Experiment #3

Stresses in a Thin-walled Cylindrical Pressure Vessel

Stephen Mirdo

Performed on October 11, 2010

Report due October 25, 2010

 Table of Contents

Object ………………………………………..………………………….………….…. p. 1

Theory …………………………………………………………………………..…pp. 1 - 3

Procedure ………………………….…………………………………...……..……..... p. 4

Results ….................................................................................................................. p. 5 - 6

Discussion and Conclusion …………………….......…………………….......…... pp. 7 - 8

Appendix ……………………………………..…………………..….……..…... pp. 9 - 11

 Object
The object of this experiment was to determine the stresses developed in a thin-walled
pressure vessel when subjected to a uniform internal pressure.

Theory
Stress is defined as the intensity of a force per unit area. A normal stress is a
stress that acts perpendicular to the cross-sectional area of a member. In a thin-walled,
cylindrical pressure vessel, the normal stress has two components. One component is the
normal stress acting on a transverse section and is known as a longitudinal stress, σL.
The other component is the normal stress acting on a longitudinal section and is known as
the circumferential, or hoop, stress, σh.

Theoretically, the normal stresses σL and σh can be determined by employing

Newton’s First Law and a force balance equation. Figure 1 below is a free body diagram
of a cylindrical pressure vessel with hemispherical ends. By using method of section, an
equilibrium equation for this scenario can be written as follows:

ΣFx = σL(πDt) – P(π/4)D2 = 0 (Equation 1)

where σL is the longitudinal stress, D is the diameter of the pressure vessel, P is the
pressure present in the vessel and t is the thickness of the vessel’s walls. Rearranging
Equation 2 and solving for σL yields the following equation that solves for the theoretical
value of the longitudinal stress.

σL = PD/4t (Equation 2)

Figure 1: Free body diagram of a pressure vessel exposing σL (Adapted from Mechanics of
Materials, T.A. Philpot, 2011)

1
 Similarly, the theoretical hoop stress, σh, can also be determined by employing
Newton’s First Law and a force balance equation. Figure 2 below shows a free body
diagram exposing the hoop stress. Again, using method of section, an equilibrium
equation yields the following:

ΣFz = σh(2tΔx) – P(DΔx) = 0 (Equation 3)

where σh is the hoop stress, t is the thickness of the vessel walls, Δx is a finite segment of
the vessel wall, P is the pressure acting inside the vessel and D is the diameter of the
pressure vessel. Rearranging Equation 4 to solve for the theoretical hoop stress yields the
following:

σh = PD/2t (Equation 4)

Figure 2: Free body diagram of a pressure vessel exposing σh (Adapted from

Mechanics of Materials, T.A. Philpot, 2011)

Another method used to express normal stress is to employ Hooke’s Law.

Hooke’s Law is defined as the proportionality of a load to deflection incurred by the load.
For a uniaxial loading scenario, Hooke’s Law is written as:

σn = Eε (Equation 5)

where σn is the normal stress, E is the modulus of elasticity of a material and ε is the
uniaxial strain.2

For a cylindrical pressure vessel with hemispherical ends, the loading scenario is
biaxial. It is termed biaxial because the longitudinal stress, σL, and the hoop stress, σh,
are acting on the pressure vessel simultaneously. Thus, the deformation of the vessel
must be determined by summing both stresses by employing the principle of
superposition. The principle of superposition states that the effects of separate loadings
can be added algebraically if each effect is linearly related to the load that produced it and

2
the effect of the first load considered does not significantly change the effect of the
second load.1

Employing Hooke’s Law and the principle of superposition, the value of the longitudinal
strain, εL, of the pressure vessel can be computed using the following equation:

εL = (1/E)(σL – υσh) (Equation 6)

where εL is the longitudinal strain, E is the elastic modulus of the pressure vessel, σL is
the longitudinal stress, υ is Poisson’s ratio of the vessel’s material and σh is the hoop
stress of the vessel. Again, employing Hooke’s Law and the principle of superposition
for the hoop stress, Equation 6 becomes the following:

εL = (1/E)[σL – υ(Eεh + υσL)] = σL/E – (1/E)(Eυεh + υ2σL) = σL/E – υεh – (υ2σL)/E

