×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Average moment of inertia of concrete coated pipe

Average moment of inertia of concrete coated pipe

Average moment of inertia of concrete coated pipe

(OP)
Hi there,

I am considering the concrete coating for the moment of inertia of pipe when analysing s lay using offpipe. Anyone one can provide some help in doing so? currently i use the formula below.

Is = I for steel
Ic = I for concrete
Iavg = Average I
Es = Young's modulus for steel
Ec = Young's modulus for concrete

Iavg = Is + Es/Ec*Ic

IF anyone has got better formula please let me know.

RE: Average moment of inertia of concrete coated pipe

The use of such formula in an environment where the concrete can become cracked is not warranted. For a composite beam simply supported where the whole length of the compression head in concrete develops no (hopefully) cracks in tension, it is fine. At the cracks of a cylinder in flexure is less than the formula you use asserts; it is however bigger than Is because the other side it is expected would remain attached without cracks.

Maybe the crack distances along the member can be studied with the formulas proposed for reinforced concrete, but I seriously doubt it, for surely the tests have not comprised composite pipes externally surrounded in concrete. Hence we would be deriving the distances theoretically on assumptions or values of actual slippage at the crack for some length, and driven by the amount of tension the concrete can actually stand and the maximum adherence at the interface. More or less in the same way such distances are derived.

In short one should expect for flexural situations some reduction of the concrete contribution to inertia is required, maybe 60 to 80% of the contribution maybe standing as an average; 50% would be warranted in the compressive side and then who knows around 2/3 average over the length in the other side.

In dynamical situations where vibration may spall the cover I wouldn't consider but the steel.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources