CH-307 EQIPMENT DESIGN

Report on

Types, applications and design of

vessels of Non-Circular crossection.

By
Radhesh Sirohiya Enroll no-09112048
Vivek Pandey Enroll no-09112047
Voggu Vikas Reddy Enroll no-09112031

B.Tech 3rd Year Chemical Engineering

1|Page
 Acknowledgement

We would like to acknowledge and extend our heartfelt gratitude to all those who
have directly or indirectly helped us and made the completion of this Project possible
especially Sh. Vimal C. Srivastava, -- for his vital encouragement and suppor,for his
assistance, constant reminders and much needed motivation and help and inspiration
he extended to us.

2|Page
 Introduction

The aim of the report is to set down, in readily available fashion, the
fundamental theory needed for the design of some typical pressure
vessels of non-circular cross section.

Of these the most common are the rectangular section tanks. They are
often used as bulk storage containers or as baths in the treatment of
metals and fibres and surface coating processes etc. For this reason
vessels of this type have been given special attention. Other shapes are
also included by reference rather than by a worked example.

In explanation of the underlying theory a number of fully worked out

examples are given showing the procedure which may be adopted
when preparing the necessary calculation sheets for different types of
vessels.

There are no national or international standards or codes of practice

that will cover all of the types. Here ASME VIII, Div.1, Appendix 13
probably offers the best guidance on a number of different designs.
Unfortunately, in its present form, it is rather cumbersome and
requires considerable time for proper understanding and assimilation.
Another useful source of information on rectangular tanks can be
found in the Theory and Practical Design of Bunkers. Rectangular
section headers are also covered by the Swedish Pressure Vessels
Code, British Standard BS I 113: 19694 and the Italian Standard
ANCC-VSR Collection Section VSR IS: 1978. The last two
references need to be viewed with considerable reservations as they
appear to contain a number of discrepancies which are inconsistent
with the fundamental theory.

Where there is no relevant code, the procedure outlined here follows

the same logic, based on fundamental engineering theory as used in
the codes and should therefore be equally acceptable. Such procedure
should be regarded as evidence of good modern day general

3|Page
engineering practice in this field. It is hoped that it will promote a
better understanding of the problems associated with such vessels
which are often either ignored or not given the consideration and
attention which they deserve. Such tanks can be quite complex in their
detailed design and unawareness on the part of the designer and/or
fabricator, to appreciate the various aspects can lead to costly
ramifications later on. These tanks although they appear to be very
simple indeed, can nonetheless cause considerable embarrassment if
not assessed adequately at the outset.

Additional guidance is given on square/rectangular ducting. Normally

such ducting is restricted to 20 psig (0138 N/mm2). However, the
procedure outlined in this article has no limitation per se.

Comparison of the rectangular vessels with the equivalent size

cylindrical (circular cross-section) vessels indicates that the former are
rather inefficient. Cylindrical vessels will sustain considerably higher
pressures, for the same wall thicknesses and size, see Fig. 20.
However, practical consideration will often force the designer to select
a rectangular shape as the best available option.

The fundamental theory is applicable to both external and internal

pressure. Worked examples given in the text refer to internal pressure
for the simple reason that, for the external pressure application,
considerable gaps still exist in the knowledge of the allowable
compressive stress levels which will not cause buckling or plastic
collapse in rectangular and other noncircular tanks. In such instances it
should be possible to use the design data contained in the British
Standard BS 449: 1969 for checking the main stiffeners and beams.

4|Page
 Fundamental theory for rectangular
section pressure vessels
Figure 1 shows the basic geometry of the rectangular vessel with
sharp corners and which is subjected to a uniform pressure of p.

Where
L = the longer span
h = the shorter span
l1= second moment of area of the beam BCB about its neutral axis
l2 = second moment of area of the beam BAB about its neutral axis
Due to symmetry about axes AA and CC it will be convenient to
analyse one quadrant only of the cross-section shown. This quadrant
is in equilibrium under the action of the loads and moments indicated
in Fig. 2.

