ACI JOURNAL
PAPER
Title no. 80-45
Buckling of Thin Concrete Domes
by Mehdi S. Zarghamee and Frank J. Heger
A design procedure for determining the buckling strength of concrete
domes with prestressed concrete edge rings is presented. This proce
dure was developed using a conceptual model for predicting the
buckling strength of concrete domes based on the available literature
on stability of spherical shells and creep of concrete. The model is
based on the assumption that the dome contains geometric imperfec
tions in the form of spherical caps with different radii of curvature.
The buckling strength of the dome is governed by the buckling
strength of the least resistant cap. To predict the buckling strength of
a shallow concrete cap including the effects of geometric nonlinear
ity. creep. and material nonlinearity, a computer analysis of the
buckling strength of spherical caps having several shallowness pa
rameters in the critical range was performed using the BOSOR5 com
puter program. The effect of cracking on the buckling strength was
approximated by examining the stress states prior to buckling and ju
diciously selecting the time of failure.
The paper also contains the results of a survey conducted on 245
thin concrete domes built over large prestressed concrete tanks dur
ing the past two to three decades. These tend to substantiate the ad
equacy of the proposed design procedure for such domes. Also. a
survey of the actual geometry of a dome known to exhibit very se
vere imperfections and an evaluation of published creep buckling test
results were conducted for further evaluation and validation of the
proposed design procedure.
Keywords: bucklinR: compressive strength; computer programs; creep proper
ties: domes (structural forms); mathematical models; prestressed concrete:
reinforced concrete: shells (structural forms); spherical shells; structural de
sign; tanks (containers).
The purpose of this paper is to present a rational
procedure for predicting buckling loads for thin con
crete spherical shells, similar to those constructed over
prestressed water tanks. The scope of the procedure is
limited to thin shells with R/ t ~ 500. For these shells,
the stresses at the time of buckling are not high enough
that cracking would result in a significant reduction of
the critical buckling load. The procedure developed
may be used to design thin reinforced concrete spheri
cal shells that are frequently used as roofs of cylindri
cal prestressed concrete water tanks. It may also be
used as the basis for developing design procedures for
spherical shell roofs of many other types of structures.
For domes over occupied spaces, higher load factors
than the ones proposed may be appropriate.
ACI JOURNAL I November-December 1983
TECHNICAL.
In the past 40 years, more than 3000 papers have
been published on the buckling of spherical shells.
Comprehensive surveys of literature on the buckling of
spherical shells in general, and concrete domes in par
ticular, are presented by Kaplan, I Hutchinson and Ko
iter," and Scordelis. J The main results of the published
research, significant in the development of our recom
mended procedure for determining critical buckling
load, are as follows:
I. The critical buckling pressure of an elastic spheri
cal shell can be predicted with the available computer
ized models, considering the nonlinear axisymmetric
deformations of the shell before buckling and the axi
symmetric as well as the nonaxisymmetric, buckle
shapes. The results obtained are in agreement to within
about 25 percent with the experimental results obtained
from carefully conducted tests on near perfect speci
mens and specimens with specific imperfections.
2. Buckles observed after the buckling process on ex
periments conducted on concrete and PVC domes are
nearly 2.5 JRi in diameter and are mostly located near
the boundary of the shell.
3. The critical buckling load of a spherical shell is se
verely affected by deviations from its perfectly spheri
cal shape that result in a significant change of R/t over
a large enough region of the order of magnitude of a
buckle size. Imperfections, which are the cause of the
discrepancy between the experimental results and those
computed based on the classical theory, result from in
stantaneous deformations, creep deformations, and
manufacturing tolerances. The effect of imperfections
caused by instantaneous deformation is included in
nonlinear buckling analyses. Imperfections caused by
creep and manufacturing tolerances are responsible for
observed deviations of the experimental results from
those obtained through nonlinear analyses.
Received Jan. 13, 1983, and reviewed under Institute publication policies.
Copyright 1983. American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved, including
lhe making of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyrighl propri
etors. Pertinent discussion will be published in the September-October 1984 ACI
JOURNAL if received by June I, 1984.
487
Mehdi .\'. LarKhamee is an aSSUCI(lfe 01 Sunpson Gumpert:. & Heger Inc.. Con
sulting Engineers. Arlington. Mass. He received his PhD in structural engi
l1eerlllg .Iroll1 the Unn'enllY of Illmois in /lJ65 and his Schll11 malhematics from
:HIT in 1968. Dr. Larghamee Iw.\ per/armed re~ea,.ch and ha.~ h'rlUen papers in
Ihelieltls o/struclural dynamIcs. stabilit.r. structural analysl.'). numerical mefh
()d~. uptillfi:.atlul1. hydr(Julic.~. mathematics. und al1tefll1a~- litlll propoRalfons. He
has IX veurs ql experience III ell,stl11eennR pructJce. teach'n)!. and manuxement,
Frank J. Heger. f-~4 CI. is a sentor principal at Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc..
Consulling Engineers. Arlington. Mass. and San FranCISCO. Calif. He ;.1
chalfman of ACI Cummi/lee 344, C{n:ular Prestressed Concrete StruclUres. atld
" member 0/ ACI-ASCE CCmll11lflee 445. Shear alld TorSIOn. Dr. Heger re
ceived his ScD Jrom MIT in 1'162 und has JJ I'ears' expertence in structural en
gineertnR pran{ce (lnll teachi,,!!.. His other research work has resulted in new
deSign methods .lor hUrled concrete pipe und box sectlOlH. bUried plastic tanks.
und the seismIC re,Hstum.:e 0.1 pre.... tressed concrete tanks.
Fig. I - Geometry of imperfection
1.5
1.0
~----------------
0.5
Slmpl, Supported S".lIow C.p
0.0
o II 10 20 so
Fig. 2 - Comparison between analytical predictions
for buckling of deep and shallow shells with clamped
boundaries. simply supported boundaries, and bound
aries free to displace radialIy.
488
4. Imposed imperfections in the form show in Fig.
I have little effect on the critical buckling load if such
imperfections are spread over regions much smaller
than the buckle size.
S. The theoretical study of Bushnell4.5 reveals that
imperfections with a diameter of 4.3 -JRt result in the
largest reduction of the critical buckling load. Further
more, imperfections result in high bending stresses at
