0
Research Papers: Design and Analysis

Design Optimization of Compound Cylinders Subjected to Autofrettage and Shrink-Fitting Processes

[+] Author and Article Information
Ossama R. Abdelsalam

Ph.D. candidate
e-mail: ossama_ramy@yahoo.com

Ramin Sedaghati

Professor
FASME
e-mail: ramin.sedaghati@concordia.ca
Mechanical and Industrial Department,
Concordia University,
Montreal, Quebec H3G 1M8, Canada

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology. Manuscript received July 11, 2012; final manuscript received October 12, 2012; published online March 18, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Mordechai Perl.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 135(2), 021209 (Mar 18, 2013) (11 pages) Paper No: PVT-12-1094; doi: 10.1115/1.4007960 History: Received July 11, 2012; Revised October 12, 2012

The autofrettage and shrink-fit processes are used to increase the load bearing capacity and fatigue life of the pressure vessels under thermomechanical loads. In this paper, a design optimization methodology has been proposed to identify optimal configurations of a two-layer cylinder subjected to different combinations of shrink-fit and autofrettage processes. The objective is to find the optimal thickness of each layer, autofrettage pressure and radial interference for each shrink-fit, and autofrettage combination in order to increase the fatigue life of the compound cylinder by maximizing the beneficial and minimizing the detrimental residual stresses induced by these processes. A finite element model has been developed in ansys environment to accurately evaluate the tangential stress profile through the thickness of the cylinder. The finite element model is then utilized in combination with design of experiment (DOE) and the response surface method (RSM) to develop a smooth response function which can be effectively used in the design optimization formulation. Finally, genetic algorithm (GA) combined with sequential quadratic programming (SQP) has been used to find global optimum configuration for each combination of autofrettage and shrink-fit processes. The residual stress distributions and the mechanical fatigue life based on the ASME code for high pressure vessels have been calculated for the optimal configurations and then compared. It is found that the combination of shrink-fitting of two base layers then performing double autofrettage (exterior autofrettage prior to interior autofrettage) on the whole assembly can provide higher fatigue life time for both inner and outer layers of the cylinder.

Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Gamer, U., and Lance, R., 1983, “Residual Stresses in Shrink Fits,” Int. J. Mech. Sci., 25, pp. 465–470. [CrossRef]
Parker, A. P., 2001, “Autofrettage of Open-End Tubes—Pressures, Stresses, Strains, and Code Comparisons,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 123, pp. 271–281. [CrossRef]
Parker, A. P., 2001, “Bauschinger Effect Design Procedures for Compound Tubes Containing an Autofrettaged Layer,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 123, pp. 203–206. [CrossRef]
Parker, A. P., and Kendall, D. P., 2003, “Residual Stresses and Lifetimes of Tubes Subjected to Shrink Fit Prior to Autofrettage,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 125, pp. 282–286. [CrossRef]
Majzoobi, G. H., Farrahi, G. H., Pipelzadeh, M. K., and Akbari, A., 2004, “Experimental and Finite Element Prediction of Bursting Pressure in Compound Cylinder,” Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping.81, pp. 889–896. [CrossRef]
Lee, E.-Y., Lee, Y.-S., Yang, Q.-M., Kim, J.-H., Cha, K.-U., and Hong, S.-K., 2009, “Autofrettage Process Analysis of a Compound Cylinder Based on the Elastic-Perfectly Plastic and Strain Hardening Stress-Strain Curve,” J. Mech. Sci. Technol., 23, pp. 3153–3160. [CrossRef]
Amran, A., and Kabashi, E. M., 2007, “Optimum Autofrettage Pressure in Thick Cylinders,” Jurnal MeKaniKal, 24, pp. 1–14.
Jahed, H., Farshi, B., and Karimi, M., 2006, “Optimum Autofrettage and Shrink-Fit Combination in Multi-Layer Cylinders,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 128, pp. 196–200. [CrossRef]
Kumar, N., Mandal, D. K., Mondal, S. C., and Acharyya, S. K., 2011, “Optimization of Shell thickness in Multilayer Pressure Vessel and Study on Effect of Number of Shells on Maximum Hoop Stress,” Int. J. Eng. Sci. Technol., 3, pp. 2693–2700.
Kumar, N., Mandal, D. K., Mondal, S. C., and Acharyya, S. K., 2011, “Optimum Autofrettage Pressure and Shrink-Fit Combination for Minimum Stress in Multilayer Pressure Vessel,” Int. J. Eng. Sci. Technol., 3, pp. 4020–4030.
Huang, X., and Moan, T., 2009, “Residual Stress in an Autofrettaged Tube Taking Bauschinger Effect as a Function of the Prior Plastic Strain,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 131, p. 021207. [CrossRef]
Parker, A. P., 2012, “Compound and Monoblock Cylinders Incorporating Reverse-Autofrettage to Reduce External Hoop Stresses,” Proceedings of ASME PVP2012 Pressure Vessels and Piping Division Conference, July 15–19, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Paper No. PVP2012-78298.
ansys, Theory Manual 2010, Release 13 Documentation, ANSYS, Inc.
Jahed, H., and Ghanbari, G., 2003, “Actual Unloading Behavior and Its Significance on Residual Stress in Machined Autofrettaged Tube,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 125, pp. 321–335. [CrossRef]
Norton, R. L., 2011, Machine Design, 4th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
JMP, 2005, Design of Experiments, Release 6, SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC.
Myers, R. H., and Montgomery, D. C., 1995, Response Surface Methodology—Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments, Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics, New York.
Nuran, B., and YiC., 2007, “The Response Surface Methodology,” M.Sc. thesis, University of South Bend, USA.
Conn, A. R., Scheinberg, K., and Vicente, L. N., 2009, Introduction to Derivation-Free Optimization, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics and the Mathematical Programming Society, Philadelphia, PA.
Kaymaz, I., and McMahon, C. A., 2005, “A Response Surface Method Based on Weighted Regression for Structural Reliability Analysis,” J. Probab. Eng. Mech., 20, pp. 11–17. [CrossRef]
Huber-Carol, C., Balakrishnan, N., Nikulin, M., and Mesbah, M., 2002, Goodness-of-Fit Tests and Model Validity (Statistics for Industry and Technology), Birkhäuser, Boston.
Jasbir, S. A., 2004, Introduction to Optimum Design, 2nd ed., Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
Philip, E., Walter, M., and Michael, S., 2005, “An SQP Algorithm for Large Scale Constrained Optimization,” SIAM Rev., 47, pp. 99–131. [CrossRef]
ASME (2004), Alternative Rules for Construction of High Pressure Vessels in Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Division 3, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Geometrical and finite element model of two-layered cylinder

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Actual and bilinear kinematic stress–strain behavior

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Residual hoop stress for a single layer autofrettage cylinder using the bilinear kinematic and the real models

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Radial distribution of residual hoop stress for two-layer shrink-fitted cylinder

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Maximum residual hoop stresses for different combinations-requirement (a)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Maximum residual hoop stresses for different combinations-requirement (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Maximum residual hoop stresses for different combinations-requirement (c)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Residual hoop stress distribution through the cylinder thickness for the first combination

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Residual hoop stress distribution through the cylinder thickness for the second combination

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Residual hoop stress distribution through the cylinder thickness for the third combination

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Residual hoop stress distribution through the cylinder thickness for the fourth combination

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Residual hoop stress distribution through the cylinder thickness for the fifth combination

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Residual hoop stress distribution through the cylinder thickness for the sixth combination

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Residual hoop stress distribution through the cylinder thickness for the seventh combination

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Fatigue life for different combinations in case of requirement (a) for the inner and outer layers of the cylinder

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Fatigue life for the different combinations in case of requirement (b) for the inner and outer layers of the cylinder

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Fatigue life for the different combinations in case of requirement (c) for the inner and outer layers of the cylinder

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In