(Equation 7)

where εh is the hoop strain. Further simplifying Equation 7 yields:

εL + υεh = [σL(1-υ2)] / E (Equation 8)

Rearranging Equation 8 and solving for the longitudinal stress, σL, yields:

σL = E(εL + υεh) / (1-υ2) (Equation 9)

Similarly, the hoop stress, σh, can be derived using the method described through
Equations 6 through 9 and yields:

σh = E(εh + υεL) / (1-υ2) (Equation 10)

3
 Procedure
Equipment:

Thin-walled cylindrical pressure experiment apparatus

Strain indicator

Experiment:

1) Power on the strain indicator. Set the gage factor to 2.5 and set channels 1
and 2 to quarter bridge.
2) Calibrate the strain indicator for channels 1 and 2 to zero the display. Channel
1 will read the longitudinal strain and channel 2 will read the hoop strain.
3) Ensure that the dump valve is secured.
4) Use the pump to increase the pressure of the cylinder to 100 psi.
5) Once the readings of the strain indicator have become steady, record the
values indicated for longitudinal and hoop strain. These values are indicated
in microstrain, or x10-6.
6) Use the pump to increase the pressure of the cylinder to 200 psi.
7) Again, allow the indicated strain readings to become steady and record these
values.
8) Repeat steps 6 and 7 until a final pressure of 500 psi has been reached.
9) Open the dump valve of the apparatus to release the pressure of the cylinder.
10) Repeat steps 3 through 9 for three more trials.

Figure 1: Thin-walled cylindrical pressure experiment apparatus (Adapted from

Materials Laboratory Manual, Fall 2010, University of Memphis, Department of M.E.)3

4
 Results
Table 1: Properties of the cylindrical pressure vessel
Diameter (in) 4.08
Thickness (in) 0.39
Poisson's Ratio 0.285
Elastic Modulus (psi) 2.30E+07

Table 2: Recorded longitudinal and hoop microstrain gathered over four trials at
incremental pressures.
Trial 1 Trial 2
Hoop Hoop
Pressure Longitudinal Pressure Longitudinal
Strain Strain
(psi) Strain (με) (psi) Strain (με)
(με) (με)
100 6 17 100 7 17
200 11 36 200 10 37
300 11 54 300 15 56
400 21 74 400 20 77
500 26 94 500 24 95

Trial 3 Trial 4
Hoop Hoop
Pressure Longitudinal Pressure Longitudinal
Strain Strain
(psi) Strain (με) (psi) Strain (με)
(με) (με)
100 4 18 100 5 19
200 8 36 200 9 38
300 12 54 300 13 57
400 17 73 400 18 76
500 21 93 500 22 96

Table 3: Calculated experimental and theoretical longitudinal and hoop stresses using
Equations 2, 4, 9 and 10. Note: Microstrain values are the averages of four trials.
Longitudinal Hoop
Pressure Experimental Experimental Theoretical Theoretical
Strain Strain
(psi) σL (psi) σh (psi) σL (psi) σh (psi)
(με)avg (με)avg
100 5.50 17.75 264.32 483.58 261.54 523.08
200 9.50 36.75 500.01 987.75 523.08 1046.15
300 12.75 55.25 713.36 1474.06 784.62 1569.23
400 19.00 75.00 1010.72 2013.06 1046.15 2092.31
500 23.25 94.50 1256.24 2531.53 1307.69 2615.38

5
 Longitudinal Stress vs. Pressure in a Thin-Walled Pressure Vessel

1400.00

1200.00
Longitudinal Stress of Vessel (psi)

1000.00

800.00

600.00

400.00

200.00

0.00
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Press ure in Vesse l (ps i)

Theoretical Experimental

Figure 3: Graph of experimental and theoretical longitudinal stress over pressure

increments of 100 psi in a cylindrical pressure vessel.

Hoop Stress vs. Pressure in a Thin-Walled Pressure Vessel

3000.00

2500.00
Hoop Stress of Vessel (psi))

2000.00

1500.00

1000.00

500.00

0.00
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Press ure in Ves sel (psi)

Theoretical Experimental

Figure 4: Graph of experimental and theoretical hoop stress over pressure increments of
100 psi in a cylindrical pressure vessel.

