Bifurcation Calculation Report

TECHNICAL REPORT
Document No.
859 063351
Project
PROVIDENCIA
Author (s)
Stoll V
Date
21/07/2011
Via Daniele Manin, 16/18

I-36015 Schio (VI) Italia
Title
Calculation Report Bifurcation

Summary
The present report on the structural analysis of the inlet bifurcation of PROVIDENCIA shows that its
design fulfils all requirements according to the standard ASME B.P.V.C. VIII-2 AD, Appendix 4, Article
4.1 e Appendix 5, Article 5.1 applying the Design Pressure pk = pnom +30% = 0,5898 [MPa], the
Nominal Pressure pnom = 0,4537 [MPa] amd the Test Pressure pT = pk +50% = 0,8847 [MPa]. The
Nominal Pressure is determined by the Static Head (51 m) and the difference of Centerlines of Turbine
(250,64 masl) and Biforcation (256,50 masl). The following table summarizes the results obtained:
Stress Range
Primary General Membrane, pk
Primary General Membrane, pT
Primary Local Membrane, pk
Primary Bending, pk
Primary Membrane + Bending, pk
Primary Local + Secondary, pk
Max. Total Primary Stress, pT
Cumulative Usage Factor (fatigue)
Copy to:
Complete
Report
Page. 1
only
Eff. Value
63 [MPa]
95 [MPa]
72 [MPa]
146 [MPa]
72 [MPa]
104 [MPa]
224 [MPa]
0,025
Copy to:
Allow. Limit
163,3 [MPa]
310,5 [MPa]
245,0 [MPa]
245,0 [MPa]
163,3 [MPa]
490,0 [MPa]
490,0 [MPa]
1
Complete
Report
HIDRO PROVIDENCIA SA
Proj. Manager (F. Trentin)
ANDRITZ Hydro Srl.
Tech.Proj.Man. (E. Zordan)
Page.
1 only
Approval
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
Author::
Stoll/V
Verified by:
Cristian Vanzin
Approved by:
G. Pasqualotto
Relative report(s):
Number of pages, incl. header:

Associated Drawing n
Calculation File(s):
859 063 351
Mod.
00
18
Page No.
Content
1. CALCULATION DATA ...............................................................................3
1.1 MATERIALS .................................................................................................................. 3
1.2 LOADS DEFINITION OF LOAD CASES ............................................................................ 3
2. MODELLING..............................................................................................4
2.1 GEOMETRY AND MESH .................................................................................................. 4
2.2 LOADS AND CONSTRAINS .............................................................................................. 5
3. CRITERIA ..................................................................................................7
3.1 CRITERIA FOR THE STATIC ANALYSIS ............................................................................. 7
3.2 DEFINITION OF THE ADMISSIBLE LIMITS........................................................................... 8
3.2.1
Limiting Stress Sm ........................................................................................................8
3.2.2
Limiting Stress Sps ........................................................................................................8
3.2.3
Limiting Stress Exceptional ..........................................................................................8
3.3 CRITERIA FOR THE LIFE STRESS ANALYSIS ..................................................................... 9
4. RESULTS ................................................................................................10
4.1 LOCALIZING OF STRESS ZONES ................................................................................... 10
4.2 LOAD CASE #1: DESIGN PRESSURE PK ........................................................................ 10
4.2.1 Primary General Membrane ............................................................................................10
4.2.2 Primary Local Membrane ................................................................................................11
4.2.3 Primary Bending..............................................................................................................12
4.2.4 Primary Combined (Membrane & Bending) ....................................................................12
4.2.5 Secondary Combined (Secondary Membrane & Bending) .............................................13
4.2.6 Deformation.....................................................................................................................14
4.2.7 Conclusion.......................................................................................................................15
4.3 LOAD CASE #2: NOMINAL PRESSURE PNOM ................................................................... 16

4.4 LOAD CASE #3: TEST PRESSURE PT ............................................................................ 16
4.5. LOAD CASE #4: LIFE STRESS ANALYSIS ...................................................................... 18
5. CONCLUSION .........................................................................................18
Andritz Hydro srl, Schio, Italia
Dept
Technical Report n 859063351 U.T.
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
2 / 18
1. Calculation Data
1.1 Materials
Tensile
Strength
The bifurcation is realized in steel plates S355J2G3 EN 10025Note with its mechanical properties
depending on the size of steel plates as indicated in the following table:
Thickness s
Tensile Strength
Min. Tensile
Applicable Effective Thickness
[mm]
Rm MPa]
Strength Rm [MPa]
parts
of parts [mm]
490 630
490
All
10 - 30
3 < s 100
Table 1.1.1
Yield
Strength
Thickness s
[mm]
10 < s 16
Min. Yield
Strength Rs [MPa]
355
Pipe Downstream
Effective Thickness
of parts [mm]
10
10 < s 16
355
Pipe Upstream
12
10 < s 16
355
Steel Cones
15
16 < s 40
345
Rib (Scythe)
30
Applicable parts
Table 1.1.2
The general properties of carbon steel used for the FE- analysis:
- youngs modulus
E
= 210.000 [MPa]
- poisons ration
= 0,3
- density
= 7.850 [kg/m3]
1.2 Loads Definition of Load Cases

