Composites: Part B 32 (2001) 387±399

www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesb

Numerical modeling of composite laminated cylinders in compression

using a novel imperfections modeling method
N.G. Tsouvalis*, A.A. Zafeiratou, V.J. Papazoglou, N.C Gabrielides, P.D Kaklis
Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, 9 Heroon Polytechniou Ave.,
15773 Zografou, Athens, Greece
Received 5 June 2000; revised 14 March 2001; accepted 19 March 2001

Abstract
The present study presents the ®nite element modeling procedure of two composite laminated cylinders exhibiting initial geometric
imperfections. Using as input a set of experimental measurements of the cylinder geometry, the application of the skinning method leads to
the analytical representation of the cylinder imperfect internal, external and middle surfaces. A ®nite element mesh is then easily constructed
over these surfaces. The results of the analysis are in very good agreement with the experimental strains and buckling load measurements and
are used to estimate the knockdown effect of the imperfections on the cylinder buckling behaviour. They are also compared to results
obtained by other simpler ®nite element models, in an effort to evaluate the accuracy of various modeling simpli®cations. q 2001 Elsevier
Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: B. Buckling; Composites

1. Introduction Composite laminated shell structures are normally quite

Composite materials and especially ®ber reinforced plas-
tics have long ago overcome the condition of being just
another very attractive construction material and are now
widely used in a plethora of applications, from the civil
engineering sector to the marine, offshore and aerospace
industry. Their inherent advantages over the traditional
construction materials (high strength to weight ratio, low
maintenance, very good fatigue characteristics, ability to
tailor their mechanical properties) have forced the scienti®c
community towards successfully solving the basic manufac-
turing, structural design and applications problems. Nowa-
days, attention is basically given towards expanding their
use to additional, more complicated and challenging appli-
cations, as well as optimizing the structural design of
composite structures. Hence, among others, buckling failure
has become a major concern for any new structural design,
particularly due to the low stiffness of composites with
respect to the other structural materials. The design trends
to reduce dimensions through structural optimization and
avoid stiffening members, since monocoque structures are
more cost effective, are additional factors in favour of
buckling appearance.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 1301-7721413; fax: 1301-7721412.
E-mail address: tsouv@deslab.ntua.gr (N.G. Tsouvalis).
1359-8368/01/$ - see front matter q 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 1359-836 8(01)00023-3
susceptible to buckling, due to their small thickness.
Composite cylinders loaded by axial compressive loading
are a classical example of this kind of structures, met as a
structural member in almost all sectors of the civil engineer-
ing, offshore and aerospace industry. Determination of their
buckling performance, though, is not an easy task. The
design parameters of a composite laminated shell structure
are so many and complicated (to mention only the number
of layers and stacking sequence), that the existing analytical
calculation methods cover a very small portion of their
possible combinations, whereas, where they apply, they
tend to signi®cantly overestimate buckling loads. In
addition, few of them are closed form solutions that can
be easily integrated into a common design procedure.
The same happens also to the numerical analyses,
although in a smaller degree, since parameters like bound-
ary conditions can be modeled more accurately. Linear
buckling loads calculated using numerical models are also
overestimated with respect to the experimental values,
whereas the introduction of geometric nonlinearities in the
analysis (large de¯ections) signi®cantly improves the
results. The difference between recorded and numerically
calculated buckling loads increases, as the deviations of
the actual structure from its nominal characteristics
(nominal thickness, nominal stacking sequence, nominal
material properties, etc.) increase. The cause of these
388 N.G. Tsouvalis et al. / Composites: Part B 32 (2001) 387±399
deviations are geometric and material defects, which appear
very frequently in composite structures, depending on their
manufacturing method. Shape and geometry imperfections,
load eccentricities, as well as material faults like voids, ®ber
misalignments, resin rich or resin dry areas and especially
delaminations, should be properly modeled, to reach a reli-
able numerical prediction of the buckling load. Once such
modeling procedures are developed and their results vali-
dated through successful comparisons to experimental
measurements, performance of extensive parametric studies
is an easy task and very important conclusions can be drawn
without carrying out very costly experimental programs.
The effect of material defects on the buckling perfor-
mance of composite cylinders has been the subject of
several studies [1±4]. The consequent investigation of
geometrically imperfect cylindrical shells was initially
based on that of isotropic shells [3,5]. Some initial efforts
on comparing experimental, numerical and analytical buck-
ling loads [6,7] were followed by statistical studies regard-
ing the effect of manufacturing on the imperfection patterns
[8] and the numerical calculation of the `knockdown'
factors that have to be applied on the theoretical elastic
critical buckling loads of GFRP curved panels to account
for the presence of imperfections [9].
The scope of the present study is twofold. First, to present
a new method for modeling the initial geometric imperfec-
tions of a composite laminated cylinder and second, to
exploit this method for the construction, and ®nally the
evaluation, of a ®nite element mesh of the `actual' cylinder.
Geometric imperfections can be of any type, such as
ovalizations, deviations of the cylinder axis of symmetry
from a straight line and thickness variations. The internal
and external surfaces of the imperfect cylinder are modeled
in the present paper by two smooth bicubic spline surfaces,
that interpolate the measurements data. These surfaces are
constructed with the aid of the so-called skinning method, a
CAGD (Computer-Aided Geometric Design) technique
enabling the reconstruction of three-dimensional bodies
from cross-sectional data. Such a request arises in a wide
spectrum of applications, ranging from reverse engineering
(stereolithography) to medical imaging. The obtained
numerical results for the geometry of the cylinder support
the assertion that, in comparison to any best-®tting
approach, the present one not only recovers satisfactorily
the shape of the underlying surfaces, but pass through (inter-
polates) the measured data. Moreover, and in contrast to any
scheme relying on double Fourier analysis, the analytic
structure of the present one (bicubic spline) is in full confor-
mity with that of the element which is used in the ensuing
®nite element analysis (16-node isoparametric shell
element).
The above skinning method is applied for the ®nite
element modeling of two GFRP hand lay-up composite
cylinders that have been experimentally tested and numeri-
cally modeled in concentric axial compression [10,11]. The
available experimental measurements of the cylinder
geometry were in the form of internal surface and thickness
data, but they can also be in the form of internal and external
surface data. Moreover, experimental data can be captured
in any mesh over the cylinder surfaces, either regular or
even irregular. Based on these experimental measurements
of the geometry, various FE meshes of the cylinder middle
surface are constructed, having different densities. The
