Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
ABSTRACT: The effect of axial friction forces on the calculated hoop stress of
an unstiffened silo, or of the top unstiffened portion of a silo is analyzed. Ig-
noring the beam-column interaction between axial friction forces and radial
pressure due to the grain may result in an error of 20% in some cases. This
results in a variable actual factor of safety which depends on the geometric
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
characteristics of the silo. An instability analysis is carried out which sets limits
on the maximum unstiffened length of a silo. This is done on a probabilistic
basis and an algorithm is suggested for the design of an unstiffened silo or a
silo stiffened by rings.
INTRODUCTION
The design of the wall of a silo is based primarily on the lateral load
applied by the grain while the presence of the axial friction forces due
to the grain is ignored. The effect of the axial friction forces may, how-
ever, in some cases be significant.
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
This paper deals with the analytical solution of the deflection in the
radial direction of the wall of a cylindrical unstiffened silo under static
loading due to grain. The objective here is not the derivation of a closed
form solution for the deflection, but, rather, is the investigation of the
effect of the axial forces due to friction from the grain on the hoop stresses.
To obtain this objective, a Fourier series solution for the deflection of
the wall is used. The analytical solution and the investigation of the in-
teraction between lateral and axial forces is limited to the linear elastic
region. For this reason, a complete analysis of instability of an unstif-
fened silo under the axial friction forces is carried out. This not only sets
the limits to the validity of the interaction analysis, but also establishes
maximum unstiffened length of a silo. Wind loading effects are not in-
cluded in this paper.
BASIC ASSUMPTIONS
/
/
/
/
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
/
/
/
/
//
/ /}////// //////// / > /'"rrrrr
- *
-+T
FIG. 1.Cylindrical Silo
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
Imagine a unit width strip of wall cut out from the wall (Fig. 1). As-
sume axisymmetric loading conditions (static loading). Then on this strip-
beam the following forces act:
1. Lateral pressure, p(x), due to the grain (consider only the gravity
field), (Pa).
2. Axial friction forces, q{x), due to the friction of the grain on the
wall, (Pa).
3. The hoop forces, T(x), acting on the strip from the rest of the cy-
lindrical wall, (N).
Then, the total lateral force on the unit width strip-beam per unit of
length, p(x), is (2)
p(x) = p(x)rA9 - T(x)AQ (1)
Also T(x) = a e t = E^t (2)
in which the circumferential strain is
w
*e = - (3)
W(x)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
in which \L' = tan 4>' = the coefficient of friction of grain on the bin
walls; and 4>' = angle of friction of grain on the bin walls.
For the lateral pressure, p(x), the Janssen's formula is assumed to be
valid (5)
mR
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
Vo - V(. ,-f Jo
PWZ = O. (7)
?({)
W(x)^
H
Cut
wall '
W(x)
strip-
beam
1379
Q - Q(. qiOd^O, Q(x) = Q, ?(9d. (8)
Jo Jo
Jo Jo
differentiate
dV(x)
= ~p(x). (10)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
dx
dQ{x)
= cj(x) ., (11)
dx
dM(%) dV(x) dw(x) _
*?(*) - w(x)q(x) - ^dx + V(x) + x ^
dx + ^
dx Q(x)
+ w(x) =0 (12)
dx
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
-f(E^=-V(*)-0(*)^ (14)
differentiate
dw dV(x)
^ ( E l a O + f- Q(x) = p(x). (15)
dx dx Jx~ dx
The boundary conditions at A give
Q(0) = Qo = 0
Then Eq. 8 becomes with substitution of Eq. 5
12 12
w v+ p{x)w + p(<%
' w\ ' r't* Et3
(19)
Using Eq. 6
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
Thus v ( l - e _ p 5 ) ^ = vx + - ( e ~ p * - l )
h P
Then Eq. 19 becomes
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
12M.' , 12 12v
w +- vx + - (e""* - 1) zu" + v(l - e-|Mr)u>'} + 2 a> = 3 (1 - e~")
P J r r Et
W21)
12u/v 12u'v 12 12v
zvw + 4- x - - (1 - e"p
*) w" + -rrr- x
Ef3 P Ef3 (1 - e~> )w' +r
^
w=
Ef3
(1 - e^"*)
px
or K),0 + A x - - (1 - e" ) w" + A ( l - e-px)w' + Bw = C(l - e~ p *)... (22)
P
in which A = 12u'v/Ef 3 ; B = 12/r2t2; a n d C = 12v/Et3. Eq. 22 is the
governing differential equation for the wall strip-beam u n d e r the lateral
and axial (friction) static loading d u e to the grain. This equation, h o w -
ever, is extremely difficult to solve analytically a n d obtain the exact closed
formed solution for the deflection w(x). The main source of the difficulty
is the presence of the distributed nonuniform axial friction forces. This
is evident from Eqs. 15 a n d 18. If Q(x) = constant (thrust), Eq. 15 yields
a zero coefficient for w' a n d Eq. 18 is simply
ErA6f3 . EfA8
w'v + Qw" + w = p(x)rA8 (23)
fl(x)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
rrnrf
This total axial force is not applied as a constant force throughout the
strip beam but it is the maximum axial force applied at the lower end
of the beam. Thus, it is conservative to "apply" this total axial force to
the full length of the beam. How conservative such an assumption is
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
assumed
C.G.of
distributed
axial forces
aL
rffr
(b)
FIG. 5.Actual (a) and Conservative (b) Axial Resultant Forces on Strip-Beam
Deflected by Lateral Pressures
1382
No other uses without permission. Copyright (c) 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers. All rights reserved.
