Solutions computed
20
1.8
1.6
1.4 /
/
1 II
1.2
~,=, /
~ LO / .i
~" r"
"o_ 0.8 -/~--~ Experimental w(0}, rola= I18, Ref. [9]
-.i Experimental w(0), rola = 116, Ref. [9]
---A Analytical W(ro), rola =118 Ref. [9]
o.e lF --i Analytical w(ro), rola=l/6~ Ref. [gJ
0.4 /~ ---m, Present result w(0), ro/a = I/8.25
Present result w(0), ro/a =1115.5
0.2/
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 L6 1.8
deflection, wo
Fig. 2. Comparison of load-deflection curves o b t a i n e d in the p a p e r
for a shallow spherical shell, X ---- 5, v = -} with the results o b t a i n e d in,
reference [9] (Fig. 7)
here are compared with results obtained in reference [9] and
reported in Fig. 2. In this figure the result of r o / a = 1/8.25 ob-
tained here is almost identical with the experimental data [9]
(with a slightly different value of r o / a = 1/8) up to Wo = 0.5.
(Deviation existing between these two results in the range of w0
greater than 0.5 is probably due to plastic effect.) However, it
differs somehow from the theoretical solution obtained in the
same reference. The comparison is thus generally regarded to
be very good.
As anticipated, for a given amount of total applied load, the
(2) maximum deflection (at the center) for the case of r o / a = 1/16.5
is higher than that of r o / a = 1/8.25 (see Fig. 2) since the loading
intensity in the former is foul' times as much as that in the latter.
Both theoretical and experimental results (Wo values associated
with a given P) of r o / a = 1/64 reported in reference [9] (see
Fig. 2) are also higher than those of r o / a = 1/8.25 and 1/16.5.
Numerical results
To begin with, an assessment is necessary of the basic assump-
tion of the highly localized maximum-stress phenomenon in a
spherical shell under local load; viz., the maximum stresses ob-
tained from the shallow-shell theory must be quite independent
of the cap sizes chosen.
Before attempting to verify this assumption, let us first briefly
discuss all important geometric parameters introduced in this
problem so that a better understanding of the feature problem
may be possible. This problem as shown in the inset of Fig. 3 is
described by the following parameters: the radius of shell R,
the thickness h, the applied load P (or P * = P R / E M ) , and the
radius of the loaded area r0 (or U = ro/~v/~).
The question of greatest interest is what is the maximum stress
.... (or ~'ma.~ = ~ . . . . h / P ) in the spherical shell under these
conditions. An approach to this question is assisted by employ-
ing a simplified model (a spherical cap which is characterized
by k = m a / ~ / ~ , where a is the radius of the cap base and m is
function of Poisson's ratio as defined in the "governing equa-
tions" section) for the full shell, and then solving the spherical
cap equations [equations (1)].
Clearly, k (or a) values of the spherical cap are arbitrarily
chosen, and for results obtained from the shallow-shell theory
to be valid or useful, solutions must be quite independent of k
values chosen, or the deviations of the maximum stresses ob-
tained among different k values should at least be negligible.
To this end, four different Xvalues of 6, 6.75, 7.45, and 14.82 are
chosen for convenience. A U value equal to 0.22 is selected and
a series of solutions corresponding to different P* values (0.1
JOURNAL OF SHIP RESEARCH
 30 4.0

28 -- !-- / 3.0
26 '~ 2.0

\\

1.0
~ , ~ , ~ present solution
~,= --- Result obtained
in Ref. [5]
18 U=I Yg]~ 0.5
II / / - .8 Wmax =. I

,,
w =#1 / ~x'~."x~."'~. /Result obtained by

::
max . ,,near t , e o r , , , ,

w < w
max
=.6 j ~ . ~ " ~. Ref. E6]
"~.....
"max -" ~ Wmax = ~ . ~ . ~ .
, / /// .Zu=,.0_ m"