buckling load and the deformations time history calculated
by applying this method are compared to the experimental
recordings, as well as to results obtained by simpler ®nite
element models, in order to evaluate the accuracy of various
modeling simpli®cations.
2. Cylinder lay-up and geometry
Among the various glass ®ber reinforced cylinders tested
within the framework of the experimental program
described in Ref. [10], two are selected here for investiga-
tion, namely cylinder RVM05A and cylinder RVM07.
These particular cylinders were selected as typical examples
of the two cylinder groups tested having different R/t ratios.
Both cylinders were manufactured on a cylindrical mould
using the hand lay-up method, thus resulting in more intense
imperfections with respect to other, common to cylindrical
parts fabrication methods, such as ®lament winding. Fiber
reinforcement was E-glass woven roving of type `Rovimat
1200', while the matrix was isophthalic polyester resin of
type `Synolite 288'. `Rovimat 1200' had a chopped strand
mat coating on one side, to facilitate proper bonding of the
layers. Each layer has a nominal thickness of 1.38 mm and
the material properties shown in Table 1 [12]. These proper-
ties have been experimentally measured by testing two ply
¯at specimens with sequence [08]2. Young's moduli are
similar in tension and compression.
Cylinder RVM05A has a [08/908] stacking sequence, with
the 08 layer on the inside and the 908 layer on the outside,
Table 1
Rovimat 1200/Synolite 288 layer properties
Property Value
Young's modulus in 14.7^0.1 GPa
weft direction, E1
Young's modulus in 13.2^0.4 GPa
warp direction, E2
Shear modulus, G12 3.5^0.1 GPa
Poisson's ratio, n 21 0.18^0.03
Tensile strength in 199.6^11.5 MPa
weft direction, s ut,1
Tensile strength in 178.5^7.4 MPa
warp direction, s ut,2
Compressive 249.6^38.9 MPa
strength in weft
direction, s uc,1
Compressive 217.1^14.3 MPa
strength in warp
direction, s uc,2
Shear strength, t u,12 103.6^7.1 MPa
 N.G. Tsouvalis et al. / Composites: Part B 32 (2001) 387±399
Fig. 1. Cross section of cylinders RVM05A and RVM07 showing lamination overlaps.
while cylinder RVM07 has a [08/908/08] lay-up. The 08
direction is the axial direction of the cylinder, coinciding
to the weft direction of the layers. The two layers of cylinder
RVM05A consist of two separate sheets each, laminated as
shown in Fig. 1a, so as to form four overlap regions at 908
intervals. Fig. 1b shows the corresponding lamination of
cylinder RVM07, where again four overlaps at 908 intervals
are formed, two at the middle layer and one at each of the
other two layers. Each one of these overlaps is 50 mm wide.
Both cylinders have a nominal internal radius of 300 mm
and a total length equal to 800 mm, including two reinforced
zones at the ends, 100 mm wide each (Fig. 2). These end rein-
forcements are added to the cylinder to avoid damage and fail-
ure at the ends of the cylinder during load application and to
ensure that this will happen at its monitored midpart. Accord-
ing to the authors' experience, as well as other references [11],
for geometries similar to those investigated here, the in¯uence
of these reinforcements on buckling load is negligible. Thus,
the clear (unreinforced) length of the cylinder which is
600 mm, is used in all calculations performed. The nominal
thickness of cylinders (tnom, Fig. 2) is 2.8 mm for RVM05A and
4.1 mm for RVM07, excluding the overlap zones, thus result-
ing in R/t ratios equal to 108 and 72, respectively.
3. Modeling
3.1. Mesh description
The general purpose ®nite element code SOLVIA is used
Fig. 2. Geometry of cylinders RVM05A and RVM07 (dimensions in mm).
389
for the buckling analyses [13]. Both cylinders are modeled
using 16-node isoparametric shell elements, which have
proved their adequacy in modeling axially compressed
cylinders in earlier studies. These elements account for
transverse shear deformation effects, incorporating Midlin's
formulation and are combined with the laminated material
model, allowing modeling of the actual cylinder stacking
sequence.
Regarding boundary conditions, each cylinder is ®xed at
one of its ends and loaded at its other end by an axial
compressive force. Rigid links are used at the loaded end,
connecting all nodes of the end circumference to a central
auxiliary node, on which the compressive force is applied.
This auxiliary node has its axial translation and all rotations
free (Fig. 3) to properly model the actual experimental
conditions [10]. The use of rigid links constrains the loaded
end to remain ¯at and circular throughout the load applica-
tion, maintaining its initial radius.
Various ®nite element meshes are used in the present
study. All these meshes are regular, denoted by two
numbers C £ L, the ®rst indicating the number of elements
in the circumferential direction and the second the number
of elements in the axial one. The initial application of an
analytical solution to the problem, often provides valuable
information, not only about the expected buckling load, but
also about the corresponding modeshape. Thus, having an
idea of the expected modeshape, one can properly select the
density of the ®nite element mesh, in order to be able to
obtain such a de¯ected shape. Although the existing
390 N.G. Tsouvalis et al. / Composites: Part B 32 (2001) 387±399
Fig. 3. Loading and boundary conditions of the cylinders.
analytical closed form solutions have a limited range of
validity, in the sense that they do not cover all combinations
of stacking sequences, boundary conditions, etc., their
results are still important as initial estimations. As an exam-
ple, in the present study, application of an analytical
solution for cylinders with simply supported ends [14],
resulted in a critical buckling load of 304.4 kN for cylinder
RVM05A, with a modeshape consisting of six axial half
waves (m) and nine circumferential full waves (n). Very
close was also the second buckling load, having a value of
304.8 kN and a respective modeshape (m,n) ˆ (5,9). For
cylinder RVM07, the calculated critical buckling load was
equal to 688.1 kN, with a (5,8) modeshape. Therefore, the
above results indicate that one needs a ®nite element mesh
with at least 25 nodes in the axial direction to be able to
accurately obtain the six half waves and at least 72 nodes in
the circumferential direction in order to obtain the nine full
waves (considering at least ®ve nodes per half wave). Note
that the above values should be increased, if one suspects
that the buckles are not uniformly distributed over the length
of the cylinder, but are localized in a smaller area (i.e. near
its middle). The coarsest mesh used in this study consisted
of 25 elements in the circumferential direction and eight
elements in the axial one (25 £ 8). This corresponds to 75
nodes in the circumference and 25 nodes in the axial direc-
tion for the 16-node elements used, values that, as lower
limits, are in accordance with the analytical solution indica-
tions. The ®nest mesh used was a 40 £ 16 one.
3.2. Modeling imperfections
The raw experimental measurements of the cylinders'
imperfect geometry [10] included data for their internal
surface and their thickness. An automated noncontact
laser device operating inside the specimen provided a
three dimensional scanning system for measuring the devia-
tion of the internal shell wall from a perfectly cylindrical,
arti®cial reference surface. The internal surface of the speci-
mens was measured along the radial direction in 2232
points. The measuring grid was perfectly regular, consisting
of 31 axial stations with an interval of 20 mm, and 72
circumferential stations with an interval of 58. On the
other hand, the measuring grid for the thickness was not
regular, being more dense at the layer overlaps (Fig. 1).
Over the normal surface of the cylinder, the thickness
scan was performed on a 50 £ 50 mm grid, whereas at the
overlaps the circumferential spacing was reduced to 25 mm.
Thickness was measured over a cylinder length of 500 mm,
