Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 474

ENGINEERING

SOFTWARE

PIPE STRESS ANALYSIS


SEMINAR NOTES

Notice: Unless otherwise noted herein, the information contained in these course notes is
proprietary and may not be translated or duplicated in whole or in part without the expressed
written consent of COADE Engineering Software, 12777 Jones Rd., Suite 480, Houston,
Texas 77070.
Copyright {c} 1985 - 1998 COADE, Inc.

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes


Section 1
Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction to Pipe Stress Analysis ........................................................................ 1


1.1 Theory and Development of Pipe Stress Requirements ........................................... 8
1.1.1 Basic Stress Concepts ............................................................................... 8-14
1.1.2 3-D State of Stress in the Pipe Wall ....................................................... 14-15
1.1.3 Failure Theories ........................................................................................... 16
1.1.4 Maximum Stress Intensity Criterion ..................................................... 18-19
1.2 Fatigue Failure ....................................................................................................... 20
1.2.1 Fatigue Basics .............................................................................................. 20
1.2.2 Fatigue Curves ............................................................................................. 22
1.2.3 Effect of Fatigue on Piping ..................................................................... 24-25
1.2.4 Cyclic Reduction Factor ............................................................................... 25
1.2.5 Effect of Sustained Loads on Fatigue Strength .......................................... 26
1.3 Stress Intensification Factors ............................................................................ 28-33
1.4 Welding Research Council Bulletin 330 ................................................................. 34
1.5 Code Compliance ..................................................................................................... 43
1.5.1 Primary vs. Secondary Loads ................................................................. 43-45
1.5.2 Code Stress Equations ............................................................................ 45-46
1.5.3 B31.1 Power Piping ..................................................................................... 46
1.5.4 B31.3 Chemical Plant and Petroleum Refmery Piping .............................. 47
1.5.5 ASME Section III, Subsections NC & ND (Nuclear Class 2 & 3) .......... 49-50
1.5.6 B31.4 Fuel Gas Piping ................................................................................. 51
1.5.7 B31.8 Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Code ............................. 52
1.5.8 Canadian Z183/Z184 Oil/Gas Pipeline Systems ......................................... 54
1.5.9 RCC-M C ...................................................................................................... 55
1.5.10 Stoomwezen ................................................................................................. 56
1.5.11 Special Considerations of Code Compliance ........................................... 56-59
1.5.12 Evaluation of Multiple Expansion Range Cases ......................................... 59

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1.0 Introduction to Pipe Stress Analysis


In order to properly design a piping system, the engineer must understand both a system's
behavior under potentialloadings, as weIl as the regulatory requirements imposed upon it
by the governing codes.
A system's behavior can be quantified through the aggregate values of numerous physical
parameters, such as accelerations, velocities, displacements, internaI forces and moments,
stresses, and external reactions developed under applied loads. Allowable values for each
of the se parameters are set after review of the appropriate failure criteria for the system.
System response and failure criteria are dependent on the type of loadings, which can be
classified by various distinctions, such as primary vs. secondary, sustained vs. occasional,
or static vs. dynamic.
The ASME/ANSI B31 piping codes are the result of approximately 8 decades ofwork by the
American Society ofMechanical Engineers and the American National Standards Institute
(formerly American Standards Association) aimed at the codification ofdesign and engineering standards for piping systems. The B31 pressure piping codes (and their successors, such
as the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Section III nuclearpiping codes) prescribe minimum
design, materials, fabrication, assembly, erection, test, and inspection requirements for
piping systems intended for use in power, petrochemical/refinery, fuel gas, gas transmission,
and nuclear applications.
Due to the extensive calculations required during the analysis of a piping system, this field
of engineering provides a natural application for computerized calculations, especially
during the last two to three decades. The proliferation of easy-to-use pipe stress software
has had a two-fold effect: first, it has taken pipe stress analysis out ofthe hands ofthe highlypaid specialists and made it accessible to the engineering generalist, but likewise it has made
everyone, even those with inadequate piping backgrounds, capable of turning out officiallooking results.
The intention ofthis course is to provide the appropriate background for engineers entering
the world of pipe stress analysis. The course concentrates on the design requirements
(particularly from a stress analysis point ofview) of the codes, as weIl as the techniques to
be applied in order to satisfy those requirements. Although the course is taught using the
CAESAR II Pipe Stress Analysis Software, the skills learned here are directly applicable
to any means of pipe stress analysis, whether the engineer uses a competing software
program or even manual calculational methods.

Why do we Perform Pipe Stress Analysis?


There are a number ofreasons for performing stress analysis on a piping system. A few of
these foIlow:
In order to keep stresses in the pipe and fittings within code allowable levels.

1
2

In order to keep nozzle loadings on attached equipment within allowables of


manufacturers or recognized standards (NEMA SM23, API 610, API 617, etc.).

1-1

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3
4

In order to keep vessel stresses at piping connections within ASME Section VIII
allowable levels.
-

In order to calculate design loads for sizing supports and restraints.


In order to determine piping displacements for interference checks.

In order to solve dynamic problems in piping, such as those due to mechanical


vibration, acoustic vibration, fluid hammer, pulsation, transient flow, and relief
valve discharge.

In order to help optimize piping design.

Typical Pipe Stress Documentation

Documentation typically associated with stress analysis problems consists of the stress
isometric, the stress analysis input echo, and the stress analysis results output. Examples
ofthese documents are shown in Figures 1-1 through 1-5 on subsequent pages.
The stress isometric (Figure 1-1) is a sketch, drawn in an isometric coordinate system, which
gives the viewer a rough 3-D idea of the piping system. The stress isometric often
summarizes the piping design data, as gathered from other documents, such as the line list,
piping specification, piping drawing, Appendix A (Figure 1-2) of the applicable piping code,
etc. Design data typically required in order to do pipe stress analysis consists of pipe
materials and sizes; operating parameters, such as temperature, pressure, and fluid
contents; code stress allowables; and loading parameters, such as insulation weight,
external equipment movements, and wind and earthquake criteria.
Points of interest on the stress isometric are identified by node points. Node points are
required at any location where it is necessary to provide information to, or obtain information
from, the pipe stress software. Typically, node points are located as required in order to:
define geometry (system start, end, direction changes, intersection, etc.)

1
2

define element stiffness parameters (changes in pipe cross section or material,


rigid elements, or expansion joints)

3
4

note changes in operating conditions (system start, isolation or pressure reduction valves, etc.)

designate boundary conditions (restraints and imposed displacements)


specify mass points (for refinement of dynamic model)

note loading conditions (insulation weight, imposed forces, response spectra,


earthquake g-factors, wind exposure, snow, etc.)

retrieve information from the stress analysis (stresses at piping mid spans,
displacements at wall penetrations, etc.)

1-2

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes


The input echo (Figure 1-3) provides more detailed information on the system, and is meant
to be used by the engineer in conjunction with the stress isometric.
The analysis output provides results, such as displacements, internal forces and moments,
stresses, and restraint loadings at each node point of the pipe, acting under the specified
loading conditions. CAESAR II provides results in either graphic or text format; Figures
1-4 and 1-5 present stress and dis placement results graphically. The output also provides
a code check calculation for the appropriate piping code, from which the analyst can
determine which locations are over stressed.

SSEMl
tUI

tower-:'~[

Haterial A186 Gr.B


SH @ 788 deg. = 16.588 psi
SC @ 78 deg. = 28.888 psi
t = 788 deg. F. Flue Gas
P = 125 psi
Dia = 28" Std.Wall
Insul = 2" Calciul!I Silicate

,~~.y..

SUpport ......

rD_

~3S
~..~145
j;

COl!lputed therl!lal expansion of the vessel is


17.268E-6 in/in/deg.F. at a telllp of 828 deg.F.
Node 188 is 28.88 ft. above vessel skirt
'i

Disp. @ 188 = (828-7B)deg.F(17.268E-6)in/in/deg*


(28.88)(12)ft.in/rt. = 3.121 in.
X

Disp. D 128 = (B28-78) (17.268E-6)(28.88+6.5-15)(12)


= 1.8 in.

Figure 1-1

1-3

Exchanger
0

0
ANSI/ASME 831.3-1984 ROmON
TABLEAI

ASME CODJ! FOI. PIUlSSUIUI PlPINO


CHEMICAL PLANT AND PBTROLBUM Rl!FlNBIlY 'IPINO

ASMJ! COD! fOI. 'IU!SSUIUI'IPINO


CIIEMICAL PLANT AND PBfR.OLEUM lEFINI!IlY.IPINO

TABLE A-1 (CONT'OI


BASIC ALLOWABLE STRESSES IN TENSION FOR METALS lU
Nurilers ln '-thKes Rtftr to Notes ,., ~ A TMIes; Specifications AIt ASTM Uilleu DIIIIIwIIt lIIdItaIId

00

--

s,oc.

....

,-

....
CrIN

(5J

CorMo SIooIICooI'41
...... lIId T.... ICooI.,

Mio.

T-.
W

TAlLE A-1 (CONT'O)


BASIC ALLOWABLE mESSES DI TENSION FOR METAl
,....., ln l'IntIthtsa Refer ta Notes ,., AppetIdII A T.... 5pIcIfIcaIIons Art AS

lIto.

5111S.
bI

!MY$.

...

T_
IOJOO

2DII

4IID

JIIO

5l1li

..

........... __ , bI ID._ lIoUI T---.., en

650

1110

- -..

'"

~
t.:.:I

."
.....

'"0
(!)

UJ.

fil
fil

JAIIIO

e.
'<
.....

fil
fil

1101

UJ.

(!)

' ...
icI

~
1

JI:>.

,.

11111

AU.

.,,,

-ZO}
oz.

C~)~1

.......

A".
icI

A"

A 100
A lJJ
Al]f

A!6t

A]81
API Sl

SPl

F,.
.n

l'V

l'l .
(el

...

Al"
AI"
.lPlSL

(51)m)

151
!SJI
C51)
1571

csu
(57)

U.,

ca,
ca'

511:1

C!ll ISS'
C511
('U

",.1

SP2

A]8'

S..,

V..

APl5L

x..

"Il C"'

" J01

5..,
S..,

VCO

c'Il

c,. .. In.thIdI)

A JO,

5PJ

"'16&1'.65
A 'l'Gr. 65

A.71
"611

b"In.'''''

"Sl.Gr. et
A 'J.Gr. 6S

M ...

(t)

h'U'.llIIckl

...
:s}
1lC4'

""Z
A 671

AllO

5..,

E
lISl

5PJ

YS.

JO

oo

,S

oo

S
.....

20.0

20.0

20.1

20.0

ZO.O

zo.o

zo.o

20.0

ZO.O

zo.o

lS

20 ..

.,}

.,

20

20.0

20.0

20.0
20.0

20.0
20.0

20.0
20.0

10.01

zo.'

It.7

lU

17.1

21.0

Il.0

au

IIaI

21.0

21.0

21.0

21.0

11.9

lU

10.11

.S

IJ.O

10Aj

il

.S

1'"

lM

9.D

6.5

'.5

1...

11.

UAI
UA

0.0

'"

17.0

lU

1J.O

lU

11.9

17.1

11 ..

"..

lU

lU

-zo
-20

1-20

-2.

Oz.

-20

...
...

oo

...

...
60

61

.,

02

zo.o

-2'

C'1r

..

50

ZU

zo.J

1'.'

lIA

IY.'

lU

16.D

1571 C6"

..0

65

)5

lU

ZU

lU

zo.o

lU

lU

17.0

C571 C6"

C05

IIPl5L
Alli

<J

oo

-50
-20

lUI
V42

(el

ct)

I-z

AU'

ca'
1511 C551
1511

65

S.

11.7

11.J

20.0

..
... .

zo.'

52

zz.o

ZU

52

ZU
ZU

1
22.01

22

2Z.0
22.0
lU

-20

I~'

oZ.

5'

n.o

22.0

11.'

173

11.0

l:I

Z
0
Sfil

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes


CAESAR II VERS 3.18 JOBNAME:SSEM1
PIPE DATA

DEC 10, 1992

3:05 am

Page 1

From 100 To 105 DY= 3.500 ft.


PIPE
Dia= 20.000 in.
Wall= .375 in.
Insul= 2.000 in.
GENERAL
T1= 700 F P1= 125.0000 lb./sq.in.
Mat= (l)LOW CARBON STEEL
E= 27,900,000 lb./sq.in.
v = .292
Density= .2899 lb./eu.in.
RIGID Weight= 3,290.00 lb.
DISPLACEMENTS
Node 100
DX= .000 in.
DY= 3.121 in.
DZ= .000 in.
RX= .000
RY= .000
RZ= .000
ALLOWABLE STRESSES
B31.3 (1990)
Se= 20,000 lb./sq.in.
Sh1= 16,500 lb./sq.in.
From 105 To 110 DY= 3.000 ft.
BEND at "TO" end
Radius= 30.000 in. (LONG)
Bend Angle= 90.000
Angle/Node @2= .00 108
From 110 To 115 DX= 12.000 ft.
BEND at "TO" end
Bend Angle= 90.000
Radius= 30.000 in. (LONG)
Angle/Node @2= .00 113
From 115 To
DISPLACEMENTS
Node 120
RZ= FREE

120

Angle/Node @1= 45.00 114

DY= -15.000 ft.

DX= FREE

DY= 1.800 in.

DZ= FREE

From 120 To 125 DY= -3.000 ft.


BEND at "TO" end
Bend Angle= 90.000
Radius= 30.000 in. (LONG)
Angle/Node @2= .00 123
From 125 To 130
RESTRAINTS
Node 130 +Y

DX= 35.000 ft.

From 130 To 135


RESTRAINTS
Node 135 +Y

DX= 35.000 ft.

From 135 To 140


RESTRAINTS
Node 140 +Y

DX= 35.000 ft.

From 140 To 145 DX= 20.000 ft.


BEND at "TO" end
Bend Angle= 90.000
Radius= 30.000 in. (LONG)
Angle/Node @2= .00 143
From 145 To 150
RESTRAINTS
Node 150 ANC

Angle/Node @1= 45.00 109

DY= -12.000 ft.

Figure 1-3

1-5

RX= FREE

RY= FREE

Angle/Node @1= 45.00 124

Angle/Node @1= 45.00 144

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

CASE 3 (EXP)D3=D1-D2

FILE:SSEI11

DEC 4.1992 12:4?am


QUIT

nODES
OURSTR
I1AXSTR
BHDlltG

TORS
AXIAL
STRESS
S'inBOL
BI'IDUIG

TORS
AXIAL
STRESS
COLOR
BI'IDItIG

TORS
AXIAL
STRESS

"~'"
1'I0DE= 123

OUERSTRESSED l'IODES

~"

~,

Figure 1-4
CASE 1 (OPEJW+DIS+T1+P1

F1LE:SSEnl

DEC 4.1992 12:49am

RESET
QUIT

l'IODES
DEFU
SPECFY
I1AGnIF
GROW
COLORS
ORIGI'IL
BLArtK

Iml:'I}"
HRDCP'i

ItODE= 125

I1AX. DISPS.

Figure 1-5

1-6

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

What are these Stresses?


The stresses calculated are not necessarily real stresses (such as could be measured by a
strain gauge, for example), but are rather "code" stresses. Code stress calculations are based
upon specific equations, which are the result of8 decades of compromise and simplification.
The calculations reflect:
1

Inclusion or exclusion ofpiping loads, based upon convenience of calculation or


selected failure. In fact the result may not even represent an absolute stress
value, but rather a RANGE of values.

Loading type - these are segregated, and analyzed separately, as though they
occur in isolation, even though they actually are present simultaneously.

Magnification, due to local fitting configuration, which may in reality reflect a


decrease in fatigue strength, rather than an increase in actual stress.

Code committee tradition - every code is a result of a different set of concerns


and compromises, and therefore may appear to be on a different branch of the
evolutionary ladder. Because of this, every code gives different results when
calculating stresses.

A summary of significant dates in the history of the development of the piping codes is
presented below:
1915

Power Piping Society provides the first national code for pressure piping.

