11 views

Uploaded by sagar1503

PVP200PVP2003-19313-1931

- Design of Shell
- Pvdci 1.2 Pressure Vessel Design as Per Asme
- PVD-by alim
- Aluminum Manual 37
- Sample3 Spreadsheet
- Composite Tank Sell Sheet 42575
- DNV-Diving Support Vessel
- ME489 Notes-Slides Abul-Fazal-Arif Ansys-Manual
- Case N-597-2 Requirements for Analytical Evaluation of Pipe Wall Thinning
- FinElem EvalHwk2 Martínez (1)
- Standard Specification for Pressure Vessel Plates
- melessssssssssssss.docx
- Internal Loads determination using finite element analysis
- Trunnion Checking for Piping Stress Analysis _ What is Piping
- Observation
- Basics for Stress Analysis of Underground Piping Using Caesar II-20150924
- File Serve
- 5-RC2-30-VESS-JSD-95-000-0400
- X_Chena.pdf
- Pressure Vessels

You are on page 1of 5

July 20-24, 2003 Cleveland Ohio, USA

PVP2003-1931

COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT

METHODOLOGIES FOR STRESS

ANALYSIS OF REINFORCING PADS

Michael W. Guillot

Stress Engineering Services

Metairie, LA 70001

ABSTRACT

Finite element analysis is widely used to model the

stresses resulting from penetrations in pressure vessels to

accommodate components such as nozzles and man-ways. In

many cases a reinforcing pad is required around the nozzle or

other component to meet the design requirements of Section

VIII, Division 1 or 2, of the ASME Pressure Vessel Code [ 1].

Several different fmite element techniques are currently used

for calculating the effects of reinforcing pads on the shell

stresses resulting from penetrations for nozzles or man-ways.

In this research the stresses near a typical reinforced nozzle on

a pressure vessel shell are studied. Finite element analysis is

used to model the stresses in the reinforcing pad and shell.

The commercially available software package ANSYS is used

for the modeling.

Loadings on the nozzle are due to

combinations of internal pressure and moments to simulate

piping attachments. The f'mite element results are compared

to an analysis per Welding Research Council Bulletin 107 [2].

INTRODUCTION

Stress analysis of pressure vessels has improved with the

widespread availability of the personal computers and

advanced engineering software such as finite element analysis

packages [3]. A number of different software packages have

been developed for pressure vessel design and analysis such as

COMPRESS. These programs combine Code calculations

with the WRC 107 analysis for external loads. In some cases

these "canned" programs will indicate that a design has failed

or is marginal. In these cases a more detailed stress analysis is

needed to determine if the design is actually acceptable. The

f'mite element method is very useful for more detailed stress

analyses. However, use of the finite element method for

Jack E. Helms

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Louisiana State University

Baton Rouge, LA 70803

applicable codes such as the American Society Mechanical

Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section

VIII, Division 1 or 2. Experienced finite element analysts use

different approaches for modeling the vessel and components

such as nozzles and reinforcing pads.

Moini and Mitchell [4] used finite element analysis to

study the stress concentration in a nozzle to shell intersection

in a thick walled pressure vessel. The specified boundary

displacement method was applied to measure the stress

concentration due to geometrical discontinuity. The analysis

developed in their research was compared to the work of

previous investigators and it was found to offer significant

improvement. Jawad and Farr [5] presented an analysis for

stresses on attachments to a pressure vessel due to external

loads such as piping. Their analysis was based on the

procedures in Welding Research Council Bulletin No. 107.

Porter, et al. [6] presented guidelines for using PC-based

Finite element software for pressure vessel analysis.

Guidelines were outlined for element selection, meshing,

application of loads and boundary conditions.

Welding Research Council Bulletin No. 429 [7] provides

guidelines for 3D stress analysis of pressure vessels using the

Finite Element Method.

Many thin wall vessels exist which can be accurately

modeled with shell elements. This provides a convenient way

to analyze the area around nozzles on vessels with external

loads, typically from piping, which do not fit the criteria of

WRC 107 [2]. Because of simplicity, shell elements are

preferred over brick elements and can be used to quickly and

efficiently model the vessel-nozzle junction.

Several

methodologies using shell elements have been used to model

this critical area. This paper compares four of the most

1

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/19/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

computed using WRC 107. All analyses were linear elastic.

surface of the nozzle to model the effects of the internal

pressure acting on the flange blind. Internal pressure of 100

psig was applied on the inside surface of all shell elements

except those elements added to model the reinforcing pad.