5|Page
Clearly from the balance of the horizontal and vertical forces acting
on the quadrant we obtain

Tc =

which represents the direct tensile load in member BC, and

TA =

the tensile load in member AB respectively. In evaluating these

tensile forces the thicknesses t1 and t2 are considered to be negligible
in comparison with dimensions such as L and h, i.e.

( effectively equals to L/2 .

In any member of a structure subjected to bending the total strain

energy is given by

U= ...............(1)

where M is the bending moment at any point on the member caused

by the combined effect of the imposed loads and the supporting forces
and moments, whether statically determinate or not.
6|Page
Two further postulates (Castigliano's theory) help to solve the
problem. These are:
(i) The partial differential coefficient of the strain energy in a
structure with respect to a load F acting on a structure, is
equivalent to the displacement of F along its line of action,
i.e.

= = ............. (2)
(ii) The partial differential coefficient of the strain energy with
respect to a moment acting on a structure is equivalent to
the angle through which that portion of the structure
rotates when the moment is applied
= = .............(3)

When, as in this case, the support of the structure (point A) does not
give way under the action of the loading, then there is no deformation
of the structure at this point of support and the two expressions just
quoted can be equated to zero.
By setting down the equation for moments along AB and BC and by
considering the strain energy due to bending (by integrating along AB
and BC respectively) it can be shown that the moments at the three
important points A, B and C become for a general case

MA

7|Page
 ( ) ..................(4)

MB

( ) ................(5)

Mc= ( ) ...................(6)

Where

K= and

Notice that

MB= - ( )

where the first term denotes the bending moment at mid span for a
simply supported beam BCB under the action of uniform load p. For a
uniform wall thickness throughout, the parameter

K=

which is the same as P and the three moment expressions simplify to

the following

MA

( ) ................(7)

MB

( ) ................(8)

Mc= ( ) ..............(9)

8|Page
where once again

the ratio of shorter to longer spans. By substituting specific values for

the parameter (i.e. = 0,01,02, ... etc. up to = 1) we can express
the three moments in a very much simplified form
MA= A2 pL2 .....................(10)

MB= B 2 pL2 .....................(11)

MC= c 2 pL2 .....................(12)

where A, B and c are the three new parameters which, for uniform
wall thickness throughout, are dependent on ratio only.
The plots for these three parameters are shown in Fig. 3, where after
simplification these can be written as

A= .....................(13)

B= .....................(14)

c= .....................(13)

Identical plots to those shown in Figure 3 were obtained from the

equations given in ASME VIII, Appendix 13 and the Swedish
Pressure Vessels codel indicating that these are also based on
fundamental engineering theory.
When comparing the above equations with the corresponding
parameters given in these two codes it must be borne in mind that the
latter3 specifies the two spans as 2m x 2n so that the relevant
constants a will dint-r factor of four, since M reference ( l) and M = a
3pm reference (3). Thus for consistency a1L2 must be equal to a3 m2.

9|Page
As L2 == 4m2 hence this factor of is contained in the parameter ex.1
in all the expressions for moment given as M = apm 2Hence it can be
seen that this approach presented in this article will satisfy both
ASME VIII,
Div.1 and the Swedish Pressure Vessels code for the plain rectangular
vessels but refer has still to be made to these codes for the allowable
design stress and the weld factor where necessary. From the plots
shown in Fig 3 the moment distribution curve along each member can
be quite easily obtained by the following method.
(a) For members BCB, span L First draw to a suitable scale the
free end moment distribution curve BCB which is given by
the standard equation

Mxb= { } ................(16)

where x is the distance from point B. (Distance B-B to represent the

span length L.) Refer back to Fig. 3 to obtain the relevant bending
moment at the corners, M. = a.pL2. Draw a new "zero bending
moment" axis 0-0 at a distance equal to M. below the original datum
line BB (as shown in Fig. 4a). The resultant sketch will give the
complete bending moment distribution diagram for the longer span
length L. Moment at any point along BB is then simply given by the
vertical intercept, either above or below

