International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies

E-ISSN22498974

Research Paper

DESIGN AND STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF PRESSURE VESSEL DUE TO CHANGE OF NOZZLE LOCATION AND SHELL THICKNESS
Shaik Abdul Lathuef 1 and K.Chandra sekhar 2 PG Student, 2Associate Professor Department of Mechanical Engineering, QIS College of Engineering and Technology, Ongole, Andhra Pradesh. ABSTRACT
In the past several years there have been significant changes to the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel (B&PV) Code and the use of international pressure vessel codes such as EN13445. This paper discusses some of the potential unintended consequences related to Governing Thickness of shell as per ASME. Here have a scope to change the code values by take the minimum governing thickness of pressure vessel shell to the desired requirements and also relocate of nozzle location to minimize the stresses in the shell. A low value of the factor of safety results in economy of material this will lead to thinner and more flexible and economical vessels. Here we evaluated the stress in the vessel by Zick analysis approach. KEYWORDS: Design procedure, nozzles orientation, stress calculation

Address for Correspondence

1

1.0 INTRODUCTION Pressure vessels are probably one of the most wide spread equipment within the different industrial sectors. In fact, there is no industrial plant without pressure vessels, steam boilers, tanks, autoclaves, collectors, heat exchangers, pipes etc. For many years an ISO committee (ISO TC/11, Annaratone 2007) was dedicated to study pressure vessels and provide design guidelines with necessary codes and design procedure of pressure vessel as per ASME sec VIII Div-1 to adequately cover the intended subject matter. However, even when the code includes specific regulations to determine the thickness of the different components, and taking minimum thickness it will leads to make thinning vessel with required factor of safety at design temperature and pressure. With minimum thickness of the shell we can make light weight vessel and low cost vessel. At the same time it may operate at safe conditions facing some issues related to structural analysis by evaluating the L.P zick analysis are exhaustively taken into consideration. In thin cylindrical shell following stresses were induced due to internal pressure. 1. Circumferential stress(hoop stress) The circumferential stress has the tendency to split up the cylindrical shell into two troughs. c = P R / t

Fig:1Circumferential Fig:2 Longitudinal stress (hoop stress) stress. 2. Longitudinal stress. The longitudinal stress has the tendency to split up the cylinder shell into two cyliders. =PR/2t 2.0 Design Criteria These equipment usually present in industrial plants, are used as filter vessel, gas and vapor storage IJAERS/Vol. I/ Issue II/January-March, 2012/218-221

systems. The following design procedure shows an example of pressurized horizontal steel tank used as storage vessel in processing plant. Governing Thickness tg as per UCS 66(a) have a scope to modify Some extent in which this can be minimize the thickness of vessel shell with required factor of safety, by using higher strength materials for vessel construction and change in nozzle location. The Code procedure is to followed to determine the vessel thickness within an effective factor of safety. Design Data Code of Design and Construction = ASME Sec VIII Div -1 Fluid handled = Water Working Pressure = 9Kg/cm Design Pressure-Internal P =10.0Kg/cm Design Pressure (External) = Nil Nominal inside diameter D = 100cm corroded inside radius R = (D/2)+ Ca = (100/2) +1.5 = 50.15 cm Weld joint efficiency E = 1 Nominal inside crown radius L = 90mm Applicable loadings on vessel as per UG-2 1. Internal design Pressure 2. Vessel supports Hydro static test pressure =1.3PE= 1.3101 = 13 Kg/cm as per UG-99 Pressure relief device requirements as per UG 125(a) All pressure vessels within the scope of ASME code division, irrespective of size or pressure, shall be provided with pressure relief device .A Suitable pressure relief device is provided by the client in the connected piping and hence the connection for the same is not provided on the vessels. Drain opening requirements as per UG - 25 (f) Vessel subjected to corrosion shall be supplied with a suitable drain opening at the lowest A 50 NB drain pipe connection is provided at the bottom of the vessel, end point practicable in the vessel. Inspection opening requirement as per UG- 46 (C) This Vessel is provided with hand hole opening of DN 150,one on each Dished end.

International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies Table.1 Material selection and specifications.

E-ISSN22498974

Table.2 Governing thickness as per UCS66(a) 3.0 Design calculations

Nozzles N1 & N2 along with reinforcement pads are attached to the vessel with full penetration welding and as per UW-15(b), since nozzle configuration is to fig. UW-16(c), it is exempted from strength calculation. The saddle at the lowest section must resist the horizontal force (F). 3.5 Stress Calculations STRESS CALCULATIONSA FOR 8MM SHELL THICKNESS (L. P. Zick Analysis as per Pressure Vessel handbook by Eugene F. Megyesy): Table 3.Parametrs For Zick Analysis