starting 50 mm away from one end and ®nishing 50 mm
before the other. Hence, with a cylinder length equal to
600 mm, the thickness scan covered the central 500 mm
of the specimen. Within the framework of the present
study and in order to analytically construct the full internal
and external surfaces of the cylinders, thickness measure-
ments at the ends of the cylinder were assumed equal to
those at the closest axial station. Note that the provided
experimental data had already been manipulated to account
for possible misalignments between the longitudinal axis of
the specimen and the measuring frame [10].
In order to apply the ®nite element analysis for any user-
speci®ed mesh of the imperfect cylinder, it is necessary to
possess a handy analytical representation for both its inter-
nal and external surfaces. These representations are built
here with the aid of the skinning method, which is widely
used in the area of CAGD for constructing the outer skin of
three-dimensional bodies from measurements taken on a
family of, usually parallel to each other, axial stations
[15,16].
Let us assume that we are given with a measurement set:
[
N
Dˆ Di ; Di ˆ {…zi ; uj ; rij †; j ˆ 1; ¼; M};
iˆ1
providing the radius rij of the internal surface of the cylinder
at the axial station z ˆ zi, 0 # z # L, and the circumferential
station u ˆ u j, 0 # u # 2p . Without loss of generality, we
shall henceforth assume that u 1 ˆ 0 and u M ˆ 2p . It is note-
worthy that the skinning method, which will be outlined in
the sequel, remains readily applicable also when the number
of circumferential stations varies along the axis of the cylin-
der. Then, a skinning surface that interpolates the data set D,
is a vector-valued function Sint …u; z† [ IR3 that can be
represented as:
X
N
Sint …u; z† ˆ Li …z†Qi …u†; 0 # z # L; 0 # u # 2p: …1†
iˆ1
Here Qi …u† are the so-called skeletal lines, i.e., spatial
curves lying on the axial planes z ˆ zi and interpolating
the planar point sets …uj ; rij † in the following sense:
Qi …uj † ˆ …xij ; yij ; zi †T ; j ˆ 1; ¼; M; …2†
where xij ; yij are the cartesian coordinates of the planar
point whose polar coordinates are equal to uj ; rij . Further-
more, Li(z) are scalar functions, referred to as the blending
functions, satisfying the constraints:
Li …zk † ˆ dik ; i; k ˆ 1; ¼; N; …3†
d ik denoting the Kronecker's delta. By virtue of Eqs. (2) and (3),
 N.G. Tsouvalis et al. / Composites: Part B 32 (2001) 387±399
one can readily show that Eq. (1) interpolates the given
measurement set D.
Thus, the analytical structure of the interpolant Sint …u; z†,
that represents the internal surface of the cylinder, depends
on the manner the skeletal lines Qi …u† and the blending
functions Li(z), are to be constructed. In our case, both
have been chosen to be twice continuously differentiable
(C 2) cubic splines. This choice secures that the resulting
skinning surface Sint …u; z† possesses suf®cient geometric
smoothness, namely its tangent plane along with the
Gaussian and mean curvatures vary continuously, while
its degree within each polynomial patch Sint …u; z†,
uj # u # uj11 , zi # z # zi11 , is ®xed and low (bicubic).
The latter also guarantees full compatibility between the
adopted analytical representation of the cylinder boundary
surfaces with the ensuing ®nite element modeling, that, as
stated in the beginning of the previous subsection, uses 16-
node isoparametric shell elements, which are indeed
bicubic.
In view of the above, computing Sint …u; z† is equivalent
to computing the C 2 cubic splines Qi …u† and Li …z†,
i ˆ 1,¼,N. This is done by endowing the interpolation
constraints (2) and (3) for Qi …u† and Li(z), respectively,
with appropriate boundary conditions, leading to well
posed interpolation problems. As for Qi …u†, which are
closed (Qi …0† ˆ Qi …2p†), these conditions are the well
known periodicity conditions:
dr Qi …0† dr Qi …2p†
r ˆ ; r ˆ 1; 2; …4†
du d ur
guaranteeing that Qi …u† will be twice continuously differen-
tiable over the entire interval [0,2p ]. Then, after selecting a
suitable basis for the cubic polynomial segments of Qi …u†,
Eqs. (2) and (4) lead to an (M 2 1) £ (M 2 1) linear system
for the weights of the basis functions. Since the matrix of
this system is positive de®nite, the system can be robustly
solved with a cost of O(M 3) operations. Detailed expres-
sions for both the left- and the right-hand side matrices of
this system can be found in the Appendix; see Eq. (A.11)
and the ensuing comments therein.
As for the cubic spline blending functions Li(z),
i ˆ 1,¼,N, we impose the so-called natural boundary
conditions:
d2 Li …z1 † d 2 Li …zN †
2
ˆ ˆ 0: …5†
dz dz2
Then, combining the interpolation constraints of Eq. (3)
with the above boundary conditions, and adopting the
cubic basis already chosen for the skeletal lines Qi …u†, we
are led to a linear system for the weights of the basis func-
tions in all cubic segments of Li(z), 0 # z # L. Structurally,
the left-hand side matrix of this system is almost identical to
that of the skeletal lines, the only difference being that now
the matrix is tridiagonal as well, which guarantees its robust
solution after O(N) computations; see Eq. (A.14) and the
ensuing comments in the Appendix.
391
The construction of the skinning surface Sext …u; z†; that
represents the external surface of the cylinder, requires the
materiallization of a straightforward preprocessing step.
This is due to the fact that we are not given measurements
on the external surface of the cylinder but, instead, measure-
ments of the
0
wall thickness tij over a set of angles u 0j ,
j ˆ 1,¼,M , at each
0
axial station z ˆ zi. Note that, neither
the cardinality M nor the angles u 0ij need to coincide with
those used for measuring the internal surface. Then, the
preprocessing step simply consists in producing the required
external-surface measurements via the formula:
Sext …u 0j ; zi † ˆ Sint …u 0j ; zi † 1 …tij cosu 0j ; tij sinu 0j ; zi †T ;
…6†
i ˆ 1; ¼; N; j ˆ 1; ¼; M 0 :
Next, the skinning surface Sext …u; z†, u 01 # u # u 0M 0 ,
0 # z # L, that interpolates the data set in Eq. (6), can be
constructed by employing the technique, described just
above, for deriving the internal surface Sint …u; z†. Obviously
u 0M 0 2 u 01 ˆ 2p; whereas u 01 does not, in general, coincide
with u 1 ˆ 0.
Once we possess the analytic representation of both the
internal, Sint …u; z†, and the external, Sext …u; z†, cylinder
surface, we need to evaluate its midsurface Smid …u; z† for,
in the subsequent ®nite element analysis, a shell element is
determined by its nodes on Smid …u; z† and the wall thickness
at each one of these nodes. Taking into account the u -
domain de®nitions of Sint …u; z† and Sext …u; z†, we have the
following formula for the intermediate surface:
1
Smid …u; z† ˆ S …u; z†
2 int
( )
1 Sext …2p 1 u; z† if 0 # u # u 01
1 :
2 Sext …u; z† if u 01 # u # 2p
…7†
The numerical performance of the adopted skinning method
is tested against several experimental data sets. A typical
example of such a comparisson is shown in Fig. 4, where the
deviation of cylinder RVM05A internal surface from its
nominal radius is plotted versus the circumference angle
at two different axial stations of the cylinder, at distance
200 and 300 mm from one of its ends. Positive deviations
are outwards from the nominal radius, while negative devia-
tions are inwards. Fig. 4 con®rms our numerical experience
that, between the experimental points which are by
construction interpolated, the constructed surface exhibits
a very good behaviour by conforming to the geometry
(monotonicity and convexity) information of the data.
This can be attributed, on one hand, to the low degree
(cubic) of the component splines in representation formula
(Eq. 1) and, on the other hand, to the direct geometry signif-
icance of the parameters z and u appearing therein. The
same good behaviour is obtained for cylinder RVM07 too.
Fig. 5 presents a developed view of the cylinder RVM05A
392 N.G. Tsouvalis et al. / Composites: Part B 32 (2001) 387±399