1926

The American Standards Association initiates project B31 to govern


pressure piping.

1955

Markl publishes his paper ''Piping Flexibility Analysis", introducing


piping analysis methods based on the "stress range".

1957

First computerized analysis ofpiping systems.

1968

Congress enacts the Natural Pipeline Safety Act, establishing CFR 192,
which will in time replace B31.8 for gas pipeline transportation.

1969

Introduction of ANSI B31.7 code for Nuclear power plant piping.

1971

Introduction of ASME Section III for Nuclear power plant piping.

1974

Winter Addenda B31.1 moves away from the separation ofbending and
torsional moment terms in the stress calculations and alters the intensification factor for moments on the branch leg of intersections.

1978

ANSI B31.7 is withdrawn.

1987

Welding Research Council Bulletin 330 recommends changes to the


B31.1, B31.3, and ASME III Class 2 and 3 piping codes.

1-7

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1.1 Theory and Development of Pipe Stress Requirements


1.1.1 Basic Stress Concepts

Normal stresses: Normal stresses are those acting in a direction normal to the face of the
crystal structure ofthe material, and may he either tensile or compressive in nature. (In fact,
normal stresses in piping tend more to tension due the predominant nature of internal
pressure as a load case.) Normal stresses may be applied in more than one direction, and
may develop from a numher of different types of loads. For a piping system, these are
discussed below:

Longitudinal stress: Longitudinal, or axial, stress is the normal stress acting parallel to
the longitudinal axis ofthe pipe. This may he caused by an internal force acting axially within
the pipe:

- - -.....-

Figure 1-6

SL =

Fax/ Am

Where:
SL =

longitudinal stress, psi

Fax =

internaI axial force acting on cross-section, lb

Am =

metal cross-sectional area of pipe, in2

1t(do2 - di 2 ) / 4

1t dm t

do

outer diameter, in

di

inner diameter, in

dm =

mean diameter, = (do + di) / 2

1-8

FAX

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

A specifie instance of longitudinal stress is that due to internaI pressure:

Figure 1-7

PAil Am

design pressure, psig

Ai

internaI area of pipe, in2

1t

SL
Where:

di 2 1 4

Replacing the terms for the internaI and metal areas of the pipe, the previous equation may
be written as:

For convenience, the longitudinal pressure stress is often conservatively approximated as:
SL

P do 1 4 t

Another component of axial normal stress is bending stress. Bending stress is zero at the
neutral axis of the pipe and varies linearly across the cross-section from the maximum
compressive outer fiberto the maximum tensile outer fiber. Calculatingthe stress as linearly
proportion al to the distance from the neutral axis:
Variation in Bending Stress Thru
Cross Section
Max compressive stress

Neutral Axis

1/2 max compressive stress


Zero bending stress
1/2 max tension stress
Max tension stress

Figure 1-8

1-9

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Where:
Mb = bending moment acting on cross-section, in-lb
c

= distance ofpoint ofinterest from neutral axis of cross-section, in

moment ofinertia of cross-section, in 4

Maximum bending stress occurs where c is greatest - where it is equal to the outer radius:
Smax

Where:
Ro

= section modulus of pipe, in3

outer radius of pipe, in

= 1/Ro
Summing aH components oflongitudinal normal stress:
SL

Fax / Am + P do / 4 t + Mb / Z

Hoop stress: There are other normal stresses present in the pipe, applied in directions
orthogonal to the axial direction. One ofthese stresses, caused by internaI pressure, is called
hoop stress. This stress acts in a direction parallel to the pipe circumference.

Figure 1- 9
The magnitude of the hoop stress varies through the pipe wall and can be calculated by
Lame's equation as:
SR = P (ri 2 + ri 2 ro2 / r 2) / (ro2 - q2)

1-10

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes


Where:
SR

hoop stress due to pressure, psi

ri

inner radius of pipe, in

ra

outer radius of pipe, in

radial position where stress is being considere d, in

The hoop stress can he conservatively approximated for thin-wall cylinders, by assuming
that the pressure force, applied over an arbitrary length of pipe, l CF = P di 1), is resisted
uniformly by the pipe wall over that same arbitrary length (Am = 2 t 1), or:
SH =

SR

P di 1/ 2 t 1, or:

P di / 2 t, or conservatively:

Radial stress: Radial stress is the third normal stress present in the pipe wall. It acts in
the third orthogonal direction, parallel to the pipe radius. Radial stress, which is caused by
internal pressure, varies between a stress equal to the internal pressure at the pipe's inner
surface and a stress equal to atmospheric pressure at the pipe's external surface. Assuming
that there is no external pressure, radial stress may be calculated as:

= -p

Figure 1-10

Where:
SR = radial stress due to pressure, psi
Note that radial stress is zero at the outer radius of the pipe, where the bending stresses are
maximized. For this reason, this stress componenthas traditionally been ignored during the
stress calculations.

Shear stresses: Shear stresses are applied in a direction parallel to the face of the plane
of the crystal structure of the material, and tend to cause adjacent planes of the crystal to

1-11

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

slip against each other. Shear stresses may be caused by more than one type of applied load.
For example, shear stress may be caused by shear forces acting on the cross-section:
Shear Distribution
Profile

-----~)

----------~= j

---------- ~

~IN=O

/MAX

Figure 1-11

VQ/Am

'tmax

maximum shear stress, psi

shear force, lb

shear form factor, dimensionless (1.333 for solid circular section)

'tmax

Where:

These shear stresses are distributed such that they are maximum at the neutral axis ofthe
pipe and zero at the maximum distance from the neutral axis. Since this is the opposite of
the case with bending stresses, and since these stresses are usually small, shear stresses due
to forces are traditionally neglected during pipe stress analysis.
Shear stresses may also be caused by torsionalloads:

T
Figure 112
'tmax

1-12

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes


Where:
MT

internaI torsion al moment acting on cross-section, in-lb

distance of point ofinterest from torsional center (intersection ofneutral axes)


of cross-section, in

torsional resistance of cross-section, in4

2I

Maximum torsional stress occurs where c is maximized - at the outer radius:

'tmax

Summing the individual components of the shear stress, the maximum shear stress acting
on the pipe cross-section is:

'tmax

v Q / Am + MT / 2 Z

Example Stress Calculations:


As noted above, a number of the stress components described above have been neglected for
convenience during calculation ofpipe stresses. Most V.S. piping codes require stresses to
be calculated using some form of the following equations:

Longitudinal stress: SL

Shear stress:

Hoop stress:

Mb / Z + Fax / Am + P do / 4 t

Calculations are illustrated for a 6-inch nominal diameter, standard wall pipe (assuming the
piping loads are known):

Cross sectional
properties:

Piping loads:

da

6.625 in

Bending moment (Mb)

4247 ft-lb

di

6.065 in

Axial force (Fax)

33488 lb

0.280 in

Pressure (P)

600 psi

8.496 in3

Torsional Moment (MT)

8495 ft-lb

Am

5.5813 in2

1-13

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Longitudinal stress:
SL

4247 x 12/8.496 + 33488/5.5813 + 600 x 6.625/4 (0.280)

15547 psi

Shear stress:

'[

8495 x 12/2 (8.496)

= 5999 psi

Hoop stress:
SR =

600 x 6.625/2 (0.280) = 7098 psi

1.1.2 3-D State of Stress in the Pipe Wall


During operation, pipes are subject to aIl ofthese types of stresses. Examining a small cube
ofmetal from the most highly stressed point of the pipe wall, the stresses are distributed as
so:

S4
SR

:
'

SH

....

{SH
SL

Figure 1-13
There are an infinite number oforientations in which this cube could have been selected, each
with a different combination of normal and shear stresses on the faces. For example, there
is one orientation of the orthogonal stress axes for which one normal stress is maximized,
and another for which one normal stress is minimized - in both cases all shear stress
components are zero. In orientations in which the shear stress is zero, the resulting normal
components of the stress are termed the principal stresses. For 3-dimensional analyses,
there are three of them, and they are designated as SI (the maximum), S2, and S3 (the
minimum). Note that regardless of the orientation of the stress axes, the sum of the
orthogonal stress components is always equal, i.e:
SL + SR + SR = SI + S2 + S3
The converse ofthese orientations is that in which the shear stress component is maximized
(there is also an orientation in which the shear stress is minimized, but this is ignored since
the magnitudes of the minimum and maximum shear stresses are the same); this is
appropriately called the orientation of maximum shear stress. The maximum shear stress

1-14

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

in a three dimensional state of stress is equal to one-halfofthe difference between the largest
and smallest of the principle stresses (SI and S3).
The values of the principal and maximum shear stress can be determined through the use
of a Mohr's circle. The Mohr's circle analysis can be simplified by neglecting the radial stress
component, therefore considering a less complex (i.e., 2-dimensional) state of stress. A
Mohr's circle can be developed by plotting the normal vs. shear stresses for the two known
orientations (i.e., the longitudinal stress vs. the shear and the hoop stress vs. the shear), and
constructing a circle through the two points. The infinite combinations of normal and shear
stresses around the circle represent the stress combinations present in the infinite number
of possible orientations of the local stress axes.
A differential element at the outer radius of the pipe (where the bending and torsional
stresses are maximized and the radial normal and force-induced shear stresses are usually
zero) is subject to 2-dimensional plane stress, and thus the principal stress terms can be
computed from the following Mohr's circle:
TMAX
T

S2

'"

S,

-T
TMAX

T
Figure 1-14

The center ofthe circle is at (SL + SR) / 2 and the radius is equal to [[(SL - SR) / 2]2 + 't2 ]1/2.
Therefore, the principal stresses, SI and S2, are equal to the centerofthe circle, plus or minus
the radius, respectively.
The principal stresses are calculated as:
SI

(SL + SR) /2 + [ [(SL - SR) / 2]2 + 't2 ]1/2 and

S2

(SL + SR) / 2 - [ [(SL - SR) / 2]2 + 't2 ]1/2

As noted above, the maximum shear stress present in any orientation is equal to (SI - S2) / 2,
or:
'tmax

[(SL - SR)2 + 4 't2 ]1/2

1-15

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1.1.3 Failure Theories


To be useful, calculated stresses must he compared to material allowables. Material
allowable stresses are related to strengths as determined by material uniaxial tensile tests,
therefore calculated stresses must also be related to the uniaxial tensile test. This
relationship can he developed by looking at available failure theories.

crYield

Strain
Tensile Test Results
Unixial Tensile
Test Machine

Tensile Test
Specimen

Figure 1-15
There are three generally accepted failure theories which may he used to predict the onset
of yielding in a material:
1 - OCTAHEDRAL SHEAR, or VON MISES THEORY
2 - MAXIMUM SHEAR, or TRESCA THEORY
3 - MAXIMUM STRESS or RANKINE THEORY
These theories relate failure in an arbitrary three dimensional stress state in a material to
failure in a the stress state found in a uniaxial tensile test specimen, since it is that test that
is most commonly used to determine the allowable strength of commonly used materials.
Failure of a uniaxial tensile test specimen is deemed to occur when plastic deformation
occurs; i.e., when the specimen yields.

1-16

COADE Pipe 8tress Analysis 8eminar Notes

The three failure theories state:


Octahedral 8hear - Von Mises Theory:
"Failure occurs when the octahedral shear stress in a body is equal to the octahedral
shear stress at yield in a uniaxial tension test."
The octahedral shear stress is calculated as:

= 1/3 [ (SI - 82)2 + (82 - 83)2 + (83 - 8 1)2 ]112

'tact

In a uniaxial tensile test specimen at the point ofyield:


81

8Yield; 82 = 83 = 0

Therefore the octahedral shear stress in a uniaxial tensile test specimen at failure is
calculated as:
'tact

1/3 [ (8Yield - 0)2 + (0 - 0)2 + (0 - 8Yield)2 ]1/2

2 112

8Yield / 3

Therefore, under the Von Mises theory:

Plastic deformation occurs in a 3-dimensional stress state whenever the


octahedral shear exceeds 2 1/2 x 8Yield / 3.
Maximum 8hear 8tress - Tresca Theory:
"Failure occurs when the maximum shear stress in a body is equal to the maximum
shear stress at yield in a uniaxial tension test."
The maximum shear stress is calculated as:
'tmax

In a uniaxial tensile test specimen at the point ofyield:


81 =

8Yield; 82 = 83 = 0

'tmax

80:

(SYield - 0) / 2

= 8Yield / 2

Therefore, under the Tresca theory:

Plastic deformation occurs in a 3-dimensional stress state whenever the


maximum shear stress exceeds 8Yield / 2.

1-17

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Maximum Stress - Rankine Theory


"Failure occurs when the maximum tensile stress in a body is equal to the maximum
tensile stress at yield in a uniaxial tension test."
The maximum tensile stress is the largest, positive principal stress, SI. (By definition, SI
is always the largest of the principal stresses.)
In a uniaxial tensile test specimen at the point of yield:
SI

SYield; S2 = S3 = 0

Therefore, under the Rankine theory:

Plastic deformation occurs in a 3-dimensional stress state whenever the


maximum principal stress exceeds SYield.

1.1.4 Maximum Stress Intensity Criterion


Mostofthe CUITent piping codes use a slight modification ofthe maximum shear stress theory
for flexibility related failures. Repeating, the maximum shear stress theory predicts that
failure occurs when the maximum shear stress in a body equals SYield/2, the maxim um shear
stress existing at failure during the uni axial tensile test. Recapping, the maximum shear
stress in a body is given by:
'(max = (81 - S3) / 2
For the differential element at the outer surface of the pipe, the principal stresses were
computed earlier as:
SI

(SL + SR) / 2 + [ [(SL - SR) / 2]2 + '(2 ]1/2


=

As seen previously, the maximum shear stress theory states that during the uniaxial tensile
test the maximum shear stress at failure is equal to one-half of the yield stress, so the
following requirement is necessary:
tmax = [(SL - SR)2 + 4 1 2 ]112

<

Multiplying both sides arbitrarily by two saves the time required to do two mathematical
operations, without changing this relationship. Multiplying by two creates the stress
intensity, which is an artificial parameter defined sim ply as twice the maximum shear stress.
Therefore the Maximum Stress Intensity criterion, as adopted by most piping codes, dictates
the following requirement:
[(SL - SR)2 + 4 '(2 ]1/2 < SYield

1-18

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Note that when calculating only the varying stresses for fatigue evaluation purposes (as
discussed in the following section), the pressure components drop out of the equation. If an
allowable stress based u pon a suitable factor ofsafety is used, the Maximum Stress In tensity
criterion yields an expression very similar to that specified by the B31.3 code:
[ Sb2 + 4

S~

] 1/2 < SA

Where:
Sb

longitudinal normal stress due to bending, psi

St

shear stress due to torsion, psi

SA

allowable stress for loading case, psi

Example Stress Intensity Calculations:


Calculation of stress intensity may be illustrated by returning to our 6-inch nominal
diameter, standard wall pipe for which longitudinal, shear, and hoop stresses were
calculated. Reviewing the results ofthose calculations:
Longitudinal stress: SL

15547 psi

Shear stress:

5999 psi

Hoop stress:

7098 psi

Assuming that the yield stress of the pipe material is 30,000 psi at temperature, and a factor
of safety of 2/3 is to be used, the following calculations must he made:
[(SL - SH)2 + 41:2 ]112 < 2/3 x SYield, or:
[(15547 - 7098)2 + 4 x 5999 2 ]1/2 < 2/3 x 30000, or:
14674 < 20000
The 14674 psi is the calculated stress intensity in the pipe wall, while the 20000 is the
allowable stress intensity for the material at the specified temperature. In this case, the pipe
would appear to be safely loaded under these conditions.

1-19

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1.2 Fatigue Failure


The fail ure modes discussed above were sufficient to de scribe catastrophic failure based upon
one time loadings. However, piping and vessels were also found to suffer from sudden failure
following years of successful service. The proposed explanation for this phenomenon was
fatigue failure ofthe material, resulting from propagation of cracks on the material crystal
structure level due to repeated cyclic loading.