/ .--~'u = :6-- Wmax= 1.0~ ~

0.o~

o
.2 .4 .6 .8 1.0 1,2
Maximumdeflection.Wma~
Fig. 3 Load-deflection c u r v e s for a s p h e r i c a l shell 0.01 , i I i i , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 I0 12 1.4 1o6 1o8 20 2.2
U = ro/RJVh-
Fig. 4 Maximum stress v e r s u s l o a d e d a r e a p a r a m e t e r for d i f f e r e n t
_< p* _< 5) is obtained for each of these X values. The results so deflection Ievels
obtained indicate that the differences of the maxinmm stresses
among these X values are of the order of less than 2 percent while
the differences of the maximum deflections are less than 8 per-
cent. In addition, these results also show that deflection fields adopted in practical design. For example, if a U value of 0.5 is
die out quite rapidly from the center so that the boundary condi- selected, the maximum stress (a' ..... ) obtained here associated
tions introduced in the spherical cap have only minor effect. with a deflection level of w0 = 0.6 is only 74 percent of the value
With these preliminary test results at hand, we can proceed to obtained via linear theory in reference [6].
use one or two arbitrary X values to obtain the maximum stresses It is hoped that results presented in these two figures might
for different local levels (different P*) distributed over various serve as general guidelines in practical design. For example,
areas (different, U). However, it should be noted that the loaded considering a shell (R and h are given) under load P acting over
area must be kept relatively smaller than the spherical cap so that area of radius r0, one can always determine the corresponding
the edge effects introduced by using spherical cap theory could be maximum deflection from Fig. 3. With this information avail-
neglected. able, the maximum stress can be readily determined from Fig. 4.
Two cases of X values of 7.45 and 14.82 are examined. Again, On the other hand, if the design is required to estimate the shell
differences in the solutions between these two X values are about thickness, a trial-and-error process may be involved because of
of the order of errors as mentioned earlier; therefore, only the the shell thickness presented with different order in different scale
results of X = 7.45 are reported and presented in Figs. 3 and 4. parameters.
In Fig. 3, the curves of the external loadings versus the maxi-
mum deflections are plotted for different loading areas of U Discussion and conclusions
ranging from.0.2 to 2.2 (this is the range of practical interest); h/[arguerre equations governing the axisymmetric response of
the maximum deflection is up to an order of one shell thickness. shallow spherical shells are utilized to estimate the local stresses
From this figure it is demonstrated again that for a given magni- in a spherical shell under external loading. Numerical solutions
tude of externaI load the corresponding maximum deflection is are obtained using a nonlinear relaxation technique to solve the
higher when the load is distributed in a smaller area. finite-difference equivalents of shell equations. The present
Figure 4 exhibits the curves of the maximum stresses versus solution in the small-deflection range appears to be in good agree-
loaded-area parameters in a semilogarithmic scale for different ment with the result obtained in reference [6] (see Fig. 4).
levels of the maximum deflections. Displayed in the same figure In order to assess the validity of the general computer program
is the result obtained by Wichman et al. [6], which actually is a developed, a particular geometry of spherical cap under local
summarized result based on Bijlaard's work of the linear shallow- loading is examined. Solutions obtained herein compare very
shell theory. A good correlation is observed between their result favorably with results in the literature [9].
and that of Wma~ = 0.1 obtained here for U values of between 0.2 For the purpose of demonstrating the highly localized phenom-
and 1. enon of the maximum stress in the spherical shell under local
From Fig. 4 it is apparent that for higher load or deflection loading, a shell is chosen such that R, h, and ro are fixed (say U
levels the ratios of the maximum stresses (a .... ) to loads (P) tend = r o / ~ v / ~ = 0.22) and from which, four different sizes of small
to be smaller; this suggests that in cases of higher load levels the portion (spherical cap) are selected. In each cap geometry, solu-
linear (or small deflection) theory will be too conservative to be tions are obtained (with U = 0.22) for different values of P*