3.1 Shell thickness calculation under internal pressure for horizontal vessel-As Per UG- 27(c) Reqrd. Thickness (tr) = (PR/(SE-0.6P)) = (1050.15/(1406.141- 0.610)) = 0.358 cm Total shell thickness= tr + Ca = 0.358 + 0.15 = 0.508 cm Code minimum required thickness as per UG16(b)(4) +Ca = 0.25+0.15= 0.4cm For reducing pressure vessel weight we consider the plate thickness here as t =8mm instead of governing thickness 12mm.as per UCS 66(a). Since t > tcode and > tr+Ca, Provided plate thickness is adequate. Since 8 mm > 4 mm & 5.08 mm, provided plate thickness is adequate. 3.2 Dished head thickness (pressure on concave side) as per UG-32 (d) Type of dished head 2:1 Ellipsoidal tr- Required minimum thickness after forming = PD/(2SE-0.2P) = 10100.3/(21406.11-0.210) = 0.3569 cm Total thickness of dished head trf = tr + forming allowance + corrosion allowance trf = 0.3569+0.1+0.15 = 0.606 cm Code minimum required thickness as per UG16(b)(4) = 0.25+Ca=0.25+0.15= 0.4 cm tr/L = 0.36/90= 0.003966 Since tr/L is > 0.002, applied formula as per UG32(d) for thickness calculation is satisfied For low value of factor of safety the plate thickness can taken here as t =8mm Verification as per UG-32(b) t rhs = 0.321cm trhs+Ca = 0.321+0.15 = 0.47 cm Since t > trf, > tcode and > trhs+Ca, provided nominal plate thickness is adequate. Since 8mm > 6.06 mm, 4 mm & 4.7 mm, provided nominal plate thickness is adequate. 3.3 Nozzle Neck thickness as per UG-45 for Nozzles N1 & N2,N3 & N4. Don Outer diameter for N1 & N2, = 16.83 cm Don Outer diameter for N3 & N4.= 6.03cm 3.4.Nozzle attachment weld path strength check for Nozzles as per UG-41

D = Out side diameter of the vessel A= Dist. From tangent line of head to the center of saddle b= Width of saddle H=depth of dish head L= Length of vessel tan-tan P=Internal design pressure Q=Load on one saddle R= outside radius of sheel ts thickness of shell tw = thickness of wear plate Ts = shell thk + wear plate thk ts2 = shell thk2 + wear plate thk2 Web plate thickness = = Contact angle Shell Material = Allowable Stress,S = Yield Point, Fy= Saddle material = Allowable Stress, = Yield Point = Joint Efficiency, E =

1016 350 150 310 1250 10 1085 508 8 8 16 128

mm mm mm mm mm Kg/Cm2 g Kg mm mm mm mm mm

40 13.78 5.91 12.20 49.21 142.23 2391.34 20 0.314 0.314 0.629 5.03 0.47 120 20000 34700 16600 36000 1

in in in in in psi lb in in in in in in Deg psi psi psi psi

12 mm 120 Deg SA 516 Gr 70 1406.14 Kg/Cm2 2439.7 Kg/Cm2 SA 36 1167.01 Kg/Cm2 2531.05 Kg/Cm2

Longitudinal Stress: S1- Stress at saddles (Tension): S1=(QA((1-((1-A/L)+(R2-H2/(2AL)))/ (1+4H/3L))/K1R2ts For 8mm Shell S1= 246.39psi S1=1.698MPA Stress at saddles (Compression) The compression stress is not factor in a steel vessel where t/R 0.005 S2- Stress at midpan. S2=((QL)/4) (1+2 ((R2-H2)/L2))/(1+4H/3L))(4A/L))/( R2ts) For8mm Shell S2= 67.098PSI, or S1=0.46237 MPa SL-Stress due to internal pressure For 8mm shell =PR/2ts = (142.2320.08)/(20.315) psi = 4533.6psi (or) 31.25MPa Sum of tension stresses For 8mm =246.39+67.058+4533.6=4847 psi (or) = 33.42 Mpa Check # Allowable stress (S) * Joint Efficiency = =200001 =20000 psi(or)= 137.89 MPa The sum of tension stresses does not exceed the stress value of the girth seam, Hence it is safe. Tangential Shear: S3-Tangential shear in Shell (shell not stiffned):Check # A> R/2 = 13.78 > 20.08/2 = 13.78 > 10.04 TRUE The applicable formulae is S3=K2Q/Rts ((L-2A)/(L+(4/3)H))

IJAERS/Vol. I/ Issue II/January-March, 2012/218-221

International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies Here thicknessof (Ts) is taken the sum of shell thickness+wear plate thickness Tangential shear in shell FOR 8mm =73.2Psi (or) =0.59Mpa S2 shall not exceed 0.8 times the allowable stress value of vessel material. Check # S2 < 0.8S =73.2 < 16000 psi The tangential shear does not exceed the 0.8 times of allowable stress value of the material. Hence it is safe. Circumferential Stress: S4-Stress at horn of the saddle: check # L< 8R= 49.21 < 820.79 = TRUE Applicable Formulae is
S4=-(Q/(4Ts(b+1.56(RTs))))-((12K6QR)/(LtTs2))