1.2.1 Fatigue Basics


Steels and other metals are made up of organized patterns ofmolecules, known as crystal
structures. However, these patterns are not maintained throughout the steel producing an
ideal homogenous material, but are found in microscopic isolated island-like are as called a
grains.
Inside each grain the pattern ofmolecules is preserved. From one grain boundary to the next
the molecular pattern is the same, but the orientation differs. As a result, grain boundaries
are high energy borders. Plastic deformation begins within a grain that is both subject to
a high stress and oriented such that the stress causes a slippage between adjacent layers in
the same pattern. The incremental slippages (called dislocations) cause local cold-working.
On the first application of the stress, dislocations will move through many of the grains that
are in the local area ofhigh stress. As the stress is repeated, more dislocations will move
through their respective grains. Dislocation movement is impeded by the grain boundaries,
so after multiple stress applications, the dislocations tend to accumulate at grain boundaries,
and eventually becoming so dense that the grains "lock up", causing a loss of ductility and
thus preventing further dislocation movement. Subsequent applications of the stress cause
the grain to tear, forming cracks. Repeated stress applications cause the cracks to grow.
U nless abated, the cracks propagate with additional stress applications until sufficient cross
sectional strength is lost to cause catastrophic failure ofthe material. Figure 1-16 illustrates
this process.

1-20

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Molecular pattern
in unstressed grain

.....Slipping of one molecular


surface over another after
first application of stress

~_
'\

~ocati'"
-+

Slipping of a second
molecular surface after a
second application of

Slip'

stress

Dislocations beginning
to interact and tangle

.~
~

After many repeated applications of


stress the dislocations are
completelytangled and the grain is
'Iocked".

With another application of the


stress, the grain "tears' and a
fatigue crack is initiated.

Figure 1-16

One Cycl e
TEST LOADING CURVE
Tensile Test
Specimen

Figure 1-17

1-21

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes


One important consideration is the fact that fatigue cracks usually are initiated at a free
surface. Corrosive attack on a material often produces pitting ofmetal surfaces. The pits
act as notches and produce a reduction in fatigue strength. In those specifie cases when
corrosive attack occurs simultaneously with fatigue loading, a pronounced reduction in
fatigue properties results which is greater than that produced by prior corrosion of the
surface. When corrosion and fatigue occur simultaneously, the chemical attack greatly
accelerates the rate at which fatigue cracks propagate.
U nfortunately, fatigue failures can occur even when the stress in a material is below the yield
stress. This is because localized stress concentrations can cause plastic deformation in a
relatively few grains des pite the fact that the stress over a gross area ofthe section may be
far below the material yield stress. If the section is subjected to a sufficient number of stress
cycles, cracks can initiate in highly stressed grains and then propagate throughout the
material, ultimately resulting in a fatigue failure of the section as a whole.
The fatigue capacity of a material can be estimated through the application of cyclic
extensive/compressive displacement loads with a uni axial test machine, as shown in Figure
1-17.
SampIe results for typical ferrous material (with a yield stress of5 7,000 psi) are shown below:

Applied Cyclic
Stress (psi)

Cycles ta
Fa il ure

300,000

23

200,000

90

100,000

550

50,000

6,700

30,000

38,000

20,000

100,000

1.2.2 Fatigue Curves


A plot of the cyclic stress capacity of a material is called a fatigue (or endurance) curve. These
curves are generated through multiple cyclic tests at different stress levels. The number of
cycles to failure usually increases as the applied cyclic stress decreases, often until a
threshold stress (known as the endurance limit) is reached below which no fatigue failure
occurs, regardless ofthe number of applied cycles. The endurance limit (for those metals that
possess one) is usually quantified as the value orthe cyclic stress level which may be applied
for at least 108 cycles without failure. Typical ratios of the endurance limit to the ultimate
tensile strength of various materials are 0.5 for cast and wrought steels; about 0.35 for
several nonferrous metals such as nickel, copper and magnesium; and 0.2 to 0.3 for rough
or corroded steel surfaces (depending on the degree of stress intensification).
An endurance curve for carbon and low alloy steels, taken from the ASME Section VIII
Division 2 Pressure Vessel Code is shown in Figure 1-18.
1-22

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

tO'I:"""------r-----T""""-----r-----T""""-----.,
NOTH:

1" E- . . . . . . .
131
_ _ _ _ . _ ..... _ _
IZI T_5-11O.1
_
""_
U1S 1II-1151to1.

-..--of __

w
Cl
:::>

1-

:::i

c...

(f)
(f)

cr:

1(f)

:::i
U
>U

FIG. 5-110.1 DESIGN FAnGUE CURVES FOR CARIION, Law ALLOY, SERIES ~IOC, HM ALLOY STEELS AllO HIGH
TENSILE S1ULS FDII TEMPERATURES NOT EXCEEDING 7UO'F

Figure 1-18
Note that according to the fatigue curve, the material doesn't fail upon initialloading, despite
enormously high stresses that appear to be weIl above the ultimate tensile stress oftypical
carbon and low alloy steels. The reasons for this are:
1

The highly stressed areas under fatigue loading are normally very localized.
Catastrophic failure under one-time loading will normally occur only when the
gross cross-section is overloaded.

Fatigue curves are usually generated through cyclic application of displacement,


rather than force, loading. Displacement loads are "self-limiting". If a pipe is
overloaded with an imposed displacement, plastic stresses will develop, deforming the pipe to its displaced position. At that point there will be no further
tendency for displacements to occur, and therefore no continuation ofthe load,
or further deformation leading to catastrophic failure. In the case of an applied
force (which is not a self-limiting load), deformation of the pipe does not cause
the force to subside, so deformation continues until failure.

The stress shown in a fatigue curve is a calculated stress, based upon the
assumption that Hooke's law is applicable throughout the range of applied
loading; i.e., S = E E, where:

modulus of elasticity ofmaterial, psi

strain in material, in/in

1-23

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes


In reality, once the material begins to yield, stress is no longer proportional to
the induced strain, and actually is much lower than that calculated.

1.2.3 Effect of Fatigue on Piping


A. R. C. Markl investigated the phenomenon offatigue failure ofpiping during the 1940's and
1950's, and published his results in papers such as "Piping Flexibility Analysis", published
in 1955. He tested a number of configurations (straight pipe, and various fittings, such as
pipe elbow, miter bend, unreinforced fabricated tee, welding tee, etc.) by using cyclic
displacements to apply alternating bending stresses. Plotting the cycles to failure for each
applied displacement, he found that the results of his experiments followed the form of
fatigue curves.

16"

~
1

(TYP,

41"
(TYP)

~IL-,......_ _ _ _ _.....

~ Girth butt weld

-a-

Range of imposed displacements to


impose complete stress reversaI.

~t--...,IL..-J-I____- -.....I -a- displacements _....:.....-----.l~R


1

angeo f ou tpane

RangeOfinPlaneL~

...&...~ _ _ _ _ _ _...J

ml!-

-a
-a. . .

displacements

~~ Range of outplane

....... Range of inplane /


displacements ~_

{(-'------....

Range of inPlane/

displacement~

displacements

7'

......... Range of outplane

"'Placements

Figure 1-19
If an initially applied displacement load causes the pipe to yield, it results in plastic

deformation, producing a pre-stress in the system, which must be overcome by subsequent


stress applications, resulting in lower absolute stresses during later load cycles. Because of
the system "relaxation", the initial values of the thermal stress are allowed to exceed the
material yield stress, with the aim being that the system "self-spring" during the first few
cycles and then settle into purely elastic cycling. This "self-springing" is also called Elastic
Shakedown. As shown in Figure 1-20, the maximum stress range may be set to 2SYieid (or
more accurately, the sum of the hot and the cold yield stresses) in order to ensure eventual
elastic cycling.

1-24

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2Sy~~~"".r-----------------

2Sy
-Sy~--------~--~~~~----~~--------~--

-2Sy~-----------------------------

Time~

Stress

Figure 1-20
Based upon this consideration, the initial limitation for expansion stress design was set to
the sum ofthe hot and the cold yield stresses - the maximum stress range which ensured
that the piping system eventually cycled fully within the elastic stress range. Incorporating
a factor of safety, this resulted in the following criterion:
SE <= F (SYe + Syh)
Where:
SE

expansion stress range, psi

factor of safety, dimensionless

SYe

material yield stress at cold (installed) temperature, psi

Syh

material yield stress at hot (operating) temperature, psi

1.2.4 Cyclic Reduction Factor


At sorne point, in the vicini ty of 7,000 cycles, the (SYe + SYh)limita tion intersects the fatigue
curve for carbon and low alloy steel. The allowable stress range must therefore be reduced
to fit the fatigue curve for cyclic applications with 7,000 cycles or more:
SE <= F f(SYe + Syh)

1-25

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Where:
f = cyclic reduction factor, as shown in the accompanying table

CYCLIC REDUCTION FACTOR TABLE


Cycles N

Factor f

7,000

1.0

7,001

14,000

0.9

14,001

22,000

0.8

22,001

45,000

0.7

45,001

100,000

0.6

100,001

200,000

0.5

200,001

700,000

0.4

700,001

2,000,000

0.3

1.2.5 Effect of Sustained Loads on Fatigue Strength


In almost an cases the material fatigue curves are generated using a completely alternating
stress; i.e., the average stress component is zero. Research has shown that the magnitude
of the mean stress can have an effect on the endurance strength of a material, the trend of
which is shown below:

cr",

..
::..

~ ,~

;~

CIl

,5

..

Ci

'j ~

~ ~

C~cles

alternating stress

For Design

crllll < 17'IIIIZ < crllt, <0"4 4

t0 5

Sa from endurance

=< S./ curve for completely

Tensile

10'

107

cr Yield

10 foilure
(b)

Figure 1-21

1-26

Mean Stress
Axis

cr Yield

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Note that as the mean stress increases the maximum permissible absolute stress (Sa + Sm)
increases, while the permissible alternating stress decreases. The relationship between the
allowable alternating stress and the average stress is described by the Soderberg line, which
correlates fairly weIl wi th test data for ductile materials. The equation for the Soderberg line
is:
SaCAllowed) = SaCfor R=-1) xCI - Sm/SYield)
Where:
R

Smin / Smax

Sa

(Smax - Smin) / 2

Sm

(Smax + Smin) / 2

Note that during the development of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III
rules and procedures for analysis ofnuclear piping, the Special Committee to Review Code
Stress Basis concluded that the required adjustments to a strain-controIled fatigue data
curve based on zero mean stress, occur only for a large number of cycles Ci.e. N > 50,000 100,000) cycles for carbon and low-alloy steels, and are insignificant for 18-8 stainless steels
and nickel-chrome-iron aIloys. Since these materials constitute the majority of the piping
materials in use, and since most cyclic loading events comprise much fewer than 50,000
cycles, the effects of mean stress on fatigue life are negligible for piping materials with
ultimate strengths below 100,000 psi. For materials with an ultimate strength equal to or
greater than 100,000 psi, such as high strength bolting, mean stress can have a considerable
effect on fatigue strength and should he considered when performing a fatigue analysis.
For a piping application, the implication of the Soderberg line on the fatigue allowable is
implemented in a conservative manner. The sustained stress Ci.e., weigh t, pressure, etc.) can
be considered to be the mean component of the stress range after system relaxation, and as
such is used to reduce the allowable stress range:
SE <= F f(SYe + Syh - Ssus)

1-27

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1.3 Stress Intensification Factors


As noted previously, Markl's fatigue tests generated endurance curves for various fitting
configurations, such as straight pipe, butt welded pipe, elbows, miters, welding tees,
unreinforced and reinforced fabricated tees, mostly using 4" nominal diameter, size-on-size
fittings. Markl noticed that the fatigue failures occurred not in the middle ofhis test spans,
but primarily in the vicinity ofthe fittings, and in those cases, they also occurred at lower
stress/cycle combinations than for the straight pipe alone.
Earlier theoretical work pointed to a possible explanation. It had been shown that elbows
tend to ovalize du ring bending, bringingthe outerfibers closerto the neutral axis ofthe pipe,
thus reducing the moment of inertia (increasing flexibility) and the section modulus
(increasing developed stress).
Ovalization
of Bend
x

Section

Figure 122
The stress intensifica tion factors (the ratio of actual ben ding stress to the calculated ben ding
stress for a moment applied to the nominal section) for elbows was known to be:
=

0.75/ h2/3

0.9/ h 2/3

10

out-of-plane intensification factor

li

in-plane intensification factor

flexibility characteristic

t R/r2

pipe wall thickness, in

bend radius of elbow, in

mean radius of pipe, in

10

li

Where:

1-28

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Markl found this to correlate fairly weIl wi th his test data and so adopted it. Tests on mitered
bends correlated weIl with those for smooth bends, providing an equivalent bend radius R
was used in the above equation for h. Markl's estimates of equivalent bend radius are shown
below:
Re

r(l + 0.5 sIr cot D) (for closely spaced miters)

Re

r(l + cot D) 1 2 (for widely spaced miters)

Re

equivalent bend radius, in

miter spacing at the centerline, in

one-half of angle between cuts

Where:

Markl found that the unreinforced fabricated tees could be modeled using the same formula
as that for single (widely spaced) miter bends could be use d, if a half angle of 45 degrees was
used. This produces a flexibility characteristic of:
h

tir

For butt welded tees (such as ANSI B16.9 welding tees) Markl again adapted the bend
equations, this time computing an equivalent radius (Re) and an equivalent thickness (te).
Markl's equation for weI ding tees was:
h

c ( te Re 1 r 2 )

ratio of tee-to-pipe section modulii, dimensionless

(tJt)3/2 (Markl's recommendation)

equivalent pipe wall thickness, in

1.60t (Markl's recommendation)

equivalent bend radius, in

1.35r (Markl's recommendation)

Where:
c

te

Re

Inserting these values into the expression for h yields:


h

4.4 tIr

This is precisely the expression used today for ANSI B16.9 welding tees.

1-29

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

For reinforced fabricated tees, Markl used the expression he had previously used for welding
tees, with different equivalent wall thickness and bend radius:
h
Where:
c
te
tp
Re

c ( te Re / r 2 )

=
=
=
=

(teft)3/2 (Markl's recommendation)

t + tp
thickness of reinforcing pad or saddle, in
r

The following tables compare the stress intensification factors suggested by Markl's test
results versus the values calculated with his equations (results are for 4" nominal diameter,
standard schedule pipe):

Bend in-plane

(in

tR/r 2

Test

Calculated

0.062

4.49

5.7428

0.210

2.17

2.5476

0.129

4.38

3.5238

0.320

2.02

1.9238

0.319

2.10

1. 9286

0.316

1.90

1.9381

0.328

1. 70

1.8904

0.331

1.53

1.8809

0.324

1.36

1.9095

0.332

1.28

1.8762

0.328

1.46

1.8904

1-30

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Unreinforced tee (io):


tir

Test

Calculated

0.0390

Il.04

10.84

0.0455

6.12

7.06

0.0947

2.95

4.33

0.1111

2.34

2.89

Reinforced tee:

in-plane (i;)
Calculated
Test

out-plane (io)
Test
Calculated

0.12

2.21

2.63

2.43

3.17

0.237

1. 78

1. 74

1.83

1.98

0.5

1.10

1.14

1.08

1.18

tpad

These fonnulas for intensification factors were adopted (and expanded) by the piping codes.
Specifie fonnulas and/or fittings recognized by the individual ASME/ANSI B31 codes are
usually shown in Appendix D ofthose codes (see Figure 1-23).

1-31

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

APPENDIX D
FLEXIBILITY AND STRESS INTENSIFICATION
FACfORS
TABLE 0-1'
FLEXIBIUTY FACTOR t AND STRESS INTENSIFICATION FACTOR 1
_ _ Ion

la)

fini"'"
fortor

0Ut~_

i.

DoKrillllon

w~."'G

.._

or plpt _

CHotts 121. (C)-(711

Ill)

,-_Id __
J

< '2 Cl +

--Ji

bond ..

~ '2 (1

..w..,.