Pin)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
for givn = L, t . m . / i
error %
FIG. 6.Qualitative Deflected Shape and Error Distribution for Deflection under
Effect of Qb Compared to Zero Axial Force
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
Et3Vn
=
(30)
'MIT 12Q /nir\ + J2_
ErABf3 \L J r2t2
or, substituting Eq. 27 into Eq. 30
12 2 f rmx
;_ P(*) sin dx
(31)
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
nir 12Q
L]
V - ErAQt ^V LV 3
24
. p(x) sin dx
if 3 ! j 0
3
MTTX
w\ '(*) = 1 y sin- (32)
/HTT\
+ 2 2
T/ r f
For Q given by Eq. 24, Eq. 28 becomes
24 HTTX
p(x) sin dx
mrx
w< w = =iS/ I T \ /Mir\ 12(x v pL 12
sin
L
(33)
L--(l -e~ )
"it3- P 7?
In Eqs. 32 a n d 33, the integral of the numerator for p(x) given by Eq. 6,
is
L
px
ftTTX vL
v(l - e ) sin dx = (1 - cos wn)
JOo L . nir
vnn
-pi
ve MTT
cos mr
"IT (34)
2 , |"P KIT
p2
P + ( T +
Eqs. 32 and 33 are the solutions of the deflection of the wall strip-beam
1384
with axial thrust equal to zero and to the resultant of the friction forces,
respectively.
INSTABILITY ANALYSIS
or jxv L - - ( l
_ p-pi - I'^VIi! fA^i ^ (36)
12 mr/ r
put in dimensionless form
JJL'V L - - (1 - e-pL)
L P J _ /nirV tl
(37)
Et " V L / 12+ n-n
Divide by Vt2/12r2;
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
|X V I - - (1 - e-pL) 12r2
P mr\ 2 2 12r2
EtV? 12
12rj tr Vl2
2 (38)
Vmr/ r fz2 Vij Vl2 rt
Let fr/L2VT2 = 1/X2, then
1
L - - (1 - e_pL) 'Vl2
(XV
P + =/(X) (39)
Et2 T U '
To obtain the minimum L for Eq. 36 to be satisfied (critical L), differ-
entiate Eq. 39 with respect to X2 and set the result equal to zero and
solve for n
2 i,2 _ 2
(40)
X4 (nir) n Tt .
o-P L 1 -Vl2
(X V (1 -
+ =2. (41)
e2 HIT/ \mrl
independent of n. Then, L critical is given from Eqs. 39 and 24, by
Q 1 2Ef2 Et2
= \L V L- - - ( 1 - - e-pL) (42)
rA0 P rVl2 rV3
1385
The right hand part of Eq. 42 gives the classical critical load for sym-
metrical buckling of a cylindrical shell under the action of uniform axial
compression neglecting the Poisson's ratio (7). Eq. 42 may be rewritten
to include Poisson's ratio, |x, according to the classical theory
Et2
No other uses without permission. Copyright (c) 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers. All rights reserved.
|A V -(l-e^L) (43)
P rV3(l - |x 2 )'
Dividing by t one obtains
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
Q Et TT2E (t\
frA6 rV3(l - (JL ) = K C12(1
- |xj2)- \L.