the boundary of the imperfection region, as well as in
side the region. The buckling behavior of an imperfect
spherical shell resembles that of a spherical cap with the
same geometry as the imperfection and clamped at the
boundary.
6. Experimental studies performed by Krenzke and
Kiernan" on the buckling strength of spherical shells
with imposed imperfections, as shown in Fig. I, sug
gest that average local radii measured over a region of
diameter d = 2.4.JRi may be used for the determina
tion of buckling strength of an imperfect shell. The di
ameter d represents the size of the observed buckles in
the experiments. The expected buckling pressure, based
on these studies, is Pcr = 0.7 Pd' where Pd = 1.1 Et/R,mp
and R,mp is the radius of curvature of the imperfection
region.
7. A theoretical study by Huang' indicates that the
critical buckling load of clamped spherical shells is
lower than that of a shell whose boundary displace
ment conforms with the membrane boundary condition
(i.e., free to displace radially). Therefore, the buckling
load of a deep spherical shell may be conservatively ap
proximated by that of a clamped shallow shell having
the same radius of curvature. Fig. 2 shows the buckling
load for a spherical shell with boundaries that are
clamped, hinged, or free to displace radially.
8. The creep buckling load of spherical shells is a
highly sensitive function of initial geometric imperfec
tions. 8 ,'
9. The creep of a reinforced concrete specimen in
creases significantly as the volume-surface ratio drops'"
(as the shell becomes thinner). This fact not only sug
gests that thin reinforced concrete shells creep more
t han massive reinforced concrete structures, but also
clouds the results obtained experimentally through test
ing of very thin microconcrete shell specimens.
10. The design procedure presented in the report of
the ACI Committee 344 " yields domes significantly
thinner than the domes designed in accordance with the
recommendations of the International Association for
Shell and Spatial Structures.3.12-ll
BUCKLING OF CONCRETE DOMES ON
PRESTRESSED CONCRETE TANKS
The concrete domes constructed on prestressed con
crete tanks" are in general characterized by a large ra
dius-to-thickness ratio (R/t ;;:: 500), a rise that is from
Vs to i';. of tank diameter, reinforcements located at
section middepth with areas equal to 0.2 to 0.3 percent
of gross 'area, tapering edge thickness for cast-in-place
domes, an edge ring prestressed to resist thrust from
full dead load and partial to full live load, and a joint
ACI JOURNAL I November-December 1983
between the bottom of the dome edge ring and the tank
wall that is either monolithic with the wall and pro
vides full continuity between wall and dome ring, or is
separated by an elastomeric pad, or is constructed in
such a way as to provide only a partial bending re
straint.
These domes are either cast-in-place using regular
concrete or built from precast concrete trapezoidal sec
tions connected by cast-in-place joints. Shotcrete domes
were used on many older tanks and on some modern
tanks. The recommendations given herein cover only
monolithic cast-in-place domes; further modifications
can be developed covering specific arrangements of
panels and connections for precast domes. Shotcrete
domes are similar to cast-in-place concrete domes and
are not recommended for climates subject to freeze
thaw conditions.
The simplified recommendations presented are pred
icated on the following assumptions about the se
quence of construction and loading.
1. Dome is supported on its falsework and while so
supported is properly cured for at least 7 days after
concrete placement.'" Falsework is removed after 7
days.
2. Dome is subject to dead load (own weight) effects
for its entire life.
3. Maximum live load is applied after the concrete
has aged at least 30 days for a continuous duration not
exceeding one month.
We are interested in knowing the greatest lower
bound of the ultimate external pressure p that produces
creep buckling of the dome during its life. The ultimate
pressure p must satisfy the inequality
p ~ 1.4DL + 1.7LL (1)
and is applied as follows:
a fraction of p equal to 1.4DL/(1.4DL + 1.7LL) is
applied initially; the remaining part of p may be ap
plied at any time t (t is arbitrary) and sustained for 30
days.
The coefficients 1.4 and 1.7 are the load factors for
dead load and live load recommended for use in build
ing design by ACI 318.
After the application of the dead load by removal of
falsework, the shell deforms instantaneously; the de
formation of the shell consists of a constant radial
membrane displacement plus bending deformations
that occur near the boundary of the dome as well as in
the imperfection regions. The zone of boundary effects
for a shallow spherical shell with compressive mem
brane stress is larger than that predicted by a Geckeler
type solution. In fact, as pip,./ increases to near unity,
asymptotic analysis indicates that the boundary effects
propagate well into the interior of the region without
decay. Therefore, the deformations of shallow shells
cannot be estimated by the membrane deformations.
A buckle starts to form and grows with time at a
large enough imperfection region; the edge taper and
prestressed edge beam prevent a buckle from forming
ACI JOURNAL I November-December 1983
in the edge zone of cast-in-place domes. The longtime
deformation of the dome in the imperfection region re
duces the curvature and drops the pressure that pro
duces instability. The Hfect of creep deformation is,
therefore, a continual reduction of critical buckling
load with time. As the dome creeps and curvature is re
duced, membrane and bending stresses grow larger.
Since the maximum bending stress exceeds the nominal
membrane stress for a clamped shell, tensile stresses
form near the boundary of the imperfection regions.
The concrete cracks, and as it cracks, bending mo
ments are reduced by material compliance as well as by
a shift in the neutral plane. Cracking may start at pres
sure levels much lower than the buckling load and may
develop further or may be arrested during the buckling
process. If the crack grows during buckling, a loss of
buckling resistance is unavoidable.
In addition to cracking, high compressive stresses in
concrete, developed probably at the boundaries and in
the cracked sections, may result in a loss of material
stiffness. A loss in material stiffness will in turn result
in a reduction of buckling resistance.
A CONCEPTUAL MODEL FOR DESIGN OF
DOMES TO RESIST BUCKLING
A conceptual model that can be used to develop de
sign formulas for concrete domes on prestressed con
crete water tanks is presented. This includes a basic
model for predicting buckling resistance of domes with
geometric imperfections and linear elastic materials and
its extension for predicting the reduction in this resis