FledIllillJ
thoozurlstk
k

O.,

~r2

TR,

0.75

"

Jill'

-;m

-;;;-

fUlfS:,,7- --..

1.52

O.'

O.,

coti sf

.~_.!J".J,
--y Z

.!,g

,,'/1,.

\In"

1.......
;,

1.6~

bit "

CII_ (2). 1.). (5), m)

Si_ ""'' '

r..... l _ 121. D)I

"li'

,,:1./1

Ir'''

Jil"

O.,
Ir'''

:w.. i. +

OOod

.J!

r,'

.--

'--2-

~.f
2

li

CHotts 121. 1.'. (7))

lb)

W.ldlng lot .... ASIII E


81U_

'. ~ ~0t..
Tc. :i!: 1.5 T

4.~
r,

lit

~~.

'.

~:r'2
.

IN.... 121. 141. (6). Ill). (Ul)

I.~

tbt

Remforttd fabnc.t~ tn

~f"

~-;.

JiJi~

wrth pad .or !.adtllt

[Note' 121. 1.1. IBI. (12). Ill):

If + ",i)'"
f 1) ~

~~2
T' .,
Tt'
Pad

te)

lb)

lb)

o.

Urninforced f.ltricated Ue
IN.m 1Zl. I~). IIZl. mll

~l()+ '"

r,

Ii'''

o.,

Exuvdod _1... too "Ith


~ 0.0506
Tt < l..5T

'It

~I~

+ \.Ii

s.ddIe'

(1,+-r.) -i

hW

12

o.

. 1.
r,

'2

{Notn (2), loC}, Cl})]

(b)

Wtlded~ln

contour InSfrt

wllII
r. '2:: 'tWL

"''

T(~l.sr

(ffote1

(0)

en

(4), i1l). (131]

IIrIr1ch _Id IiItlno


IIn........ ...,torc;ocll

INo... (2). l.

I~).

0.9

Ir'''

1121)

Flaibllty

Factor k
Bult -.eIdi!d joint. Nducer, or _t'Id neck fI"\1e

lb)

1.0
1.2

D " " b _ ...on lWtgo

Cel

StmI
IlIlIn,ifiutioo
F_; INoto Illl

FI'" wtIdH jOint, or socttt M'!d ftarlge or fittlng

Note (14)

Up )oint """"" (wlth ASME B16.9 Iap j,nt .tub)

Lb

Tht'tAdfod pipe joint, Or U.rudfd flallQf

Z.l

C_ _ _

S""I~ ~I ...

or ComIPtld ......... d bond [Not. no

Figure 1-23
1-32

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Subsequent research has demonstrated that Markl's formulas, having been based on a
limited numher configurations (significantly having omitted reduced outlet tees) and
disregarding any need to intensify torsional stress, are inaccurate in some respects.
The major problem with reduced intersections tees lies in the out-of-plane bending moment
on the header. Stresses due to these moments can never he predicted from the extrapolation
of size-on-size tests. Figure 1-24 below illustrates the origin of this problem.

Area of high
bending .............
stresses

Mob

Size-on-size

Mob

Reduced Intersection

Figure 1-24
Errors due to these moments can be non-conservative by as much as a factor oftwo or three.
Furthermore, when the rlR ratio is very small, the branch connection has little impact on the
header, so use oflarge stress intensification factors for the header can produce unreasonably
large calculated stresses.
R.W. Schneider ofBonney Forge pointed out this inconsistency for reduced branch connections. His paper on the subject states that the highest stress intensification factors occur
when the ratio ofthe branch to headerradiiis about 0.7, at which point the nonconservativism
(versus Markl's formulas) is on the order oftwo.

i from Markl

0.7

1.0

1.0

r/R
Ratio of Actual i to Markl's i vs
Ratio of 8ranch to Header Radius

Figure 1-25

1-33

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1.4 Welding Research Council Bulletin 330


The Wei ding Research Council's Bulletin 330, "Accuracy of Code Stress Intensification
Factors for Branch Connections" documented a major attempt to re-assess the existing code
requirements for the intensification of stresses at tees and other branch connections. The
difficulty ofthis task was summed up in the bulletin by author E. C. Rodabaugh, who stated:
''We would rate the relative complexity ofi-factors for pipe, elbows and branch connections
by the ratios 1 :5:500. These comments on relative complexity, we think, are relevant at this
point because at least sorne readers will be looking for simple answers to what they perceive
to be a simple subject. They will not find any simple answers in this report."
Summarizing the findings ofWRC 330 in order ofincreasing importance:
1)

The following note should be added wi th regard to branch connection flexibilities:

"In piping system analyses, it may be assumed that the flexibilityis represented
byarigidjointatthebranch-to-runcenterlinesjuncture. However, the Code user
should be aware that this assumption can be inaccurate and should consider the
use of a more appropriate flexibility representation."
2)

ASME 2/3 and B31.1 users can use the ''Branch Connection" expressions for
unreinforcedfabricated tees wheneverrlR< 0.5. (Markl's formulas specified that
the same stress intensification factor be used on both the branch and header legs
of a tee, regardless of relative sizes. The codes noted above permit the reduction
ofthe stress intensification factor at the branch for relative diameters. CAESAR fi
automatically considers the effects ofreduced intersections on the stress intensification factors for these codes unless directed otherwise by the user through
the setup file.)

3)

B31.1 erred when including the calculations for branch connection stress
intensification factors; instead they should have included the calculations as
they appeared in ASME III. (Further clarification of this note is given in note
10 herein.)

4)

B31.3 should include the stress intensification factors for branch connections as
per ASME III. (B31.3 uses Markl's original formulas, thus specifying the same
stress intensification factor for both the branch and header of a tee, regardless
of relative sizes.)

5)

B31.3 should intensify the torsional moment at branch connections, with the
torsional intensification factor estimated as: it = (rlR)i o.

6)

B31.3 should eliminate the use of ii = 0.75io + 0.25 for branch connections and
tees. It can give the wrong relative magnitude for header moments, and may
underestimate the difference between Mo and Mi for rlR ratios between 0.3 and
0.95, and perhaps over-estimates the difference for rlR ratios below 0.2 and for
rlR = 1.0.

1-34

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

7)

B31.3 and B31.1 should add restrictions to the stress intensification factor tables
indicating that they are valid for RIT < 50.

8)

The codes should add notes that indicate that the stress intensification factors
are developed from tests and/or theories based on headers being straight pipe
with about two or more diameters length of pipe on either side of the branch.

9)

The codes should also add notes to indicate that for branch connections/tees the
stress intensification factors are only applicable where the axis ofthe branch pipe
is within 5 degrees ofnormal to the surface of the header pipe.

10)

The stress intensification factors for unreinforced fabricated tees, weldolets, and
sweepolets should be changed to:

For (rlR) < 0.9:


lb

1.5(RIT)2/3 (rlR)1/2 (r/rp ), with ib(tIT) > 1.5

For (rlR) = 1.0:


0.9 (RIT)2/3 (r/rp ), with ib(tIT) > 1.0

And:

0.8 (RIT)2/3 (rlR), with ir > 2.1

lb

intensification factor for branch (to be linearly interpolated for rlR ratios
hetween 0.9 and 1.0)

mean radius ofheader pipe, in

thickness ofheader pipe, in

mean radius ofbranch pipe, in

rp

outer radius ofbranch pipe, in

thickness ofbranch pipe, in

Ir

intensification factor for run (header) pipe

Ir

Where:

Additionally, if a radius of curvature r2 is provided at the connection, which is not less than
the larger of t/2, (Tb'+Y)/2, or T/2, then the calculated values of ib and ir may be divided by
2.0, but with the restriction that ib>1.5 and ir >1.5.
Also, where reduced outlets are discussed, branch ends should he checked using Z = p (r2)t
and i(tIT) in place ofi, with i(tIT) > 1.0.

1-35

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Il)

There was not sufficient data available onreinforcedfabricated tees for Rodabaugh
to make any definitive recommendations regarding them. Rodabaugh does
however suggest that the normal usage whereby the width of the pad is taken
to be at least equal to the radius ofthe nozzle should be observed even though
not explicitly directed by the code.

12)

For t/T ratios of about one or more, stresses tend to be higher in the header, and
are fairly independent ofthe wall thickness ofthe nozzle. As the tlI' ratio gets
much smaller than one, the largest stresses shift to the branch. (This finding
originally came out of the research for WRC 297.)

Comparisons ofWRC 330's proposaIs for stress intensification factors for various types of
tees, versus B31.3 calculated values are shown on the following pages.

1-36

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

NO INTERSECTION RADIUS
"831.3" VS. 'WRC 330' UNREINFORCED, FA8RICATED TEE STRESS INTENSIFICATION FACTORCOMPARISON

HEADER
NOM

BRANCH
SCH

WRC

--B31.3---

330 b

i ib

WRC

iob
iOb

--B31.3---

i oh

1 330 h

330 h

330 b

ioh

1 40.

40.

2.433

2.874

2.433

.853

1.081

2.433

.959

1.125

1 48.
2 48.

1 48.
2 40.

4.184
3.359

2.769
2.769

3.359
3.359

..m
.B24

.822
1.010

2. tHe
2.986

2.769
2.769

3.359
3.359

1.319
.927

1.6""
1.125

J 40.
l 40.
J 43.

1 414.
2 414.

3.479
4.769
3.4811

2.860
2.860
2.868

3.488
3.488
3.488

.822
.U8

1.011
.738

3.488
3.481
3.4811

l.b57
1.657

1.881

2.86B
2.868
2.86"

1.362
1.362

.822

2.111
2.111
3.893

.925

1.125

4 40.
4 40.
4 40.

1 48.

3.416
4.682
5.694
3.B92

3.169
3.169

3.892
3.892

.928

1.139

2.11111

.677

.831

3.169
3.169

3.892
3.892

.557

.684
l.0U

3.892
3.a92

1.5119
1.5B9
1.189
.916

1.953
1.853
1.468

.814

2.lem
2.665
3.46m

3.169
3.169
3.169
3.169

3.891

Z 40.
3 4B,
4 414.
1 48.
2 48.

4.589

3.441
3.Hl

1.1128
.758
.617
.54J
.889

1.271
.927
.763
.669

3.441
3.441
3.441
3.441
3.441

".255
4.255
4.255
4.255
4.255

1.639
1.639

2.826
2.826
1.817
1.488
1.125

.816

!.lm

2.m

.671
.589
.528
.885

.834
.732
.656
1.81l@

2.11111

.764
.671
.681
.549

.954
.837
.751
.686

.BU

1.811!

.747
.669
.612
.535

.936
.839
.671

.797

1.l!ea

.915
.837
.732
.654

4 49.
5 40.
S 48.
~ 411!.
5 40.
5 411!.

3 40.

3 411.
4 48.

5 48.

6 49.

2 48.

b 411!.
6 411!.
6 40.
6 4\J.

:) 48.

S 48.

:) 4f.1.
.. 48.

a 48.
B 411!.
49.
B 48.

4 U.
5 411.
6 48.

5 411.
b 4@.
B 411.

19 48.

.. 411.

III! 4B.

S 48.

18 48.
lB 48.
19 48.

8 411.

12 48.

12 48.
12 41.

12 48.
12 48.

14
14
14
14
14

48.
4B.
4B.
49.
4B.

b 48.
18

n.

5 48.
h 4B.
B 48.

18 48.
12 48.
b 48.
8 48.
10 48.

12 48.
14 48.

5.5BII
6.359
4.255

3.441
3.44J

4.255
4.255
4.255
4.255
4.255

4.477
5.444
6.282
6.919
4.548

3.655
3.655
3.655
3.b55
3.655

4.540
4.548
4.541
4.541
4.541

5.187
5.918
6.592
7.218
4.94'1

3.961
3.961
3.961
3.9bl
3.961

4.949
4.949
4.949
4.949
4.949

5.642
6.294
6.884
7.875
5.284

4.213
4.213
4.213

5.284
5.284
5.284

4.213
4.213

5.284
5.284

6.834

4.392
4.392

.728
.666
.592
.52@
.795

5.599

.697
.689
.545

3.348

3.441

b.bBB
7.549
8.443
5.523

40592
4.392

5.523
5.523
5.523
5.513
5.523

6.383
7.382
B.IM
8.569
5.599

4.458
4.45B
4.458
4.4Se
4.4511

5.599
5.599
5.599
5.599

4.392

.5J9
.795

Lltllll

.768

1.all'!

.877

.767
.686
.653

2.nll

2.1111
2.342
3.14B
3,783

2.711

3.374
4.836

3.655
3.655
3.655
3.655
3.655

3.an

1.478
I.H2

.91B

1.125

4.548

1.741

4.548

1. 741

4.548

1.348
1.883
.986

2.162
2.162
1.674
1.346
1.125

1.886
1.754
1.410
I.PS
.911

2.356
2.191
J.76J
1.472
1.125

1.122

2.516
2.282
l.a41
1.407

4.540

4.541

3.961
3.961
3.961
3.961
3.961

4.949
4.949

2.111
2.399
2.871
3.755
4.697

4.zn

2.@86
1.756
1.468

~.213

5.284
5.284
5.28"
5.284
5.284

.997

1.125

2.118
2.523
3.312
4.138
4.919

4.392
4.392
4.392
4.392
4.392

5.523
5.523
5.523
5.523
5.523

2.882
1.741
1.338
1.1163
.895

2.b18
2.189
1.673
1.337
1.125

2.328
3.847

4.458
4.45B
4.458
4.4511
4.458

5.599
5.599
5.599
5.5'19
5.599

1.911
1.468

2.405
1.839

1. Ib8

1.469

.982
.894

1.125

2.111
2.258
2.811

3.361
4.399

3.811

4.538
U188 . 4.977

1-37

4.213
4.213

4.213

4.949

4.949
4.949

1.236

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

NO INTERSECTION RADIUS
"B31.3" VS. 'WRC 330" UNREINFORCED, FABRICATED TEE STRESS INTENSIFICATION FACTOR COMPARISON

HEADER
NOM

16 40.

16 48.

lb 4".
16 4@,
lb 48.

8RANCH
SCH

WRC

-831.3

330 b

i ib

6.825
7.633
8.322
8.723
5.595

4.449

18 40.

7.281
7.B50
8.229
8.797
5.598

8 40.
I@ 48.

12 48.
14 40.
lb 48.

18
18
18
lB
18

48.
48.
40.
48.

20
20
20
2"
20

40.
48.
4".
48.
48.

12 40.
14 40.
16 4~.
18 4~.
20 40.

7.711
8.882
8.640
9.165
5.801

24 48.
24 40.

16 48.
18 40.

4~.

18 40.
12 40.
14 48.
lb

40.

i ib

iob

WRC

831 .3

iOb

330 b

330 b

330 h

i ih

4.446

5.595

.928

2.664

4.446

5.595

4.446

5.595
5.595

.651
.583
.534

.733
.672

.510
.795

.641
1.098

.618
.567

4.449
4.449
4.449

5.598
5.598
5.598
5.598
5.598

4.681
4.681
4.681
4.681
4.601

5.BBI
5.a61
5.B01
5.881
5.8@1

.597
.56Q
.532
.592
.793

4.707

.583
.549
.521

4.707

5.943
5.943
5.943
5.943

4.446
4.446

4.4~9

5.595

.541

.586
.795

3.332

I.6b9
1.334

2.1011
1.b79

3.961
4.352

4.446
4.446

5.595
5.595

1.123
1.822

1. 413
1.286

4.973

4.446

5.595

.894

1.125

.777 : 2.964
.713 : 3.523
.6811
3.871
.636 '4.423
1. 80~ l 4.976

4.449

5.598

5.598
5.598
5.598

1.5&1
1. 263
1. 1-49
1. "lib

1.889

4.449

.752
.718
.671

5.156

4.601

.736

3.512

.694
.658

3.951

6.52(1
6.520

1.113
.887

1.411
1.125

4.783
6.801

5.6lB
5.670

1.186
.945
.883

1.511

6.424

7.227
7.227
7.227

.783

.640
.733
1.89B

5.879
6.293
6.695

5.899
5.899
5.899

7.532
7.532
7.532

1.083
.937
.B81

.51l!