M A R C H 1973 21
 (up to 5) ; the deviations among them are of the order of less than
2 percent. This indicates that the maximum stress in the spheri-
cal shell due to local load can be quite accurately estimated from
shallow-shell theory if the load is confined to a relatively small
area.
Solutions are then obtained for )~ = 7.45 and 14.82 for different
loaded area parameters and load levels; again, differences be-
tween these two solutions are negligible. Results presented in
Fig. 3 are the local loads versus the maximum deflections for the
different load area parameters U ranging from 0.2 to 2.2; results
displayed in Fig. 4 are the maximum stresses versus load area
parameters for different levels of the maximum deflections Wm~
with values ranging from 0.1 to 1.
It is hoped that results presented in Figs. 3 and 4 can readily be
used in practical design. For example, if the shell geometry
(R and h) and loading conditions (P and r0) are given, then the
corresponding maximum deflection can be determined from Fig.
3. With this information at hand, the associated maximum
stress can be readily obtained from Fig. 4. However, if the shell
thickness is desired in the design, then the solution will require a
short effort of trial and error.
Again it should be emphasized that for smaller U values (smaller
loaded area) the results obtained from shallow-shell theory
could provide a good approximation to the maximum stresses in
a spherical shell under local loading, since edge effects of spherical
caps would become negligible, and the response of the full shell is
indeed a highly localized phenomenon. In fact, most cable sys-
tems in the area of current interest possess small U values, be-
cause the size of the cable is relatively much smaller than that of
spherical structure.
For the sake of completeness, it may be advisable to discuss
briefly the limitations regarding key parameters involved in the
computation. A shell is called "shallow" if the ratio of its rise
at the center to the base diameter is less than, say 1/8; useful
values for the shallow-cap geometry parameter, X, associated
with this limitation are in the range of 4 to 15. In addition,
the assumption of the localized nature of the maximum stress
field obtained by utilizing shallow-cap theory will be valid if the
load radius, r0, is significantly less than that the cap, a; a realistic
ratio between these two quantities is suggested as ro/a <_ 0.5.
Of course, the smaller the value of ro/a, the better the expected
accuracy of the maximum stress. In accordance with the fore-
:)2
going discussion, an important relation between loading area and
cap geometry parameter, U and X, may be taken as U/X < 0.27.
For a more accurate analysis, a complete shell theory is de-
sirable, but much difficulty in the mathematical aspects will be
encountered.
The effect of the highly localized maximum stress may be
minimized by providing a reinforcing pad in the spherical vessel
or by increasing the contact area between the cable and sphere.
References
1 Laura P. A. and Casare]la, M J., "A Survey of Publications
on Mechanical Cables and Cable S:stems, Rept. 68-1, Institute of
Ocean Science and Engineering, The Catholic University of America,
Washington, D. C.
2 Casarella, M. J. and Parsons, M., "A Survey of Investiga-
tions on the Configuration and Motion of Cable Systems under
Hydrodynamic Loading," Marine Technology, Vol. 4, No. 3, July
1970.
3 Bijlaard, P. P., "Computation of the Stresses from Local
Loading in Spherical Pressure Vessels on Pressure Vessel Heads,"
Welding Research Council Bulletin No. 34, March 1957
4: Bijlaard, P. P., "Stresses in a Spherical Vessel from Radial
Load Acting on a Pipe," Welding Research Council Bulletin No. 49,
1-30, April 1959
5 Bijlaard, P. P., "Influence of a Reinforcing Pad on ~he Stresses
in a Spherical Vessel Under :Local Loading," Welding Research
Council Bulletin No. 49, 63-73, April 1959.
6 Wiehman, K. R., Hopper, A. G., and Mershon, J. L., "Local
Stresses in Spherical and Cylindrical Shells Due to External Load-
ings," Welding Research Council Bulletin, No. 107, Aug. 1965.
7 Reissner, E., "Stress attd Small Displacements of Shallow
Spherical Shells," J. Math. Phys., Vol. 25, 1946, pp. 80-85 and pp.
279-300.
8 Ashwell,D. G., "On the Large Deflection of a Spherical Shell
with an Inward Point Load," Proc., I.U.T.S.M. Syrup. on the Theory
of Thin Elastic Shells, Delft, August, 1959; North Holland Publi-
cation, Amsterdam, 1960, pp. 43-63.
9 Penning, F. A. and Thurston, G.A., The ~tabfllty of Shal-
low Spherical Shells Under Concentrated Load," NASA CR-265,
1965
10 Fitch, J. R. and Budianskv, B., "The Buckling and Post-
Buckling Behavior of Spherical Caps Under Axisymmetric Load,"
AIAA Jourt+al, Vol. 8, No. 4, April 1970, pp. 686-693.
11 Perrone, N. and Kao, ~., Large Deflection Response and
Buckling of Partially and Fulty Loaded Spherical Caps," A I A A
Journal, Ve]. 8, No. 2, Dec. 1970.
12 Perrone, N. and Kao, R., "A General Nonlinear Relaxation
Technique for Solving Nonlinear Problem in Mechanics," Journal
of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 38, No. 2, June 1971, pp. 371-376.
JOURNAL OF SHIP RESEARCH