6
 Discussion & Conclusion
It was noted that the graphs produced for stress due to pressure, as seen in Figures 3
and 4, generated a linear function. It can be concluded that the pressure in the cylindrical
vessel did not exceed the proportional limit, or yield strength, of the vessel’s material.
The deformation incurred by the pressure was elastic and completely recoverable.
Therefore, the use of Hooke’s law was applicable. If the plotted data had yielded an
exponential line portion, Hooke’s Law would only be applicable to the data points that
occur before the curvature.

The experimental values calculated for longitudinal stress and hoop stress are
within an acceptable range of their respective theoretical values. However, due to the
fact that the stresses were measured indirectly by the test apparatus, a percent difference
analysis was conducted to conclude if the results produced by this experiment were
accurate. The values for the percent difference of experimental and theoretical
calculations of longitudinal and hoop stress can be seen in Table 4 and Table 5.

Table 4: Percent Difference between calculated theoretical and experimental

longitudinal stress of cylindrical pressure vessel.
Pressure Experimental Theoretical % Difference
(psi) σL (psi) σL (psi) of σL
100 264.32 261.54 1.06%
200 500.01 523.08 4.51%
300 713.36 784.62 9.51%
400 1010.72 1046.15 3.45%
500 1256.24 1307.69 4.01%

Table 5: Percent Difference between calculated theoretical and experimental hoop

stress of cylindrical pressure vessel.
Pressure Experimental Theoretical % Difference
(psi) σh (psi) σh (psi) of σh
100 483.58 523.08 7.85%
200 987.75 1046.15 5.74%
300 1474.06 1569.23 6.25%
400 2013.06 2092.31 3.86%
500 2531.53 2615.38 3.26%

The percent difference analysis of the theoretical and experimental results of the stresses
calculated from the experimental data allowed for the conclusion that they are relatively
numerically equivalent and therefore accurate.

There were a few sources of error in this experiment. One source of error was
due to the readings of the indicated strain. The strain indicator values fluctuated very

7
slowly around a central value. This was most likely due to the need of new wiring
between the strain gage and strain indicator. Another source of error was incurred by the
readings of the pressure gauge of the thin-walled cylindrical pressure vessel apparatus.
Without automation, it was difficult to bring the pressure of the vessel to an exact
indicated pressure. The error of the pressure recordings will cause a slightly skewed
calculated value for the theoretical longitudinal and hoop stresses.

A few improvements for this experiment can be made. One such improvement
would be to employ a puzzle-like, educational approach. Instead of simply calculating
the stresses present in the vessel, it would be interesting to use the same approach as in
this experiment to calculate experimental stresses, but the objective would be to destroy
the pressure vessel. By adding stresses that are beyond the proportional limit of the
material and recording the indicated strains, one performing this experiment could
identify the material used in the construction of the pressure vessel. Another
improvement would be to ensure that the wiring used on the testing apparatus is properly
grounded and there is no damage to the wiring. Damaged wiring generates line noise and
skews the actual indicated strains produced by the strain indicator.

8
 Appendix
Data Usage

Sample calculation of average longitudinal strain at 100 psi:

(6 + 7 + 4 +5) με / 4 = 5.5 με

Sample calculation of theoretical longitudinal stress, σL, at 300 psi using Equation 2:

σL = (300 lbf/in2 * 4.08 in) / (4 * 0.39 in) = 784.62 psi

Sample calculation of experimental hoop stress, σh, at 300 psi using Equation 10:

σh = [23 x 106 lbf/in2 * (55.25με + 0.285 * 12.75με)] / (1 – 0.2852) = 1474.06 psi

Sample calculation of % Difference of theoretical and experimental values of

longitudinal stress, σL, at 500 psi:

| (1307.69 psi – 1256.24 psi) / [(1256.24 psi + 1307.69 psi) / 2] | * 100 = 4.01%

9
Bibliography

1. Mechanics of Materials, 2nd Edition

Timothy A. Philpot (2011)

2. Fundamentals of Material Science and Engineering: An Integrated Approach

W.D. Callister, Jr and D.G. Rethwish (2008)

3. Materials Laboratory Manual, Fall 2010

University of Memphis, Department of Mechanical Engineering

10