Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

www.elsevier.com/locate/tws

Buckling strength of the cylindrical shell and

tank subjected to axially compressive loads
Seung-Eock Kim *, Chang-Sung Kim
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Construction Tech. Research Institute, Sejong
University, 98 Kunja-dong, Kwangjin-ku, Seoul 143-747, South Korea
Received 7 June 2001; received in revised form 23 October 2001; accepted 23 October 2001

Abstract
This paper aims to develop practical design equations and charts estimating the buckling
strength of the cylindrical shell and tank subjected to axially compressive loads. Both geometrically perfect and imperfect shells and tanks are studied. Numerical analysis is used to evaluate
buckling strength. The modeling method, appropriate element type and necessary number of
elements to use in numerical analysis are recommended. According to the results of the parametric study of the perfect shell, the buckling strength decreases significantly as the diameterto-thickness ratio increases, while it decreases slightly as the height-to-diameter ratio increases.
These results are different from those in the case of columns. The buckling strength of the
perfect tank placed on an extremely soft foundation and a stiff foundation increases by up to
1.6% and 5.6%, respectively, compared with that of the perfect shell. The buckling strength
of the shell and tank decreases significantly as the amplitude of initial geometric imperfection
increases. Convenient and sufficiently accurate design equations and charts used for estimating
buckling strength are provided. 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Cylindrical shell; Tank; Buckling strength; Initial geometric imperfection; Design equation
and chart

1. Introduction
Cylindrical shells and tanks with very thin walls are susceptible to buckling when
they are subjected to axially compressive loads. Analytical and experimental research
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: sekim@sejong.ac.kr (S.-E. Kim).
0263-8231/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 2 6 3 - 8 2 3 1 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 0 6 6 - 0

330

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

on the buckling of cylindrical shell structures has been performed mainly in the field
of mechanics and aeronautics. Goto and Shang [1] studied cylindrical shells with
thickness-to-diameter ratio of less than 350 and height-to-diameter ratio greater than
3. Their study was limited to relatively thick perfect shells that failed by plastic
buckling. Mandra and Mazzolani [2] researched cylindrical shells with diameter-tothickness ratio less than 400 subjected to axial compression. They found that the
thin cylindrical shells were very sensitive to initial geometric imperfections. Kim
and Kardomateas [3] analyzed an orthotropic shell. Chryssanthopulos et al. [4] studied stiffened cylinders. Soldatos [5] researched shells with non-circular cross-section.
Donell and Wan [6], Miller [7] and Singer [8] performed experimental studies for
relatively thick cylindrical shells with diameter-to-thickness ratio of less than 400.
Their test results showed the cylindrical shells buckle locally where initial geometric
imperfections are large.
Melerski [9] performed linear elastic analysis of cylindrical tanks. Peek [10] analyzed unanchored liquid storage tanks under lateral loads. Lau and Zeng [11]
presented a simplified mathematical model for modeling the flexible bottom plate in
an unanchored cylindrical tank. Malhotra [12] carried out uplifting analysis of cylindrical tanks. Peek and El-Bkaily [13] studied postbuckling behavior of unanchored
steel tanks under lateral loads. Nam and Lee [14] studied the unsymmetrically loaded
cylindrical tank on an elastic foundation.
The aim of this paper is to investigate the buckling strength of the cylindrical
shell and tank with diameter-to-thickness ratio of greater than 800, which are, in
general, used for large-scale storage of liquid. Generally, buckling analysis may be
divided into bifurcation and loaddeflection analysis. Bifurcation analysis is used for
perfect systems, while loaddeflection analysis is used for imperfect systems. This
paper presents the buckling strength of the geometrically perfect cylindrical shell
and tank with a wide range of height-to-diameter and diameter-to-thickness ratios.
The geometrically imperfect cylindrical shell and tank are also studied. Practical
design equations and charts estimating buckling strength of the cylindrical shells and
tanks are proposed.