MODELING

Porter, et al. [8] addressed the use of different computer

codes and element types. In this work only one computer

code, ANSYS 6.1, and one element type, Shell93, an eight

node shell element are used. Four Finite Element modeling

approaches are used. In the first approach, Method 1, the shell

in the reinforcing pad area is modeled with the thickness equal

to the sum of the shell and the reinforcing pad thicknesses.

The second approach, Method 2, used a separate layer of shell

elements for the reinforcing pad, but the shell and reinforcing

pad elements shared common nodes. The third approach,

Method 3, consisted of a separate layer of shell elements for

the reinforcing pad. The nodes on the inner and outer

diameter of the reinforcing pad were coupled with

corresponding shell and nozzle nodes to simulate attachment

welds. The last approach, Method 4, used a separate layer of

shell elements that were offset per the actual thicknesses. The

nodes on the inner and outer diameters of the reinforcing pad

were coupled to corresponding shell and nozzle nodes to

simulate attachment welds. Method 5 results were derived per

WRC 107.

A base case was developed using the COMPRESS

pressure vessel design and analysis software with two subcases for longitudinal and circumferential piping loads. The

two sub-cases were then modeled with finite element analysis

using ANSYS 6.1. A vertical pressure vessel was chosen for

the analyses and the pertinent design details are outlined in

Table 1 and the finite element mesh is shown in Fig. 1.

Table 1

Vessel Material

Nozzle Material

Modulus of Elasticity

Poisson's Ratio

Vessel Outside Diameter

Seam-to-Seam Height

Wall Thickness

Reinforcing Pad Thickness

Reinforcing Pad Width

Nozzle Outside Diameter

Nozzle Thickness

Internal Pressure

Longitudinal Piping Load

Circumferential Piping Load

SA-516-70

SA- 106B

30,000,000 psi

0.3

144 in

120 in

0.375 in

0.375 in

10in

24 in

0.687 in

100 psig

1,700,000 in-lb

600,000 in-lb

performed for each of the four modeling approaches.

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The base case was chosen by trial and error to produce a

design that would appear marginal or that actually failed the

design stress specifications per WRC 107 in COMPRESS.

The vessel diameter, seam-to-seam height, thickness, design

pressure, and reinforcing pad were all chosen to be typical of

vessels in a chemical process plant.

The COMPRESS

pressure vessel design and analysis software was used to apply

increasing piping loads until a case was developed that

appeared to fail the design specifications per WRC 107 for

longitudinal and circumferential piping loads, each acting

separately. These two cases were then modeled using shell

elements.

In all of the plots the stress intensity is plotted instead of

individual stress components.

The Code defines stress

intensity as two times the maximum shear stress. The stress

plots begin at the nozzle surface and extend outward along a

radial line past the outer edge of the reinforcing pad.

Figures 2 through 7 are plots of the stress intensities due

to the longitudinal moment listed in Table 1. The four FEA

methods discussed above are labeled as 1 through 4,

respectively, and the WRC 107 data is labeled as 5 in the plots

below, Figs. 2-13. Both FEA and WRC 107 data labels have a

letter appended. The "U" indicates the upper, or outer,

surface of the elements representing the reinforcing pad, and,

"L", indicates the lower, or inner, surface of the elements

representing the shell. Figures 2 and 3 are at the top of the

nozzle on the vertical shell shown in Fig. 1. The FEA stress

A total of 1988 eight-node shell elements (Shell93) were used

to model the shell and nozzle. In all cases the nodal layout

was identical and the models should serve as good

comparisons for the methods. The bottom of the tank was

constrained in all but the radial direction. The top of the tank

was restrained from rotation and a tensile stress was applied to

model the effects of the internal pressure acting on the vessel

2

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/19/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

modeling singularity at the nozzle/reinforcing pad interface.

WRC 429 states that there are modeling singularities at the

cylinder-cylinder juncture, which generate fictitiously high

stresses [7]. Actual stress intensities are probably closer to the

WRC 107 stress intensities, The WRC 107 results are more

conservative at the pad edge.

Figure 2 plots the upper surface stress intensities at the

top of the nozzle. The WRC 107 data is more conservative at

the edge of the reinforcing pad.

70

60

50

40

30

.F.

20

== 10

0

1

Q,.

