CDKB Case Study Page 1 of 4

Tool Provider -
Home / Tools
About
Partners
Contact Us
Links

Pressure Vessel Design Case Study

Engineering Solver
This case study considers the design of a cylindrical storage vessel typical of those used in chemical and
process industries to store liquids. Corrosion resistance, strength and ease of fabrication make composite
Applications materials particularly attractive for this sort of application. The installed cost of a GRP vessel compares
Design Approach * favourably with that of more traditional materials, such as stainless steel and lined carbon steel vessels. The
majority of such vessels have diameters in the range 1 to 10 m, with wall thicknesses of between 5 and 50 mm.
Structural Behaviour *
In many respects, the process of designing a composite vessel is the same as that facing the designer of metal
Design Equations * vessels. The design must take into account the design stress resulting from the pressure and size of the vessel
in question. However, the composite designer is faced with the additional task of designing the material to be
In-service Factors * used. In so doing, they will generally take the opportunity to use a variety of differing layers within the laminate
construction in order to achieve the most economical and desirable combination of properties.
Special
Considerations * The design methodology used in this case study is that developed in BS4994.This requires that the design
Codes / Standards process is considered in three stages, assessment of allowable strain, calculation of the applied unit loads and
the selection of an appropriate laminate configuration.
Case Studies
Case Study Parameters
* Greyed out items
above are enabled once The vessel considered in this case study is a cylindrical vessel, internal diameter 1.75 m with an effective
items are selected from pressure of 2 bar (0.2 MPa). The operating temperature for the vessel is 40°C. In service, the vessel contents
the axes. level will primarily be static, although on occasion, the vessel will be emptied and refilled. The case study will
follow the design process, using the BS4994 methodology, to develop a suitable laminate configuration.
Background Info
Allowable Design Strain

BS4994 determines an allowable design strain through the use of a number of part factors, which account for the
effects of loading, environment and manufacturing conditions on the long-term chemical and mechanical
behaviour of the GRP laminates.

These part factors are defined as follows:

k1 method of manufacture (range 1.6 to 3.0)

k2 long term behaviour (range 1.2 to 2.0)

k3 temperature (range 1.0 to 1.2)

k4 cyclic loading (range 1.1 to 1.4)

k5 curing procedure (range 1.1 to 1.5)

The product of these factors, and a further safety factor of 3.0 results in an overall design factor, K, which is used
to evaluate the allowable design strain, εL.

For the case considered here, these part factors are evaluated as follows:

For hand lay-up, part factor k1 = 1.6

For long term behaviour, part factor k2 = 2.0

For temperature, assuming operation at 40°C, and use of a resin system with a heat distortion
temperature of 80°C or higher, part factor k3 = 1.0

For cyclic stressing, assuming occasional filling and emptying, part factor k4 = 1.1

For curing procedure, assuming post cure at elevated temperature, part factor k5 = 1.1

Therefore, as

The "load limited" allowable limit loading uL is given by

http://www.admc.esrtechnology.com/CDKB/CaseStudies/Pressure%20vessel%20design... 10-09-2014
CDKB Case Study Page 2 of 4

where u is the ultimate tensile unit strength (UTUS is in N/mm per kg/m2 ) of the material, and K is the design
factor calculated above.

chopped strand mat (CSM) the UTuS is 200 N/mm/(kg/m2), thus uL = 17.2 N/mm/(kg/m2)
woven rovings (WR) the UTuS is 300 N/mm/(kg/m2), thus uL = 25.8 N/mm/(kg/m2)

The load limited allowable strain is given by

where u and K are as previously defined and X is the laminate extensibility.

For CSM, the extensibility is 12 700 N/mm/(kg/m2), giving εL = 0.14%

For WR, the extensibility is 16 200 N/mm/(kg/m2), giving εL = 0.16%

There is a further overriding upper limit to the design strain of the lesser of 0.2% or 0.1 x εr (where εr is the
fracture strain of unreinforced resin in a simple tensile test.

Assuming a resin strain to failure of 3%, then, in this case, the design remains load limited and the design unit
loading ux = uL, i.e. 17.2 N/mm/(kg/m2) and 25.8 N/mm/(kg/m2) for CSM and WR respectively.