2. Geometrically perfect cylindrical shell

In this section, the buckling strength of the geometrically perfect cylindrical shell
is presented. The analytical solution of the shell is widely known and briefly introduced herein. Numerical analysis is also performed. An appropriate element type
and the necessary number of elements to be used in numerical analysis are recommended by comparing analytical and numerical results.
2.1. Analytical solution
If a cylindrical shell simply supported at the ends is uniformly compressed in the
axial direction as shown in Fig. 1, the general solution for very small displacements
can be given in the following form [15,16]:

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

331

Fig. 1. Cylindrical shell subjected to axial load.

u A sin nq cos

mpx
,
H

(1)

v B sin nq cos

mp
H

(2)

mp
,
H

(3)

and
w C sin nq cos

where A, B and C are constants; H is the height of the cylindrical shell; and n and m
are the buckling number of circumferential and longitudinal half-waves, respectively.
When the simply supported conditions of w 0 and d2w / dx2 0 are used at the
ends, the critical stress is obtained as
scr

Nx R E

,
t
S (1n2)

(4)

where
R (1n2)l4 a(n2 l2)4(2 n)(3n)l4n2 2l4(1n2)l2n4(7
n) l2n2(3 n) n42n6,

S l2 (n2 l2)2

2
1n 2
2n2l2
l2
n [1 a(n2 l2)2]
1n
2
1n

332

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

2a 2 1n 2 2
n [n (1n)l2 ,
l
1n
2

t2
,
12R2

mRp
,
H

Nx is the axial force, E is Youngs modulus, n is Poissons ratio, t is the thickness

of the shell, and R is the radius of the shell. Theoretically, the critical stress of Eq.
(4) has an infinite number of solutions as the values of m and n vary. The minimum
critical stress among these is determined as the buckling stress. One difficulty in
using Eq. (4) is that the m and n values leading to the buckling stress are unknown
until a large number of critical stresses are calculated and compared. As a result,
the equation essentially requires a lot of calculations of critical stresses depending
on the values of m and n in order to get the lowest critical stress, i.e. buckling stress.
Assuming that many buckling waves (m) form along the length of the cylinder,
the value of l2 becomes large. Then, Eq. (4) can be simplified in the following form:
scr

Nx 1n2 (n2 l2)2

(1n2)l2

.
t
E
l2
(n2 l2)2

(5)

When the value of n in Eq. (5) is equal to zero, axisymmetric buckling occurs, and
Eq. (5) is simplified as
scr

Nx
E H2
m2p 2

,
D
t
tH2
R2Dm2p2

(6)

where D Et3 / [12(1n2)] is the flexural rigidity. Since scr is a continuous function
of mp/H, the minimum value of Eq. (6) can be written in the following form:
scr

Et

R3(1n2)

(7)

Analytical solutions given by Eqs. (4)(7) will be used for the benchmark values
in selecting an appropriate numerical model in Section 2.2.
2.2. Numerical analysis
Herein, an appropriate numerical model including the element type and necessary
number of elements in numerical analysis is presented. A parametric study is performed over a wide range for the cylindrical shell. An accurate design equation estimating the buckling strength is proposed.

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

333

2.2.1. Analysis method

Buckling analysis, in general, may be divided into bifurcation and loaddeflection
analysis as shown in Fig. 2. Bifurcation buckling occurs when a maximum axial
compressive stress becomes equal to the buckling stress. The bifurcation analysis
was carried out using ABAQUS, a commercial finite element analysis program
[17,18]. The equation of bifurcation analysis is expressed in the following form:
([K] l[S]){y} 0,

(8)

where [K] is the stiffness matrix of the system, [S] is the stress stiffness matrix, l
is an eigenvalue determining buckling load (or load factor), and {y} is an inherent
vector determining buckling mode. If the load applied to the structure is QN, the
critical buckling load is lQN. This bifurcation analysis can capture both the buckling
stress and the failure mode of structures.
2.2.2. Selection of analysis model
The dimensions of the cylindrical shell used were diameter of 20 m, height of 40
m and thickness of 0.025 m. The resulting diameter-to-thickness and height-to-diameter ratios are 800 and 2, respectively. Material properties were E
2 1011 N / m2, n 0.3 and sy 3.2 108 N / m2. When a full model was used,
ABAQUS did not predict the buckling mode and buckling strength accurately. Thus
a half-model in height was used in this study (Fig. 3). The simply supported and
the symmetric boundary conditions were used for the bottom and top, respectively.
In the following, an appropriate analytical model was selected by comparing the
analytical with the numerical results.
2.2.2.1. Element type Three-dimensional shell elements offered in ABAQUS can
be divided into four-node (S4R, S4R5) and eight-node (S8R, S8R5) shell elements
in view of the number of nodes per element, and five- (S4R5, S8R5) and six-degrees-

Fig. 2.