-...e- 1u

--t~-- 2u

....: ~3u

-~o-, 4u

x

0

10

20

5u

30

~

150

--e-- 1u

- m - - 2u

,~. 3U

~-~-~,4U

5U

._~ 100

C

50

0

10

20

F i g u r e 4 B o t t o m o f N o z z l e - U p p e r Surface

Figure 5 is a plot of the stress intensities at the lower surface

of the bottom of the nozzle. WRC 107 underestimates the

stress intensities at the reinforcing pad edge.

70

30

"~ 60

--e.-- 1L

-..J-. 2L

..... 3L

-~.~,-,,.4L

X 5L

~ 5o

~ 40

~ 30

~ 20

top of the nozzle. The WRC and Finite Element stress

intensities are consistent.

10

0

0

10

20

30

160

"~.. 140

120

80

10020

6o ~

40

Figure 5 B o t t o m o f N o z z l e - L o w e r Surface

--e,-- 1L

---~t.-- 2L

......~ 3L

,-,,,~,, ,,,4L

X 5L

:'~

Figures 6 and 7 are the stress intensities for the surfaces of the

fight side of the nozzle. In Fig. 6 WRC 107 underestimates

the stress intensities, but the magnitudes are small compared

to the stress intensities in the loading direction in Figs. 2

through 7.

0

0

10

20

30

m

- 30

~" 25

--e.-,..- 1U

--E,-- 2U

.....~ 3U

~-~,~.~4U

:X 5U

~W 2o

= 15

-~ 10

surface at the bottom of the nozzle. WRC 107 significantly

overestimates the stress intensities at the edge of the

reinforcing pad.

5

0

10

20

30

Figure 6 R i g h t Side o f N o z z l e - U p p e r Surface

3

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/19/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

The stress intensities for the left side of the nozzle are

identical to the stress intensities on the fight side of the nozzle

due to symmetry of the vessels and loading. The left side

stress intensities are not shown as the plots would be

redundant.

60

..~

30

.--Q-- 2L

~o-,- 3L

-~ 2O

-..~..~- 4L

E~ 10

X 5L

- . o - - 1L

40

--e-- 1L

~'

4O

60

.~

5o

.-w-- 2L

3L

~ 2o

,~

x

,

10

20

5L

30

Figure 10 plots the stress intensities at the upper surface

of the fight side of the nozzle. WRC 107 overestimates the

stress intensities at the edge of the reinforcing pad.

30

70

"~. 60

shown in Table 1. Figures 8 and 9 are for the top of the

nozzle. The stress intensities at the bottom of the nozzle are

identical due to symmetry of the load case and are not shown.

In Fig. 8 the stress intensities are essentially the same at the

edge of the reinforcing pad.

50

40

- - , - - 1U

--I~-- 2U

~ 3o

,:.~...3U

= 20

~ 10

0

-~,;~.,,~,.4U

X

0

60

a.

J

20

.....~ - 4 L

10~

10

10

20

5U

30

50

+ I U

-m--2U

.....

~.,

3U

-- 20

-~.....~ 4U

~ 10

X 5U

10

20

surface of the fight side of the nozzle.

WRC 107

overestimates the stress intensity at the edge of the reinforcing

pad.

30

.= 80

j - 70

1

/

{ 60

50

= 40

nozzle. The stress intensities agree closely at the edge of the

reinforcing pad.

~ 2o

1L

- - I - 2L

~ 10

0

10

20

~..~;~.~-3L

-,~<,,,oo4L

5L

30

Figure 12 is a plot of the upper surface stress intensities at

the left side of the nozzle. WRC 107 overestimates the stress

4

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/19/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Method 1 shows some deviation near the edge of the

reinforcing pad.

=

100

~"

80

60

+ l U

-.S-- 2U

3U

40

=

20

....~---.~4 U

X

0

10

20

5U

30

modeling complexity, with Method 1 being the easiest to

implement and the most common method used in pressure

vessel modeling. Method 2 results are very close to Methods

3 and 4, and are essentially identical beyond the outer edge of

the reinforcing pad. In this study finite element Method

lappears to be not be totally consistent with the other three

finite element approaches in the directions of the moment

loads. However, it appears that all four methods are probably

more accurate than WRC 107. In several of the plots the

WRC 107 estimates are considerably higher than the f'mite

element results. In these cases, the more accurate finite

element results indicate that the vessel design is adequate

where WRC 107 indicates a failed design.

F i g u r e 12 L e f t Side o f N o z z l e - U p p e r S u r f a c e

intensities on the left side of the nozzle.

WRC 107

overestimates the stress intensity at the edge of the reinforcing

pad.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

4 Front Engineering of Baton Rouge, Louisiana provided

access to the COMPRESS pressure vessel design and analysis

software package without which this project would not have

been possible.