10 | P a g e
the new datum line 0-0 as the case may be. In this particular instance
Fig. 4 shows the moment distribution curve which is applicable to the
following three geometries: (i) datum line 0-0 for a rectangular header
whose hlL ratio equals 05, (ii) datum line 0-0 for square header, i.e. h
= L and (iii) for built in beam where h = o. The points of contraflexure
and also shown for these cases. This sort of information could prove
useful when the decision has to be made on the best location of the
welded seam or any other outside attachment.
(b) For members BAB, span h
Similar procedure to that described above can be used to obtain the
moment distribution diagram for the shorter span. The only difference
in procedure is that the initial free end bending moment curve is now
given by the equation
1 x2
Mxa = ph x
2 h

11 | P a g e
 pb 2
=
t2

where x is the distance from point B (towards A this time). The new
distance BB should now represent, to the same scale as above, the
shorter span h.
The basic engineering theory and the above procedure indicate that
each member of a rectangular section vessel can be treated as an
initially simply supported (free end) beam uniformly loaded along its
entire length which is then subjected to the end moments MB , the
latter determined from Fig. 3. This approach will be useful for
calculating the central deflection of the members. This is illustrated in
Figs. 4(b) and (c) and the plot for the central deflection of the longer
span L is given in Fig. 5. So far we have dealt essentially with
uniform wall rectangular vessels. The preceding basic theory is
equally applicable to rectangular vessels which have peripheral
stiffeners spaced along the length of the vessel as shown in Fig.6. In
such cases we have to check not only the strength of the stiffeners but
also the stress levels in the wall panels between these stiffeners.
The strength of the peripheral stiffeners can be determined by the
method described above, as for the plain rectangular vessels, by
substituting ps for the uniform pressure load p used in the preceding
analysis. Equations (4), (5) and (6) can be used directly for a general
case where the second moments of area of the stiffeners I and 11 and
the wall thicknesses I2 of the two main sides are different.

12 | P a g e
For uniform wall and stiffener sections Equations (10), (11) and (12)
and Fig. 3 become once more applicable provided ps is substituted
for p in the relevant equations.
The wall panels between the stiffeners can be treated as rectangular
panels fixed (built-in) at all four edges and subjected to a uniform

13 | P a g e
pressure load p over the entire area. Reference (7) covers this
particular case and gives the maximum bending stress, which occurs
at the centre of the long edges, as
pb 2 pb 2
= 0.5 or 0.5
t2 t2

where the value of depends solely on the ratio of the two sides a/h, h
is the width or the shorter span and t is the panel plate thickness. Fig.
7 gives the plot for the variable for various a/b ratios. Notice that for
alb values above 215 the parameter = 05, giving
This represents the same situation that occurs for a built-in beam of
span b. Here the end moment
M 6 pL2 pL2
= 0.5
12t 2 t2

and the plate section modules for ac unit width strip

Hence the bending stress at the built in edge
M 6 pL2 pL2
= 0.5
12t 2 t2

1.5 2.5
p= 0.375 kg 2
10 cm

i.e. the same as above. This confirms that for wall panels whose alb
ratio exceeds 215 we can treat the central portion of such panels as a
fixed-in beam of span equal to the width of the panel.
One further detail which will require consideration is the solution for
the corner wall panels, whether the corner occurs between the main
side panels or between the side panels and the flat ends which may
have transverse stiffeners. Such details can be dealt with by
evaluating the bending moments and tensile loads shown in Fig. 8.