E-ISSN22498974

For 8mm= 1440.14Psi = 9.929 MPa S4 shall not exceed 1.5 times the allowable stress value of shell material. 200001.5 = 30000 psi(or) = 206.844 MPa The S4 does not exceed the 1.5 times of the allowable stress value, it is safe. S5-Stress at bottom of shell: S5 = - (K7Q/(Ts(b+1.56(RTs))) S5 = - (1817.418/7.215) S5 FOR 8mm PLATE= 251.90Psi (or) =1.736MPa S5 shall not exceed the compression yield point multiplied by 0.5 =34700 0.5 = 17349.99 psi = 119.62 MPa S5 does not exceed the compression yield point multiplied by 0.5, it is safe. S6-Circumferential Stress: PR/ts=9066 psi(or) 62.5Mpa Table .4 Stress analysis on saddle and shell by zick Analysis

The actual allowable stress of the material does not exceed the two thirds of the yield point of the material, then it is safe. And all the induced stress below the allowable stress then the design is safe. Here all induced stress in the vessel for the given design considerations is bellow the allowable stresses. so design is safe, and Provided plate thickness is adequate. 4.0 ANALYSIS OF PRESSURE VESSEL ANSYS is a general purpose finite element modeling package for numerically solving a wide variety of mechanical problems. In order to validate stress analysis here zick analysis and stress calculations were done. By taking minimum wall thick in all aspects the thickness 8mm is satisfied. with factor of safety less as compared with code required may satisfy the code specification also by examining the stress with zick analysis and have a another criteria to minimize the stress in the vessel with minimum thickness of the shell by changing the nozzle location ,here nozzle(vent, drain) is placed in the dished end instead of shell. By the ANSYS report here observed that the equivalent (von-mises) stress, maximum principal stress, and stress intensity were decrease by placing the vent and drain in the dished end. Analysis conducted under the same internal pressure and fixed supports with 8mm shell thickness. The purpose of this was to ensure that the results of the finite element analyses were compared to the analytical findings is same.

Graph.1 Stress in shell with allowable stress by zick Analysis

Table 5. Ansys values for 8 mm plate with five orientation of nozzle locations
Nozzle location on the shell left end on the shell middle on the shell right end on dished end on dished end Total Deformation mm 0.2787 0.2204 0.2201 0.2019 0.2029 Von Mises stress MPa 135.8 146.52 148.89 75.792 75.585 Maximum Principal stress Mpa 129.54 133.33 128.06 80.749 80.401 Stress Intensity Mpa 154.82 166.00 169.04 82.315 82.071

IJAERS/Vol. I/ Issue II/January-March, 2012/218-221

International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies

E-ISSN22498974

Graph.2 Plotted results for 8mm plate with five orientation of nozzle locations

5.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Fig:3 Total deformation of 8mm shell thickness

Fig.4 Stress intensity of pressure vessel

Fig.5 Directional deformation of vessel 6.0 CONCLUSIONS A numerical design study was performed to examine the structural failure of pressure vessels exposed to internal pressure by varying the shell thickness and nozzle location. By inspecting these plots it apparent that the minimum thickness 8mm will taken safe for design conditions. Instead of Governing Thickness tg as per UCS 66(a) of vessel thickness of the shell as taken 10mm for ASME section XIII-div-1 pressure vessel. For this given operating temperature and pressure conditions and observed that the location of the nozzles on the dished end with hillside orientation for minimum stress concentration. By inspecting these plots it is apparent that the 8mm thickness shell will suitable for designed condition with safe condition and economically benefit. Whenever wet take high factor of safety it may lead to safe operating condition but as a design engineer have to know the low value for the factor of safety results in economy of material. And also investigate IJAERS/Vol. I/ Issue II/January-March, 2012/218-221

Fig.6 Equivalent (von-mises)stress of vessel new techniques to reduce the stresses and use of higher strength materials and lower safety factors resulted in thinner vessels. REFERENCES

1. Stresses in Large Horizontal Cylindrical Pressure Vessels on Two Saddle Supports by L. P. Zick.Original paper published in September 1951 "THE WELDING JOURNAL RESEARCH SUPPLEMENT." 2. Location of reboiler return inlet nozzle and its effect on Distillation Column article@processenggservices.com, 0052009 Process Engineering Services. 3. Optimal wall-thickness of the spherical pressure vessel with respect to criterion about minimal mass and equivalent stressdraankozak, josipserti.ANNALS OF THE FACULTY OF ENGINEERING HUNEDOARA 2006 TOME IV. Fascicole 2 Understanding How Changes in Pressure Vessel Codes May Impact Pressure Vessel Performance .Patrick J. Sullivan Highlander Engineering Services 2008, PLLC Argyle, NY 4. Results of fea analyses at nozzle/shell junctions subjected to external loads steven R. Massey charlie S. HsiehBlack & veatch pritchardInc-2009