Buckling analyses.

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

36,17 mm

334

Fig. 3.

Modeling of cylindrical shell: (a) full model; (b) half-model.

of-freedom (dof) (S4R, S8R) shell elements in view of the number of degrees of
freedom per element. The 5-dof shell element has three displacement and two
rotational components. The 6-dof shell element has three displacement and three
rotational components. The critical stresses obtained by numerical analyses using
these element types (Fig. 4) were compared with the theoretical stresses calculated
by Eq. (4). When element type S8R was used, the error in the buckling stress was
less than 1.4%. When elements S4R and S4R5 were used, the buckling stresses were
overestimated by up to 15% even though a sufficient number of elements was used.
Thus element type S8R was selected in numerical analysis.
2.2.2.2. Number of element Buckling strength was obtained using different numbers of elements in both circumferential and axial directions. Analysis results were
compared with the theoretical ones given by Eq. (4) (Fig. 5). When the number of
elements in the circumferential direction increased from 12 to 32, the maximum error
reduced from 6.5% to 0.8%. It was preferable to keep the number of elements to
more than 20 in order to obtain accurate buckling strength.
Buckling stress was less sensitive to the number of elements in the axial direction
than to the number in the circumferential direction. When the number of elements
in the axial direction increased from 10 to 40, the maximum error reduced from
0.8% to 0.4%. When 32 elements in the circumferential direction and 40 elements
in the axial direction were used, the buckling strength estimated was very accurate,
within an error of 0.4%.

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

Fig. 4.

Critical stresses associated with mode shape corresponding to element type.

Fig. 5.

Buckling stresses associated with different numbers of elements.

335

336

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

2.2.2.3. Buckling mode

The first, second and third mode shapes obtained by
numerical analysis are shown in Figs. 68, respectively. The first mode occurs in
m 1 and n 5, the second mode occurs in m 3 and n 9, and the third mode
occurs in m 5 and n 11. An axially symmetric buckling mode, one of higherorder modes, is shown in Fig. 9. This buckling mode occurs in m 10 in the axial
direction and n 0 in the circumferential direction. The buckling modes show good
agreement with the theoretical ones.
2.2.3. Parametric study
Buckling stresses were evaluated for cylindrical shells with diameter-to-thickness
ratio ranging from 800 to 2000 and height-to-diameter ratio from 0.5 to 3. Material
properties used were the same as before. The buckling stresses corresponding to the
various diameter-to-thickness and height-to-diameter ratios are presented as the ratio
of buckling stress to elastic modulus in Table 1. The axisymmetric buckling mode
(i.e. n 0, m ) occurred in the italicized area in Table 1. Their buckling stresses
were almost the same as the theoretical ones calculated by Eq. (7). The m and n
type buckling mode occurred in the non-italicized area in Table 1 and their buckling
stresses are very close to theoretical ones obtained by Eq. (4). Figs. 10 and 11 show
the buckling stresses with respect to the various diameter-to-thickness and heightto-diameter ratios. The buckling stress decreases significantly as the diameter-to-

Fig. 6.

First mode shape of cylindrical shell (m 1, n 5).

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

Fig. 7.

337

Second mode shape of cylindrical shell (m 3, n 9).

thickness ratio increases (Fig. 10), while the buckling stress decreases slightly as the
height-to-diameter ratio increases (Fig. 11). These trends are different from those in
the case of columns. This is because buckling of a cylindrical shell is governed by
not only the axial buckling mode (m) but also the circumferential buckling mode
(n). The number of half-waves in the circumferential direction (n) decreases as the
height-to-diameter ratio increases.
2.2.4. Design equation
A design equation estimating the buckling strength of geometrically perfect cylindrical shells was developed by using regression analysis on the results in Table 1.
The following design equation predicts buckling strength accurately with approximately 1% errors:

H
scr
1.19
E
D

0.0256

t
.
D

(9)

3. Geometrically perfect cylindrical tank

The cylindrical tank, i.e. the cylindrical shell with a bottom plate, was studied.
Since a theoretical solution could not be obtained due to its complexity, numerical

338

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

Fig. 8. Third mode shape of cylindrical shell (m 5, n 11).

Fig. 9.

Axisymmetric buckling mode shape.