The following load cases are considered for the analysis based on the standards of Andritz Hydro for
operation of hydraulic turbines:
Type of
Load
Type of
Condition
Description
Applied Loads
Application Case
case
Intern. Pressure pk
1
Normal
Design
Pressure Load
Intern. Pressure
Static
2
Normal
pnom
Nominal
Pressure Load
Life Stress
Analysis
Exceptional
Normal
Test
Test Pressure pT
Fatigue
Cycles of pressure
fluctuation
Pressure at level 256,50 masl

pk = 1,3 x pnom = 0,5898 [MPa]
Partial Load* on outlet pipe
60% x Aout x pk = 1350 [kN]
Nominal Pressure at level 256,50 masl:
pnom =0,4537 [MPa] @ Qmax = 14 [m3/s]
Partial Load* on outlet pipe
60% x Aout x pnom = 1030 [kN]
Test Pressure
pT = 1.5*pk = 0,8847 [MPa]
Conventional Life Cycle of 50 years with
500 start-ups per year (from p=0 to pnom)
of which 8000 cycles are considered to
water hammer (pk)
Table 1.2.1
As defined in the above table for the fatigue analysis considers a complete pressure rise and a
depressure to zero for each start-up and stop, which is a conservative approach. Further one third of
the cycles are considered to be under the condition of water hammer. For the load this is a cycle form
p=0 to pnom, and additionally a cycle from pnom to pk.
Nota 1
EN 10025: Hot-Rolled Products of Non-Alloyed Structural Steels International Conformity
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
3 / 18
2. Modelling
2.1 Geometry and Mesh
The latest manufacturing drawing (dwg. no. 859055104) is the basis of the calculation models. The 3-D
models for the calculation are created in UNIGRAPHICS. For simplification the welds have been
modelled as part of the sheet metal as they look like after manufacturing. For meshing, calculation and
evaluation of the results the finite element program ANSYS 12.1 was used. The mesh consists of
quadratic tetrahedron with 10 nodes. In total there are 489211 nodes & 254786 elements.
Figure 2.1.1
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
4 / 18
2.2 Loads and Constrains

The inlet and the outlet pipes have been added to apply a frictionless bearing at their ends and the
pressure has been applied at the inside of the structure. Further the pressure load effects have been
applied on the outlet pipes. Please note that only 60% of the force created by the pressure load on the
area has been applied, as this is the conventional portion transferred into the structure. The other
portion of 40% is usually transferred into the surrounding oncrete.
The thickness of the steel plate on the upstream side has been considered to be 12 mm in order to
have a safe transmission at the welding between the steel pipe and the inlet cone. However the
penstock does not necessarily have to be 12 mm on its total length. From a level of approx. 265 masl
and above the thickness could be reduced to 10 mm.
Figure 2.2.1
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
5 / 18
Pressure only:
Figure 2.2.2
Forcse from pressure load Pressure only:
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
6 / 18
3. Criteria
3.1 Criteria for the Static Analysis
The analysis of the static loads is executed according to the standard ASME BPVC VIII-2 Appendix 4
applying the method of Stress Categories, which is outlined below:
Figure 3.1.1
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
7 / 18
3.2 Definition of the Admissible Limits