tance due to creep, cracking, and material nonlinearity.
Basic model
First, consider a deep-clamped spherical shell made
from concrete. Concrete creeps with time, has a non
linear stress-strain relationship in compression, and
cracks when the tensile stress exceeds certain limits.
Assume that the surface of this shell contains a number
of geometric imperfections, each one in the form of a
spherical cap as shown in Fig. 1, with various imper
fection diameters and various imperfection radii of
curvature. Based on the works of Bushnell: Krenzke
and Kiernan,6 and Huang,' assume that the buckling
strength of this shell is governed by the lowest buckling
load of the imperfection regions, each assumed to be
clamped at its boundary. Applying this assumption to
the imperfections in our basic model, the buckling of
the shell is governed by the buckling strength of the
imperfection least resistant to external pressure.
For a linear elastic material with no time-dependent
properties, the buckling strength of a clamped spheri
cal cap is shown in Fig. 2. The least resistant spherical
cap is the one with a shallowness parameter f,. = 4,
computed based on an average radius of curvature in
the imperfection region. The diameter of the imperfec
tion corresponding to A = 4 is d = 4.3 ..J Rim,,!, where
.Domes on small tanks. i.e. tanks with diameters less than 100 ft. are pre
stressed a day or two after casting; for these domes. buckling is robl the govern
ing design criteria.
489
R imp and 1 are the average radius of curvature and the
average thickness of the dome over the imperfection
region.
For an actual deep concrete dome, consider cap-like
regions of the dome centered at points P on the dome
with diameter d = 4.3 -./Rplp where R p and t" are aver
age radius of curvature and average thickness in the re
gion. Let us denote the maximum radius-to-thickness
ratio in all such regions as
(2)
The buckling load of a clamped spherical cap with A
= 4 is Pcr = 0.66 E (tl R)2. This suggests that the buck
ling load Pcr of the imperfect dome, ignoring creep,
material nonlinearity, and cracking, may be expressed
as
(3)
where
1- RII J2 (4)
13,mp = l(Rlt)m
A bound on the magnitude of imperfections has been
defined by the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code l6
requiring that the maximum departure from the true
shape should be less than or equal to the shell thickness
over a chord length of 4.7 .JRi for shells with R/I ~
250. This requirement implies that for imperfections of
the form shown in Fig. 1, the rise of the imperfection
may drop from 2.771 to 1.77t, corresponding to R;m/R
= 1.56 and a reduction in Pcr by about 59 percent;
Therefore, 13,mp = 0.41. [The chord length of 4.7 .J1[i
corresponds to 4.7 -./R imp 111.56 = 3.8 -./R,mpl where
R,mp and 1 are the average local radius and thickness of
the imperfect region; the corresponding value of A in
the imperfection region is 3.5, and Pcr is approximately
0.66 E(tlR,mp)2 (Fig. 2.).]
The British Standard BS 5500 17 for metal pressure
vessels requires that the local radius of curvature, based
on an arc length of 2.5 .JRt , should not exceed the
nominal value by more than 30 percent. Therefore,
R,m/R = 1.3, and correspondingly, 13imp = 0.59. The
selection of 2.5 .J1[i in lieu of 4.3 .JRi is more conser
vative and is based on the size of the large buckles ob
served experimentally after the buckling process.
For reinforced concrete domes, it is proposed that
the following bound on the magnitude of imperfections
be imposed to prevent failure of domes with large im
perfections designed in conformance to this model: The
average radius of curvature measured over a region of
diameter d = 2.5 -./RI should not exceed the nominal
radius of curvature by more than 40 percent.
For a dome with RII = 800 and t = 4 in. (10.2 cm),
the...minimum diameter of the buckle region is d = 2.5
-./800/2 = 71 1 = 283 in. "'" 24 ft (7 m), and the rise of
490
the shell segment over the length d is 0.78 1 = 3.13 in.
(8 cm). In order to preclude an increased radius due to
imperfections greater than 1.4 times the nominal value,
the shell rise over any 24 ft (7 m) diameter region must
not be less than 0.561 = 2.24 in. (5.7 cm). Thus, the
shell surface must not deviate by more than 3.13
2.24 = 0.91 in. (2.3 cm) from the theoretical shape
over any 24 ft (7 m) diameter region on the shell sur
face.
Such imperfections reduce the buckling load to a
value that is at least 50 percent of the buckling load of
a shell with no imperfections. The resulting critical
buckling load for a concrete dome, ignoring creep, ma
terial nonlinearity, and cracking, is then
Prr = 0.33 E (~ r (5)
The coefficient 0.33 is comparable to the buckling
coefficient of 0.25 given in the report of ACI Commit
tee 344. 11
Effects of creep
For an elastic shallow spherical cap, creep is ex
pected to reduce the buckling strength of the shell con
siderably. To quantify the effect of creep on buckling
strength, the following two questions must be an
swered.
1. What is the expected magnitude of the ultimate
creep strain?
2. What is the effect of creep strain on the reduction
of the buckling strength for a spherical cap?
The magnitude of ultimate creep depends on many
factors including concrete strength, volume-surface ra
tio, duration of load, age of concrete at loading, as well
as the average humidity during load application. A
procedure for determining creep of a spherical shell
subjected to a load applied on the 28th day after plac
ing the concrete is as follows:
1. Obtain the specific creep,18 the ratio of basic creep
strain-to-stress, as a function of concrete strength f: .
2. Obtain the drying creep,19 assuming that there is
always 100 percent relative humidity inside the tank.
Under this assumption, the thickness of the dome be
comes the effective volume-surface ratio.
3. Modify drying creep for relative humidity of the
environment in accordance with the correction factor
given by Fintel and Khan. '9
4. Add drying creep to basic creep to obtain total
creep for concrete loaded on the 28th day after casting.
(Further modifications for the age of concrete at load
ing are discussed below.)
Thin domes creep significantly even when they are
subjected to live loads, such as snow loads that are as
sumed to act for a one-month duration. The fraction of
total creep that takes place during a month may be ob
tained from Reference 10. For example, for a 4 in.
(10.2 em) thick shell, 30-day creep is approximately 25
percent of the ultimate creep. Creep strain due to live
load should be further reduced to account for the age
of concrete at the time of the application of live load.
ACI JOURNAL I November-December 1983
The age of concrete at the time of live load application
cannot be assumed to be 28 days while simultaneously "
~ 2.0 D.... Lo." Cr R.H 10..
considering the ultimate creep for the dead load which ;;