Fig. 4. Comparison of internal surface for cylinder RVM05A (shown developed).

internal surface as constructed after applying the skinning
method to the experimental data, whereas Fig. 6 shows a
side view of both internal and external surfaces of this cylin-
der. The presence of the four overlaps is obvious in this last
®gure. All calculated results in Figs. 4±6 are based on a
38 £ 12 16-node shell element mesh, consisting of 114
equally spaced nodes in the circumferential and 37 equally
spaced nodes in the axial direction.
Regarding a qualitative and quantitative evaluation of the
imperfections, Figs. 4 and 5 indicate that the internal surface
of cylinder RVM05A presents a characteristic ovalization
pattern, which is maximum at one end of the cylinder and
gradually becomes less intense towards the other end. The
same happens for cylinder RVM07. The maximum devia-
tion of this ovalization scheme from the nominal radius is
equal to about 50% of cylinder RVM05A nominal thickness
(40% of its average thickness) and about 20% of cylinder
RVM07 nominal thickness (16% of its average thickness),
that is, global shape imperfections are much more intense in
the thinner cylinder RVM05A. Regarding thickness imper-
fections, Table 2 presents the average of the experimental
thickness measurements at the four overlap and the four

Fig. 5. Developed internal surface of cylinder RVM05A.

 N.G. Tsouvalis et al. / Composites: Part B 32 (2001) 387±399 393

Fig. 6. Developed internal and external surface of cylinder RVM05A.

normal sectors of the cylinders, along with their coef®cient overlaps and the normal sectors, as in Table 2. Model 2 is of
of variation (numbers in parentheses). It is reminded that course unrealistic, since it does not model the outward
each overlap is approximately 50 mm wide (arc length). In eccentricity of the overlaps with respect to the midsurface.
the same table, the nominal thickness values and the overall However, as it will be shown later, it is very useful as a
average thicknesses are also provided. It is evident from this reference model, since the only imperfections it represents
table that both cylinders are thicker than they were intended are those due to the thickness changes at the overlaps.
to be, especially at their normal sectors. Model 3: Imperfect midsurface, considering the nominal
In order to investigate the in¯uence of the out-of-round- value of thickness (t ˆ 2.8 mm for RVM05A and
ness and thickness variations, as well as how accurate some t ˆ 4.1 mm for RVM07), ignoring overlaps. Model 3
simple models of these variations are with respect to the represents the pure out-of-roundness imperfections of the
actual situation, the following ®nite element models were midsurface.
developed. In all cases the cylinder length was 600 mm. Model 4: Imperfect midsurface, considering a uniform
thickness for the whole cylinder (thus ignoring overlaps),
equal to the overall average (3.5 mm for cylinder RVM05A
Model 1: Perfect midsurface, considering the nominal
and 5.0 mm for cylinder RVM07). Same to model 3, with
value of the cylinder internal radius (Rin ˆ 300 mm) and
different thickness.
the nominal value of thickness (t ˆ 2.8 mm for RVM05A
Model 5: Imperfect midsurface, considering the different
and t ˆ 4.1 mm for RVM07), ignoring overlaps. Model 1
average thicknesses of Table 2 at the overlaps and the
corresponds to the nominal perfect geometry of the two
normal sectors. Model 5 is a very close approximation of
cylinders and is thus used as the basic reference model.
the actual cylinder, since its only assumption is the homo-
For this case, the ®nite element analysis was performed
geneous but different thickness in each sector.
for various meshes.
Model 6: Imperfect midsurface and actual thickness
Model 2: Perfect midsurface, considering the nominal
distribution.
value of the cylinder internal radius (Rin ˆ 300 mm) and
Table 3 summarizes the basic characteristics of the above
taking into account the different average thicknesses at the
six FE models. A comparison of model 1 to model 3 reveals
Table 2 the sole in¯uence of the out-of-roundness imperfections
Thicknesses of the normal and the overlap sectors, in mm on the buckling loads. The same happens by comparing
model 2 to model 5, for the most complicated situation of
Cyl. Sector RVM05A RVM07
eight different thicknesses. The sole in¯uence of thickness
No. 1 (overlap) 4.2 (6.7) a 5.8 (7.3)
No. 2 (normal) 3.1 (7.3) 4.8 (9.8)
Table 3
No. 3 (overlap) 3.9 (14.9) 6.3 (10.9)
No. 4 (normal) 3.2 (9.0) 4.9 (11.6) Basic characteristics of the FE models developed
No. 5 (overlap) 4.0 (7.0) 5.9 (8.8)
Model Midsurface Overlaps Thickness
No. 6 (normal) 3.3 (8.1) 4.7 (5.0)
No. 7 (overlap) 4.6 (6.2) 5.2 (7.2) 1 Perfect Ignored Nominal
No. 8 (normal) 3.1 (7.8) 4.6 (4.3) 2 Perfect Considered Sector average
Overall average thick. 3.5(15.5) 5.0 (13.3) 3 Imperfect Ignored Nominal
Normal nominal thick. 2.8 4.1 4 Imperfect Ignored Overall average
Overlap nominal thick. 4.1 5.5 5 Imperfect Considered Sector average
a 6 Imperfect Considered Actual distribution
Numbers in parentheses indicate the coef®cient of variation.
394 N.G. Tsouvalis et al. / Composites: Part B 32 (2001) 387±399

imperfections is revealed by comparing model 2 to model 1 Table 4

and model 5 to model 3. Finally the results of models 4 and Eigenvalue buckling loads for models 1 and 2, in kN
5 show the accuracy of their assumptions, when compared Geometry Mesh (C£L) RVM05A RVM07
to the results of the closest to reality model 6.
Model 1 Analytical [14] 304.8 688.1
25£8 ˆ 200 307.2 679.4
24£10 ˆ 240 308.0 681.2
4. Results 36£12 ˆ 432 300.3 674.5
38£12 ˆ 456 300.0 674.1
A linearized buckling analysis was performed for the 40£16 ˆ 640 299.6 673.6
Model 2 38£12 ˆ 456 408.3 889.2
models with perfect midsurface, whereas a geometrically
nonlinear buckling analysis was performed for all models.
The ®rst type of analysis leads to the critical buckling load
modeshape, compared to the (5 £ 8) one predicted by the
and its associated modeshape of the cylinder, whereas the
closed form solution.
second one provides the load-de¯ection curve, strain and
Table 4 shows that the analytical solution predicted the
stress histories of the cylinder and the consequent nonlinear
buckling load very accurately, since its difference from the
buckling load. For cylinder RVM05A, an experimental
best ®nite element result (that corresponding to the ®nest
buckling load equal to 290 kN was measured, accompanied
mesh) is only about 2%. The same Table indicates also that
by local buckling at midlength of the cylinder and an
there is very good convergence of the results for the model 1
indication of twisting [10]. For the thicker cylinder
meshes analyzed. Therefore, taking into account that in
RVM07, a failure load equal to 704 kN was recorded,
order to properly model geometry models 2 and 5 with differ-
with signi®cant material failure accompanying buckling
ent thickness at the overlaps, a circumferential subdivision
[11]. It was not clear from the test whether local buckling
which is at least equal or submultiple of the overlap width is
resulted in material failure or vice versa, but the ®nal
needed, the 38 £ 12 mesh was selected for further consid-
load-axial shortening recording is in favour of the ®rst
eration in the remaining eigenvalue and nonlinear analyses.
option, since almost all of the cylinder load carrying capa-
Table 4 presents also the linearized eigenvalue buckling
city was lost suddenly, without any progressive evolution of
loads for model 2. The increased average thicknesses with
the failure [10].
respect to the nominal values, as well as the stiffening effect
of the overlaps which are taken into account in model 2,
4.1. Eigenvalue analysis result in model 2 eigenvalue buckling loads which are
increased about 30±35% with respect to the model 1
The effect of mesh magnitude was investigated ®rst, by loads. Signi®cant differences appear also in the mode-
performing eigenvalue analyses of model 1 for various shapes. Whereas model 1 buckles with a normal modeshape
meshes. The results are shown in Table 4 for both cylinders, as shown in Fig. 7 for cylinder RVM05A, the modeshape of
along with the analytical prediction. All model 1 meshes of model 2 presents local buckling deformations, more concen-
cylinder RVM05A result in a (5 £ 9) modeshape, whereas trated at the midlength of the cylinder and at that portion of
the analytical solution predicted a (6 £ 9) one. For cylinder its circumference having minimum thickness. This can be
RVM07, all model 1 meshes of Table 4 result in a (4 £ 8) seen in Fig. 8, presenting the critical buckling modeshape

Fig. 7. Buckling modeshape of cylinder RVM05AÐmodel 1.