.m

5.446

49'1
.585
.784

.637
.746

5.830
6.283
6.563

5.788
S.7B8
S.788

7.384;1 U63
7.3B4 .993
7.384
.933

5.788

7.384

6.480
6.4110
6.40&
6.489
6.480

B.280
8.280

.788

1.800

4~.

10.394
10.134
7.227

5.670
5.670

5.m

7.227
7.227
7. '227,

.546
.560
.785

11.763
!lU17
7.532

5.899
5.899
5.899

7.5321

.501

7.532.
7.532!

.572

7.384 j
7. 384:
7.384,
7.384

.56 48.
36 41l.
36 48.

30 -4B.
32 49.
34 48.

36 48.

36 48.

42
42
42
42

30

48.
48,

40.
4@.

42 40.

40.

32 U.
34 48.

36 40.
42 40.

11.210

5.788

11.599

5.788

9.902
7.384

5.788
5.788

11.5(18
11.9(17

b.400

12.231
12.633
8.209

b.UB
6.488

b.m
b.480

.79'l.

8.208 ;
8.208 ;
8.20~ :
8.2@0 ;
8.209

1.252
1.125

5.140
5.140

.672

34 40.

.'193

.B92

4.619
5.796

.530

30 4~.
32 411.

!.b10

1.4&9

4.707

6.520
6.520

34 411.
34 48.

1.m

1.483
1. 277
1.117

5.BiH
5.a81
5.BIH
5.801

4.391

5.140
5.140

14 40.

5.m

1.009 ; 5.282

9.782
6.528

32 40.

5.598 1 .894

1.446
1.2116
1.125

5.943
5.943
5.'143

24 4~.
3" 40,
24

4.601

1.589

4.797
4.787
4.7@7

30 48.
39 48.

36 40.
32 40.

4.601
4.601
4.681

,633

20

32 41Ll.

4.449
4.449

Lel8

24 40.

32 49.

3.281

4.449

3.604
4.1lB
4.633

24 40,

4.m

330 h

5.595
5.595

24 4@.

40.

330 h

ioh

4.446
4.446

8.076
8.566
9.@37
5.943

4.707

i ih
ioh

.,m '
.713
I.m

1.888
.713

.537
.521
.507

.780

1-38

.089
.6&8
.649
1.BS8

5.lbB
5.533
5.a86
6.228
7.289

S.670

5.943:

\,:)48

l.h92

1.191

1.504

!.lm

Lm

.B'11

I.! 25

l
i

i
i

1.204
1.125
1.281

1.197
1.125

1.35a
1.266

.8B2

1.198
1.125

1.238
! .157
8.m 1.087
S.2U 1 1.828
B.2BILl 1 .878

1.587
1.482
1.393
1.316
1.125

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

NO INTERSECTION RADIUS

"831.3" VS 'WRC 330" WELDOLET STRESS INTENSIFICATION FACTOR COMPARISON


HEADER
NOM

BRAN CH
SCH

3 48.
3 48.
3 48.

..931.3..i ib

i ib
iOb

WRC

iOb

---B31 ,3---

i ih

i Oh

330 b

330 h

i ih

i oh

330 h

330 h

40.

2.433

1.097

1.897

.~51

.451

2.162

1.Il97

l.097

.588

.518

1.516
1.516

.371
.451

2.1110

1.516

1.516

1 ;::::

1.516
1.516

.371

:::

.451

2.986

1.516

1.516

.722
.588

.722
SilS

411.
2 4B.
3 411.

3.363
4.769
3.483

1. 570
1. 578
1.5711

1.570
1.570
1.570

.467
.329
.451

1 2.1110

.748

.748

1 2.11l0

1.571
1.571

.748

.748

i 3.093

1.57@
1.570
1. SHI

1.578

.329
.451

.508

.588

1
3.366
1
1 4.682

1.756
1. 756

1.756

.522

.522

2.110

1,756

1.75b

.83b

.B3b

1.756

.375

1. m

5.694

1.756

1.756
1.756

.308

.375 i 2.18e
.308: 2.665

1. 756
1. 756

.836
.659

.836
.659
.588

A0.
'1 40.
2 48.

WRC

, 330 b

330 b

.467

4 48.
4 411.
4 48.

1 40.
'1 411.
3 40.

4 41l.

4 40.

5
S
5
5
5

48.
4@,
48.
4@.
411.

il

40.

6 ~8.
6 4@.
6 4@.

1 411.
'1 411.
3 411.
-4

411.

5 411.
2 40.
3 40.
4 40.

!.?Sb

l :. :9:
1

.::r .) __,

1.920

1 4.589

1. 920
1.928
1. 920
L92@

1.920
1.928
1.920
1.920
1.920

2.848
2.048
2.B48

2.048
2.848
2.048

2.848
2.048

2.848
2.1148

i 5.580
[ 6.358
: 4.255
4.47i
,5.444
6.2112
6.919
4.540

6 40.

5 40.
6 411.

8 40.

3 48.

,5,187

2.233

2.233

8 40.

4
5
b
S

! 5.910

2.233

6.592
7.210
4.'149

2.233

2.233
2.233
2.233
2.233

8 40.
Il 40.
B 40.

40.
4iJ.

48.
40.

10 40.

4 U.

10 40.
10 4~.
10 40.
!~ 40.

S 48.

5.642
6.294

12
12
12
12
12

40.
40.
40.
41l.
40.

14
14
14
14
14

40.
40.

n.

40.
40.

2,233
2.233

il 40.

6.884

2.384
2.384
2.384

B 411.

7.S75

2.384

III U.

5.284

2.384

S 40.
(, 4@.
8 40.

6.034

III 41l.

8.443

2.492
2.492
2.492
2.492

6.6@0

7. 54'?

2.492

12 411.

6 40.

UB3

8 40.
10 40.
12 40.

7.3112
8.1bb
S.569

2.526
2.526
2.526
2.526

14 40.

5.599

2.526

.451 ~5t

2.492
2.492
2.492
2.492
2.492
2.526

I.ni
1. 928
I.cm
1. 928

.579

2.188

.418
.344

2.11'"
2.342

.382
.451

3.11411
3.783

Lm

t.m

1.920

2.1148
2.1148
2.848
2.1148

'4.@3b

2.848
2.848
2.148
2.848
2.148

2.1811

2.233

.451

.458

.458

2.108

.376
.3311
.296

.376
.331
.296
.451

2.101l
2.711
! 3.374

.451

.430
.378
.339
.318
.451

.422

.422

.379

.379

.451
.4311
.378

.339
.318

.346

.346

.303

.303

.m

.451

.378

.413
.378

.3311

.338

.~ .J

.295

1 .451

.451

\ .396

.346

.346

2.526

.396

.319

2.526

.309
.295

2.526

1 .451

2.526

l.m
1.92i!
1. 7~

.579

.302

.~13

;!

3.m_~ ._1!756_~_~~m8

.418
.344

2.384
2.384
2.384
2.384
2.384

1.756

'9~

.295
.451

' 2.258
\ 2.811

3.361
~.399

2.233
2.233
2.233

.975
.755

2,848

.5118

.5118

2.233

!.IIb3

t.m

2.233
2.233

.989
.794
.664
.598

,989
.794

1.135
.994
.831
.635
.588

L 135
.994
.831
.635
.588

1.181
.987
.755

1.181

2.233

.., ,.,.,..,.
L.J..0~1

2.492

2.492

2.492

2.492

2.492

2.492

2.492

2.492
2.492

2.328
3.847
3.811

2.526
2.526

4.5311

2.526
2.526

4.917

1-39

2.526

.588

.755
.687

\2.lH!

2.492

.B20

.975

i 2.8711
! 3.755
! 4.697
2.523
'3.m
4.138
4.9119

.914

.'m

2.384
2.384
2.384
2.384

.914

.975

2.384
2.384
2.394
2.394
2.384

2.lBB
2.399

.914
.914
.820
.632
.528

2.384

2.526

2.526
2.526
2.526

2.526

.b~3

sile
1.885
.829
.663
.558
.588

.607

.664
.58B

.987
.152
.603
,588
1.885

.829
.663
.558
.508

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes


t:l.Q INTERSECTION RADIUS
"831.3" VS 'WRC 330" WELDOLET STRESS INTENSIFICATION FACTOR COMPARISON

HEADER
NOM

1& 48.
16 48.
16 48.

16 4@.
16 48.

8RANCH
SCH

WRC

-831.3..

330 b

i ib

330 b

330 h

8
11
12
14
lb

6.825
7.633
8.322
9.723
5.595

2.524
2.524
2.524
2.524
2.524

2.524
2.524
2.524
2.524
2.524

.3711
.331
.383

.371
.331

.289
.451

.289
.451

2.664
3.332
3.961
4.352

1
l 7.2111
; 7.858

2.526
2.526
2.526

2.52l,
2.526
2.526
2.526
2.526

.351
.322
.387
.287
.451

.351
.322
.387

2.9/,4
3.523
3.871

.287

4.423

.451

.339
.324
.383
.286

.339
.324
.31113
.286
.451

.332
.313
.297

.332
.313
.297
.451

48.
4a.
48.
48.

48.

i ib
iob

330 b

WRC

iob

.313

-831.3..

i oh

i oh

330 h

330 h

2.524
2.524
2.524
2.524
2.524

2.524
2.524
2.524
2.524
2.524

.947
.758
.637
.5B8
.509

.947

2.526
2.526
2.526
2.521:
2.526

.952

4.976

2.526
2.526
2.526
2.526
2.526

3.28B

2.617

3.6114

2.617

4.118
4.633
5.156

2.617

4.973

i ih

.759
.637
.588
.519

19 48.

18 40.
18 4B.

18 41.
lB 40.

28 48.
20 41.
20 4!1.

21 40.
28 48.

24 48.

24 48.
24 48.
24 40.

10
12
14
16

,II.
4".
48.
46.

i1 8.229
! 8.797
18 411.! 5.598

2.~m

2.526

7.71l
8.182
8.648
18 411. 1 9.165
28 4&. i 5.811

2.617
2.617
2.617
2.617

2.617
2.617
2.617
2.617
2.617

8.176
8.566
2" 40 . 9.137
5.943
24 48.

2.681
2.681
2.691
2.6Bl

2.681
2.681
2.691
2.681

12 48.
14 n.
16 48.

16 40.'

18 48.

2.617

.451

.451

33 U.
38 48.

24 48.;
38 40.,

.6S3
.571
.588

.653

.798
.726
.635
.565
.518

.;98
.726
.635

2.617

2.617
2.617
2.617
2.617
2.617

3.512
3.951
4.397
5.282

2.681
2.681
2.681
2.681

2.6Bl
2.681
2.681
2.681

.763
.679

.763
.679
.619
.5@8

2.617

.618

.568

.383
.451

.383
.451

4.619
5.796

2.942
2.942

2.942
2.942

.51B

10.3114
1@.134

3.261
3.261
3.261

.314

.m

4.783
6.881
6.424

3.261
3.261
3.261

3.261
3.261
3.261

.692
.543
.518

.682

.322
.451

.314
.322

7.227

3.261
3.261
3.261

.578
.549
.508

.6l]

24 40.

34 40.

3" 40.

11. 763

3.:m

3.398

.289

34 48.
34 40.

32 40.
34 40.

18.317
7.532

3.39!l
3.398

3.:m

.329
.451

.289
.329
.451

5.879
6.293
6.695

3.398
3.398
3.398

3.3118
3.399
3.398

.578
.540

36 40.
36 48.

3.331
3.:)31

3.331
3.331
3.331

.297
.287
.336
.451

.297
.287
.336
.451

5.446

5.8311
6.283
6.563

3.331
3.331
3.331
3.331

3.331
3.331

.612
.571

56 40.
36 40.

30 40. ; Il.218
32 40. 1 II. 599
34 41!1. 1 9.962
7.384
36 40,

3.331

.:)37

3.331

.sltS

42 48.
42 40.

38 48. 1 11.588
32 40. 1 11. 9117

.321
.311
.381

.321

5.168

.311
.3U

i 5.533
i 5.886

.293
.451

.293
.451

6.228
1.289

3.699
3.699
3.699
3.699
3.699

3.699
3.699
3.&99
3.b99
3.&99

.716
.669
.628
.594
.5"8

4~.

42 48.
42 48.

34 4@.! 12.28!

12.633
42 48. 1 8.2111

36 40.

.637
.508

2.942
2.942

31 40.
32 4111.

42

.5&8

2.942
2.942

32 48.
32 43.

SilS

9.782
6.528

32 40.

.571
.588

.717

.852
.717

3.331
3.:331

3.699
3.699
3.699
3.6119
3.699

3.398

3.331

3.6119
3.699
3.699
3.699
3.699

1
1

"

1-40

.sIB

.543

.58a

.612
.571
.537
.508
.716
.669
.628
.594
.516

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

NO INTERSECTION

RADIUS
"831.3" VS 'WRC 330" SWEPOLET STRESS INTENSIFICATION FACTOR COMPARISON
HEADER

8RANCH

NOM

SCH

WRC

-831.3

330 b

i ib

iob

330 b

i ib

WRC

-.. 831.3..

330 b

330 h

i ih

ioh

iob

i ih
330 h

ioh
330 h

1 48.

48.

2.43;>

.929

.986

.382

.372

2.1b2

.929

.9ib

.43i

.419

2 48.
2 48.

48.
2 48.

4.884
3.359

1.188
1.188

1.251
1.251

.291

.354

.316
.372

2.188
2.986

1.188
1.188

1.251
1.251

.566
.398

.596
.419

3 48.
5 48.
3 48.

48.
2 48.

2.618
4.155

1.222
1.222

1.296
1.296

.467
.294
.551

1.296
1.296
1.296

.617

1. 296

1.222
1.222
1.222

.582

1. 222

2.188
2.188
3.893

.582

3 40. 1 3. 480

.495
.312
.372

.395

.617
.419

4 48.
" 48.
4 48.
-4 48.

1 48.
2 48.
3 41.

1.337
1.337

1.450
1.450

.372

3.461

1.337
1.337
1.337
1.337

1.458
1.4SB
1.45"
1.450

.637
.582
.386

.544

1.458

.;m

2.188
2.188
2.665

.698

1.458

.566
.356
.255

.637

1.337
I .n?

.522
.329
.235

5 4t1.

1 48.

.685

1.585

1.585

1.439

1.585

1.439

1.585
1.585

.4112
.284
.249
.372

1.439
1.439

1.439

.579
.365
.258
.226
.338

1.585

2
3
4
5

1.439
1.439

1.585

5 48.

1.439

1.585
1.585

.685
.614
.473
.380

.416
.279
.245

.311
.273

.219

.244

2.111
2.108
2.711
3.374

.334

.372

4.036

1.518
1.518

.355
.312
.290
.256
.372

2.1'8
2.258
2.B18
3.361
4.399

1.632
1.632
1. 632
1.632
1.632

.349
.313
.286
.258
.372

2.188
2.399
2.87i
3.7:15
4.697

1.726
1.726
1.726
1.726
1.726

.341

2.m

.312

2.523

.272

3.382

1.793
1.793
1.793

.244
.372

4.138

5 48.
5 48.
5 40.
il 4@.
il 48.

b 40.

2.563
4.868
5m

48'1 3.sn

! 2.483
41. i 3.940
411. , 5.588
41. ~ 6.358
48. : 4.255

3.738
2 40.
3 40.
5.444
., 41. ; 6.282

1.439

1.518
1.518
1.518
1.518

1.585

1.691
1.691

Lm

:; 48. i
6 48. !

6.919
4.540

l.m

1.691
1.691

3 48. ,

5.187

1.632

1.843

4
5
6
8

.,8.
48.
48.!

5.910

1.632
1.632

1.843

48.

4.949

10 48.

4 48.

10 48.
18 48.

5 48.
b 411.!
1
8 48.!
UI 411'1

48.

4~.

a 48.
8 4m.
B 48.

a 4m.
3 40.

10 48.
10 48.
12 48.

12 48.
12 48.
12 48.