~ .
occurs after infinite time. A reduction factor of 0.6 on :>o
the creep strain was used to account for the age of con
~"
crete at the time of live load application for domes built
on water tanks.
~"

,
.!:
"
The dead load creep and the live load creep of a c 1.0
dome built from an average concrete with 3750 psi ~
strength is shown in Fig. 3 as a function of shell thick ..
;;

ness. u
For cast-in-place concrete domes prestressed before .. Av.r.g. 8now Lo." Cr....

the 28th day, the creep due to dead load will be more ..
;;
than the total creep obtained from Fig. 3; the amplifi 0.0 L-_ _....L.._ _.....l ..I...._ _....J.. L-.....J
cation factor for the age of concrete at loading to be
applied to dead load is given by Fintel and Khan. 19 The
2 4

creep factors obtained from Fig. 3, after correction for Conor.t. Do... Thlc.. n In.

the age of concrete (7 days) at the time of loading, may
be used for design calculations. A single creep amplifi
cation factor may be calculated as the ratio of the sum
of the creep strains due to a factored dead load applied
on the 7th day and a factored live load applied as de
scribed above to the sum of the corresponding instan
taneous strains. This value is used for the determina
tion of the buckling strength of a spherical cap with
time-dependent material properties.
The effect of creep strain on the reduction of the
buckling strength of a concrete dome is predicted by a
nonlinear analysis that includes the simultaneous ef
fects of creep, geometric nonlinearity, and stress-strain
nonlinearity. The analytical procedure employed is de
scribed later in this paper.
Effects of cracking
To evaluate the effect of cracking, let us first con
sider the case of linear elastic material with no time-de
pendent properties. An analytical study by Bushnell on
a spherical shell with an imperfection having a shallow
ness parameter of" = 4 has shown bending stresses
which are approximately 1.4 times the nominal mem
brane stress just prior to buckling.
If we consider a section subjected to a combined
nominal compressive membrane stress (1 and a maxi
mum bending stress of 1.4(1, a tensile stress of 0.4(1 and
a compressive stress of 2.4(1 will ensue at the surfaces.
For thin domes with a large R/t, the tensile stress may
be less than the tensile strength of concrete. If a tensile
crack starts at the outer surface of concrete dome, it
will propagate only partially through the thickness of
the dome as the tensile stress diminishes with the crack
depth due to the shift in the neutral axis. In general,
flexural tension cracking in a shell made of linear elas
tic materials is a highly localized phenomenon and does
not alter the stress state or the stiffness of the shell ap
preciably.
For nonlinear materials having time-dependent prop
erties, we also expect that the effects of flexural crack
ing on the buckling strength of the dome to be insignif
icant. Although the analytical procedure used for creep
buckling of shallow caps does not model cracking
ACI JOURNAL I November-December 1983
Fig. 3 - Creep versus thickenss of a concrete dome lo
cated in an environment with an annual average out
side relative humidity of 50 percent (arid), 70 percent
(humid), and inside relative humidity of 100 percent
and loaded after 28 days with f.' = 3750 psi (25.9
MPA)
properly, the states of stress near the time of buckling
were examined to determine whether large tensile
stresses had developed. The shell was considered buc
kled when the tensile stress, based on an uncracked
shell, exceeded an arbitrary, but judiciously selected,
limit of 1200 psi.
Effects of material nonlinearity
The stress-strain relationship for concrete is highly
nonlinear if stress exceeds 0.7 fi . In fact, we may as
sume that for design purposes, the stress-strain relation
of concrete is a multilinear function as shown in Fig. 6
for a concrete with fi = 4000 psi (27.6 MPa).
For a thin shell made from linear elastic materials,
buckling will occur at nominal stress states that may be
far below yielding. For example, a perfect dome made
of 4000 psi (27.6 MPa) concrete with R/t = 840 buck
les when the nominal membrane stress
R
(J=
2t Per
~ 0.33 E(~) = 1416 psi (9.76 MPa) (6)
Geometric imperfections and creep increase the ef
fective radius-to-thickness ratio and hence reduce the
nominal stress (1 even further. For shells with imperfec
tions, the combined membrane and bending stress is
significantly below 2.4(J = 2.4 x 1416 = 3400 psi (23.4
MPa). Therefore, material nonlinearity is not expected
to result in a significant reduction of buckling strength
for very thin spherical caps made of linear elastic ma
terials.
Assuming that the effective radius-to-thickness ratio
at buckling due to imperfections is twice the nominal
491
value, it can then be estimated that, if the minimum
nominal R/t is larger than 500, no significant reduc
tion of buckling strength due to material nonlinearity is
expected to occur. (If R/t is much less than 500, buck
ling is not expected to be the governing design criteria
for the shell.)
When the material creeps, the bending moments
prior to buckling may grow large, and the maximum
compressive stress may exceed 2.4 times the nominal
membrane stress assumed previously. Material nonlin
earity has been incorporated in the creep buckling
analysis model.
The model uses von Mises yield criteria that the plas
tic strain increment vector is normal to the yield sur
face; therefore, incremental plastic strains are ex
pressed in terms of an effective plastic strain increment
and an effective stress defined as a = (a~ + a 22
a I0"2)'/,. The multilinear function shown in Fig. 4 is con
sidered as the nonlinear relationship of the effective
stress to effective strain.
Analytical model
For the analytical prediction of the buckling strength
of a reinforced concrete dome subject to creep, crack
ing, and material nonlinearity, Bushnell's BOSOR5
computer program 20 for the prediction of the buckling
strength reduction of a clamped shallow cap with A =
4 was used. This shell represents the least resistant im
perfection of the dome to buckling. Its buckling load
is assumed to be identical to the buckling strength of
4000
'i
Do
,;
.... 3000
....
II)
"0
t:
2000
CJ
1000
o an initial number of circumferential waves n. For this
.001 .002 .003 .004 .005 .ooe .007
Concr.te Str.ln, In.lln.
Fig. 4 - Concrete stress strain curve and its multili
near representation for BOSOR5 (1000 psi = 6.894
MPa)
492
the dome. The BOSOR5 program is applicable to any
segmented or branched ring stiffened shell of revolu
tion; details of the analysis procedure and its applica
tions are given in References 21 through 26. In general,
the analysis procedure involves subjecting the shell to a
fixed external load and computing the stress state and
the prebuckled, axisymmetric deflected configuration of
the shell at various times. Bifurcation buckling anal
yses, considering nonsymmetric buckling modes, are
made for each deflected configuration.
The creep property of concrete is expressed with a
transformed time scale t as
(7)
As a result of this assumption, specific creep is pro
portional to the transformed time 1; furthermore, the
analysis may be performed by equal time steps. There
fore. the method of analysis reduces to determining the
transformed time t at which the shell buckles under the
applied loads. The axisymmetric prebuckling analysis
and the nonsymmetric buckling analysis are described
below. See Reference 25 for a more detailed descrip
tion of this process.
Axisymmetric prebuckling analysis
In the axisymmetric prebuckling analysis, large de
flection effects and elastic-plastic material behavior are
simultaneously accounted for by means of a double it
eration loop. In the inner loop, the nonlinear equa
tions, including terms due to moderately large deflec
tions, are solved by the Newton method. Material
properties, including nonlinearity and creep, are held
constant in this loop. In the outer loop, the material
properties are updated by means of a subincremental
process described in detail in Reference 21. This subin
cremental process permits the use of rather large load
increments without excessive loss of accuracy in the so
lution. Plasticity calculations are based on the von
Mises yield criterion and associated flow rule. Incre
mental flow theory is always used for the prebuckling
analysis. Iterations over the inner and outer loops con
tinue at a given load level until the displacement vector
converges within a certain prescribed amount. In this
way the favorable convergence property of the Newton
procedure is preserved, equilibrium is satisfied within
the degree of approximation inherent in a discrete
model, and the flow law of the material is satisfied at
every point in the structure at every load increment.
Nonsymmetric buckling analysis
Bifurcation buckling loads corresponding to non
symmetric buckling modes are calculated by selecting
wave number n, the stability determinant is calculated
for each load increment. The load is increased until the
stability determinant changes sign and one or more ei
genvalues are detected between two sequential steps or
until the maximum allowable user-specified load has
been reached. At this point in the calculations, a series
ACI JOURNAL I November-December 1983