 N.G. Tsouvalis et al. / Composites: Part B 32 (2001) 387±399 395

Fig. 8. Buckling modeshape of cylinder RVM05AÐmodel 2.

for model 2 of cylinder RVM05A. Similar results were
obtained for cylinder RVM07 too.
The model 2 results of Table 4 are in good agreement
with other relative results in Ref. [11], the ones presented
here being closer to the experimental buckling loads. The
small differences noticed, are justi®ed by the slightly differ-
ent FE models considered in the two studies.
4.2. Nonlinear analysis
In an attempt to evaluate the validity of each geometry
model, the nonlinear analysis was performed for all models.
The nonlinear buckling loads were obtained using the
following process: a large deformation nonlinear analysis
was ®rst performed, with a linearly increasing load and an
automatically adjusted time step. For various time steps of
this analysis, the model data accumulated until the current
time step was saved. Then, using as input (i.e. as initial
conditions) these saved data, an eigenvalue analysis was
performed to obtain the buckling load. This procedure was
repeated by performing the eigenvalue analysis at various
steps of the nonlinear analysis, until convergence of the
buckling load was obtained. For the performance of the
nonlinear analysis of model 1 an arti®cial initial imper-
fection is needed to initiate buckling, since model 1 is
geometrically perfect. Thus, a deformation scheme similar
to the ®rst eigenvalue buckling modeshape was considered,
having a pre-de®ned maximum value equal to 0.001 £ t.
Table 5 presents the results of all nonlinear calculations,
together with the experimentally measured buckling loads.
Comparing model 1 to model 3 and model 2 to model 5, we
see a reduction of the buckling load in both cylinders, owing
solely to the imperfections of the midsurface. It is important
to note that this reduction is about the same for both cylin-
ders and both comparisons, varying from 216 to 218%.
The same consistent behaviour is found, when one compares
model 1 to model 2 and model 3 to model 5 for both cylin-
ders. The resulting increase of buckling loads for models 2
and 5 varies between 35 and 38% and is due to the increased
thickness and the stiffening effect of the overlaps, which are
taken into account in these models. This stiffening effect
remains the same regardless of whether the midsurface is
geometrically perfect or not. A comparison between model
3 and model 4 veri®es the expected result drawn out also in
Ref. [11], that the critical buckling load of composite cylinders
under compressive loading is proportional to the square of
their thickness, just as in the case of isotropic cylinders.
The predictions of the closest to reality model 6 are very
good, differing from the experimental buckling loads by
only 4% for both cylinders. Relatively good are also the
predictions of model 5, which results in differences of
14% for cylinder RVM05A and only 4% for cylinder
RVM07. This model is simpler than model 6 and therefore
more ease to develop, since it does not account for the actual
thickness distribution, but only for uniform sector average
thickness distributions. All other models do not give results
of acceptable accuracy with respect to the experimental
measurements, since it appears that, for the cylinders exam-
ined, the effect of both the imperfections of the midsurface
and the overlaps are too strong to be neglected.
Table 5
Experimental and nonlinear buckling loads, in kN
Geometry RVM05A RVM07
Model 1 292.7 654.7
Model 2 404.5 878.8
Model 3 245.4 534.9
Model 4 382.3 826.0
Model 5 331.8 734.7
Model 6 301.9 728.0
Experiment Refs. [10,11] 290.0 704.0
396 N.G. Tsouvalis et al. / Composites: Part B 32 (2001) 387±399

Fig. 9. Axial shortening versus load for cylinder RVM05AÐmodel 6.

The cylinder axial shortening predicted by model 6 is
plotted against the experimental measurements in Fig. 9
for cylinder RVM05A and in Fig. 10 for cylinder RVM07.
The comparison is quite good, indicating that the axial stiff-
ness of the cylinders was accurately modeled. Good corre-
lation also exists between the calculated and measured
strains. Figs. 11 and 12 present the axial and circumferential
strains at the cylinder midlength, plotted versus the applied
load for cylinders RVM05A and RVM07, respectively.
Numerical strains are average values over the circumference
of the cylinders, whereas the experimental data were taken
in three positions, spaced 1208 between each other. The
clear minimum exhibited by one of the axial strains experi-
mental curves near the failure load for cylinder RVM07
(Fig. 12) strengthens the previously expressed view that
local buckling of cylinder RVM07 might be the initial
cause of the observed material failure.
A material failure analysis was performed for both cylin-
ders, calculating the Tsai-Hill failure criterion value in
various steps of the nonlinear response for model 6. At the
nonlinear buckling load level, the maximum criterion values
were found to be quite low, equal to 0.22 for cylinder
RVM05A and 0.43 for cylinder RVM07, thus indicating
no material failure before buckling failure. These results
show that stress levels in cylinder RVM07 are higher than
those in cylinder RVM05A, thus making the buckling load of
the former cylinder closer to its material failure load than the
respective relation in the latter cylinder. It must be noticed,
however, that the calculated failure criterion values increase
very fast near the buckling region of the nonlinear analysis.

Fig. 10. Axial shortening versus load for cylinder RVM07Ðmodel 6.

 N.G. Tsouvalis et al. / Composites: Part B 32 (2001) 387±399 397

Fig. 11. Axial and circumferential strains versus load for cylinder RVM05AÐmodel 6.