Applied Loads

The applied loading on the vessel is then calculated using conventional analysis techniques. In this case,
assuming no significant axial loading, the vessel wall circumferential unit stress is given by:

where P is the pressure, D is the vessel diameter and t is the vessel wall thickness.

Laminate Construction

At this point, it is possible to design the laminate construction.

The total quantity of reinforcement, in this first case for a vessel constructed simply from multiple CSM layers, is
simply determined by:

where wx is the weight of a single layer and nx is the number of layers.

Therefore a total weight of 10.2 kg m-2 of reinforcement is required. The distribution of this would be selected
according to manufacturers' individual preferences, but one suitable configuration would be:

2 layers 300 g m-2 (one at each surface) = 0.6 kg m-2

16 layers 600 g m-2 = 9.6 kg m-2
Total = 10.2 kg m-2

Assuming a glass content of 30% for CSM, the wall thickness would be 2.2 mm per kg/m2 of glass, giving a total
wall thickness of 22.4 mm.

A more efficient structure is obtained using a combination of CSM with WR, in which case the laminate
construction is determined as follows:

The design unit loading in the WR must be reduced such that the strain does not exceed the design limit for
CSM, hence

http://www.admc.esrtechnology.com/CDKB/CaseStudies/Pressure%20vessel%20design... 10-09-2014
CDKB Case Study Page 3 of 4

per kg/m2 of glass

The design of the laminate can then be determined from

Therefore a suitable design would be as follows:

Detail Calculation Total

Reinforced gel coat - -

1500 g/m2 CSM 17.2 x 1.5 25.80

800 g/m2 WR 22.6 x 0.8

x5 x5 129.10
450 g/m2 CSM 17.2 x 0.45

800 g/m2 WR 22.6 x 0.8 18.08

300 g/m2 CSM 17.2 x 0.30 5.16

Resin rich layer with binding tissue - -

TOTAL 178.14

In this case, assuming a glass content of 30% for CSM with 2.2 mm per kg/m2 of glass, and a glass content of
55% for CSM with 0.95 mm per kg/m2 of glass, the vessel wall thickness would be 13.5 mm.

Dished End Design

If a torispherical end is desired for such a vessel, a typical geometry would be hi /Di = 0.25 and ri /Di = 0.15 (Note
that this is slightly deeper than would be used for a typical metallic construction).

At these values, the shape factor Ks is approximately equal to 1.78. The membrane unit load for a domed end
subject to pressure is given by

For the current case, that is

Assuming a construction of CSM mat and woven rovings, similar to that for the vessel shell, gives a required
weight of reinforcement is given by

Therefore a suitable design would be as follows:

Detail Calculation Total

Reinforced gel coat - -

1200 g/m2 CSM 17.2 x 1.2 20.64

800 g/m2 WR 22.6 x 0.8

x12 x12 309.84
450 g/m2 CSM 17.2 x 0.45

800 g/m2 WR 22.6 x 0.8 18.08

300 g/m2 CSM 17.2 x 0.30 5.16

http://www.admc.esrtechnology.com/CDKB/CaseStudies/Pressure%20vessel%20design... 10-09-2014
CDKB Case Study Page 4 of 4

Resin rich layer with binding tissue - -

TOTAL 353.72
This gives an actual laminate thickness of 25.06, assuming a glass content of 30% for CSM with 2.2 mm per
kg/m2 of glass, and a glass content of 55% for CSM with 0.95 mm per kg/m2 of glass, as previously.

For a laminate of this thickness,

and the assumed value of Ks = 1.78 is reasonable. If it had been found that the value of Ks was not acceptable,
then the calculation would need to be repeated with a better estimate for the value of Ks until convergence was
achieved.

Reference: BS4994 - Specification for Vessels and Tanks in Reinforced Plastics, BSI 1973.
Keywords: BS4994, Design, Design strain, Part factors, Laminate, Code

http://www.admc.esrtechnology.com/CDKB/CaseStudies/Pressure%20vessel%20design... 10-09-2014