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

339

Table 1
Buckling stresses of perfect cylindrical shell (scr 103 / E)
D/t

H/D
0.5

800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000

Numerical
analysis

Eq. (9)

Numerical
analysis

Eq. (9)

Numerical
analysis

Eq. (9)

Numerical
analysis

Eq. (9)

1.5013
1.3586
1.2111
1.1021
1.0170
0.9365
0.8654
0.8075
0.7610
0.7200
0.6819
0.6355
0.6054

1.5141
1.3459
1.2113
1.1012
1.0094
0.9318
0.8652
0.8075
0.7571
0.7125
0.6729
0.6375
0.6056

1.4920
1.3240
1.1875
1.0706
0.9885
0.9230
0.8152
0.7955
0.7421
0.6965
0.6570
0.6250
0.6000

1.4875
1.3222
1.1900
1.0818
0.9916
0.9154
0.8500
0.7933
0.7438
0.7000
0.6611
0.6263
0.5950

1.4421
1.3195
1.1755
1.0541
0.9581
0.8814
0.8221
0.7730
0.7334
0.6950
0.6574
0.6250
0.5901

1.4613
1.3000
1.1691
1.0628
0.9742
0.8993
0.8351
0.7794
0.7307
0.6877
0.6495
0.6153
0.5845

1.4330
1.2960
1.1689
1.0390
0.9450
0.8650
0.8035
0.7525
0.7120
0.6827
0.6490
0.6248
0.5899

1.4462
1.2855
1.1570
1.0480
0.9642
0.8889
0.8264
0.7713
0.7231
0.6806
0.6427
0.6089
0.5785

Fig. 10. Buckling stresses for various thickness and shape ratios.

340

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

Fig. 11. Buckling stress for various shape and thickness ratios.

analysis was used. The numerical model was the same as that in the case of the
geometrically perfect shell, except that the bottom plate was also being modeled. A
half-model consisting of element type S8R was used. The numbers of elements used
were 32 in the circumferential and 40 in the axial direction. The material properties
used were the same as those previously. The effect of the soft and the stiff foundation
shown in Figs. 12 and 13 was studied.

Fig. 12.

Tank on soft foundation.

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

341

Fig. 13. Tank on stiff foundation.

3.1. Soft foundation

The extremely soft foundation was assumed to get a lower-bound buckling strength
of the cylindrical tank. The ideal boundary condition was modeled by simple supports
at the nodal points on the circumferential edges of the tank bottom. Parametric studies
were performed for tanks with diameter-to-thickness ratio ranging from 800 to 2000
and height-to-diameter ratio ranging from 0.5 to 3. Identical thicknesses of the wall
(tw) and bottom plate (tb) were used. The buckling stresses are listed in Table 2.
The buckling strength of the perfect cylindrical tank on the soft foundation
increased by up to 1.6% compared with the cylindrical shell. Thus, the same design
equation [Eq. (9)] can be used in estimating the buckling strength of the geometrically perfect tank placed on a soft foundation.
3.2. Stiff foundation
The extremely stiff foundation was assumed to get an upper-bound buckling
strength. The ideal boundary condition was modeled by simple supports at the nodal
Table 2
Buckling stresses of perfect cylindrical tank on soft foundation (scr 103 /E)
D/t

800
1100
1400
1700
2000

H/D
0.5

1.5192
1.1022
0.8659
0.7203
0.6061

1.5155
1.0958
0.8648
0.7134
0.6031

1.4551
1.0702
0.8353
0.7025
0.6005

1.4351
1.0456
0.8046
0.6898
0.5905

342

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

points on the circumferential edges as well as on the bottom plate. The ranges of the
diameter-to-thickness and height-to-diameter ratios studied were the same as before.
Identical thicknesses of the wall (tw) and bottom plate (tb) were used. The calculated
buckling stresses are listed in Table 3. The buckling strength of the perfect tank
placed on the stiff foundation increased by a maximum of 5.6% compared with that
on the soft foundation.
A design equation for estimating buckling strength of the geometrically perfect
cylindrical tank was developed by using regression analysis on the results listed in
Table 3. The following design equation predicts the buckling strength with sufficient
accuracy within approximately 1% error:

H
scr
1.28
E
D

0.0256

t
.
D

(10)