of eigenvalue problems is set up and solved to deter
mine the bifurcation buckling load corresponding to the
nth circumferential wave. The value of n is changed
within a preselected range of values and the process is
repeated.
Numerical results
Employing the analytical model described above for
a shallow spherical shell with A = 4 subjected to as
sumed pressure levels, the state of stress and the defor
mation configuration are calculated at various times
until the shell buckles. The assumed shallow shell rep
resents the least resistant imperfection of a concrete
dome to buckling by external pressure. Using the re
sults of this model, we expect to compute a buckling
load reduction factor which would be valid for the en
tire dome. The geometry of the shallow shell consid
ered, which represents the imperfection region alone, is
described below:
R;mp 3000 in. (76.2 m)
t 4 in. (10 cm)
E 3.6 x 106 psi (24,800 MPa) for f/ 4000
psi (27.6 MPa)
/I 0.17
H 9.374 in. (23.8 cm)
O! 4.53 deg
Note that R;m/t = 750 corresponds to a nominal ra
dius-to-thickness ratio of 536, approximately a lower
bound of the R/t used in concrete domes over pre
stressed tanks. For shells with larger radius-to-thick
ness ratios, the stresses are expected to be lower and the
effect of the nonlinearity of stress-strain relationship
less significant.
For the shallow shell considered, the classical buck
ling load is Prl = 1080 psf (5270 kgflm 2). Assuming fi
nite deformations but material linearity and elasticity
(no time-dependent variation of properties), the critical
buckling load as expressed by Eq. (3) may be written as
Pr, = 0.55Pd = 590 psf (2880 kgf/m 2 ). Using the
BOSOR5 program, the buckling strength of this shell
considering creep, cracking, and material nonlinearity
of concrete was predicted. These results were employed
to predict the values for the buckling load reduction
factor of the concrete shell considered. The method of
analysis consisted of applying various loads p < Pc, and
analyzing the states of stress and deformation in the
shell at various times as the concrete creeps until the
shell snaps through.
When the shell buckles, the transformed time at
buckling is the ratio of creep strain to instantaneous
strain. The analytical model does not incorporate the
effect of concrete cracking. In general, prior to insta
bility a small tensile region may exist near the bound
ary of the shallow shell. As the buckling load ap
proaches, large bending stress, and hence a tensile re
gion, develops near the center of the shell away from
the boundaries. We have examined the state of stress in
the shell at times immediately prior to buckling and
have selected the time of failure as the time at which a
maximum tensile stress of 1200 psi (8.3 MPa) develops.
ACI JOURNAL I November-December 1983
0 . 8 . - - - . . - - - - . - - -.....- - - - , : - - - - - . - - ,
!
.
u
I I.
0.7
C
~U Crackl.,. Not IftclucIad
":'" 0.8
...~!l LIIllItIng T....... 8tr
0.8
0.4 L---1 ...J.... .L-_ _- - ' .........- - '
ll.8 1.0 1.8 2.0 2.8
eraap 8tra1n I IIl.t.llt....ou. 8tralll
Fig. 5 - Reduction factor for buckling stre.ngth of. a
shallow spherical concrete shell due to matenal nonlIn
earity, creep and cracking
The ratios of the creep strain to the instantaneous strain
at such times were used to plot Fig. 5, which gives the
buckling reduction factor due to creep, tensile crack
ing, and material nonlinearity of a concrete dome with
A = 4.
The component of deformation resulting from con
crete creep increases the radius of curvature of the shell
and is equivalent to an effective reduction of the shal
lowness parameter X. Therefore, it is not known
whether the analysis performed for A = 4 results in "a
minimum buckling load for a shell material that creeps
with time. (Note that the value of X = 4 is selected
from Fig. 2 as the shallowness parameter correspond
ing to the minimum buckling load of a spherical shell
with a fixed Rlt, computed on the basis of linear elas
tic materials with no time-dependent properties). To
test whether imperfections with larger shallowness pa
rameters (deeper shells) are more susceptible to creep
buckling including material nonlinearity, a shallow shell
with the same Rand t but with X = 6 was subjected to
the same pressure levels, matching the critical trans
formed times corresponding to A= 4. The shell did not
buckle in either the axisymmetric or asymmetric modes.
Therefore, critical imperfection is expected to have a
shallowness parameter close to A = 4 with a buckling
load, including the effects of cracking, material nonlin
earity, and creep, which is not different appreciably
from those obtained for A = 4 and reported herein.
Note that snap-through buckling of the critical imper
fection takes place axisymmetrically; it, in turn may
trigger asymmetric snap-through buckling of the dome
itself.
BASIC DESIGN PROCEDURE
The procedure for the design of concrete domes over
prestressed concrete tanks to resist buckling, based on
the foregoing discussion, is as follows:
1. Select a trial value for dome thickness t for a dome
having a given radius.
493
 2. Estimate dead load DL, based on trial dome
thickness, snow load SL, and live load LL.
3. Compute factored dead load I.4DL, factored
snow load 1.7SL, and factored live load 1.7LL.
4. Select a value of capacity reduction factor ep = 0.7
to account for the variability of concrete properties,
dome construction, and accuracy of buckling analysis.
5. Select a value for the reduction factor of buckling
strength due to imperfections {3;mp = 0.5 if the average
radius of curvature R;mp measured over a re~ion of di
ameter d = 2.5.JRi is not more than IAR, where R is
the nominal radius of curvature; otherwise, select {3imp
= (R/R;mp)2.
6. Select a buckling reduction factor {3< due to creep,
material nonlinerarity, and cracking of concrete by ob
taining the creep factor under the dead load and the
snow load from Fig. 3 after correcting the dead load
creep for the age of concrete at the time of loading '9 if
different from 28 days. From the dead-load and snow
load components of creep, total creep strain and,
therefore, {3< may be computed using Fig. 5.
7. Compute
P ~ = 0.66 ep {3;mp {3<E (~ y (8)
where
E = 57,000...g;, f: in psi
8. Check that the factored total load P ~ p~
P = I.4DL + I.7LL
SIMPLIFIED DESIGN PROCEDURE
A simplified design procedure is developed based on
the basic procedure previously described. This simpli
fied procedure is based on the following additional as
.sumptions.
The dead load of the dome is applied no sooner than
7 days after the concrete is cast.
The live load is due only to snow.
The dome is designed for a minimum live load of 12
psf (58.6 kgflm 2).
The dome has a nominal thickness which is not less
than 2Yz in. (6.4 cm).
Minimum nominal concrete strength is f: = 3000 psi
(20.7 MPa).
The simplified design procedure under these condi
tions is as follows:
1. Choose a trial thickness for a dome with radius R.
2. Calculate the factored total load P from Eq. (10).
3. Select a value of ep = 0.7 to account for the vari
ability of concrete properties and accuracy of buckling
analysis.
4. Select a value for the reduction of buckling
strength caused by imperfections {3;mp = 0.5 based on
the premise that the average radius of curvature R;mp
measured over a region of diameter 2.5 .JRi" does not
exceed 1.4 times the nominal radius of curvature
494
5. Based on the design live load, select a value for
reducing buckling strength of the dome due to creep,
material nonlinearity, and cracking as follows
(3 _ {0.44 + 0.003 (LL) for 12 ~ LL < 30
< - 0.53 for LL ~ 30 (11)
where LL is in psf.
If an existing dome has been designed for less than 12
psf (58.6 kgflm 2) live load, the reduction factor for
buckling strength becomes a function of thickness
which may be expressed as
{3< = 0.476 + (0.0051 - 0.046) (I - ~~) (12)
where LL is in psf.
6. Calculate E from Eq. (9).
7. Compute the creep buckling load of the dome Po,
incorporating the effects of geometric imperfections
and of concrete properties from
(13)
where (3< is obtained from Eq. (11).
(9) 8. Check that p ~ Po.
SURVEY OF EXISTING DOMES
where
A survey of large concrete domes that have been
constructed over prestressed concrete water tanks by
(10)
the major builders of prestressed concrete tanks in the
United States was conducted as a part of our study.
Initially, a questionnaire was prepared to assemble the
basic geometric and loading information about existing
large thin domes. Criteria were given so that the only
domes included were those whose R/l ratio resulted in
a safety factor of 6 or less, based on the following
buckling equation given in the report of ACI Commit
tee 344, and an assumed design live load of 30 psf (146
kgflm 2).
S(DL + LL)
~ (14)
R 0.25 E
where DL and LL are unit dead and live loads. E is the
initial elastic modulus of concrete, and S is the safety
factor which incorporates allowance for creep and is
normally between 4 and 6.
The survey included 245 domes that were built pri
marily in the late 1950s and throughout the 1960s,
1970s, and early 1980s. The frequency distribution of
tank diameters and the rise, thickness, radius-to-thick
ness ratio, and concrete strength of the surveyed domes
are shown in Fig. 6 through 10. The type of construc
tion of the dome, dome-to-tank wall joint, and the pre
stressing levei are given in Table 1.
ACI JOURNAL I NovemberDecember 1983
 67 187

50
48

41

19
14

5
I
80 100 120 140 180 180 200 220

Tank Dlemeter, It

Fig. 6 - Frequency distribution of tank diameter for 35

surveyed domes (1 ft :::: 0.3048 m)
21
2 1
I I I I I

1/8 1/10 1/12 1/14 1/18

123

Dome AI / B... DI.m.t.r

Fig. 7 - Frequency distribution of dome rise to base
diameter ratio for surveyed domes