2 7 (44)
4V3
in which Kc = 1Z ( 45 )
Z = - V l - |x2 (46)
rt
Thus, the preceding instability analysis is valid for the assumptions tac-
itly made: Cylinder initially perfect, with r/t ratios large enough to be
susceptible to elastic shell-type buckling. The last assumption is valid
for all practical cases of unstiffened silos and for the unstiffened parts
of a ring stiffened silo, as long as (1)
7 = 11.78 n (48)
Eq. 48 along with Eqs. 45 and 47 will estimate the buckling stress with
a probability of 50%.
The case of farm silos, however, is actually one of a pressurized cyl-
inder with an elastic core. Experimental and theoretical investigations
have shown that the critical buckling stress is increased with the increase
of the internal pressure and the stiffness of the elastic core by reducing
the initial imperfections.
1386
Of _ L _ . _n._
No other uses without permission. Copyright (c) 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers. All rights reserved. 6
8 -
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
0.10 - ^
8
*? '
4 ___
>
0.01
2 4 6 8 2 4 6 8 2 4 6 8
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
283 14
in which 7 ' = 0.000276 1.0 - 0.00413 ('- ) e<- .8r/<r . . . (51)
1387
and Vo = m Q2 (52)
Eqs. 48 and 51 are best fit equations which predict the loads at which
50% of bins with a given r/t ratio and p0 will buckle. Eq. 51 is considered
No other uses without permission. Copyright (c) 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers. All rights reserved.
Et
(0.6057 + for 600 s - s 5,000 (53fl)
M-'v
x - - (1 - e~") = <
t L p Et
0.605-y' - for 1,000 < - =s 3,300 and p < 0.33 . . . (536)
The data analyzed by Bucklin, et al. (3) were measured for p0 s 0.33.
Eq. 53 reveals a significant behavior of the silo grain system which is
simulated in the equation by a pressurized cylinder under axial compres-
sion.
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
The left side of the equation is the total axial compressive stress caused
by the grain friction at a depth, x, below the top of the silo (neglecting
the dead load of the structure).
The right side represents the axial stress at which an unstiffened por-
tion of the silo with its lower edge at a depth, x = Lcr, below top and
an unsupported length, Lu, will buckle with a probability of 50% (L =
Lcr for an unstiffened silo or the top unstiffened portion of a stiffened
silo). This L is subjected, however, to the condition described by Eq.
47, i.e., the unstiffened portion has to be in the range of intermediate
length for Eq. 53 to be valid. The thickness, t, to be used in Eq. 53 is
the one of the unstiffened portion. If the thickness is not uniform, the
minimum, t, within the particular portion under consideration should
be used.
The right side probabilistic stress for a given r/t ratio and E depends
on the grain lateral pressure alone. But the friction stress (left side) also
depends on the lateral pressure for a given |x', as shown in Eq. 24. This
is a major point: Compressive stress and lateral pressure of this partic-
ular pressurized cylinder are not independent. Thus, the buckling stress
of the system should not be determined for any arbitrary value of in-
ternal pressure as in other cases (4).
Under the foregoing considerations, the satisfaction of Eq. 53, and thus
the buckling behavior of the silo, depends only on Lcr for given E, r, t,
|JL' , k and m. Eq. 53 is valid as long as Eq. 47 is satisfied for L. The
selection of Lcr as the independent variable is justified as follows.
In any particular case of design, all E, r, t, juu', k and m, as well as L
are given. Then, using these E, r, \i', k and m values in Eq. 53, and
setting first x = Lcrt , the equation is solved with some iterative scheme.
(The thickness, t = tr, to be used in this solution procedure is the min-
imum one within the length, Lcrl). Then, Lcn = the distance from the
top of the silo down to the maximum unstiffened length of the wall for
which a 50% probability exists for buckling (Fig. 8). If Lcrl > L, no stiff-
1388
No other uses without permission. Copyright (c) 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers. All rights reserved.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
Lers
n7T777T7777777777777777r77n77Tn7
x-(l-e-px)
t L P
12 (Lu\(LU T7 2 E
= 1+- (54)
HTAT'^ 12(1 - \S)) \Lu
in which 7 is given by Eq. 48.
Eq. 54 is based on buckling of an unpressurized cylinder with no elas-
tic core, and as such is conservative. Substituting, x = Lcr2 = Lcrl + Lu2,
in which Lcrl has been calculated from the previous step, the only vari-
able in Eq. 54 is Lul, as it should for a short cylinder. Again, the thick-
ness, t, in Eq. 54 is the minimum one within the Lu considered.
In general then, for the sth unstiffened portion of the silo, Eq. 53 is
solved for Lcrs with t = ts. Then Lus = Lcrs = Lcrs - Lm-x is checked against
Eq. 47. If Eq. 47 is not satisfied, Lcre_i and ts are substituted into Eq. 54
and the maximum Lus is obtained. (In the case of fs_i = ts, Eq. 54 gov-
erns always for s > 1).
8000 3000
r/t RATIO
decreases. This decrease is dramatic for low r/t values which indicates
that reducing the radius, r, or increasing the thickness, t, is beneficial
in terms of the unstiffened length of the silo, only in the range of low
r/t values.
Figs. 10 and 11 show the solution of Eqs. 53a-b, respectively. Clearly
Eq. 53a from Harris' data shows the same general behavior as the clas-
sical theory, while Eq. 53b gives a critical length that is nearly constant
for each t. Fig. 12 presents a combination of the solutions of Eqs. 53a-b
in which Eq. 53b was used in the range 1,000 < r/t < 3,300 for p <
0.33. The two solutions coincide at r/t = 2,000, while 59b yields L much
lower than that given by 53a at r/t = 1,000.
A comparison of the solution of Eq. 53b versus 53a with A7 = 0 (ig-
noring the effect of the internal pressure) is shown in Fig. 13. Here it
can be seen that while the effect of the internal pressure given by Eq.
53b is quite significant in the region of r/t = 2,000, it is zero, however,
in the region of r/t = 1,000. If one considers the fact that Eq. 53b is based
on data from a model silo, that is of a pressurized cylinder with an elas-
tic core (grain) present, while Eq. 53a with A7 = 0 is based on data from
a nonpressurized cylinder, then Fig. 13 reveals that Eq. 53b is not re-
alistic in the range of low r/t values. Thus, Eq. 59a is considered to ap-
ply, and Fig. 10 gives the critical length for which 50% of the unstiffened
1390
100 -
1328)
THICKNESS, cm (in)
No other uses without permission. Copyright (c) 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers. All rights reserved.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
r/t RATIO
FIG. 10.I Critical According to Eq. 53a for 50% Probability of Buckling
I00
(328)
"
80
(262)
"
60
(197)
"
THICKNESS, cm (In)
2.34 x
(l,000)\
40 2.22-.~--_
t)3l) (0 8 7 3 ) ^ - - . . - - - __
0
r/t RATIO
FIG. 11.L Critical According to Eq. 536 for 50% Probability of Buckling ( In-
side the Range of Validity of Eq. 536 Outside Range of Validity of Eq. 536)
1391
THICKNESS, cm (in)
No other uses without permission. Copyright (c) 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers. All rights reserved.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
r/t RATIO
FIG. 12.L Critical According to Eq. 53b in Range 1,000 s r/t 3,300 (for p <
0.33) and Eq. 53a in Rest Range of r/t and for p > 0.33 ( Eq. 53a in the Regions
where Eq. 53b was Used)
THICKNESS, cm (in)
2000 3000
r/t RATIO
FIG. 13.L Critical According to Eq. 53b ( ) versus that of Eq. 53a, but with
Ar = 0 (); Probability of Buckling 50%
1392
too
(328)
No other uses without permission. Copyright (c) 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers. All rights reserved.
THICKNESS, cm (rnl
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
60
<
o
. 40
1
1131)
20
168)
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
1
3000
r/t RATIO
(Jj \ -0.54
(55)
and the solution of Eq. 53a is given in Fig. 14. Thus, Figs. 10 and 14, or
Eq. 53a gives the critical length of an unstiffened silo or the max unstiff-
ened top portion of the silo, such that buckling from the wall friction
forces is prevented.
In the case where the height of the silo is greater than Lcr, the pro-
cedure described in the previous section can be applied to determine the
position of the next stiffening rings. However, if the resulting un-
stiffened portions are governed by Eq. 54, it is more likely that the spac-
ing of the ring stiffeners is very small and the structure becomes un-
economical. An example which shows the spacing, Lu2, (Fig. 8) for the
case of constant thickness (fj = t2) is given in Table 1. It can be seen
that the spacing increases with thickness and r/t ratio. The increase of
Lu2 with increase in r/t ratio comes from the fact that Lux decreases with
an increase in r/t, thus the axial force and lateral pressure associated
with Lu2 increases as r/t decreases. Provided that the thickness remains
the same, Lu decreases only slightly with the number of ring stiffeners.
This is due to the fact that Lu obtained by Eq. 54 is in general very small,
so that the increase in the axial stress is rather small from ring to ring.
1393
If, however, the thickness changes, Eq. 53a may control in more than
one unstiffened portion of the silo, and so the effectiveness of the ring
stiffening increases.