4. Geometrically imperfect cylindrical shell

This section examines the buckling stress of the geometrically imperfect cylindrical shell. The loaddefection analysis was used.
4.1. Analysis method
The loaddeflection analysis method accounts for initial geometric imperfections,
which could be determined by a linear superposition of buckling eigenmodes. The
initial geometric imperfection is expressed in the following form:

xi

wii,

(11)

i0

where i is the ith mode shape and wi is the associated scale factor.
Non-linear static analysis, including both material and geometric non-linearity,

Table 3
Buckling stresses of perfect cylindrical tank on stiff foundation (scr 103 / E)
D/t

800
1100
1400
1700
2000

H/D
0.5

1.5353
1.1133
0.8737
0.7243
0.6107

1.5192
1.1042
0.8676
0.7151
0.6078

1.5135
1.1010
0.8650
0.7132
0.6060

1.5130
1.0905
0.8340
0.7007
0.6056

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

343

was used to obtain the ultimate load capacity. The NewtonRaphson solution technique and default convergence tolerances were used for non-linear analyses.
4.2. Analysis model
The numerical model is the same as that in the case of the geometrically perfect
shell. The half-model with element type S8R was used. Simply supported and symmetric boundary conditions were used for the bottom and the top, respectively. The
numbers of elements used were 32 in the circumferential and 40 in the axial direction.
The material properties were the same as those used previously. The parametric
studies were performed for diameter-to-thickness ratios of 800, 1400 and 2000 and
for height-to-diameter ratio from 0.5 to 3. The first buckling mode shape obtained
by eigenvalue analysis was used as the initially imperfect shape of the shell. The
ratio of the magnitude of initial imperfection to wall thickness (d0 / t) varied from 0
to 3.
4.3. Analysis results
Cylindrical shell structures, in general, are very sensitive to the amplitude of the
initial geometric imperfection. The buckling stresses associated with the different
diameter-to-thickness and heightdiameter ratios, and the magnitudes of initial
imperfection, are presented as the ratio of buckling stress to elastic modulus in Table
4 and Figs. 1417. It was observed that the cylindrical shells with the axisymmetric
buckling mode were much more sensitive to initial imperfection than those with the
non-axisymmetric buckling mode. The buckling strength of a geometrically imperfect
cylindrical shell can be estimated by linear interpolation using the data in Table 4
and Figs. 1417.

5. Geometrically imperfect cylindrical tank

This section examines the buckling stress of the geometrically imperfect cylindrical tank. The loaddeflection analysis was used. The initial geometric imperfections
could be determined by a linear superposition of buckling eigenmodes. The numerical model was the same as in the case of the geometrically perfect tank, except for
the geometric imperfections being modeled. Parametric studies were performed for
tanks with diameter-to-thickness ratios of 800, 1400 and 2000 and height-to-diameter
ratio ranging from 0.5 to 3. The first buckling mode shape obtained by eigenvalue
analysis was used as the initially imperfect shape of the tank. The ratios of the
magnitude of initial imperfection to wall thickness (d0 / t) varied from 0 to 3.
5.1. Soft foundation
The buckling stresses of the geometrically imperfect cylindrical tank placed on
the soft foundation are presented with respect to the imperfection ratio (d0 / t) in Table

344

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

Table 4
Buckling stresses of geometrically imperfect shell (scr 103 / E)
H/D

0.5

1.0

2.0

3.0

d0/t

0.0
0.1
0.3
1.0
2.0
3.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
1.0
2.0
3.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0

D/t
800

1400

2000

1.5013
0.9223
0.6145
0.3446
0.2803
0.2564
1.4912
1.9000
0.8270
0.5266
0.4127
0.3343
1.4421
1.0395
0.8530
0.7252
1.4330
1.1108
0.9631
0.8458

0.8654
0.6029
0.4673
0.2461
0.2127
0.2015
0.8152
0.5405
0.4349
0.2436
0.1985
0.1785
0.8221
0.6233
0.5315
0.4584
0.8035
0.5386
0.4490
0.4012

0.6054
0.4584
0.3489
0.1858
0.1508
0.1377
0.6040
0.3923
0.3061
0.1658
0.1387
0.1235
0.5901
0.3384
0.2824
0.2535
0.5899
0.2905
0.2140
0.1913

5 and Figs. 1821. It was observed that the tanks with the axisymmetric buckling
mode were more sensitive to initial imperfection than those with the non-axisymmetric buckling mode. The buckling strength of a geometrically imperfect tank
placed on a soft foundation can be estimated by linear interpolation using the data
in Table 5 and Figs. 1821.
5.2. Stiff foundation
The buckling stresses of the imperfect tank placed on the stiff foundation are
presented with respect to the imperfection ratio (d0 / t) in Table 6 and Figs. 2225.
The buckling strength of a geometrically imperfect cylindrical tank placed on a stiff
foundation can be estimated by linear interpolation using the data in Table 6 and
Figs. 2225.