.0

31
39
22
2
25 26
20
11
10
2 3
I 3 2 1

2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 &00 &&0 800 850 700 7&0 800 8&0 100 1&0

t, tn. R/t

Fig. 8 - Frequency distribution of thickness for sur Fig. 9 - Frequency distribution of radius-to-thickness
veyed domes (l in. = 25.4 ,em) ratio for surveyed domes
ACI JOURNAL I November-December 1983 495
 132
74
30
9 Partial
I
3500 4000 4500 5000
t ~ ,pel
Fig. 10 - Frequency distribution of concrete strength
of surveyed domes (1000 psi = 6.894 M~a)
The thickness of these domes ranges from 2 to 4.75
in. (5.1 to 12.1 em). All the 2 in. thick domes included
in the survey were built before 1965; in fact, after 1968
there is no dome among those surveyed with less than 3
in. (7.6 em) of thickness.
The nominal concrete strengths are in most cases in
the range of 3500 to 4000 psi (24.1 to 27.6 MPa). None
of the domes surveyed had a nominal concrete strength
of less than 3500 psi (24.1 MPa). With the exception of
several shotcrete (or gunite) domes, concrete design
strengths of more than 4000 psi (27.6 MPa) are used
only occasionally.
The radius-to-thickness ratios of the domes surveyed
range between 500 and 960. Several domes with a ra
dius-to-thickness ratio of more than 900 were built in
1960s, but none in the 70s or 80s.
The live loads used for the original design of the
domes vary considerably, ranging from 2 to 40 psf (9.8
to 195.3 kgf/m 2 ). Extremely low values of live load,
much less than the minimum value specified by BOCA
and the Uniform Building Code, have been used for
various domes located in the southern U.S. that were
designed and built from late 1950s to as recently as
1980.
To analyze the data assembled through our initial
survey, the ratio of Po. the sum of the allowable dead
plus live loads computed from the design formula of
ACI 344 with S = 4, to the sum of the design dead and
live loads p' were computed for each dome. The
amount of this ratio that exceeds one represents the ad
ditional margin of safety of the dome against buckling
beyond the minimum design criteria of ACI 344.
The results indicate that 41 domes, or one out of
every six domes surveyed, are thinner than required by
the design criteria of ACI 344. This conclusion is valid
not only for domes designed and built before ACI 344
recommendations were published, but also for some
domes built as late as 1981.
496
Table 1 (a) - Type of construction of surveyed
domes
Type Percent
Cast in place 74
Precast 4
Shotcrete or gunite 22
Table 1 (b) - Type of dome/wall joint of surveyed
domes
Type Percent
Elastomeric pad 12
Monolithic 80
8
Table 1 (c) - Prestressing level of surveyed
domes
Type Percent
Full live load 96
Partial live load 4
The following two ratios related to the design proce
dures herein were also computed.
1. The ratio of Po the maximum factored total dead
I,
and live loads that the dome can carry computed from
our basic design procedure, to the sum of the corre
sponding factored design loads p. This ratio represents
an additional margin of safety against creep buckling
beyond the safety factor included in our design proce
dure.
2. The ratio of Po, the maximum factored total dead
and live loads that the dome can carry computed from
our simplified design procedure, to the sum of the cor
responding factored design loads p. This ratio should
differ from the previous ratio only by the approxima
tion in simplification.
These analyses show that the proposed simplified de
sign procedure is quite accurate, and Po does not differ
from Po by more than a few percent.
I
The frequency distribution of the additional margin
of safety, over and above the requirements of the pro
posed simplified design method, is given in Fig. 11 for
the surveyed domes. It shows that from the 245 domes
surveyed, eight domes are slightly underdesigned based
on the proposed methods, two have no additional mar
gin of safety, and about seven domes have small addi
tional margins with respect to the design criteria pre
sented herein. Out of these 17 domes, 8 were built in
60s,S in 70s, and 4 in 80s. Several of these domes have
been designed for extremely small live loads, as low as
5 psf. As far as we know, these domes have survived
since late 60s and early or mid 70s without any prob
lems.
The variation with live load of the safety margin
computed in accordance to the design criteria given in
this report to that computed in accordance with ACI
344 is given in Fig. 12. The results shown in Fig. 12 in
dicate that the design criteria of ACI 344 correspond on
the average to allowable loads that are about 25 per
cent more conservative than the allowable loads pre-
ACI JOURNAL I November-December 1983
dicted from the simplified design criteria. This differ
ence reduces to about 12 percent when the design live
load is very small and reaches about 35 percent for a 40
psf (195.3 kgf/m') live load.
The actual geometric and material characteristics of
the surveyed domes may differ from the nominal val
ues. The actual concrete strength, especially after suf
ficient time has elapsed for almost all creep deforma
tions to take place. is usually higher than the nominal
design value. However, in certain circumstances there
is a possibility of delivery of a truckload of lower
strength concrete. The concrete in a 10 yd 3 (7.6 m')
mixing truck covers approximately 1000 ftc (93 me) of a
3-in. (7.6-cm) dome. This area is equivalent to the area
of a circular disk 37 ft (9.1 m) in diameter. If concrete
is cast in approximately circular areas, the area that
contains the lower strength mix can be larger than a
buckle size. As concrete strength affects the instanta
neous modulus of elasticity by its square root, the ef
fect on the critical buckling load of the variability in the
concrete strength is not expected to exceed the <b factor
of 0.7, which is equivalent to a concrete strength re
duction by as much as 50 percent.
The actual thickness of the dome is not expected to
be significantly less than the design value because of the
level of control exerted by the builders. Even if mea
surable variation of thickness exists, it is not likely that
a significant underthickness would extend over an area
comparable in size to a 20 to 30 ft (6.1 to 9.1 m) diam
eter buckle, depending upon the radius and the thick
ness of the shell.
The actual imperfections of a cast-in-place dome de
pend on the accuracy and stiffness of the formwork
and its support. One of the existing form work systems
was examined to estimate actual imperfections. This
system was designed for a 130 ft (39.6 m) radius dome
consisting of sheathing supported on curved radial ribs
approximately II to 12 ft (3.3 to 3.7 m) long placed 3
ft (I m) on center which, in turn. are supported on
concentric rings. The ribs are cut of 2 x 10 No. I
southern yellow pine and have a minimum depth at the
center of 8 V, in. (21.6 cm). The rings are comprised of
straight W8 x 10 wide flange steel sections supported
independently at points approximately 10 ft (3 m) apart
located on a series of jack-supported purlins on the top
of scaffold towers.
The imperfections in the geometry of the dome are
caused by
I. Error in the height of wide flange support result
ing from measurement error in the height of a purlin,
assembly tolerances. and differential deflections. Such
errors affect a region of the dome of the size compara
ble to a buckle. The peak error is considered to be
about I/~ in. (13 mm).
2. Error caused by the deflection of wide flange sec
tions, which also affects a region comparable in size to
a buckle. The magnitude of this error is about Vs in. (3
mm).
3. Error caused by the deflection of the ribs. This er
ror may be essentially compensated for in cutting the
ACI JOURNAL I November-December 1983
profile. If it is not assumed that the rib deflection has
been compensated, an error of I/. in. (6 mm) may en
sue.
4. The tolerances in cutting ribs and deflections of
sheathing, etc., probably do not affect a large enough
region to cause a reduction of the buckling strength.
On the b~sis of the peak errors assumed above. we
expect to have a peak geometric imperfection of less
than a I in. (25 mm) over a 20 ft (6 m) region. For a
3 in. (7.6 cm) thick concrete dome with R = 130 ft
(39.6 m), this results in approximately 28 percent in
crease in the radius of curvature, approximately ~!J of
the permissible imperfection of 41 percent.
Recently, the deviations of the surface points from
the true spherical shape of a 4 in. (10.1 cm) thick 240 ft
(73.1 m) radius concrete dome were measured. The
dome was built from 4000 psi (27.6 MPa) concrete and
is believed to have very severe imperfections compared
to most concrete domes. The measured deviations are
shown in Fig. 13. Our calculations show that the radius
of curvature in the imperfection region is about 360 ft
(110 m), and the size of imperfection is sufficiently
large to affect buckling strengh. This results in a 13""1' =
0.45 which is only 10 percent less than the value rec
ommended herein for design purposes. Note that this
dome does not satisfy the bound we have placed on im
perfections. The value for (3, from Fig. 5 is estimated at
0.51 [or from Eq. (II) at 0.50]. Therefore, the buckling
strength of the dome computed from Eq. (8) is 106 psf
(518 kgflm') or 104 psf (508 kgflm') using the simpli
fied procedure, which is adequate for supporting its
factored dead plus live load of 102 psf (498 kgflm').
BUCKLING TESTS OF MODEL
MICROCONCRETE DOMES
Vandepitte and Rathe'7.Z8 report on a series of exper
iments conducted on creep buckling of spherical domes
made of microconcrete. The domes were approxi
mately 0.7 cm (0.28 in.) thick with a radius of 2.43 m
(96 in.) and a rise of 0.193 m (7.6 in.). Creep buckling
tests were conducted on specimens with and without
prestressed edge beams. Since the clamping device may
cause significant deformations or imperfections near
the boundary of an unprestressed shell and thus cause
scatter in test results, only results of the experiments
conducted on specimens with prestressed edge beams
were considered. The average buckling strength of the
test specimens under a short-time loading was reported
to be Pa = 0.62 E (fIR)'. The scatter in the data was
approximately 20 percent peak.
Total creep was measured independently on thin bars
of microconcrete cast from the same batches as the test
specimens. The bars were kept under the same condi
tions of temperature and humidity as the test speci
mens. The ratio of creep strain to instantaneous strain
was computed for each bar on the day that the corre
sponding test specimen buckled.
Creep buckling tests were conducted by subjecting
the domes to various percentages of the average buck
ling load and recording the time to failure. The anal
497
 58 1.40 r-----r---"T"""----r---.,-----,