5
b
8
111

1.632
1.632

1.843
1.843
1.843

.315
.276
.248
.226
.330

5.M2
6.294
6.884
7.875
5.284

1.726
1.726

1.968
1.968

.3@b
.274

1.726

1. 96B

1.726
1.726

1. 968
1.968

.251
.219

6.834
48. 1 6.688
41.
7.549

1.793
1.793

.297
2.857
2.857
.272
2.857
.237
2.857 1 .212
2.857
.325

6.592
7.218

48.\

48. Ii

8.443

12 48.

12 48.

14 4I!.
14 40.

48. i 6.3S3
7.382
8.166
18 48.
12 48.
8.569
14 4B.
5.599

14

40.

14 40.
14 41.

5.523

1.193

1.793
1.793

1.814

Il 48.

1.814
1.814

1.814
1.S14

2.885
2.885
2.885
2.885
2.085

.~27

.2B4
.248
.222
.212
.314

.638

.452

!
i

2. IIi

2.1811
2.342
3.848
3.783

4.989

.327
2.328
.286
3.847
.255
3.811
.243 . 4.530
.372 1 4.977

1-41

1.439

1.518
1.518
1.518

1.793
1.793

1.814
1.814
1.814
1.814
1.B14

Lm

.6911
.419

.755
.755
.677

.521
.419

.723
.723

.805
.885

.568
.458

.624

1.691

1.691

.376

.419

1.843

.i77
.723

1.691
1.691

.581

1.843

.581

.878
.816
.656

1.843

.486

.548

1.843

.371

.419

1.968

.828

1.843

.937

L968

.822
.719
.681

1.9b8
1. 968

.468
.367

2.1157

.850
.719

.975
.815

.543
.434

.623

1. 968

2.i57
2.1157
2.857
2.857
2.085
2.885

2."85
2.885

2.885

.365

.6B6
.524
.419

.498
.419

.779

.896

.595

.684
.547
.46"

.476
.480
.364

.419

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

NO INTERSECTION

RADIUS
"831.3" VS 'WRC 330" SWEEPOLET STRESS INTENSIFICATION FACTOR COMPARISON
HEADER

9RANCH

WRC

-931.3---

NOM

SCH

330 b

i ib

!6 40.

8 48,

6.825

1.813

16 48.
16 48.
16 411.

18 411.
12 48.
1-4 48.
16 48.!

7.633

l.813

8.322
8.723
5.595

1.813
1.813

2.884
2.IS4
2.884
2.184

1.813

2. B84

18 48.

18 48.:

;.2111

18 4f1.

18 48.
lB 4f1.

7.858
J.C
1 8.229
16 41. i 8.797

1.814
1.814
1.814

2.885

1.814

18 40.

18 48.,

5.:5'18

1.814

1.@8S
2.885

1.878
1.878
1.878
1.878
1.B78

2.168
2.168
2.160
2.160
2.160

1. 9t8
1.918
1. 918

2.213
2.213

16 48.

12 41.

4".

28 48.

12 48.

7.711

28 48.

14 48.

8.882

2S 48.
28 48.

16 4e.

a.bU

28 48,

28 49.!

24
24
24
24

lb 48. i 8.176
18 4111.! 8.566
2e 48.: 9.1137
24 U.! 5.943

48.
48.
48.
40.

lB

48.
1

9.165
5.881

330 b

.2116

.231

--931.3---

330 b

330 h

i ih

ioh

330 h

330 h

.385
.273
.258

3.:m

2.664

1.813

2.884

1.813

.680
.544
.458
.417
.364

.782
.625
.479
.419

.612

.704

.515
.469
.418
.364

.592

3.961

l.813
1.813

.372

4.352
4.973

1.813

2.884

2.964

1.814

.zn

3.:i23
3.871

1. 81~

.2211
.286

.291
.266
.253

1.814

.324

.372

4.423
4.976

2.885
2.885
2.1185
2.085

1.814

2.885

.243
.231

.28S
.267
.251
.236
.372

3.288
3.614
4.118
4.633
5.156

1.878
1.878
1.878

2.168
2.163
2.163

.214
.372

3.512
3.951
4.:591
5.282

.25111
.372

.218

.288
.324

.239

2.885

.252

2.085

.231

2.213
2.213

.216

.284
.322

.236
.223
.211
.321

.258

.245

2.1b'

2.168

t.918
1. 918
1.910

2.213
2.213
2.213
2.213

.544
.483
.434
.362

.503'
.419

4.619
5.796

2.971
2.171

2.428
2.428

.448
.357

.419

4.783
6.811
6.424

2.269
2.269
2.269

2.692

2.692
2.692

.474
.378
.353

.563
.449
.419

2.354
2.354
2.354

2.B!5
2.885

.4r18
.374

.477
.446

2.B85

.352

.419

2.750
2.756
2.750
2.751

.425
.397

.585
.472
.443
.419

3.854
3.1154
3.854
3.854

.492
.459
.432
.418

.519
.4911

3.854

.349

.419

.213

UI.394

2.269
2.269
2.269

2.692
2.692
2.692

.218
.224
.314

.259
.266
.:512

2.354
2.354

2.885
2.885
2.885

.28M
.228
.315

.238
.272
.572

5.879

18.134

32 48.

32 48.

t 7.227

34 48.

48.! 11.763
32 48.1 10.317
34 48.! 7.532

2.354

.539
.471
.419

1.878

2.428
2.428

24 41l.
3111 48.

.526

1.870

2.m

.318

1.814

ioh

.570
.519
.454
.404
.363

2.1m

32 4i1.
32 48.

i ih

2.884
2.884
2.884

9.71l2

24 48,'
30 41l.

34 48.
34 48.

iob

WRC

iob

6.528

38 4!11.
38 48.

30

1.918

i ib

6.293
6.695

1.911

.659

.633
.560

.599

.525
.466
.419

.526

36 48.

3b 4f1.

30 48. f 11. 218


32 48. 1 Il. 599
34 48. i 9.982
7.384
36

2.312

42 48.
42 40.

32 48.

3B 48., 11. 588


11. 987
34 48. 1 12.281
3& 48. i 12.633
42 4@. f 8.28@

2.548
2.548
2.540
2.541
2.540

3b 48.

36 40.

42 48.

42 48.
42 48.

48.1

2.312

2.312
2.312

2.751
2.758
2.751
2.750
3.054
3.854

3.854
3.854
3.854

.2116

.245

15.446

.199

.237

5.838

.234.

.279

8~;) 3

.372

6.213
6.563

2.312
2.312
2.312
2.312

.221
.213
.287
.2S1
.310

.265 1 5.168
.256 i 5.533
.249
5.886
.242 1 6.228
.:m l 7.289

2.548
2.548
2.548
2.548
2.548

1-42

.373

.352

.591
.552

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1.5 Code Compliance


1.5.1 Primary vs. Secondary Loads

Markl's investigation of the fatigue problem, following the earlier recognition of the
maximum stress theory offailure, led to identification of the basic problem in the design of
piping systems. Not one, but two different criteria must be satisfied, one for primary loads,
which may lead to single application catastrophic failure, and one for cyclic, dis placementdriven loads that may lead to fatigue failure (especially in the vicinity offittings and other
discontinuities) after repeated applications. The main characteristics ofthese two different
types of loads are described below:

Primary Load Characteristics:


1 -

Primary loads are usually force driven (gravity, pressure, spring forces, relief
valve, fluid hammer, etc.).

Primary loads are not self-limiting. Once plastic deformation begins it continues
unabated until force equilibrium is achieved (through change of the external
boundary conditions or through material strain hardening), or until failure of
the cross section results.

3 -

Primary loads are typically not cyclic in nature (and those that are, such as
pulsation or pressure variation, show characteristics of both primary and
secondary loads).

Allowable limits for primary stresses are related, through failure modes such as
those advanced by the Von Mises, Tresca, or Rankine theories, to the material
yield stress (i.e. the point where plastic deformation begins), the ultimate
strength, or, for sustained loads only, to time-dependent stress rupture properties (such as creep characteristics).

5 -

Excessive primary load causes gross plastic deformation and rupture. Failure
may occur with a single application ofthe load. Note that failures that occur due
to single load applications usually involve pressure (hoop stress) design failures
and are not directly addressed by CAESAR n or by the flexibility stress
requirements ofthe codes. Such pressure design requirements are encompassed
in the minimum wall thickness requirements discussed in detail in separate
sections of the codes.

Secondary Load Characteristics:


1 -

Secondary loads are usually displacement driven (thermal expansion, imposed


anchor movements, settlement, vibration, etc.).

Secondary loads are aImost always self-limiting, i.e. the loads tend to dissipate
as the system deforms through yielding or deflection.

Secondary loads are typically cyclic in nature (except settlement).

1-43

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Allowable limits for secondary stresses are based upon cyclic and fatigue failure
modes, and are therefore limited based upon requirements for elastic cycling
after shakedown and the material fatigue curve.

A single application of the load never produces failure. Rather catastrophic


failure can occur after some (usually high) number of applications of the load.
Therefore, even if a system has been running successfully for many years, it is
no evidence that the system has been properly designed for secondary loads.)

Several examples should help illustrate:

Primary Stress Failure: Springs were improperly sized to support the weight of the valve
operator on a system. When the line was fled for hydrotest, everything (stresses and
displacements) appeared fme, since the pipe could support the moment imbalance at
ambient temperature. However, heating up the fluid (and pipe) during startup, the valve
sagged and the guardrail was crushed in less than 30 minutes due to the decrease in strength
at the operating temperature.
Steps ta failure:
1

Weight loads were improperly accounted for. (The primary stresses were tao
high.)

At operating tempe rature there was a resulting drop in material strength.

Gross deformation began almost immediately and continued until force equilibrium was achieved (the spring bottoming out).

Secondary Stress Failure:


After 12 years of successful operation, inspection of the inside surface of a vessel revealed
fatigue cracks in the vicinity of a piping nozzle connection. A subsequent analysis showed
that a temperature increase in the adjacent vessel and piping system (alongwith a relocation
of pipe restraints for the new operating conditions) made several years ago caused the
stresses to exceed the expansion allowables. Even though the calculated stress range at the

1-44

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes


junction was weil over 470,000 psi, thejunction survived several years hecause of the selfrelieving nature of the thermalload, and the fact that the system cycled fewer than a dozen
times over the two year period.
Steps to failure:
1

Thermal allowables were exceeded by mistake.

After about a dozen applications of the excessive load, cracks formed on the
highly stressed inside surface of the vessel at the junction with the nozzle.

Therefore, code compliance requires that the piping system be checked for both types of
loading - primary and secondary. The basic steps involved in doing code compliance are
outlined below:
1

Compute the primary stresses, i.e. the stresses due to the sustained primary
loads, usually weight and pressure, and those due to the occasional primary
loads, such as earthquake, wind, fluid hammer, etc.

Compute the range of the varying stress, i.e. the expansion stress range.

Compare the primary stresses to their allowables, which is based on a factor of


safety times the hot yield stress.

Compare the expansion stress range to its allowable, which is a factor of safety
times a value varying with the number of cycles such that it fits the material
fatigue curve (adjusted for mean stress), but never exceeds the sum of the hot
and cold yield stresses.

Note that due to the shakedown effect, and the fact that the primary and secondary stresses
have different failure criteria, these two load types are reviewed in isolation. Therefore, it
should he stressed that, as far as most codes are concerned, there is no such thing as
"operating stress".

1.5.2 Code Stress Equations


The piping code stress equations are a direct outgrowth of the theoretical and investigative
work discussed above, with specific limitations established by Markl in his 1955 paper. The
stress equations were quite similar throughout the piping codes (i.e., between B31.1 and
B31.3) until the winter of 1974, when the power codes, having observed that Markl was
incorrect in neglecting intensification of the torsional moment in a manner analogous to the
bending component, combined the bending and torsional stress terms, thus intensifying
torsion.
It should be noted that the piping codes exactly calculate the stress intensity (twice the
maximum shear stress) only for the expansion stress, since this load case contains no hoop
or radial components, and thus becomes an easy calculation. Including hoop and radial
stresses (present in sustained loadings only) in the stress intensity calculation makes the

1-45

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

calculation much more difficult. When considering the hoop and radial stresses, it is no
longer clear which of the principal stresses is the largest and which is the smallest.
Additionally, the subtraction of Sl-S3 does not produce a simple expression for the stress
intensity. As it turns out, the inclusion of the pressure term can be simplified by adding only
the longitudinal component of the pressure stress directly to the stress intensity produced
by moment loadings only. This provides an equally easy-to-use equation and sacrifices little
as far as accuracy is concerned.
The explicit stress requirements for the piping codes addressed by CAESAR II follow below.
Note that most codes allow Pdi2 / (d0 2 - di 2 ) to be used in place ofPdo / 4t.

1.5.3 831.1 Power Piping


The B31.1 code requires that the engineer calculate sustained, expansion, and occasional
stresses, exactly as defmed below:

Sustained:
0.75i MA

P do
+

4t

Where:
Ssus, SI

sustained stress, psi

intensification factor (single factor for aIl types of moments), as per


Appendix D ofB31.1 Code (note that 0.75i may not be less than 1.0)

MA

resultant moment due to sustained (primary) loads, in-lb

[Mx2 + My2 + M z 2 ]1/2

basic allowable material stress at the hot (operating) temperature, as per


Appendix A ofB31.1 Code. Sh is roughly defined as the minimum of:

Sh

1)

1/4 of the ultimate tensile strength of the material at operating


temperature;

2)

1/4 of the ultimate tensile strength of the material at room


temperature;

3)

5/8 ofthe yield strength ofthe material at operating temperature


(90% of the yield stress for austenitic stainless steels);

4)

5/8 ofthe yield strength of the material at room temperature (90%


of the yield stress for austenitic stainless steels); and

5)

100% of the average stress for a 0.01 % creep rate per 1000 hours.

1-46

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Expansion:
iMc

z
Where:
SE

expansion stress range, psi

Mc

resultant range ofmoments due to expansion (secondary) loads, in-lb

SA

=
=

Allowable expansion stress, psi

Sc

basic allowable material stress at the cold (installation) temperature, as per


Appendix A ofB3!.1 Code.

Occasional:
Soce

Pdo

0.75iMB

0.75i MA
+

4t

Where:
Soce = occasional stresses, psi
MB

resultant moment due to occasionalloads, in-lb

occasionalload factor

1.2 for loads occurring less than 1% of the time

1.15 for loads occurring less than 10% of the time

1.5.4 831.3 Chemical Plant and Petroleum Refinery Piping

Sustained:
B31.3 does not provide an explicit equation for sustained stress calculations, but only
requires that the engineer compute the longitudinal stresses in the pipe due to weight and
pressure, and then ensure that these do not exceed Sh. This is most commonly interpreted
to mean:

Fax
+

4t

1-47

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Where:
Fax

axial force due to sustained (primary) loads, lb

Mi

in-plane bending moment due to sustained (primary) loads, in-lb

Mo

out-plane bending moment due to sustained (primary) loads, in-lb

li> 10

in-plane, out-plane intensification factors, as per Appendix D ofB31.3 Code

Sh =

basic allowable material stress at the hot (operating) temperature, as per


Appendix A of B31.3 Code. Sh is defined as the minimum of:
1)

1/3 of the ultimate tensile strength of the material at operating temperature;

2)

1/3 ofthe ultimate tensile strength of the material at room temperature;

3)

2/3 of the yield strength of the material at operating temperature (90%


of the yield stress for austenitic stainless steels);

4)

2/3 ofthe yield strength ofthe material at room temperature (90% of the
yield stress for austenitic stainless steels);

5)

100% of the average stress for a 0.01% creep rate per 1000 hours;

6)

67% of the average stress for rupture after 100,000 hours; and

7)

80% of the minimum stress for rupture after 100,000 hours.