60

a. 50

--e--lL

40

--m-- 2L

ao

-.,,::~~. 3L

-- 20

..~-~.,~.- 4 L

10

10

20

5L

30

F i g u r e 13 L e f t S i d e o f N o z z l e - L o w e r S u r f a c e

1 and the others. Case 1 is equivalent to welding a forging

into the shell. This forging is significantly stiffer than the

shell or reinforcing pad and the shell is relatively less stiff in

the circumferential direction. This effect distorts the shell

outside of the reinforcing pad diameter. The effect does not

occur with the longitudinal moment loading as the vessel is

stiffer in the longitudinal direction.

REFERENCES

[1] ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII,

2001.

[2] Welding Research Council Bulletin 107, 1979, Welding

Research Council.

[3] Pastor, T.P., and Hechmer, J., "ASME Task Group Report

on Primary Stress," Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology,

February 1997,Vol. 119, pp. 61-67.

[4] Moini, H., and Mitchell, T.P., "Stress-Analysis of a

Thick-Walled Pressure-Vessel Nozzle Junction," International

Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 1991, Vol. 46, No. 1,

pp. 67-74.

[5] Jawad, M.H., and Farr, J.R., Structural Analysis and

Design of Process Equipment, Second Edition, 1989, John

Wiley and Sons.

[6] Porter, M.A., Martens, D.H., and Marcal, P., "On Using

Finite Element Analysis for Pressure Vessel Design,"PVP,

ASME.

[7] Welding Research Council Bulletin 429, 1998, Welding

Research Council.

[8] Porter, M.A., Martens, D.H., and Hsieh, C.S., "A

Comparison of Finite Element Codes and Recommended

Investigation Methodology," PVP Vol. 359, 1997, ASME,

New York, NY, pp. 241-246.

CONCLUSIONS

Linear elastic fmite element analysis using shell elements

can be effectively used to demonstrate that some designs that

are considered marginal or failed by a less precise method

such as WRC 107, are in actuality, adequate.

5

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/19/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

- Design of ShellUploaded byanon_660004464
- Pvdci 1.2 Pressure Vessel Design as Per AsmeUploaded byAdekimi Emmanuel
- PVD-by alimUploaded byTarun
- Aluminum Manual 37Uploaded byLUIS4563
- Sample3 SpreadsheetUploaded bySaxa Man G
- Composite Tank Sell Sheet 42575Uploaded bymalcivar67
- DNV-Diving Support VesselUploaded byElchin Sattarov
- ME489 Notes-Slides Abul-Fazal-Arif Ansys-ManualUploaded byOmaroMohsen
- Case N-597-2 Requirements for Analytical Evaluation of Pipe Wall ThinningUploaded bymobpas
- FinElem EvalHwk2 Martínez (1)Uploaded byJosua Martinez
- Standard Specification for Pressure Vessel PlatesUploaded bywaqas
- melessssssssssssss.docxUploaded byetayhailu
- Internal Loads determination using finite element analysisUploaded byviluk
- Trunnion Checking for Piping Stress Analysis _ What is PipingUploaded byVivekanandan Mahendran
- ObservationUploaded bypapum2013
- Basics for Stress Analysis of Underground Piping Using Caesar II-20150924Uploaded byiaft
- File ServeUploaded byDeepakSingh
- 5-RC2-30-VESS-JSD-95-000-0400Uploaded byShaaban Noaman
- X_Chena.pdfUploaded bygreg1212
- Pressure VesselsUploaded byChevronelle
- Piping Stress Job Interview Questions – What is PipingUploaded bysrivastava1984rahul
- Need Help Solving Coupling Temperature and Displacement Analysis - DASSAULT_ ABAQUS FEA Solver - Eng-TipsUploaded byAnush Jk
- Static-Dynamic-Analysis.pdfUploaded bypksisodia
- Comparing Numerical Alternatives to Model Jet Grouting in TunnelsUploaded bysepehr_asap
- 9A03703 Finite Element MethodsUploaded bysivabharathamurthy
- Qas 1 01 Fabricated Components Waterwall Panels 082914Uploaded byTimmyJuri
- Dec 97Uploaded byHoGSP
- Analytical Study of the Tibia Bone under Static Load using Finite Element MethodUploaded byIJRASETPublications
- FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF WELDED JOINTSUploaded byjangdini
- pune p.docUploaded bypravin2m

- StretchingUploaded byMaurice Marchant
- DS68_9-597.pdfUploaded byRamon Fraga
- TN-503.pdfUploaded bysagar1503
- A Comparison Study of Pressure Vessel Design Using Different StandardsUploaded byManasses junior
- ExpandedandWelded.pdfUploaded bysagar1503
- Gasket DesignUploaded bysagar1503
- file2.txtUploaded bysagar1503
- Finite Element Evaluation of Clearance Effect OnUploaded bysagar1503
- Pressure VesPressure Vessel Failures - Hayes1996sel Failures - Hayes1996Pressure Vessel Failures - Hayes1996Uploaded bysagar1503
- unit IIIUploaded bymuraligocam
- Stainless Steel Feedwater and Condenser TubingUploaded bysoubhadra nag
- PV Elite and CodeCalcUploaded byraulrrt
- asset-v1_MITx+2.961.1x+2T2018+type@asset+block@1._Business_Planning-2Uploaded bysagar1503
- Egineering Activities Relationships.xlsUploaded bysagar1503
- LabPracticalExam Instructions (1)Uploaded bysagar1503
- Laskin 2013Uploaded bysagar1503
- Fabricated StrainersUploaded bypank22
- fddgfeerUploaded bysagar1503
- HayesUploaded byMurugananthamParamasivam
- Basket StrainersUploaded byYarlagadda Harsha Vardhan
- Strainer Information.pdfUploaded bymahdi
- Pub1382Uploaded bysagar1503
- 134572662-Monorail-Design-Excel.pdfUploaded bysagar1503
- Pressure VesPressure Vessel Failures - Hayes1996sel Failures - Hayes1996Pressure Vessel Failures - Hayes1996Uploaded bysagar1503
- 134572662 Monorail Design Excel134572662 Monorail Design ExcelUploaded bysagar1503
- unpack.3.XistWorkshop.pdfUploaded bysagar1503
- Tack n Temp WeldsUploaded bypavi32
- みんなの日本語初級I -問題集.pdfUploaded byLukyLuky
- Minna No Nihongo I - CDs 1.2.3.4 TracklistUploaded byDany Rdz
- Integrity of Reactor Pressure Vessels in Nuclear Power Plants: Assessment of Irradiation Embrittlement Effects in Reactor Pressure Vessel SteelsUploaded bycruggieri99

- Lawrence AUploaded bycacamaca350
- Computer Aided Design and Analysis of Swing Jaw Plate of Jaw CrusherUploaded bybetojulio
- FEM_NotesUploaded byJeremy Ball
- Graduate HandbookUploaded byTarun Khurana
- 1002 Geotechnical ModellingUploaded byLuke
- ASME Paper LifeManag_Pt21Uploaded bysnorburn1
- HeatKal TechnologiesUploaded byRahul Gawali
- Flare Systems Major Thrust Points for Stress AnalysisUploaded byavinash sawant
- DNVGL-RP-D101.pdfUploaded bynaveen kumar
- Aeronautical 7th Semester SyllabusUploaded bySrinivasa Reddy Nallimilli
- Basics of Pipe Stress Analysis ( Must Read )Uploaded byAnh Vân Trần
- V3I6-IJERTV3IS060582.pdfUploaded byHernâniCruz
- Chapter 7Uploaded bythiwaann
- Application of Elastic Layered System in the Design of RoadUploaded byAnonymous 7VPPkWS8O
- Autodesk Inventor Simulation 2010 - Getting StartedUploaded byJuan M
- 2 FRAME&TRUSSUploaded bykannan
- Lecture 1 - IntroductionUploaded bywdmalik
- fe6a8a6e6cb7105_ek.pdfUploaded bysitorusronni
- 0389.Pdfconcrete PavementsUploaded byEdu Cincoa
- Failure Investigation of the Disc Harrow Profiles and RedesingningUploaded byEmir Abazović
- Theory of StructuresUploaded byDanica Rose Salangad
- first course for finite elementUploaded byhaabalm
- Fem for Inclined Pressure VesselUploaded byPrayas Subedi
- TiO2 rutile dataUploaded bysrraju1
- conventional and fem analysis of a damUploaded bySuryaTeja
- Mechanical Maintenance (Pankaj)..........Uploaded byPankaj Patel
- API 579Uploaded bycheveresan123
- Technical Reference ManualUploaded byNitesh Kumar
- Chap_06Uploaded byRoberto Caceres
- 05 1_EPC SV AEI L BD 00002_Pipe Stress Design BasisUploaded byPhan Van Thanh