45

37
34
30

.. ..
-:-1
10
--- 1.10
.50 .75 1.0 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.0 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.0 3.211 3.50

1.00 L...-_ _......I. ....L..._ _---l ....L._ _---'

o 10 20 30 40 110

Fig. 11 - Frequency distribution of the ratio of buck

ling load Po to factored dead and live loads p of sur
Fig. 12 - Variation with live load of the ratio of the
veyed domes
safety margin computed according to our design crite
ria to that computed in accordance to the criteria given
in ACI 344 (1 psf = 4.883 kg/1m;)

0.8 r---~r__-__,r_-__,r_-__,----r----,

0.7

0.4

,/.J.
/
. 0.3
o

0.2 L..-_ _l..-_ _l..-_ _l..-_ _l..-_.....II-._--'

o 100 200 300 400 500 800

Time In Dey.

Fig. 14 - Calculated reduction in buckling strength of

prestressed test specimens of Vandepitte and Ralfle and
;1
the measured results.
--'o~'t .~~",,-
~ 'Il-
I
to
f - I- ' - " - - - . ,

ling from Fig. 5. Results are presented in Fig. 14; test

____ I

J~,.~\ft>
" __ "

results performed from Vandepitte and Rathe are also

U
8'9;:-'- - - . . . _ - - - -
\ 41
plotted in Fig. 14. Note that the test specimens have a
radius-to-thickness ratio of about 350; consequently,
11
the effects of material nonlinearity and cracking on
buckling strength are much more significant than the
Fig. 13 - Difference in inches (1 in. = 25.4 mm) be concrete domes considered herein. Nevertheless. it can
tween the theoretical and the existing elevations for a 4 be concluded that our procedure is in general agree
in. (l0.2 cm) thick concrete dome covering a 185 ft ment with the test results. Note that the scatter in thc
(56.4 m) diameter prestressed concrete tank known to test results may be due to the material and geometric
have severe imperfections. variations in the test specimens.

yses presented by the authors in Reference 23 do not SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