3.2.1 Limiting Stress Sm
The limiting stress Sm is defined in ASME II Part as the lower value of 1/3 of the Tensile Strength or 2/3
of the Min. Yield Strength, which gives in our case the following values:
Rib (Scythe): thickness < 40 [mm]
Sm = Rm / 3 = 490 / 3 = 163,3 [MPa]
Steel Cones: thickness < 16 [mm]
Sm = Rm / 3 = 490 / 3 = 163,3 [MPa]
The value of the factor k for the load cases 1 & 2 under the condition Normal according to the definition
in 1.2 equals to k = 1.
3.2.2 Limiting Stress Sps
With respect to the limiting stress Sps it is proposed in the Appendix 4, 4.134-b to summarize the
primary and the secondary stresses excluding the peak stresses.
Rib (scythe): applying
Rs 345
=
= 0.704 0.7 , follows
Rm 490
Sps = 3*Sm = 490 [MPa]
Steel cones: applying
R s 355
=
= 0.724 0.7 , follows
R m 490
Sps = 3*Sm = 490 [MPa]
These considerations do not release to check in parallel all other criteria, such as the low cycle fatigue
and further that the limiting stress criteria are applied to obtain a safe behaviour even with local effects
in yielding zones which are always based on data from the linear elastic behaviour.
3.2.3 Limiting Stress Exceptional
Finally the stress limits during the exceptional pressure test are defined by ASME Test Load case and
are therefore based on different limitations (ASME VIII 2, Part AD, AD-151.1):
The primary membrane stress must be less than 90 [%] of Yield Strength Rs :
Rib (scythe):
Pm 0,9 x 345 = 310, 5 [MPa]
Steel cone:
Pm 0,9 x 355 = 319, 5 [MPa]
The sum of all Primary Membrane Stresses is based on a function referred to the Primary
Meme bran Stress:
o in case m 0,67 x Rs than Pm + Pb 1,35 x Rs , which means that for:
Rib (scythe):
Pm + Pb 466 [MPa] if m 231 [MPa]
Steel cone:
Pm + Pb 479 [MPa] if m 240 [MPa]

o in case 0,67 x Rs < m 0,9 x Rs than Pm + Pb 2,35 x Rs 1,5 x Pm = <variable>
For the peak stresses there are no direct limitations, as they are part of the low cycle fatigue analysis.
Note that in following table, at the load case #3 the superior category "PL + PB" is applied for
simplification instead of "Pm + PB".
As a summary we find the following table of applicable limiting stresses:
Load Cases
Part
Pm
PL (SL)
PL + PB
PL + PB + Q
Rib (scythe) 163,3 [MPa] 245 [MPa] 245 [MPa]
490 [MPa]
1 Design Pressure pk
Steel cone 163,3 [MPa] 245 [MPa] 245 [MPa]
490 [MPa]
Rib (scythe) 163,3 [MPa] 245 [MPa] 245 [MPa]
490 [MPa]
2 Nominal Pressure pnom
Steel cone 163,3 [MPa] 245 [MPa] 245 [MPa]
490 [MPa]
Rib (scythe) 310,5 [MPa]
<variable>
3 Test Pressure pT
<variable>
Steel cone 319,5 [MPa]
Table 3.2
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
8 / 18
3.3 Criteria for the Life Stress Analysis

The Life Stress or Fatigue Analysis is executed acc. to the ASME Code BPVC VIII-2 Appendix 5.
This is based on the Design Fatigue Curve which considers a medium stress higher than zero.
Figure 3.3.1
Once the maximum number of cycles Ni for each type of load history is determined, applying the
corresponding number of cycles ni, in the above shown curveNota 1, the Cumulative Usage Factor U
U = U i < 1
follows the Minors rule:
Note 1
the value of the alternating stress Sa equals to the medium of the maximum peak stresses in one cycle.
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
9 / 18
4. Results
4.1 Localizing of Stress Zones
In the following figure the applicable Stress Categories defined in 3.1 are indicted at their zones:
Primary Local Combined, PL + PB
Primary General
Membrane Pm
Primary + Secondary,
PL + PB + Q
Primary Local Membrane, PL
Figure 4.1.1
4.2 Load Case #1: Design Pressure PK

The following figures are showing the stress levels inside the component. According to ASME size and
the scope of the stresses are indicated.
4.2.1 Primary General Membrane
The Primary General Membrane Stress PLm will be obtained by sectioning the bifurcation at the
positions indicated in Figure 4.1.1 and applying the maximum value:
See figure 4.2.1
Medium value Pm
Conical Inlet Section

63 [MPa]
Conical Outlet Section

42 [MPa]
Table 4.2.1
All values are within the allowable limit:
Dept
Pmmax = 64 [MPa] < Sm = 163,3 [MPa]
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
OK.
Page n
10 / 18
Conical
Outlet
Section
Conica
Inlet
Section
Figure 4.2.1
4.2.2 Primary Local Membrane

The Primary Local Membrane Stress PL will be obtained in the zones of welding such as between the
cones itself, between cones & pipes, and between cones & rib as indicated in figure 4.2.2.
Figure 4.2.2
The values received show that all are within the all. limit: PLmax = 72 [MPa] < SL = 245 [MPa] OK.
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
11 / 18
4.2.3 Primary Bending