14 | P a g e
 Enclosed Rectangular Tank with Flat Bolted Top Cover with Gasket
Seal Fig. 16 shows the essential details of the proposed tank. The
tank is to contain liquid of specific density of 10 up to a maximum
depth of 12 m. The "gas space" pressure == 0069 N/mm 2 (IO
psig). Because of the presence of the flanged joint the cross-section of
the tank cannot be considered as an integral entity. In this instance the
cover and the tank have to be treated independently.
(i) Consider the cross-section of the tank itself. The vertical stiffeners
on the side wall can be considered as beams built-in at the lower ends
and simply supported at the flange face joint level and loaded as
shown in Fig. 17. The pressure at the bottom of the tank will be given
by P2 == 0.069 + 0.012 - 0081 N/mm 2 The pitch between the
stiffeners = 440 mm. Thus the loading per unit length of span will be
PI = 0069 x 440 = 3036 Newtons per unit length of span AB,
and P2 == 0.012 x 440 = 528 Newtons per unit Of span AB.
The two loading conditions shown above will produce the following
bending moments at
base (point B)

assuming that the triangular load distributton is over the entire

length of 15 m instead of 12 m. This will give slightly conservative
results. Thus the combined bending
moment at base will be

15 | P a g e
 M = MI + M2
=(3036/8) X 15002 + 528 X 15002 - 9330750 N.mm
Hence the bending stress at this location is 125.08 N/mml
In addition there will be a tensile load equal to = (P2 L)/2
acting on each stiffener. Therefore
d =(81 * 440 * 1500 )/(2*23.4*100)= 1142 N/mm1
So that the total tensile stress
t = 125.08 + 1142 = 13650 N/mm1.

16 | P a g e
Fig 17

Hence the combined tensile stress level =124.34 N/mm2.The above

calculations indicate once again that the plate panels and the stiffener
sections are adequate for the loading conditions specified. Now that
the overall design check has been made on the main components the
designer can carry out detailed calculations on other features
particular to his case, such as ftangedjoint details and the adequacy of
supporting sections. Note that if this enclosed tank had been of
integral construction the maximum combined tensile stress
level would only be 101 N/mm2 .Compare this with the
13650 N/mm2 calculated at the base of the vertical stiffner.

Fig 18

17 | P a g e
18 | P a g e
The information presented here is based on the basic theory contained
in Reference (8) by combining the two separate loading conditions for
panels L and h respectively. Basic information on critical moments
and tensile loads is also given for
(a) rectangular vessels with radiused corners-see Fig. 9;
(b) elliptical vessels-see Fig. 10;

19 | P a g e
 (c) long vessels of uniform thickness-see Figs. II and 12. Table 1 in
the Appendix gives some basic equations for the simple geometries
and loading systems considered in this article.

20 | P a g e
21 | P a g e
22 | P a g e
WORKED EXAMPLES
1. Open top rectangular tank with continuous horizontal wall
stiffeners
Figure 13 shows the essential details of one such tank measuring
5500 x 2000 x 2500 mm deep. The tank is to contain liquid of specific
density 15. It is to be supported on beam members forming part of
the general plant structure.
The tank is to be built from 6mm thick plate material of 432 N/mm2
ultimate strength. The corrosion effect on the plate thickness is
considered to be negligible during the useful life of the tank.
I t would normally require several attempts to establish the optimum
size of the stiffener and their respective spacing. The following check
will deal with the tank as shown in Fig. 13 in order to demonstrate the
design method rather than the final choice.
The pressure distribution on the tank walls will be linear and as
shown in Fig. 14. The pressure at the bottom of the tank due to the 25
m head of liquid of specific density of 15 will be
1.5 2.5
p= 0.375 kg 2
10 cm

(as 10 m head of water is equivalent to 1 atii or 1 kg/cm2 pressure), or

in Newtons per mm2 this pressure is equivalent to

p1
1
2.52 3.32 10 2 500 560
2 2

= 15.476 Newtons per mm of span

2000
0.364
5500

= 0.0368 N/mm2 or 368 x 10-2 N/mm2

23 | P a g e
(A) Check on Stiffeners
(i) Considering the first stiffener from the bottom, namely SI. It is
fabricated from 200 x 100 x 8 mm rectangular hollow section whose
properties are as follows
1xx= moment of inertia = 2269 em4
Zxx = elastic modulus= 227 cm3
A= sectional area = 45.1 cm2

Applications of non- circular vessels.