5. Conclusions The results obtained from the various ®nite element

The present study and its results reveal ®rst that the use of
an analytical representation of an imperfect surface for
developing an as accurate as possible ®nite element mesh
is a very useful analysis tool, leading to a very good predic-
tion of the buckling behaviour, compared to the experimen-
tal data. The particular computer aided geometric design
method used here, the skinning method, proved its validity
and can be safely used further as a parametric study tool,
producing surfaces with predetermined types and sizes of
geometric imperfections.
models developed are very useful in many ways. First
they provide credibility to the modeling procedure followed,
since they agree very well with the experimental measure-
ments. Second, they make evident that a nonlinear analysis
is needed to come up with an accurate prediction of the
buckling load. Additionally, the present results give
valuable information about the degree of accuracy of each
modeling, starting from the more simple (model 1) and
proceeding to the most complex (model 6).
Apart from the above, a comparison between eigen-
value results for models with perfect geometry and the

Fig. 12. Axial and circumferential strains versus load for cylinder RVM07Ðmodel 6.
398 N.G. Tsouvalis et al. / Composites: Part B 32 (2001) 387±399

experimentally measured buckling loads leads to the estima- and:

tion of the knockdown factors. These factors express the
Li …zk † ˆ dik ; i; k ˆ 1; ¼; N; …A:2†
reduction of the buckling load due to the geometric (and
possibly the material) imperfections. In the present case, respectively; see Eqs. (2) and (3). In addition, appro-
the complete perfect geometry is expressed only by model priate boundary conditions have to be ful®lled, namely
1, which has no midsurface imperfections and a uniform periodic boundary conditions for the skeletal lines:
constant thickness. However, the resulting knockdown
dr Qi …0† dr Qi …2p†
factors of 1.0 for cylinder RVM05A and 1.04 for cylinder ˆ ; r ˆ 1; 2; i ˆ 1; ¼; N; …A:3†
RVM07 are completely misleading and should not be taken d ur d ur
into account, since model 1 is not at all representative of the and natural boundary conditions for the blending func-
actual cylinders geometry. The two basic simpli®cations of tions:
model 1, namely the uniform nominal thickness which is
20±25% less than the actual thickness and the absence of d2 Li …z1 † d2 Li …zN †
ˆ ˆ 0; i ˆ 1; ¼; N; …A:4†
overlapping, signi®cantly in¯uence the cylinder buckling dz2 dz2
behaviour, leading to lower eigenvalue buckling loads and see Eqs. (6) and (7).
thus compensating the buckling load reduction due to the We shall now show that, combining Eqs. (A.1) and (A.3)
actual midsurface and thickness imperfections. Therefore, with our continuity (C 2) and degree (cubic) assumptions,
the agreement of experimental data and model 1 results in Qi …u† can be fully determined at the computational cost of
the present case is accidental and misleading and the result- solving a linear system. Naturally, an analogous result holds
ing knockdown factors are meaningless. On the contrary, true for Eqs. (A.2) and (A.4) that are associated with the
model 2 eigenvalue results can be safely used for the esti- blending functions Li(z).
mation of the knockdown factors, since in this model, both To start with, since Qi …u†, 0 # u # 2p , is assumed to be a
perfect geometry is preserved (no midsurface imperfections C 2 cubic spline, its restriction on the interval [uj ; uj11 ] is a
and no thickness imperfections within each sector) and the cubic polynomial that can be represented as:
stiffening effect of the overlaps is taken into account. The
resulting knockdown factors of 0.71 for cylinder RVM05A Qi …u† ˆ …1 2 t†aij 1 tbij 1 cij F…1 2 t† 1 dij F…t†;
and 0.79 for cylinder RVM07 are very typical for problems …A:5†
of this type and additionally very close to other relevant uj # u # uj11 ;
results [10]. where t ˆ …u 2 uj †=hj , hj ˆ uj11 2 uj , is the so-called local
variable, ranging in [0,1], while F…t† ˆ …t3 2 t†=6.
Obviously, since the function set {…1 2 t†; t; F…1 2
Acknowledgements
t†; F…t†} comprises four linearly independent polynomials
of degree at most three, it constitutes a basis in the space of
The results presented in this paper are based on work
cubic polynomials. Next, we set:
carried out within the framework of EU Contract No.
BEU2-CT94-0926 `Design and Validation of Imperfec-  ij ; dij ˆ h2j Q
aij ˆ Iij ; bi;j11 ˆ Ii;j11 ; cij ˆ h2j Q  i;j11 ; …A:6†
tionÐTolerant Shell Structures', whose ®nancial support
is thankfully acknowledged. The authors would like to where the dot denotes differentiation with respect to u and:
thank all partners in this project and especially the collea- 2
gues from Imperial College of Science, Technology and  ij ˆ d Qi …uj †
Q …A:7†
Medicine, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, d u2
for providing all experimental data. Substituting Eq. (A.6) into Eq. (A.5), we arrive at the
following representation for:

Appendix A. Determining the skeletal lines and the  ij F…1 2 t† 1 h2j Q

Qi …u† ˆ …1 2 t†Iij 1 tIi;j11 1 h2j Q  i;j11 F…t†;
blending functions of a C 2 bicubic interpolating skinning
surface uj # u # uj11 ; (A.8)

As discussed in Subsection 3.2, the measurement set D is which ful®lls the interpolation conditions (Eq. A.1) (C 0
interpolated by the skinning surface Sint …u; z† (Eq. (1)), continuity) and, moreover, ensures continuity between the
provided that the tensor-product components of the latter, left- and the right-hand second-order nodal derivatives, i.e.:
namely its skeletal lines Qi …u†, 0 # u # 2p, and blend-  i …uj 1† ˆ Q
 i …uj 2† ˆ Q  ij :
Q …A:9†
ing functions Li(z), 0 # z # L, ful®l the interpolation
constraints: 2
Then, in order to achieve C continuity, it suf®ces to
ensure ®rst-order derivative continuity at the nodes, that is:
Qi …uj † ˆ Iij ˆ …xij ; yij ; zi †T ; j ˆ 1; ¼; M; i ˆ 1; ¼; N;
…A:1† Q _ i …uj 1†; j ˆ 1; ¼; M:
_ i …uj 2† ˆ Q …A:10†
 N.G. Tsouvalis et al. / Composites: Part B 32 (2001) 387±399 399