The Primary Bending stress PB, can be found at the centre of the Rib (scythe). However there are also
some minor peak effects due to the chamfer, which can be neglected:
Figure 4.2.3
The ASME Code does not provide a specific limit for this type of category but for analogical comparison
with the Primary Local Membrane Stress it can be assumed the same limit SL:
PBmax = 146 [MPa] < SL = 245 [MPa]
OK.
4.2.4 Primary Combined (Membrane & Bending)

The Primary Combined (Membrane & Bending) Stress can be received along the straight zones of the
bifurcation as shown in figure 4.2.4. In order to be correct it has to be said that the combined stresses
obtained here are rather Primary General Membrane & Primary General Bending" stresses, which
means Pm + PB, and not PL + PB. In our case it is generally not possible to find areas with only one
single stress category such as: Only Primary or Only Local or Primary Combined (Membrane &
Bending). In this case we assume the same limit as for the primary Combined Stress PL + PB , which is
the same as the Primary Local Membrane Stress:(Pm + PB )max = 72 [MPa] < SL = 245 [MPa] OK
With a conservative approach this values could also be compared with the limit of the Primary General
Membrane Stress:
(Pm + PB )max = 72 [MPa] < Sm = 163,3 [MPa]
OK
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
12 / 18
By comparing the maximum Primary Combined value (72 [MPa]) with the value of the Primary General
Membrane (63 [MPa]), it can be seen that the bending effects are almost neglectable.
Figure 4.2.4
4.2.5 Secondary Combined (Secondary Membrane & Bending)

The figure 4.2.5 shows the areas of maximum combined stresses of Primary Local and Bending as well
as Secondary Bending PL + PB + Q.
In our case we find (Pm + PB +Q)max = 104 [MPa] < SPS = 490 [MPa]
OK
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
13 / 18
Figure 4.2.5
4.2.6 Deformation
The next figure shows the total deformation of the component. Obviously this behaviour is limited in
reality due to the concreting of the part. Due to the fact that there are no deformation limits applied in
the ASME Code the figure is only illustrative.
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
14 / 18
Figure 4.2.6
4.2.7 Conclusion
The findings presented for this load case show that all criteria according ASME are fulfilled under the
condition that the behaviour of low cycle fatigue is checked as well.
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
15 / 18
4.3 Load Case #2: Nominal Pressure PNom

The distribution of the loads is similar to the loads in load case #1, except the additional effect of the
linear momentum at flow of Qmax applied on the cross sections of the outlet:
F=p
max
nom
A + Qmax v max = p
max
nom
2
Qmax
A+
A
The stress values obtained are therefore not exactly linear with respect to the pressure difference to
load case #1. However, the difference is very little and neglectable. This means all values are
approximately 30% lower than in load case #1 and therefore acceptable according to the criteria of
ASME code.
4.3.1 Primary General Membrane
See figure 4.2.1
Medium value Pm
49 [MPa]

32 [MPa]
Table 4.3.1
All values are within the all. limit:
Pmmax = 49 [MPa] < Sm = 163,3 [MPa]
OK.
4.3.2 Primary Local Membrane:
PLmax = 55 [MPa] < SL = 245 [MPa]
OK.
4.3.3 Primary Bending:
PBmax
OK.
4.3.4 Primary Combined:
(Pm + PB )max = 55 [MPa] < Sm = 163,3 [MPa]
4.3.5 Secondary Combined:
= 112 [MPa] < SL = 245 [MPa]
(Pm + PB +Q)
max
OK
= 80 [MPa] < SPS = 490 [MPa] OK
4.4 Load Case #3: Test Pressure PT

In this case all loads are exactly linear with respect to the values of load case #1. This means all values
are 50% higher than in load case #1 and therefore acceptable according to the criteria of ASME code
case type exceptional.
Primary General Membrane
See figure 4.2.1
Medium value Pm
95 [MPa]

63 [MPa]
Table 4.4.1
Steel cone:
Rib (scythe)Note 1
Pmmax = 95 [MPa] < Sm = 319.5 [MPa]

Pmmax = 124 [MPa] < Sm = 310.5 [MPa]
OK.
OK.
Based on the previous findings it can further be determined which of the 2 possible limiting conditions
for the Primary General Membrane Stress can be applied:
Steel cone:
Rib (scythe):
Pmmax = 95 [MPa] < 240 [MPa]

Pmmax = 124 [MPa] < 233 [MPa]
Secondary Combined (refer to fig. 4.2.5):
Note 1
Pm + BP 479 [MPa]
Pm + Pb 466 [MPa]
(Pm + PB +Q)max = 156 [MPa] < SPS = 490 [MPa] OK
This value was not yet determined and can be found in the enclosed figure 4.4.1.
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
16 / 18
At the moment, where the maximum determined stress is lower than the 3 limits indicated above in can
be concluded that the analysis of the present load case is positive.
For completeness we will compare also the values for the Primary Combined Stresses from the figures
4.2.4 and 4.4.1:
Steel cone:
Rib (scythe):
(Pm + PB )max = 108 [MPa]