Compared to the stringers, ring stiffeners may become more econom-
ical for certain cases. This can be shown only after a complete analysis
No other uses without permission. Copyright (c) 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers. All rights reserved.
is made for both systems of stiffening for any given case. The stress from
the dead and live load of the roof should also be added in the left hand
part of Eq. 53 in such an analysis.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
b b
700 44.0 (1.4)
b
800 31.9 (1.0) 46.3 (1.5)
900 17.8 (0.6) 33.4 (1.1) 48.5 (1.6)
1,000 18.S (0.6) 34.8 (1.1) 50.6 (1.7)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
No other uses without permission. Copyright (c) 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers. All rights reserved.
7
/
Jl/ l
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
i*i2-
/
i
r~^ i
L/r RATIO
(b)
RMHVS. -. I h l 1 8 < 8 g ( 6 0 )
1 0.95 cm
(0.375 tol
XO-I6T6 (551
/ > > 15.24 (50)
/y/*^\l>.lZ (451
1 MoT^Br^^-^r-^^ r L ""
-
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
3.05 (101
TsTisi
FIG. 15.Error in Maximum Hoop Stress Due to Axial Friction Forces Interaction
with Lateral Loading versus Ratio of Silo Height over Radius
to the increase of the total height of the silo (L/r ratio). This is true for
all thicknesses. Also, for a given radius and thickness, the error is, in
general, more sensitive with higher values of the ratio L/r.
The error calculated and shown in Figs. 15(a-c) is valid for both static
and dynamic conditions of loading from the grain. This is because the
dynamic effects are included in the design of the silo walls by using
some empirical multipliers with the static pressures to account for the
overpressures created during the emptying of the silo (6). Thus, both
Eqs. 32 and 33 are multiplied by a constant to obtain the solutions cor-
responding to the dynamic conditions. This, however, does not affect
the error calculated for the maximum hoop stress.
The limit, L crl , shown in Figs. 15(a-c) is for an unstiffened silo or un-
stiffened portion of length, L crt , for which buckling is prevented with a
probability of 50%. The error corresponding to this limit is fairly constant
in the region, L/r 2 1, and it varies only slightly with the thickness. It
can be said that using Lcrl given by Eq. 53a or Fig. 10, the error in the
maximum hoop stress will be between 19% and 24% for ix varying from
1396
0.32 cm (0.125 in.)-0.95 cm (0.375 in.), as long as L/r is between 1 and
10. This limiting error increases to 27% when fj = 0.32 cm (0.125 in.)
and r = 12 m (40 ft), and to 30% when h = 0.64 cm (0.25 in.) and r >
17 m (56 ft), which are not practical cases.
The variability of the error in the maximum hoop stress and its de-
No other uses without permission. Copyright (c) 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers. All rights reserved.
pendence on ti, r and L/r, indicates that the factor of safety used in the
design of the walls of the silos is actually not constant. Thus, in some
cases it may become too low.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
CONCLUSIONS
APPENDIX.REFERENCES
1. Baker, E. H., Kovalevsky, L., and Rish, F. L., Structural Analysis of Shells,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York, N.Y., 1972.
2. Boresi, A. P., Sidebottom, O. M., Seely, F. B., and Smith, J. C , Advanced
Mechanics of Materials, John Wiley and Sons, New York, N.Y., 1978.
3. Bucklin, R. A., Ross, I. J., and White, G. M., "The Influence of Grain Pressure
on the Buckling Loads of Thin Walled Bins," ASAE Paper No. 83-4005, Amer-
ican Society of Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph, Mich., 1983.
4. Harris, L. A., Suer, H. S., Skene, W. T., and Benjamin, R. J., "The Stability
of Thin-Walled Unstiffened Circular Cylinders Under Axial Compression In-
cluding the Effects of Internal Pressure," Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences,
Vol. 24, No. 8, 1957, pp. 587-596.
1397
5. Ketchum, S. M., The Design of Walls, Bins and Grain Elevators, McGraw-Hill
Book Co., Inc., New York, N.Y., 1919.
6. "Recommended Practice for Design and Construction of Concrete Bins, Silos,
and Bunkers for Storing Granular Materials," AC1313-1977, ACI, Detroit, Mich.
7. Timoshenko, S. P., and Gere, J. M., Theory of Elastic Stability, McGraw-Hill
Book Co., Inc., New York, N.Y., 1961.
No other uses without permission. Copyright (c) 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers. All rights reserved.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by D. Craig Brinck on 07/12/12. For personal use only.
J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:1377-1398.
1398