Substituting Eq. (A.8) into Eq. (A.10) and taking into The matrix of the above system is tridiagonal, symmetric
account the boundary conditions (Eq. A.3) for r ˆ 1, we and strictly diagonally dominant. Since it is tridiagonal, it
arrive at the following linear system for the second-order admits a very simple factorization enabling its solution at a
nodal derivatives Q ij ; j ˆ 1; ¼; M; of the i-th skeletal line cost of 3(N 2 3) additions, 3(N 2 3) multiplications and
Qi …u†: 2(N 2 2) divisions, which constitutes a considerable reduc-
tion in comparison with the computational cost of the
hM21 1 h1  h  h  i;M21 ˆ bi1 2 biM ; Cholesky factorization. Obviously, the method will be
Qi1 1 1 Q 1 M21 Q
3 6 i2 6 also robust, for the matrix is positive de®nite.
hj21  hj21 1 hj  hj 
Qi;j21 1 Qij 1 Q ˆ bi;j11 2 bij ;
6 3 6 i;j11
References
j ˆ 2; ¼; M 2 2
[1] Poggi C, Taliercio A, Capsoni A. Fibre orientation effects on the
hM21  h  i;M22 1 hM22 1 hM21 Q
 i;M21 buckling behaviour of imperfect composite cylinders. In: Jullien JF,
Qi;1 1 M22 Q editor. Buckling of shell structures, on land, in the sea and in the air.
6 6 3
London/New York: Elsevier Applied Science, 1991. p. 114±123.
ˆ biM 2 bi;M21 (A.11) [2] Davies P, Rannou F. The effect of defects in tubes: Part 1. Mode I
delamination resistance. Applied Composite Materials 1995;1:333±49.
[3] Simitses GJ. Buckling and postbuckling of imperfect cylindrical
where: shells: A review. Applied Mechanics Reviews 1986;10:1517±24.
[4] Simitses GJ, Chen ZQ, Sallam S. Delamination buckling of cylind-
Iij 2 Ii;j21 rical laminates. Thin Walled Structures 1991;11:25±41.
bij ˆ …A:12† [5] Chryssanthopoulos MK, Baker MJ, Dowling PJ. Imperfection model-
hj21
ing for buckling analysis of stiffened cylinders. Journal of Structural
Engineering 1998;117(7):2017.
The matrix of system (Eq. A.11) is cyclic tridiagonal,
[6] Giavotto V, Poggi C, Chryssanthopoulos M. Buckling of imperfect
symmetric and strictly diagonally dominant. The latter composite shells under compression and torsion. Proceedings of the
two properties induce that the matrix is positive de®nite, American Helicopter Society Intl Meeting on Rotorcraft Basic
which in turn implies that (Eq. A.11) can be solved robustly Research, Atlanta, Georgia 1991:43-1±43-13.
via the Cholesky factorization. This method requires [7] Li YW, Elishakoff I, Starnes JH, et al. Effect of the thickness variation
and initial imperfection on buckling of composite cylindrical shells:
(M 2 1) 3/6 additions, (M 2 1) 3/6 multiplications,
2 Asymptotic analysis and numerical results by BOSOR4 and
(M 2 1) /2 divisions and (M 2 1) root extractions, that PANDA2. International Journal of Solids and Structures
compares very favourably with the (M 2 1) 3/3 additions, 1997;34(28):3755±67.
(M 2 1) 3/3 multiplications and (M 2 1) 2/2 divisions of the [8] Chryssanthopoulos MK, Giavotto V, Poggi C. Statistical imperfection
Gaussian elimination. models for buckling analysis of composite shells. In: Jullien JF,
editor. Buckling of shell structures, on land, in the sea and in the
As for the cubic-spline blending functions Li(z), we adopt,
air. London/New York: Elsevier Applied Science, 1991. p. 43±52.
in direct analogy with the skeletal lines Qi …u†, the following [9] Chryssanthopoulos MK, Kim KD, Dowling PJ. Buckling behaviour of
representation: composite GFRP cylindrical panels under axial compression. In: Patel
MH, Gibbins R, editors. Proceedings of 6th International Conference
Li …z† ˆ dik …1 2 s† 1 di;k11 s 1 z2k L 00ik F…1 2 s† 1 z2k L 00i;k11 F…s†; on the Behaviour of Offshore Structures. London: Bentham Press,
1992. p. 733±43.
zk # z # zk11 ; (A.13) [10] Elghazouli AY, Chryssanthopoulos MK, Esong IE. Buckling of
woven GFRP cylinders under concentric and eccentric compression.
Composite Structures 1999;45:13±27.
where s ˆ …z 2 zk21 †=zk , zk ˆ zk11 2 zk and L 00ik denotes
[11] Chryssanthopoulos MK, Elghazouli AY, Esong IE. Validation of FE
the value of the second-order derivative L 00i …z† of Li(z) models for buckling analysis of woven GFRP shells. Composite
at the node z ˆ zk. Then, appealing to the interpolation Structures 2000;49:355±67.
constraints (Eq. A.2), the boundary conditions (Eq. A.4) [12] Poggi C. Characterization of materials. BRITE±EURAM Project
(L 00i1 ˆ L 00iN ˆ 0) and working as in the case of the skele- DEVILS, Report No. WP04.DR/PM(1), Politecnico di Milano,
Italy, October 1996.
tal lines, we arrive at the following (N 2 2) £ (N 2 2) linear
[13] SOLVIA-PRE 95.0, Users manual for stress analysis. Report SE 95-1,
system for the interior second-order nodal derivatives L 00ik , Solvia Engineering AB, Sweden, April 1996.
k ˆ 2,¼,N 2 1, of each one of the blending function Li(z): [14] Vinson JR. The behavior of shells composed of isotropic and compo-
site materials. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993.
zk21 00 z 1 zk 00 z
L 1 k21 L ik 1 k L 00i;k11 [15] Woodward CD. Skinning techniques for interactive B-spline surface
6 i;k21 3 6 interpolation. CAD 1988;20(8):441±51.
[16] Wu SC, Abel J, Greenberg D. An interactive computer graphics
di;k11 2 dik d 2 di;k21
ˆ 2 ik ; k ˆ 2; ¼; N 2 1: …A:14† approach to surface representation. Communications ACM
zk zk21 1977;20(10):703±12.