6. Conclusions
This paper studied the buckling strength of the cylindrical shell and tank subjected
to axially compressive loads. The conclusions are as follows.

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

Fig. 14. Buckling stresses of imperfect shell (H / D 0.5).

Fig. 15. Buckling stresses of imperfect shell (H / D 1.0).

345

346

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

Fig. 16. Buckling stresses of imperfect shell (H / D 2.0).

Fig. 17. Buckling stresses of imperfect shell (H / D 3.0).

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

347

Table 5
Buckling stresses of geometrically imperfect tank on soft foundation (scr 103 / E)
H/D

0.5

1.0

2.0

3.0

d0/t

0.0
0.1
0.3
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0

D/t
800

1400

2000

1.5126
0.9938
0.6461
0.4933
0.3816
0.3517
0.3333
0.3176
0.3098
1.4912
0.9282
0.5747
0.4576
0.3645
0.3421
0.3261
0.3125
0.3018
1.4568
1.2880
1.1200
1.0030
0.8848
0.7728
0.6995
1.4330
1.2224
1.1002
1.0237
0.9502
0.9024
0.8518

0.8664
0.6384
0.4560
0.3673
0.2800
0.2584
0.2498
0.7408
0.2362
0.8578
0.5686
0.4021
0.3170
0.2626
0.2299
0.2186
0.2058
0.1997
0.8369
0.7328
0.6480
0.5701
0.5024
0.4381
0.3888
0.8035
0.7060
0.6506
0.5811
0.5526
0.5347
0.5150

0.6059
0.4058
0.3438
0.2880
0.2219
0.2001
0.1836
0.1757
0.1644
0.6040
0.4029
0.3014
0.2427
0.2001
0.1816
0.1677
0.1549
0.1499
0.5920
0.5064
0.4477
0.3849
0.3331
0.2917
0.2757
0.5899
0.4610
0.3818
0.3272
0.2792
0.2467
0.285

1. When elements S4R and S4R5 are used, the buckling stresses are overestimated
even though a sufficient number of elements is used. When element type S8R is
used, the buckling stresses are very close to those calculated from the analytical
equation within an error of 1.4%.
2. When a full model is used, ABAQUS does not predict buckling mode and buckling strength accurately. When a half-model in height with symmetric boundary
condition is used, ABAQUS can predict accurate buckling mode and strength.
3. The axisymmetric buckling mode (n 0, m ) occurs when the height-todiameter ratio is less than 0.5 and the diameter-to-thickness ratio is greater than

348

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

Fig. 18.

Buckling stresses of imperfect tank on soft foundation (H /D 0.5).

Fig. 19.

Buckling stresses of imperfect tank on soft foundation (H /D 1.0).

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

Fig. 20.

Buckling stresses of imperfect tank on soft foundation (H /D 2.0).

Fig. 21.

Buckling stresses of imperfect tank on soft foundation (H /D 3.0).

349

350

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

Table 6
Buckling stresses of geometrically imperfect tank on stiff foundation (scr 103 / E)
H/D

0.5

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.

5.

6.

7.
8.
9.

d0/t

0.0
0.1
0.3
1.0
2.0
3.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
1.0
2.0
3.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
1.0
2.0
3.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0

D/t
800

1400

2000

1.5353
1.0701
0.7928
0.5034
0.4413
0.3952
1.5192
1.0191
0.7225
0.4501
0.4106
0.3873
1.5135
0.9208
0.6359
0.4698
0.3893
0.3495
1.5130
0.6522
0.5207
0.4902

0.8737
0.7028
0.5626
0.3824
0.3224
0.2875
0.8676
0.5494
0.4655
0.3042
0.2732
0.2536
0.8650
0.6011
0.4602
0.2836
0.2604
0.2265
0.8340
0.6528
0.5743
0.5084

0.6107
0.5248
0.3853
0.2884
0.2426
0.2045
0.6078
0.4127
0.3159
0.2208
0.1992
0.1782
0.6060
0.4433
0.3312
0.1944
0.1783
0.1576
0.6056
0.2018
0.1564
0.1233