appear to be satisfactory for our purposes. Employing Based on the studies conducted on the buckling
the calculated ultimate creep of 2.5 times the instanta strength of reinforced concrete domes built on pre
neous creep and the assumed variation of creep with stressed tanks, a conceptual model and a simplified
time based on Reference 10, the reduction factor in the procedure were developed for design of reinforced con
average buckling load of the specimens due to creep of crete domes against buckling. The proposed conceptual
concrete were computed for the elapsed time to buck- model and simplified design formulas are based on an
498 ACI JOURNAL I November-December 1983
extensive review of theoretical and experimental infor
mation on stability of domes, review of the creep phe
nomenon in concrete materials, and an actual com
puter analysis, using the BOSOR5 computer program,
of the effect of the creep of concrete and nonlinearity
of stress-strain relationship on the buckling strength of
a dome. The effect of cracking was also incorporated
by examining the state of stress in the shell prior to
buckling and judiciously selecting the time of failure for
design purposes as the time at which tensile region
starts to grow through the thickness.
The proposed design procedure is based on an as
sumed geometric imperfection where the average radius
of curvature over a region of at least 2.5 .JRT in di
ameter must not exceed the nominal radius by more
than 40 percent. Analysis of a method of forming of
the dome during construction indicates that the actual
imperfections typically are less than those assumed. A
survey was conducted on an existing dome to quantify
the magnitude of the actual imperfections. The sur
veyed dome was known to exhibit very severe geomet
ric imperfections. Our analysis of the strength of this
dome supports the validity of our basic approach to
geometric imperfections.
The conceptual model and the simplified design pro
cedure were applied to 245 thin concrete domes de
signed and built by major prestressed concrete tank
builders. The fact that there are at least 17 existing
domes whose dimensions are close to the dimensions
that would result from our proposed design formulas is
not proof but indicates that the proposed procedure is
valid. Further, it is noteworthy that a few of these
domes were designed primarily to carry their dead load
with almost negligible design live loads.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Financial support for the study was provided by three major pre
stressed concrete tank builders: The Crom Corporation, Gainsville,
Fla., Natgun Corporation, Wakefield, Mass.; Preload Concrete
Structures, Inc .. Garden City. N.Y.; and by Simpson Gumpertz &
Heger Inc., Consulting Engineers, Arlington, Mass. The three pre
stressed concrete tank builders also provided valuable technical co
operation as well as most of the information for the survey of exist
ing domes. Additional information for the dome survey was pro
vided by Crom Prestressing. Inc., and BRR Prestressed Tanks, Inc.
NOTATION
d diameter of imperfection region
DL dead load
LL live load
H rise of dome
E modulus of elasticity
classical buckling load of a linear elastic dome
critical buckling load of a linear elastic dome including fi
nite deformations
p' critical buckling load of a concrete dome including finite de
formations, material nonlinearity, creep, and cracking
factored dead and live load
nominal radius of curvature of dome
average radius of curvature of dome in an imperfection re
gion
average radius of curvature and thickness of dome over an
imperfection region centered at point P
f: concrete strength
ACI JOURNAL I November-December 1983
t thickness or average thickness
S safety factor in accordance with ACI 344-78.
a halfsubtended angle of a spherical cap
{3,mp buckling strength reduction factor due to imperfection
(3, buckling strength reduction factor due to creep. material
nonlinearity, and cracking of concrete
-y Poisson's ratio
E, creep strain
t, instantaneous strain
A shallowness parameter = ,y12(1 - ,r) (~) "'a
SI CONVERSIONS
I in. 25.4 mm = 2.54 em
1000 Iblin.' 6.894 MPa
lib 4.448 N
I~f 4.882 kg!(m'
..;];,J: in psi 0.083";]; when!: is in MPa
REFERENCES
I. Kaplan, A . "Buckling of Spherical Shells," Thin Shell Struc
tures-Theory, Experiments. and Design, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Engle
wood Cliffs, 1974, pp. 247-288.
2. Hutchinson, 1. W., and Koiter. W. T., "Postbuckling The
ory," Applied Mechanics Review, V. 23, 1970, pp. 1353-1356.
3. Scordelis. Alex c., "Stability of Reinforced Concrete Domes
and Hyperbolic Paraboloid Shells," Concrete Shell Buckling, SP-67,
American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1981, pp. 63-110.
4. Bushnell, D., "Nonlinear Axisymmetric Behavior of Shells of
Revolution," AIAA Journal, V. 5. No.3, Mar. 1967, pp. 432-439.
5. Bushnell, D., "Symmetric and Nonsymmetric Buckling of Fi
nitely Deformed Eccentrically Stiffened Spherical Shells of Revolu
tion." AIAA Journal, V. 5, No.8, Aug. 1967. pp. 1455-1462.
6. Krenzke, M. A . and Kiernan, T. J., "The Effect of Initial Im
perfections on the Collapse Strength of Deep Spherical Shells," David
Taylor Model Basin Report 1757, Department of the Navy, Feb.
1965,34 pp.
7. Huang, N., "Unsymmetrical Buckling of Thin Shallow Spheri
cal Shells," Journal of Applied Mechanics, V. 31, Transactions,
ASME, V. 86, Sept. 1964. pp. 447-457.
8. Shi, J. J. 1.; Connor, D. J.; and Bauld, N. R., Jr., "Applica
tion of the Variational Theorem for Creep of Shallow Spherical
Shells," AIAA Journal, V. 8, No.3, Mar. 1970, pp. 469-476.
9. Jones, N., "Creep Buckling of a Complete Sphere," Journal of
Applied Mechanics, V. 43, Transactions, ASME, V. 98, Sept. 1976,
pp. 450-454.
10. Hansen, Torben c., and Mattock, Alan H., "Influence of Size
and Shape of Member on the Shrinkage and Creep of Concrete,"
ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 63, No.2, Feb. 1966, pp. 267-290.
II. ACI Committee 344, "Design and Construction of Circular
Prestressed Concrete Structures," (ACI 344R-70) (Reaffirmed 1981),
American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1970, 16 pp.
12. "Recommendations for Reinforced Concrete Shells and Folded
Plates," International Association for Shell and Spatial Structures.
Madrid, 1979,66 pp.
13. Nelson, K. 0., and Henager, C. H., "Analysis of Shotcrete
Domes Loaded by Deadweight," Preprint No. 81-512, ASCE Con
vention (St. Louis, Oct. 1981), American Society of Civil Engineers,
New York, 1981. 11 pp.
14. Dulacska, Endre, "Buckling of Reinforced Concrete Shells,"
Proceedings, ASCE, V. 107, STI2, Dec. 1981, pp. 23812401.
15. Bi!lington, David P., Thin Shell Concrete Structures, 2nd Edi
tion, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1982, pp. 311-329.
16. Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, American Society of Me
chanical Engineers, New York, 1977, Section III, Divisions I and 2.
17. "Unfired Fusion Welded Pressure Vessels," (BS 5500-1976),
British Standards Institution, London, 1976.
18. Hickey, Ken B., "Creep of Concrete Predicted from Elastic
Modulus Tests," Report No. C-1242, U. S. Bureau of Reclamation,
Denver, Jan. 1968,29 pp.
499
 19. Fintel, Mark, and Khan. Fazlur R., "Effects of Column Creep
and Shrinkage in Tall Structures-Prediction of Inelastic Column
Shortening," ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 66, No. 12, Dec. 1969,
pp. 957-967.
20. Bushnell, D., "BOSOR5-Program for Buckling of Elastic
Plastic Complex Shells of Revolution Including Large Deflections and
Creep," Computers & Structures. V. 6, 1976, pp. 221-239.
21. Bushnell. D., "Large Deflection Elastic-Plastic Creep Analysis
of Axisymmetric Shells," Numerical Solution oj Nonlinear Struc
tural Problems, AMD-V. 6, American Society of Mechanical Engi
neers, New York, 1973. pp. 103-138.
22. Bushnell, D., "Bifurcation Buckling of Shells of Revolution
Including Large Deflections, Plasticity and Creep," International
Journal oj Solids & Structures. V. 10, 1974, pp. 1287-1305.
23. Bushnell, D., "Buckling of Elastic-Plastic Shells of Revolution
with Discrete Elastic-Plastic Ring Stiffeners," International Journal
oj Solids & Structures, V. 12, 1976, pp. 51-66.
24. Bushnell, D., "Nonsymmetric Buckling of Internally Presssur
ized Ellipsoidal and Torispherical Elastic-Plastic Pressure Vessel
Heads," Journal oj Pressure Vessel Technology. Transactions.
500
ASME, V. 99, Feb. 1977, pp. 54-63.
25. Bushnell, D., and GaJletly, G. D., "Stress and Buckling of In
ternally Pressurized Elastic-Plastic Torispherical Pressure Vessel
Heads-Comparisons of Test and Theory," Journal oj Pressure
Vessel Technology. Transactions. ASME, V. 99, Feb. 1977, pp. 39
53.
26. Bushnell, D., "A Strategy for the Solution of Problems In
volving Large Deflections, Plasticity and Creep," International
Journal oj Numerical Methods in Engineering. V. II, 1977, pp. 683
708.
27. Vandepitte, Daniel; Rathe, Jaques; and Weymeis, Godelieve,
"An Experimental Investigation into the Buckling and Creep Buck
ling of Shallow Spherical Caps Subjected to Uniform Radial Pres
sure," Proceedings. lASS World Congress on Shell and Spatial
Structures (Madrid, Sept. 1979), Laboratorio Central de Estructuras
y Materiales, Madrid, 1980, V. I, pp. 1.1-1.15.
28. Weymeis, G., "Investigation of Snap-Through Buckling of
Concrete Domes (Onderzoek van het instabiliteitsverschijnsel bij be
tonnen koepels)," Laboratory for Model Investigation, State Univer
sity. Gent, 1976, 149 pp.
ACI JOURNAL I November-December 1983