Expansion:
[(ii Mi)2 + Cio Mo)2 + 4MT2]1/2

z
Where:
Mi

range of in-plane bending moments due to expansion (secondary) loads, in-lb

Mo

range of out-of-plane ben ding moment due to expansion (secondary) loads, inlb

MT

range oftorsional moment due to expansion (secondary) loads, in-lb

Sc

basic allowable material stress at the cold (installation) temperature, as per


Appendix A ofB31.3 Code.

1-48

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Occasionsl:
The equation for calculating occasional stresses is undefined by B31.3, which simply states
that the sum of the longitudinal stresses due to sustained and occasionalloads shall not
exceed 1.33Sh. The default interpretation ofthis requirement is to calculate the sustained
and occasional stresses independently (as per the equation given for sustained stresses
above) and then to add them absolutely.
Note the differences between these two codes:
1

B31.I intensifies torsion, while B31.3 doesn't.

B31.3 calculation methods are undefined for sustained and occasionalload cases,
while they are explicit for B31.1.

In its most common interpretation, B31.3 neglects torsion in the sustained case,
while B31.I includes it.

B31.I neglects all forces, while in the default interpretation, B31.3 includes Fax
in the sustained case.

Allowable stresses are different for each code.

Stress increase for occasionalloads are different for each code.

Note that both codes additionally cite a conservative value of SA, f(1.25S c + O.25Sh), which
may be used instead ofthe more liberal allowable off(1.25Sc + 1.25Sh - SI). This is a carry
over from pre-computer days, when sustained stress calculations were rarely done, so SI was
not known explicitly, and conservatively estimated to be at its maximum allowable level of
Sh.
Specific requirements of other common codes are shown below as weIl.

1.5.5 ASME Section III, Subsections NC & ND (Nuclear Class 2 & 3)

Sustained:

BI Slp + B2 Mal Z < 1.5 Sh

Bl,B2

primary stress indices for the particular product under investigation

Slp

longitudinal pressure stress

Ma

=
=

resultant moment on the cross-section due to sustained (primary) loads


rMx2 + M~ + Mz2]112, in-lb

Sh

basic aIlowable material stress at the hot (operating) temperature, as per


ASME III Code. Sh is roughly defined as the minimum of:

Ssus
Where:

= P di2 / (d0 2 - di2 ), psi

1-49

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1)

1/3 of the ultimate tensile strength ofthe material at operating temperature;

2)

1/3 of the ultimate tensile strengthofthe material at room temperature;

3)

2/3 of the yield strength of the material at operating temperature (90%


of the yield stress for austenitic stainless steels);

4)

2/3 of the yield strength of the material at room temperature (90% of the
yield stress for austenitic stainless steels);

5)

100% of the average stress for a 0.01% creep rate per 100 hours;

6)

60% of the average stress for rupture after 100,000 hours; and

7)

80% of the minimum stress for rupture after 100,000 hours.

Expansion:
SE

i Mc / Z < f( 1.25 Sc + 0.25 Sh ) + Sh - SL

resultant range of moments on the cross-section due to variations in loading


(usually due to thermal effects)

[M~

Where:
Mc

SL =

+ M; + Mz2]1I2, in-lb

Slp + 0.75 i Ma / Z (where 0.75 i >= 1.0)

Occasional:
The occasional stress equations are:
For Service Level C (Emergency):
Socc = BI x Slpmax + B2 (Ma + Mb) / Z < 1.8 Sh <= 1.5 Sy
For Service Level D (Upset):
Socc = BI x Slpmax + B2 (Ma + Mb) / Z < 2.4 Sh
Where:
Slpmax

= pressure stress due to the peak pressure, psi

Mb

resultant moment on the cross-section due to occasional (primary) loads


[Mx2 + M; + M z2]1/2, in-lb

Sy

yield stress ofmaterial at temperature, psi

1-50

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1.5.6 831.4 Fuel Gas Piping


The B31.4 piping code requires that the engineer calculate and check the sustained,
expansion, and operating stress.

Sustained:
SL

Slp + Sb < 0.75 x 0.72 x SYield

Where:
Slp =

Sb

the longitudinal pressure stress, psi

bending stress due to sustained loads, psi

Expansion:
Se =

(Sb2 + 4 St2 )1/2 < 0.72 SYield

Where:
Sb

range ofbending stress due to varying loads, psi

St

range of torsional stress due to varying loads, psi

Mt /2Z

SYield = specified minimum yield stress ofmaterial, psi.

Operating:
Sope = FIE a dT - v SH 1 + Se + SL( 1-F ) < 0.9 SYield
Where:
F

% of pipe axial restraint (long buried pipelines are considered to be fully axially
restrained, i.e. F = 1; while pipelines above ground on slide plates are not axially
restrained, i.e. F = 0

modulus of elasticity ofpipe material, psi

thermal expansion coefficient of pipe material, in/in/oF

dT =
v

temperature change of pipe from ambient, oF


Poisson's ratio

1-51

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

SR

hoop stress, psi

Pdo / 2t.

Occasional:
Soee

* 0.72 * SYield * k

Slp + Sb < 0.75

longitudinal pressure stress

resultant moment due to occasionalloads

occasionalload factor

Where:

1.5.7 831.8 Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Code


Like the B31A code, the B31.8 piping code requires that the engineer calculate and check
the sustained, expansion, and operating stress.

Sustained:

Slp + Sb < .75 S x F x T

Slp

longitudinal stress due to pressure, psi

Sb

bending stress due to sustained loads, psi

St

torsional stress due to sustained loads, psi

specified minimum yield strength of pipe material, psi

Construction Type

SL
Where:

1-52

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Factor F
Wasteland, Deserts, Mountains, Grazing Land,
Farmland, Sparsely populated areas and Offshore.
Fringe areas around cities, Industrial areas,
Ranch or Country Estates.
Suburban Housing Developments,

A
B
C

Shopping Centers, Residential Areas.


Multi-Story Buildings are prevalent, Traffic
is heavy and where there may be numerous
other utilities underground.

Temperature Derating Factor T

250 or l ess
300
350
400
450

Expansion:

(Sb 2 + 4 St2 )1/2 < 0.72 S

Where:
Sb =

bending stress due to varying loads, psi

St

range of torsional stress due to varying loads, psi

Operating:
Sope = Se + SL < S
Where:
terms are as defined previously.

Occasional:
Socc

* SYield * F * T * K

SI + Se

occasionalload factor

< 0.75

Where:
K

0.60
0.50
0.40

Pipe Temperature deg. F.

1.0
0.967
0.933
0.9
0.867

Se

0.72

all others as defined previously

1-53

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1.5.8 Canadian Z1831Z184 Oil/Gas Pipeline Systems

Sustained:
SL

0.5

* Shoop + SB

~ S

*F * L *J *T

Where:
Shoop = hoop stress

Pd/2tn

resultant bending stress

SB

specified minimum yield strength

design factor

location factor

joint factor

temperature derating factor

Expansion:
SE = (Sb2 + 4St2 )112

0.72

*S *T

Where:
Sb

St

resultant bending stress

iMb/ Z

torsional stress

Mt/ 2Z

Occasional:

* Shoop + SB

*F *L *J *T *K

Fax / A + 0.5

Fax

axial force due to sustained and occasionalloads

cross sectional area of the pipe

SB

resultant bending stress due to sustained and occasionalloads

occasionalload factor

Socc

~ S

Where:

1-54

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1.5.9 RCC-M C
Sustained:
SL =

Pdo /4tn+O.75*i*MA/Z$;Sh

Where:
p

design pressure

do

outside diameter of pipe

tn

nominal wall thickness

stress intensification factor

MA = resultant moment

(Mx2 + M; + Mz2

section modulus

)112

Sh = material allowable at design temperature

Expansion:
SE = i Mc / Z $; f(1.25S e + .25Sh ) + Sh - SL
Where:
Mc =

range of resultant moments due to expansion loads

Sc

material allowable at room temperature

Occasional:
Sace = P max do / 4tn + 0.75 * i

* (MA + MB ) / Z $; 1.2 * Sh

Where:
P max = maximum pressure occurring
MB

resultant moment due ta occasionalloads

1-55

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1.5.10 Stoomwezen
Sustained:
SL =

P (De - d ) / 4d + 0.75

* i * MA

/ Z<f

Where:
p

design pressure

De =

outside diameter

formula wall thickness

stress intensification factor

MA =

resultant moment

section modulus

sustained allowahle, the minimum offive equations (see code for details)

Expansion:
SE

* MB / Z < fe

Where:
MB =
fe

resultant moment due to expansion loads


expansion allowahle, the minimum oftwo equations (see code for details)

Occasional:
Socc =

SL + 0.75

* i * (MA +

MB) / Z < 1.2f

Where:
MB

resultant moment due to occasionalloads

1.5.11 Special Considerations of Code Compliance


1

Many of the non-power codes separate the in-plane and the out-of-plane stress
intensification factors (and do not intensify torsion). For the power codes the
SIF's can he computed for in-plane, out-of-plane, and torsional moments using
SIF = 0.9/ h 2/ 3 . For the petrochemical and other non-power codes:

1-56

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

li

0.9/h2/3

11

0.9/h2/3

li

0.9/h2/3

la

0.9/h2/3

la

Miters:

la

Welding tees:

la

Reinforced tees:
Unreinforced tees:

0.9/h2/3

li

=
=
=
=

li

0.75i o + 0.25

0.9/h2/3
0.75i o + 0.25
0.75i o + 0.25

The power codes do not recognize the extruded weI ding tee, the sweepolet, or the
weldolet. The non-power codes do, and if any ofthese fittings are used in a power
application, the engineer must consider the validity ofusing the stress intensification factors from the chemical codes.
The power codes explicitly define the equation to use for the sustained stresses.
The non-power codes do not. The non-power codes do however tell the user to
compute the longitudinal stresses due to sustained loads, and B31.3 Interpretation 4-10 issued May 8, 1985 instructed the user to include the axial force term
in this longitudinal stress. The power codes explicitly omit this axial force term
from the definition of the sustained stress calculation.

0.75/h2/3

la

=
=
=
=

Bends:

Power codes do not include pressure stiffening effects on bends, while the
petrochemical and related codes do.
Note that the power codes use the term 0.75i in the sustained stress equation,
while the non-power codes historically have not. In Interpretation 1-34 issued
February 23,1981 the B31.3 code permitted its us ers to employ the 0.75 i stress
intensification term for sustained and occasionalloads. (CAESAR II provides
this as an option.) In Interpretation 6-03 issued December 14, 1987, the B31.3
code permitted its users to ignore the stress intensification term for sustained
loads. It is recommended that this latest interpretation be ignored and that i or
0.75i be used as the stress intensification factor for sustained and occasional
loads.

Power codes provide special formulas for reduced branch connections. Nuclear
and fossil codes have not come together otl. their interpretations as ofthis time,
however. These rules come into effect whenever the branch diameter is less than
0.5 times the header diameter.

Class 1 piping rules also allow flexibility coefficients to be computed and inserted
into reduced branch intersections in order to consider the flexibili ty ofthe branch
relative to the header. No other piping code at this time includes this as an
option.

B31. 3 was the first piping code to instruct the user to rem ove corrosion allowance
from the section modulus before making sustained and occasional stress
calculations. Other piping codes simply warned of the deleterious effect of
corrosion when joined with cyclic loadings. Arguments are that B31.3 is

1-57

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

instilling a false sense of security when dealing with corrosion in this manner,
im plying that B31.3 is leading the user to believe that he is properly considering
the effects of corrosion. Other arguments state that B31.3 considers corrosion
in the wrong stress calculation, and that if anything it should have been
incorporated into the expansion stress calculation.
9

Some ofthe pi ping codes incl ude longitudinal weldjoint efficiency factors in their
allowable stress tables. In the majority of the codes where these factors are
included, the codes also instruct the user to divide the allowable stress by the
joint efficiency before using the table value for flexibility calculations, thus
increasing the allowable stress. Note that post-1980 B31.3 codes DO NOT
include the longitudinal weld joint efficiencies in the stress tables.

10 -

The piping codes are unanimously silent on the point ofBourdon pressure effects.
If included, the pressure will cause some distortion of the piping system. If
excluded there will be no displacements due to pressure.

Il -

European piping codes for the most part are formulated differently than the D.S.
codes. The Europeans use an effective stress calculation and compare the results
directly to an allowable without emphasizing the concern for fatigue. The
Swedish piping code does have a provision that allows its users to employ the
ASME B31.1-1977 code providing the Swedish allowables are used.

12 -

Almost all piping codes allow the exact expression for pressure stress to be used
in place ofPdJ4t in the sustained stress calculations. The exact pressure stress
value is:

13 -

Most piping codes also allow the use of a increased section modulus for the stress
calculations at the branch end of a reduced intersection. The reduced section
modulus is calculated as:

z =Cp) Cr2) te
Where:

mean radius of the branch, in


lesser of tnh or i tnb, in

14 -

tnh

nominal wall thickness of header, in

tnb

nominal wall thickness ofbranch, in

Note that the B31.3 and related piping codes do not intensify the torsional stress
term in the expansion or sustained stress equations, while the power codes do.
This is considered an oversight on the part of the code as Markl's tests clearly
indicate that the torsional moment should he intensified. This was con:firmed
by the research documented in WRC 330.

1-58

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

15 -

Stress indices are used in ASME Section III, Class 1, 2 and 3 piping codes. There
are three different indices:
B

Related to gross plastic deformation (sustained stress intensification factor).

Gives the magnitude of the primary plus secondary stress range


(elastic shakedown stress intensification factor).

When used with C, gives the magnitude of the primary plus


secondary plus peak stress range (C*K is the fatigue stress
intensification factor).
There are three subscripts used with the stress indices:
1

Used for pressure loadings

Used for moment loadings

Thermal gradient loadings

As a rule ofthumb, 2i =C2 * K2, where i is the stress intensification factor for the

B31 codes (as discussed above).


16 -

In almost aIl cases, the cold modulus of elasticity and nominal dimensions are to
be used in the flexibility analysis of piping systems. Using the cold modulus
produces larger, and therefore more conservative stresses. BS 806 and ASME
Class 1 codes have provisions for using material properties in the hot condi tion.
NEMA SM23 also provides for using the hot modulus of elastici ty for evaluating
loads on turbine nozzles.

1.5.12 Evaluation of Multiple Expansion Range Cases


It is often the cases that the tempe rature ofthe piping system is not constant throughout the
operating cycle, or there is potentially more than one operating cycle (i.e., pump A on, pump
Bon, both pumps on, both pumps oro.

In these cases it is common to find that the tempe rature rises on sorne occasion to a maximum
value, say Te; then, as events occur during the normal course of operation the temperature
varies between Te and other lower temperature states, say Tl, T2, ... , Tn. In these cases the
piping codes have provided a simplified method by which the cumulative damage due to the
various thermal cycles may be evaluated by converting reduced thermal expansion cycles
into equivalent full temperature cycles. The user will find that cumulative damage rules
usually become important only either the number ofthermal variations is large, or when the
magnitude of the temperature variation is a large percentage of the maximum design
temperature expected. The following rules should be followed when evaluating systems with
multiple temperature variation cycles:

1-59

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Te should be selected as the highes t operating tem perature of the pi ping system,
even if the startup cycle does not go directly to this temperature.

The expansion allowable stress should be based on Te, i.e. SA should be calculated
from Sh for temperature Te.

The range dTe is determined as the difference between Te and the ambient
temperature. Ne should be estimated as the total number oftimes during the life
of the unit that the temperature will be expected to vary from ambient to Te.

The temperature ranges between Te and each of the other reduced temperature
states should be calculated, i.e.:

dTn

The number of cycles associated with each operating mode should be estimated
as:
Temperature change dTl occur Nl times,
Temperature change dT2 occur N2 times, ... ,
Temperature change dTn occurs Nn times

The total number of equivalent full temperature cycles that these partial cycles
represent can be calculated as:

The cyclic reduction factor f should be selected based upon the number of
equivalent cycles, N, while other components of SA and SE should be based upon
tempe rature Te.
Example:
A particular process line varies in temperature as the quality of the catalyst
varies. The particulars of the operation are outlined below:

Ambient = 700 F
Startup goes to 5600 F
It is estimated that the maximum temperature ever required will be 650 0 F and
the minimum temperature required during operation will be 430 oF. The
temperature will fluctuate between 560 0 F and 650 0 F perhaps 10 times per day,
and between 560 0 F and 450 0 F perhaps 5 times per day. The design life ofthe unit

1-60

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

is 12 years, and it is estimated that the unit will be shut down at least once each
month for maintenance.