900. The buckling stress of these shells can be calculated by Eq. (7). The other
shells can be calculated by Eq. (4).
The buckling stresses decrease significantly as the diameter-to-thickness ratio
increases, while they decrease slightly as the height-to-diameter ratio increases.
These trends are different from those of columns.
The buckling strength of the perfect tank placed on an extremely soft foundation
and a stiff foundation increases by up to 1.6% and 5.6%, respectively, compared
with that of the perfect shell.
Buckling strength decreases significantly as the amplitude of initial geometric
imperfection increases. The cylindrical shells and tanks with the axisymmetric
buckling mode are more sensitive to initial imperfection than those with the nonaxisymmetric buckling mode.
Convenient and sufficiently accurate design equations to use in estimating buckling strength of the perfect shell and tank are developed.
The buckling strength of the geometrically imperfect shell and tank can be estimated by linear interpolation using data in Tables 46 and Figs. 1425.
The lower- and upper-bound buckling strength of the tank, corresponding to
extremely soft and stiff foundations, is also provided.

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

Fig. 22.

Buckling stresses of imperfect tank on stiff foundation (H / D 0.5).

Fig. 23.

Buckling stresses of imperfect tank on stiff foundation (H / D 1.0).

351

352

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

Fig. 24.

Buckling stresses of imperfect tank on stiff foundation (H / D 2.0).

Fig. 25.

Buckling stresses of imperfect tank on stiff foundation (H / D 3.0).

S.-E. Kim, C.-S. Kim / Thin-Walled Structures 40 (2002) 329353

353

Acknowledgements
This work was supported by grant no. 1999-1-311-001-3 from the Interdisciplinary
Research Program of the KOSEF in Korea.

References
[1] Goto Y, Shang C. Plastic buckling transition modes in moderately thick cylindrical shells. J Eng
Mech 1999;125(4):42634.
[2] Mandara A, Mazzolani M. Stocky cylinders if compression: postcritical path evaluation and collapse
load prediction with ABAQUS. In: Proceedings of ABAQUS Users Conference, Archen, Germany
1993; 42135.
[3] Kim YS, Kardomateas GA. Buckling of thick orthotropic cylindrical shells under torsion. J Appl
Mech 1999;66:4150.
[4] Chryssanthopulos MK, Baker MJ, Dowling PJ. Imperfection modeling for buckling analysis of stiffened cylinders. J Struct Eng 1991;117(7):19982017.
[5] Soldatos KP. Mechanics of cylindrical shells with non-circular cross-section: a survey. J Appl Mech
Rev 1999;52(8):23774.
[6] Donnell LH, Wan CC. Effect of imperfection on buckling of thin cylinders and columns under axial
compression. J Appl Mech 1950;17:7383.
[7] Miller CD. Buckling of axially compressed cylinder. Proc ASCE, J Struct Div
1976;103(ST3):695721.
[8] Singer J. On the importance of shell buckling experiments. J Appl Mech Rev 1999;52(6):1725.
[9] Melerski ES. Simple elastic analysis of axisymmetric cylindrical storage tank. J Struct Eng
1991;117(11):323960.
[10] Peek R. Analysis of unanchored liquid storage tanks under lateral loads. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn
1988;16:1087100.
[11] Lau DT, Zeng X. Generation and use of simplified uplift shape functions in unanchored cylindrical
tanks. J Pressure Vessel Technol 1996;118:27886.
[12] Malhotra PK. Uplifting analysis of base plates in cylindrical tanks. J Struct Eng 1994;120:3489505.
[13] Peek R, El-Bkaily M. Postbuckling behavior of unanchored steel tanks under lateral loads. J Pressure
Vessel Technol 1991;113:4238.
[14] Nam MH, Lee KH. Unsymmetrically loaded cylindrical tank on elastic foundation. J Eng Mech
2000;126:125761.
[15] Timoshenko SP, Gere JM. Theory of elastic stability. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1983.
[16] Timoshenko SP, Woinowsky-Krieger S. Theory of plate and shell. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959.
[17] ABAQUS/standard users manual version 5.8, vol. I. Pawtucket (RI): Hibbit, Karlsson and Sorensen, 1998.
[18] ABAQUS/standard example manual version 5.8, vol. I. Pawtucket (RI): Hibbit, Karlsson and Sorensen, 1998.