(Pm + PB )max = 224 [MPa]
< 479 [MPa]

< 466 [MPa]
OK
OK
The Primary General Stresses

are obtained at the zone where:
the bending portion is
minimum
there are no local peak
The Primary Combined

Stresses are obtained at
the zone where:
the bending portion is
maximum
there are no local
Figure 4.4.1
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
17 / 18
4.5. Load Case #4: Life Stress Analysis

As defined under point 1.2 the stress life analysis will be executed applying the cumulative Minors rule
for the following two types of cycles:
From start-up (penstock dewatered) to nominal pressure
The difference of the extreme stress levels are determined in Load Case #2 under 4.3, applying
the maximum Secondary Combined Stress:
o Extreme Stress Value:
80
[MPa]
o Amplitude for the cyclic behaviour:
40
[MPa]
o Number of cycles:
25000
Max. allowable cycles acc. Design Curve:

> 1.000.000
Partial damage:
0,025
From nominal pressure to design pressure (water hammer)

The difference of the extreme stress levels are determined by the difference between Load
Case #1 and Load Case #2, applying the maximum Secondary Combined Stress:
o Extreme Stress Value:
24
[MPa]
o Amplitude for the cyclic behaviour:
12
[MPa]
o Number of cycles:
8000
Max. allowable cycles acc. Design Curve:

> 1015
Partial damage:
0
This results is a cumulative damage over the life cycle:
0,025 < 1 OK
5. Conclusion
The structural analysis executed according to ASME BPVC VIII-2 AD, App.4 & App.5, shows that:
The design of the component assures that all occurring stresses categories are within the
respective limits for normal and exceptional cases.
The design of the component assures a life cycle higher than 50 years.
As a conclusion there are no critical issues and the component has been approved positive.
Dept
Date
Document n
Jul. 11
859 063 351
Mod.
00
Page n
18 / 18

Bifurcation Calculation Report

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Bifurcation Calculation Report

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

TECHNICAL REPORT

Via Daniele Manin, 16/18

Calculation Report Bifurcation

Proj. Manager (F. Trentin)

ANDRITZ Hydro Srl.

Tech.Proj.Man. (E. Zordan)

Number of pages, incl. header:

859 063 351

Limiting Stress Sm ........................................................................................................8

Limiting Stress Sps ........................................................................................................8

Limiting Stress Exceptional ..........................................................................................8

3.3 CRITERIA FOR THE LIFE STRESS ANALYSIS ..................................................................... 9

4.3 LOAD CASE #2: NOMINAL PRESSURE PNOM ................................................................... 16

Andritz Hydro srl, Schio, Italia

Technical Report n 859063351 U.T.

859 063 351

1.2 Loads Definition of Load Cases

Pressure at level 256,50 masl

EN 10025: Hot-Rolled Products of Non-Alloyed Structural Steels International Conformity

Andritz Hydro srl, Schio, Italia

Technical Report n 859063351 U.T.

859 063 351

Andritz Hydro srl, Schio, Italia

Technical Report n 859063351 U.T.

859 063 351

2.2 Loads and Constrains

Andritz Hydro srl, Schio, Italia

Technical Report n 859063351 U.T.

859 063 351

Forcse from pressure load Pressure only:

Andritz Hydro srl, Schio, Italia

Technical Report n 859063351 U.T.

859 063 351

Andritz Hydro srl, Schio, Italia

Technical Report n 859063351 U.T.

859 063 351

3.2 Definition of the Admissible Limits

Rib (scythe): applying

Sps = 3*Sm = 490 [MPa]

Steel cones: applying

Sps = 3*Sm = 490 [MPa]

Pm + Pb 479 [MPa] if m 240 [MPa]

Technical Report n 859063351 U.T.

859 063 351

3.3 Criteria for the Life Stress Analysis

follows the Minors rule:

Andritz Hydro srl, Schio, Italia

Technical Report n 859063351 U.T.

859 063 351

Primary Local Membrane, PL

4.2 Load Case #1: Design Pressure PK

Conical Inlet Section

Conical Outlet Section

All values are within the allowable limit:

Andritz Hydro srl, Schio, Italia

Technical Report n 859063351 U.T.

Pmmax = 64 [MPa] < Sm = 163,3 [MPa]

859 063 351

4.2.2 Primary Local Membrane

Technical Report n 859063351 U.T.

859 063 351

4.2.3 Primary Bending