RETHINKING THE ALLOWABLE PIPE LOAD ON ROTATING EQUIPMENT NOZZLES L.. Peng and A. 0, Nedsitin : ‘The 8, W. Kellogp Company Houston, Texas apgreact It 4s @ consensual beltef of piping engineers that the current allowable pipe loads on rotating equipment nozzles imposed by che equipment manufactur~ ers are too low. A more*realistic allowable should be established to better belunce equipient costs againat piping engineering and material costs. Ths arcivl. reviews past practices of equipment nozzle loada and points out dnadequactes and inconsistencies of the current standards, Tt 1a believ— ed tha the extra manufacturing or engineering cost incurred in providing Lim ereesed allowable nozzle koads fot rotating equipment can be compensated by nateriala and engineering savings in the associated piping systema, This paper proposes a set of reasonable limiting ullovables and suggests giving credix to equipment with higher allowable nozzle loads vhen a bid is being evaluated. INTRODUCTION A wiping system has to be designed to satisfy the folloving rquirenests: (a) Functtonal Adequacy ~ The yipe shall be big enough to carry the anount of fluid required for the process. Its material shall be compatible with the finid it carrfes. It is protected from excessive heat loss and from environnental damage such as corrosion, freezing and so forth. (b) Structural Tatogrity - The pipe shatl be chick encugh Co resit the intornal preswuce. It Ls properly supported for weight, wind, seienic, and other loadings. ic should be flexible enough to absorb chermal expanodion and contraction. (c) Syatem Operability - The piping shall not cause any excesaive de~ formation to the connecting equipment tins hindering £te proper operation, Flange leaking, velve sticking, cotating equipment vibration and overheating are sone of the probleas to be avcdded, While borh insuxing structural integrity and maintaining “system opera bilicy" are responsibilities of piping engineers, the task of maintaining the aysten operability 19 wore difficult because it involves the stoengih of the soauccting eqyuipaent which fs beyaad the control ef pipiag engineers, What 18@ piping engineer can do ds to arrange the pipe in such a way chat the pipe Jond applied at am equipment nozele ds Leos than che allowable Load furntohed by che equipnent manufacturer. Unfortunately tn actual practice thts ts not a3 easy ay it sounds, since the allowsble Loads ace generally very low. [tt unusual ta select a piping system meeting the elloxable nozzie load without going through a considerable pushar of Tculationg. Fleximle Leeps and spe~ ciel vestraints are normally needed for hot pipdng systens to tring the pipe Joad within the acceptable Limit. It is = consensuel (veling amont thy pipe stress engineers chat the enrrent Standard gliowsble nozzle londs shvuld ba higher. These low ablewables have contributed to ineressed plant cost by requiring additional pipe loops, re strainte, snd engineering menhoors. it fa believed that the overall plant enst san be reduced by providing equipment with bigher allowable aozzle Toad. This ts believed to be particularly vo da the case of rotating equipment. Te ds the object of this paper vo explore methods for eetting an allovable Pipe Jond on rotating equipment anazies. The pager ceviews past and corvent Practices on nozzle allowable losd, discusses the difficulties of meeting the current allovables, cltes some aperial solutiona to the problem, snd escablish ea a set of rations allovable. HISTORICAL BACKGaR D Piping enginoers have long realfzad that there 18 @ Timftntton om the avount of pipe load which can be applied to the rocating equipment nozzle. There fore, they have always refrainud from putting too much load on the equipment. They also tried for forty years to rationalize and standardize the equipment ale Joweble pipe loads. The Uif€iculty faced by today's piping engineer is not any dese than the difficulty faced by enginears forty years ago, The preacess fn standardizing the equipment allowable can be divided tate classtead and nogera atages. ELASSICAL ALLOW: S Prior to World War If, ongineers dida't even bother to know how much pipe loud a punp or a turbine could take. They resorted to common gense and Judge- ment to design maay successful plants. Although manuEactucers insisted that absolutely no pipe load was allowed to be applied to thely equipment, Rosshetn and Markl (2) found that the average pipe reaction acting on the punps were: Vertdeul thruge, Lb 3.2540 + 5)? Lazerai thrust, Lb «= 1,30 (D+ 3)° m a Bending or torefonal moment, ft-lb = 5 (D + 3) vhere Dis the outside ptpe diameter in inches. These loads ace severol thnes Higher than the allovables of the woderu pousy B-inch {203wa) or Earner. These were the good old days viten a pump could tske a lot of Load wichour even being designed for it. Regardless of the successful operating experience representud by Equation (1) Loading, in 1950 Volosewick (2) suggested that the above loading was ex- cessive. Based upon a large nunber of stress caleulations oa actual Installa~ tions, he recommended a set of rules with considerably reduced ailowablen. Js revised rules tay have heen based on the vse af higher quality material avati- able at the tine thus resulttog in thinner castings, and in higher speed equip nent more sensitive to email deflections. In this ers, equipment was not designed directly to take any pipe leads, he Loads applied were resisted by the inherient equipment atrength dentgned by other Esctors such as preseure, architectural shape, and butltotn conserve tiem, Equatich (1) fe no longer applicable, but iz does reven! the nagnitude df the Loude piping engineers vsed co avply to eguipmenc, 16MODERN ALLOWARLES In 1958, 4 new ere degen when National Electricel Manufacturers Assocta~ . tien (NEHA) published the allowable pipe forces end aoments on mechacical~drive steam turbines {3). This publication not only standardized the allowable loads but also divided the load into two categories; siagle nozzle load and combined auching load, The single nozzle is che direct measure of. the nozzle and casing streas and deformation which might cause interference between moving and fixed parca. he combined mactsine load is the combination of all the londs acting fon the machine through individual nozzles, This load is limited by the pedes- tal and baseplate strength and rigidity to assure shaft alignaent. Because of thetr fundanental significance, tho NEMA ellovables are suasatized in the fol- lowkng: 1. At each connection, the resultant forces and moment shall satisfy the Following: A + Ms 5000 ay where, @ + Resultane force, 1b, Mos Sesuleant moment, f6-1b D = Pape size of the connection (I.P.$.) in inches up to 8 inches in diaweter, For sizes greater than this, use a value of D equal co (16 + T.P.5.)/3 inches. Y - Vertical Parallel to _ Turbine Shalt Z~ Horizontal Right Angle to Shaft Figure {. NEMA Allowable Directions ?. The combined resultant forces and moments of che inlet, extraction, and exhaust connections, resolved at Che centerline of the exnause connection, must not execed the folowing cond1toae: (a) These eesultants shall satisfy: BF # My #250 0, @ uhece, Fe = Combined resultant force, Ibe aMe + Combined resultant moment, ft-ibs be = Squivatent dlaneter (in inches) of a circular opening equal ro the total ateas of the inlet, extraction, and exhaust openings up to a value of Dfnches {9 meter, For values beyond this, use & value of De equal te (18 + Equivalent Mameter)/3 inches, {b) The components of these reeultant ghali not exceed Fe © S0DC3 Fy © 125 Dey Fr = 100 De w a Me = 250 Dap Py © 125 Dep Bz © 125 ne where the directions are as shown in Figure 1. As demonsttated in Figures 3 and 4, the NEMA allowable for a single nozzle Ls only about ove eighth cf the value given by Rossheis and Mackl for a A2einch (305 mm). Needless to say, this has created a lot of problen to the piping system. ‘the allowable for the combined load is even nore stringent. Although the NEMA allowable 1s widely considered as very strict, 1¢ nevertheless ts a atandard with authority. It 4s also used conveniently as a refetence value in other applications. For instance, Awerical Petroleum Insti- tute dn dts Standard 617 (4) requites that the centrifugal compressors shall be destaned to withstand external forces and moments at least equal to 3.85 times the values calcolated from NEMA SH+21 formulas, PUMP _ALLOWABLES Standardized allowable nozzle load for pumpa were not available until 1971, when APE published in its Standard 610 (5), The original standard covered only the pumps with éinch discharge nozzle or snallec. The new 1992 6th edition has extended the scope to pumps having suction nozzles £2 inches and smaller. Y SHAFT a < Oo a “ee PEDESTAL Figure 2 API Std 610 Allowable Axes ‘The allowable piping losds are summarized in Tigures 3, 4, and 3. The lower values Tepresent the allowable loade applied in the weak direction of Che pumps. Ags wili become clear later, these new revised 1981 aliowables are approaching the rational values developed in this paper. The wajor improve went in the 1981 standards is the strengthening of the baseplates and pedestalLn Fann Fro, TT tr «3.0053» . Toned ee wero (1) rT ® se _ \ A aaibia “ ei A ; t ~ API-STD-B1O ! ‘ Pipe Sizz, D, Cashes) Pigsee 3. Single Nettle Allowebie Foree (iteauant of 3-Directin) carer sity wer Guaversion Factara i$ toch = 26.4% mm bas Sie Ws fark (2) w4r600" Eeuasion (9) COP eee ee vie sizes, v, (inched Figere 4. Stagie Hottie AMowsble Moment (Revuitent of 2-Directiarn) eres SRerston Pastore | Inch = 38.4 tre par seuen 19supports. Ik alee eliminates the original 1900 pounds minumun weight rule which hud resulted in such an incongistency that gave almeat the same conbined design aowent for all stzea af the punpe covered. Fowover, it showld be noted that @ large nunber of pumps are not built by the APE Standard, Tr so called AVS (9) pumps widely used in che chemical process industry, for inatance, do not have a standard nozzle allowable. Mout of the AVS pumps can take constderably Less load chan API punps, 8000 6000 z . 3 a § 4000 | gE § 2 3 2 NEMA [3 = Assume 2F¢ = Mc 8 000 of ‘3x3 Bud 4x6 Bx6 x10 0u1R 1 2xtd Equipment Size, Discharge by Suction, ( inches by inches ) Figure 5. Combined Resultant Moments Conversion Factors : 1 inch = 28.4 mm LLbt = 4.448 5 Frou the charte presented, £t appears thet APL STD 610 has @ higher al- Jowable than NEMA, hut in realicy, the STD 610 allowable is the move difficult one to meet. ‘This is mainly due to the fact tha a, Turbine piping ty inherently more flexible than pump pipings due te the high tenperature and pipe stress requirement. 20b, Host turbines are fadependent drives therefore theie piping ean be nore easily restrained. On che other hand, pumps are normally inetallod wick 100% or 50% sparen meaning two or three punps are generally connected rogether with common piping, ‘This creates twisting between pumps avd also aokes chen nore difficult to reetratn. €, Liguié can potentlaliy create @ nore diaturbing force than stream, Therefore, punp plping 1s more prone to vibration when excessive piping loops ate installed; careful etcencign to leop suppurta and guides are x necessity, DIFFICULTIES NITH CURRENT STANDARD ALLOABLES Tt 4s probably gafe co say that the current standarde for cyutpment noz~ zle allowable loads have caused considerable problems fox piping engineers, Tory ave tog low, Inconulstent and arbitrary. (a) Too Low - This Ly exemplified tn Figure 3, In ede Ciguee che Rosshetw asd Marki cUrve yepreaents the gliowables piping engineers used to spely, Lucy are well above the NEMA recomendations, The realistic value cua by expected ve Lie between chase two curves. (b) “Inccnststency ~ The current standard values dows not treat forces aid monents ia equal significauce, In SEMA, for instance, although the moments and forces are combined into a single psramater, che fixed scale fac~ ter applied to forced ts not consistent with the actual equipment geonetry, The inconsistency also 1s apparenc when Equstions (2) and (3) are converted inva che Merrie syste. The greatess inconsistency of the current standard allowatles, however, is the variaclon with che pipe dianeter. The standard allowable does {nerease with Lucreauing pipe aize, but is leas then directly proportional te the pipe size. Hovevar, if based on atrength of pipe oF equlpment, the allowable should vary groportionally co the square or cube of the pipe stze aa shown in Yquation (2). The nev 1982 APT 610 has wore oF less corrected thts inconalatency by requiting the consideration of both Forces und monenta tn the combined evaluation, (c) Arbitrary - Although sone conventent values have to be used when o standard fs being established, these values can make the whole standard appear to be arbitrary. Take WEMA allowable for instance, the aliovables are pro- portional co the pipe size for pipes up to 8 inches; then the increasing tate abcupely drops to one third of the original rate for pipe sizer greater chan @ inches, Regardless of che reason behind this rate drop, the use of S inches ae a change step de arbitrary, The arbitrary factor is even more apparenc In the case of 1971 API-610 punp allowable which 1s sti]1 applicable to samy plants currently under design. Owing to the minimum 1000 pound rule, tye 197L APE-610 allowable of a 1 inch by 2 inches punp ie the same aa that of a2 £ Inch by 10 inch pump. This {s due to the face that except some snall amount of high pressure pumps, most punps of refinery and petrochemical ser vices ore Hight weight types, an 8 by LO pump barely weights 1000 pounds, the aintsun weight to be used in caleblating the allowables. although tests (6, 7) have shown that 4 4 x 6 pump can resist the load allowed without ex- Beading the spucdfied U.OLO Lich displacement, it is valid to questiou 42 a Lx Z pump can cake the same load. Also it will be logical to assung an @ ¥ 10 pump vill be able to take wore, Fortunately, this 1000 pound vinimun weight rule bes been eliminaced Ln the L98L API-620, THE SOLUTIONS The [ow equipment allovable nozzle loads have forced piping cngineers to use excessive pipe loops coupled with conplex restraint arrangements co meet the requirements. This not only increases capital expendicures but also increases pocencial operational problems. Vibration, cavitation, and loss of net poustive suction head (NPSH) are gone of the gormon operacing problena re- 2suleing from excessive piping loops. To overcone the above dffficultles, engineers are occasionally ferced to resort to unconveations? epproaches sush os stiffening the pump hase plates, patting the vhole equipaent set ta suspension, making the whole equipment set free to slide, and so forth. However, even letting Che equipment stide on a ped, considerable stiffening on the baseplate 1s still frequently required &. ‘The fundamental olution to che problea is to inerease the equfament al~ Lownble loada. In orther words, higher allowable nozzle loads sre needed. Looking at current allowables, it te apparent that the pressure patt of the casing of the equtpuent i9 generally sufficiently strong to be able to cake the moment which will generate 4 pipe stress equal to approxinately ene third of the baste allowable stress. That is a large moment compared with the allowable nonent. The Mmitiog veak part ia the equipment appears to be tie baseplate and pedestal portion vbich can be very inoxpensively stiffened. RAUIONALIZE TRE ALLOWABLE Tt has been argued that low equipment alfowable nozzle Joads have resulted in inereasing the overall plant cost. Piping engineers have long realized that buying somewhat nore expensive equipment with higher clowatle noxete Yoads a: actually be cheaper, oversii, when piping cost is included. Rovever, thia philosophy is seldoniy pat into effect in buying the cquig- ment. Becauae of this, the manufacturers don't have an incentive to devety ‘nt tention to this problen. ‘They frequently give allounble nozele londs Inwer then the one thelr equipment caa actually tuke co reduce the pusssbility of equipment problens. Therefore, manufacturers must he given incentives to provide bigher atlovables as they are done tn other areas, For instances, in buying puRps or turbines, a credit is generally given to the ones with higher eFft- ciency or petiomance rate for the eventual saving in power or energy con- sumption, Although the energy aaving te not inmedlately realizcble at the time of purehooing, engineers are willing te capitalize the future saving tote che present worch Co compensate the vendors. Because of these incentives the vendors are constantly trying to improve their equipaent efficiency without being pushed to do it. ‘This process works reel vell in increasing equipment efeletency. There is no reason to believe that a ainilar process #i1} not Work for the equipment allousble load. The savings from higher equipment allowable nozzle loads are tot vory tongible. It comes from saving of pipe and pipe support material and reduces! enginedring effort. When the stated allowable nozzle loading is lower thao a practicable value, engineers will be foreed to devote much tine and effort te developing a coluticn Zor what may well be d ficticious problen. In order to have a guideline of the nageitude of the altewabl beneficial to develop a sat of rational allowables. a ts 1. Allowable Loads Because of the pipe strens, flange luad, foundation capacity and other requiraneats, the allowable pipe loads cannot be arbitrartty tmereané without proper Limit. An equipment allovable exceeding a certain limit wilt have uo practical increased value at all. To setting the practical allovable, it is necessary to avoid falling into the some diffleuttles the current stendard allovables are [acing. the ellowsblea should consider the force and moment tn equal significance, They should also vary more than directly proportional to the pipe dianeter, From Figura 6, for loads acting on the face of nozzle A or the desige nated resolving point B, the effect on the coupling displacement wil be de~ Pending on the force and moment ecting through A-B-C and ABD, tw net ca wethu flexing deformacton due to moment is much more sigwiféeant than the shear deforsation due to direct force, ‘Therefore, the tatel effect of the toad can be measured by a combined parameter M+ KiLF vhere Ky is the cor relation constant and & che equipmeat dimension, Because the equipment dinen- sion is proportional to pipe diameter, the above paranceer can be revised to M+ Kgbe. By setting Kyb = 3, this paramecer would be identical to the REMA paranecet. ut by using Keo ingtead of the simple constant, the parameter can rotleee the actual equa! signifteance of forees and momenta. KZ can be set equal co 4 with consistent units in ¥, P, and F, ‘this combined parameter can alse be called equivatent moment. That is Rios 4+ ADP 6) The variacton of che allowable with tha dianeter can be derived from the idea of LMinitine pipe etress, Based on past expetiences and practices, che Liniting pire suress shall be smaller for larger pipes, In order to have a snooth vattatton, it appears to be logleal to set the Limiting pipe stress ine versely proportional to the square root of che pipe dameter. That ie = AD s- 2 (ey Ky can se tuvghly set to 18000 pst - int’? (49,800 kPa ~ wh/2). Te should be novel that this fs not the accual pipe allowable stress but rather a seasure to set a cefercncw maxiwam pipe load. Since the standard wall thickness vae~ des roughly peopartional re che square raot of tue pipe diamecer, che secticn aedulos yf he alge ogg bu wedcren os & meee = Kail/@, gy can be set as o.08 int/? (0.0128 wif2) the allowable equivalent moment HX’ « 82 then be~ M+ 40F = Ky Ky 0? om oe, for individual nozele w+ 4oR = Ko? ce where, % > Kesuicant moment, in-Lb, (KN=M) D = Outside diameter of pipe, tm, CH) F © Kesuleant force, Lb, (RN) Constant 1440 ib/tn 253 KN/H Assuming M aod SBF pave the same contribution, the relative comaricon of this maximum load with the standard allowable is shown in Figure 3, 4, and Equation (6) represent the alloweble for each individual nozzle, For com- bined allowable the sume equation cas also be used by replacing the outside dianeter with an equiveleat diamecer. That is for combined load 2 @ Me #4 ue Fe ¥ & be where, Me = Combined resultant noment, in-ip, (KN-M) Re = Combined resultant force, ib, (KN) vex [trp toe + & = Constanc, sane ad in Kqvatian (6) , equivalent dianeter, in, (iH)Figure 6, Equal Significance of Forse and Moment stor- 1-A A= 0.8Inch Ti ae fa) fb) Figure 7. The Piping around an Equipment maAlthough wach equipnent has different vtiffnessos at different directions, the variation of the allovables at different directions should nec be greater clan 50 percent ef the saxinun conpeneat. The difference becumen ¥ and GOP chowkd not be eure chan 50 percent of the grester of the two either, Cost Benefits Equations {8) and (9) have lid out the allowable which piping engi- neers would like to have; now it de cine te fine out what de the cost bene Fit of the high allowable. Figure 7 shows a typical layout to be used in Enis investigation. fhe actual layout may loak Like the one shown in Figure 7-(a), but for Levestigation purpose the layout can be unfolded ag in Figure 7-(b). The loop of the Leg 1 is needed to absarb the expansion so the pipe will nor create too auch load on the equipment. ‘The investigation ds to find the wipe length euguived for different equipment allowables, The lover allowsble will require jonger length, and the larger the expansion the longer the L «111 also be needed. This L te ¢led ¢2 ecuipment allowable and the amouit of expenaton two vartables, dowever, aince the Line cun always be conventently stopped at Point A Locutad 20 or 30 feet avay from the equipment, ir really fovolves oaty the expansion of about 20 feet of pipe. Rurthersare, the higher the reaperacure the longer the tei¢lal length 4s required Juse for che pipe wervss purpose, the effact of tenperature on the advitional pipe length sn reducing the pipe load has greatly reduced, Based on the above, a fixed delta of 0.5 foc (2.7mm) can be used for all the cases, ‘This 0.5 inch movement te equi- valeat ¢o the expansion of 20 feet of carbon steel pipe operating at about 400°F (204°C) and also is the arount of displacement that can be controlled relatively easily by estratata, ‘The lenght required can be determined by using the gulded eantilover approximation. Frem guided eantilever formulas, Zeta, Hak cy e @ e ubore, 2 © Modulus of elastictey of pipe macertal, pel, (KPA) Lo = Moment uf dneeciol of pipe, int, cH) & = G5 to (0.0127 wy Equation (10) con be used to estimate the capital value ef che allovable in Leras of the pipe dength. GF course, the suving from the higher allowable Ls ner Lintted to the nacerial soved, The supports, cestratncs, and space saved can easily exe cued the saving from che pipe considering the fact chal many cescraints have tp be framed up from the grade. A tight space can aleo cost enginvering days Lo came up with an acceptable Loop. CONCLLS TON Piptog systens connected to rotating equipment have oecautonalty caused eperating problens. large plpe forces lave caused some pump seal to wear aut germacurely. They have also caused soe turbines to vibrate undesirably, Ga the ocher hand, excessive loops used to reduce the pipe force have caused some severe shaking dn piping, These probleas can be grewtly reduced through a barter coordination bocweos piplag enginesrs, equipment engineers and che equipnene manufacturers. This esu be achieved by the following practlee. 1. Ynew the amount of pipe loud che equipment van taice Ic is noc unusual for a piping engineer to discover toward the end of the dew cigs scage chat an equipment can aetually Lake much lese pipe toad than expected. To ablaviace this siruation vhanever possible, equipment should & purchasad that is buftt 4m accordaace with standards providing =Llowable aoz~ 6ule loade. 2. Encourage the vendors to provide the actual novzle allowables parti- eularly when Jt 1s wigher than the standard values. Tr showid ba specified that high allowable nozzle Loadings will be viewed as an advantage. 3, AU equipment purchasing coordination meetings, the subject af allow able nozzle loads should be discussed and the design paraneter agreed upon with the maoufsecurer, ACKNOMLEDGENRNT The authors Like to thank Kellogg Corporate Chief Engineer, Mr. $. 8, Handman for his objective review and conments on this paper. REFERENCE 1. Rovgheda, Dy B. and Markl, A.R.C., “The siguiftesnce of and Suggested Lintts for, the Stress in Pipe Lines Tue to the Combined Effects of Pressure and Expansion", Trans ASHE, July, 1940, PP, 443-454, 2. Wolosevick, Pr E+, “Equipment Stvess Iuposed by Piping", Petroleum Refiner, August, 1950, 3. NEMA Publication Koy SH 23-1979, "Mechanical-drive Steam Turbines* Nationsl Electric Nenufacturers Association (The original SH 20-1958 has been replaced by SM 21-1970 and SM 22-1970 which has been replaced by SM~23). 4. APL STD 617, "Centrifugal Compressors for General Refinery Services,” Averican Petroleum Institute. 5. API STD 610, “Centrdfugal Pumps For General Refinery Services," Anevican Petroleum Institute, 6th edftion, January, 1981. &, Simon, C, Ar, “Allowable Pomp Piping Loads", Hydrocarbon Processing Jone, 1972. 7. doolin, J. He, "Install Pumps for Ninimum Stress", Hydvocarten Processing, June, 1978. 8 Smith, A, P., "Rid Pumps of Ftpe Stresses", Chemical Ugineeting, July, 1979. : 9. “Proposed American Voluntary Standard (AVS)," Manufacturing Chemists Association.