Such vessels have wide application as component parts of air-cooled
heat exchangers, duct work, special piping, extrusion chambers and
specialty vessels used in laundry and hospital service and heat transfer
applications.

A pressure vessel having a non-circular axial cross-section to be

used either as an aircraft engine duct or as an aircraft fuel tank. The
use of pressure vessels is particularly important with respect to
aircraft engine ducts and fuel tanks since an engine duct or fuel tank
having an elliptical-shaped axial cross-section is aerodynamically less
protrusive than an equivalent circular cross-sectional vessel. Certain
problems, however, result from the vessel's non-circular axial cross-
sectional configuration. Where the internal pressure forces in a
circular pressure vessel create simple "hoop" tension forces in the
walls of a "circular" pressure vessel, the walls of a "non-circular"
pressure vessel become subject to varying bending moments around
the periphery. The bending moments result from the non-circular
section tending to become round under the internal pressure, with the
bending moments being maximum at the nose and tending to "open
up" the nose curvature, reducing to zero, then reversing the bending
direction at the top and bottom centerlines.

24 | P a g e
In the conventional approach to dealing with these bending loads,
internal or external frames have been added to the non-circular
pressure vessel. These frames are generally added around the entire
surface periphery of the pressure vessel, and are closely-spaced along
the entire length, thereby greatly increasing the weight and cost of the
pressure vessel. An additional disadvantage of using these frames is
the deflection of the shell's skin between each of the frame members
in the presence of pressure This skin deflection increases aerodynamic
drag, and thereby reduces propulsion efficiency, thus again
necessitating close spacing of the frames leading to increased weight
and cost.

An object of the present invention is to provide a non-circular

pressure vessel that avoids the use of support frames and their
corresponding disadvantages. An additional objective of the present
invention is to provide a non-circular pressure vessel with essentially
constant compression and tension loads around the periphery despite
the varying bending moments created by the non-circular cross-
sectional axial configuration. A further objective is to provide a non-
circular pressure vessel that is able to carry fuselage axial
compression and bending loads resulting from its attachment to the
fuselage. A further objective of the present invention is to provide a
non-circular pressure vessel that has minimal weight and maximum
aerodynamic smoothness, and which may be constructed with
minimal cost and with improved reliability.

25 | P a g e
 Conclusions
The basic engineering theory outlined in this article shows how we
can check the design of a number of non-circular cross-section
pressure vessels. The worked examples demonstrate how we can
represent various details of a rectangular tank by replacing them with
simplified geometries which can subsequently be evaluated by the
fundamental engineering theory. We must endeavour to make each
theoretical representation as close to the real component as possible.
The closer the approximation between model and actual detail the
higher the allowable design stress levels we can adopt.
The simplification procedure and the degree of sophistication needed
will depend on how arduous will be the intended duty, on the
confidence of our knowledge of the material properties and other
factors. I t is Important to realise the implications of the
simplifications and assumptions which have been made. If the
theoretical model, or the simplified geometry, is too far detached from
the real detail the design calculations may become invalid.
In other cases we can compensate for any simplifications by using
much lower design stress levels or by ensuring that the theoretical
representation is conservative. Personal experience and knowledge of
the fundamental engineering theory will dictate the course of the
appropriate action. This approach is certainly not recommended for
the beginners. If you are one then seek advice.
It is hoped that by outlining some of the salient features of the non-
circular pressure vessels this article would prove useful to the
designers and fabricators alike, and that it would, in some small way,
lead to fewer failures of the type normally classified' as due to poor or
inadequate design.

26 | P a g e