Te should be selected as the highest operating temperature ofthe piping system.


In this case, it is equal to 650 0 F.

The range dTe is determined as the difference between 650 0 and the ambient
temperature of70 0 F, so dTe = 580 0 F. The estimate of Ne, the total number of
times that the temperature will be expected to vary through this range is:
Ne

= 1 shutdown/month X

12 months/yr X 12 yr

= 144

The temperature ranges between Te and each ofthe other reduced temperature
states are:

The number of cycles associated with each operating mode are:


NI = 10 times/day X 365 days/yr x 12 yr = 43800
N2 = 5 times/day x 365 days/yr x 12 yr = 21900

The total number of equivalent full temperature cycles is:


N = 144 + (90/580)5 x 43800 + (200/580)5 x 21900 = 255

The cyclic reduction factor fis selected based upon 255 cycles, so f =1. 0 (for fewer
than 7000 cycles). As noted, the material allowable stresses SA and Sh are based
upon 650 0 F, and the expansion stress, SE, is calculated for the system operating
at 650 0 F.
Warning: These cumulative damage rules don't fully address those cases where
one part of the piping system stays at Te while another part ofthe piping system
undergoes a temperature fluctuation. In these cases it is common to simply
analyze each case separately. The ASME Section III, Subsection NB (Nuclear
Class 1 Piping) Code provides rules which may he followed should the user be
concerned about the cumulative damage where different parts of the piping
system cycle through different temperature states. The requirements are
described below:

Cumulative Damage: If there are two or more types of stress cycles which produce
significant stresses, their cumulative effect shan be evaluated as stipulated in Steps 1
through 6 below:
1

Designate the specified number oftimes each type of stress cycle oftypes 1,2,3,
... , n, will be repeated during the life of the component as nI, n2, ng, ... , nn,
respectively. In determining nI> n2, ng ... , nn consideration shall be given to the

1-61

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

superposition of cycles of various origins which produce the greatest total


alternating stress range. For example, if one type of stress cycle produces 1000
cycles of a stress variation from zero to +60,000 psi and another type of stress
cycle produces 10,000 cycles ofa stress variation from zero to -50,000 psi, the two
cycles to be considered are shown below:
(a) Cycle type 1: nl=1000; and Sa1tl=(60000+50000)/2
(b) Cycle type 2, n2=9000; and Salt2=(50000+0)/2
2

For each type of stress cycle, determine the alternating stress intensity Salt,
which for our application is one half of the range between the expansion stress
cycles (as shown above). These alternating stress intensities are designated as
Saltl , Sa1t2, ... , Saltn.

On the applicable design fatigue curve fmd the permissible number of cycles for
each Salt computed. These are designated as NI, N2, ... , N n.

For each stress cycle calculate the usage factors VI, V2, ... , Vn, where VI = nl/
NI, V2 = n21N2, ... , V n = nnlNn
Calculate the cumulative usage factor V as V = VI + V2 + ... + Vn.

5
6

The cumulative usage factor shall not exceed 1.0.

1-62

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes


Section 2
Table of Contents

2.0

Piping Design For Loading Types ............................................................................. 1

2.1

Designing For Sustained Loads - Pressure ............................................................ 2


2.1.1 Minimum Wall Thickness Requirements ...................................................... 2
2.1.2 Pressure Design ofElbows and Miters .......................................................... 4
2.1.3 Pressure Design of Flanges and Blanks ........................................................ 5
2.1.4 Pressure Design of Branch Connections ....................................................... 6
2.1.5 Restraint ofUnbalanced Expansion Joint Pressure Loads ....................... 8-9

2.2

Designing For Sustained Loads - Weight ............................................................. 10


2.2.1

Calculation ofWeight Stresses .................................................................... 10

2.2.2 Use of Standard Weight Spans .................................................................... 13


2.2.3 Consideration of Nozzle Loads .................................................................... 19
2.3

Designing For Expansion Loads ............................................................................. 22


2.3.1 Magnitude of Thermal Load ........................................................................ 22
2.3.2 Guided Cantilever Method .......................................................................... 24
2.3.3 Refining the Model Through the Use ofRestraint Stiffnesses ................... 26
2.3.4 Use of Expansion Loops ............................................................................... 27
2.3.5 Simplified Expansion Stress Check ........................................................ 29-30
2.3.6 Stress Reduction through Use of Expansion Joints .................................... 30
2.3.7 Expansion Stress - Other Solutions ..................................................... 33-33

2.4

Ranger Design ....................................................................................................... 34


2.4.1 Variable Spring Ranger Design Basics ....................................................... 35
2.4.2 Load Variation ............................................................................................. 37
2.4.3 Ranger Selection Table ............................................................................... 37
2.4.4 Ranger Design Process - Restrained Weight, Free Thermal, and More .. 39
2.4.5 Restraint Placement Using Distance to First Rigid Criteria ..................... 40
2.4.6 Notes on Ranger Design .............................................................................. 43
2.4.7 CAESAR II Ranger Design Control and Options .................................. 45-49

2.5

Designing For Occasion al Loads (Static Equivalent of Dynamic Loads) ............... 50


2.5.1 Wind Loading ............................................................................................... 50
2.5.2 Earthquake Loading ............................................................................... 54-56
2.5.3

Quickly Applied Loads ................................................................................. 56

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.0 Piping Design For Loading Types


As described in Section 1.0, the pipe stress analyst is concerned with two types ofloadsprimary and secondary. Not only are the causes and the failure modes ofthese two loading
types quite different, but not surprisingly, the solutions to these two types ofloading are
usually different as weIl. In fact, the solution to a problem caused by one of the loading types
often causes a problem with the other loading type. Therefore, a compromise must often be
reached in order to find the solution to these two types ofloading.

Note that primary loads are usually classified further, according to their duration ofloading.
Those primary loads which are nearly always present throughout operation are called
sustained loads, while those which occur less frequently are called occasionalloads. The
methods ofresisting these two types ofloads are similar, with the main difference beingfound
in the use of a higher allowable stress for occasionalloads (as seen in Section 1).

2-1

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.1 Designing For Sustained Loads -

Pressure

AlI piping systems must be designed to withstand sustained loadings. Sustained loads are
classified as those caused by mechanical forces which are present throughout the normal
operation of the piping system. Therefore the se loads:

Are force driven, as opposed to displacement driven, and

Are present for relatively extended periods of time, as opposed to those which
change dynamically.

Typical sustained loads consist of:

Pressure -loads due to operating (or design) pressure,

Weight - uniform loads due to the weight ofthe pipe, fluid, and insulation, and
concentrated loads due to the weight of in-line components (such as valves,
flanges, etc.), and

Spring hanger pre-Ioads and other applied forces.

2.1.1 Minimum Wall Thickness Requirements


Since hoop pressure stresses are approximately twice as large as longitudinal pressure
stresses, pipe wall thicknesses are initially sized for hoop stresses. Because ofthis, pressure
design of components is usually done far before, and therefore in isolation, from the pipe
stress analysis phase of piping design. Because of this, pipe stress software such as
CAESAR II does not normally handle this part ofthe design effort. A discussion of pressure
design of components is included here for the sake of completeness, and is based upon an
amalgam of the requirements of various codes. Note that pressure design of piping
components must be done according to the requirements of the user's specifie
code, not to the rules described here!
Because the pipe wall is sized for the large hoop stress, this usually provides sufficient margin
between the allowable stress and the longitudinal pressure stress to accommodate the
weight stresses. The requirement for the minimum pipe component wall thickness is:

t +c

tm

minimum wall thickness, in

minimum wall thickness required for pressure, in

sum of allowances for thread or groove depth, corrosion, erosion, and


manufacturer's tolerance, in

tm
Where:

2-2

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

For thin wall (t < D/6), straight pipe under internaI pressure, t may normally he calculated,
through various approximations of Lame's equation, as:
t

PD 1 2(SE + PY), or:

PD 1 2SE, or:

=
=

(D/2) x (1 - [(SE - P) 1 (SE + P)]1/2), or:

P (Di + 2c) 1 [2(SE - P(l-Y)]

design pressure, psig

outside diameter, in

Di

inside diameter, in

basic allowable stress at design temperature, psi

casting or longitudinal weld quality factor (typically ranges from 0.8 to


1.0)

material coefficient, with a value (depending upon the specific code


requirements) to he interpolated from:

Where:

Temperature. oF
Material

<=900

950

1000

1050

1100

1150

1200

>1250

Ferriti c

0.4

0.5

0.7

0.7

0.7

0.7

0.7

0.7

Austenitic

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.5

0.7

0.7

0.7

Nickel All oys

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.5

0.7

Other ductil e

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

Cast iron

O.

Requirements for pressure design of other piping components are described in the following
sections. (For B31.3 y = 0.0, for B3l.l y =.4. The CAESAR II check uses 0.4 for ail codes
except B3l.3, where y = 0.0.)

2-3

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.1.2 Pressure Design of Elbows and Miters


When using elbows, the minimum wall thickness after bending shall not fall below that
calculated for straight pipe.
For mitered elbows, the maximum allowable pressure is calculated differently depending on
whether the angle of the miter cut is less than or greater than 22.5.
For 0 < 22.5 0 , the allowable maximum pressure is the lesser of:
Pm

[SE(T - C)/r2]

[(T - c) 1 (T - c + 0.643 tan 0 (r2(T-c1/2)]

or:

For 0 >= 22.5 0 , the allowable maximum pressure is:

[SE(T - C)/r2] x [(T - c) 1 (T - c + 1.25 tan 0 (r2(T-cI/2)]

Pm

maximum allowable internaI pressure for miter, psig

minimum pipe wall thickness, in

r2

mean pipe radius, in

RI

effective radius of miter bend (defined as the shortest distance from pipe
center line to the intersection of the planes of adjacent miter joints - see
Figure 2-1), in

angle of miter cut (see Figure 2-1), degrees

Pm
Where:

I - - H - - - R,,------i

Figure 2-1

2-4

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.1.3 Pressure Design of Flanges and Blanks


Pressure design offlanges is a complex task, requiring consideration ofthe configuration and
materials of the flange, bolts, and gasket. Potential causes of failure are bending stresses
in the flange, localized stress concentrations in the hub, yielding of the bolts, or unloading
of the gasket, causing leakage. Design offlanges is covered in detail in Section VIn of the
ASME Boiler an Pressure Vessel Code; however, due to the complexity, it is rarely done by
the pipe stress engineer. Instead, the most common piping codes endorse the use offlanges
conforming to recognized standards such as ANSI B16.5 "Pipe Flanges and Flanged
Fittings". This standard designates standard pressure classes of flanges, which are
recognized by the codes to be acceptable for the following combinations of pressure and
temperature:

Design Pressures (psig) for Flange Pressure Classes


Pressure Class
Temperature. oF 150

300

400

600

900

1500

100

275

720

960

1440

2160

3600

150

255

710

945

1420

2130

3550

200

240

700

930

1400

2100

3500

250

225

690

920

1380

2070

3450

300

210

680

910

1365

2050

3415

350

195

675

900

1350

2025

3375

400

180

665

890

1330

2000

3330

450

165

650

870

1305

1955

3255

500

150

625

835

1250

1875

3125

550

140

590

790

1180

1775

2955

600

130

555

740

1110

1660

2770

650

120

515

690

1030

1550

2580

700

110

470

635

940

1410

2350

750

100

425

575

850

1275

2125

800

92

365

490

730

1100

1830

850

82

300

400

600

900

1500

900

70

225

280

445

670

1115

950

55

155

220

310

465

770

1000

40

85

160

170

255

430

2-5

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

A more detailed discussion of flange analysis, with specific regard to determination of


leakage under load, is provided in Section 3 of these seminar notes.

Blanks are designed based upon formulas for the calculation ofbending stresses for plates
under pressure loading. The minimum thickness for a blank is calculated as:
tm

dg [3P / 16SE]1/2 + C

inside diameter of gasket for raised or flat face flanges, or gasket pitch
diameter for ring joint and fully retained gasketed flanges, in

Where:
dg

2.1.4 Pressure Design of Branch Connections


A pipe having a branch connection is weakened by the opening that is cut in it, so it may be
necessary to provide reinforcement to replace the metal removed from the wall thickness at
the opening. A typical fabricated tee is shown in Figure 2-2.

Limitlof

Nominollhickn...

M-_MiI__I I=__ -i-______ --:J~~t=-"-----.....


pipe

--r--

ornozzr.
Thicknes:ll. measured
specification

.1
i

- - - - - - - - - t Pipe

------

Figure 2-2
For fabricated tees, with the angle between branch and header of at least 450, the area
required to replace the area of the opening is calculated as:

2-6

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Where:
Al

area required to be replaced, in2

th

pressure design thickness ofheader pipe, in

dl

effective length of pipe wall removed from header at intersection, in

sm aller angle between axes ofbranch and run, degrees

This required area must he exceeded by the total available reinforcement area, or:

Where:
A2

area resulting from excess thickness ofheader pipe, in2

d2

half-width of reinforcement zone, in

(Tb - c) + (Th - c) + dl/2, but not less than dl

Th

minimum wall thickness ofheader, in

Tb

minimum wall thickness of branch, in

Ag

area resulting from excess thickness ofbranch pipe, in2

L4

height ofreinforcement zone outside ofheader, in

lesser of 2.5(Th - c) or 2.5(Tb - c) + Tr

tb

pressure design thickness ofbranch pipe, in

Tr

minimum thickness ofreinforcing ring or saddle, if any, in

area ofwelds and reinforcement provided for the intersection within the area
of reinforcement as defined as a parallelogram extending a distance of d2 on
either side of the centerline of the branch, and from the inner wall of the
header pipe to a distance ofL4 along the axis of the branch, measured from
the outside of the header pipe.

2-7

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.1.5 Restraint of Unbalanced Expansion Joint Pressure Loads


Pressure usually only creates stress in the pipe, rather than loadings on supports/restraints,
because pressure loads are neutralized at the cross-section by the tension in the pipe wall.
One exception to this is when the pipe is not continuous from anchor to anchor, such that
tension is not present in the pipe wall at aIl locations of the system. (Note that a second
exception occurs when the Bourdon effects of pressure are considered. The Bourdon effect
is due to the axial extension of pipes either under high pressure or in long runs, causing
displacements which must be absorbed by the piping system. Since this is a displacement
load, it is a secondary load, and therefore is not considered here.)
Tension in the pipe wall is not continuous when there are expansion joints or slip joints
present in the system. These types of components are too flexible in the axial direction to
transmit the pressure force, therefore the unbalanced pressure load must be handled by
either tie rods or external pipe restraints. The unbalanced pressure load is calculated as:
Fp

Ae

Fp

Pressure force, lb

Design pressure, psig

Ae

Effective area of expansion joint

De

Effective diameter of expansion joint, in

internaI diameter of pipe + depth of one corrugation, in

Where:

When using restraints to absorb the unbalanced pressure load, it is recommended that
guides be located on the adjacent pipe runs in order to reduce the danger ofbuckling. The
Expansion Joint Manufacturers Association recommends that the first guide be placed a
distance no further than 4 pipe diameters from the expansion joint, with the second guide
placed no further than 14 pipe diameters from the first.
Figure 2-3 shows some typical piping layouts using expansion joints.

2-8

COf\DE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

* O=Pipe
~-+--Vertical

....

0.0.

Support

/,f-----~-

/Pipe

Anchor

Expans~_11

Joint

--; C

~
Anchor

""
1st Guide

'-----~E

Ail Other Guides

Figure 2-3
More information on the use ofexpansion joints is foundin Section 2.3.6 and Section 3 ofthese
seminar notes.

2-9

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.2 Designing For Sustained Loads - Weight


2.2.1 Calculation of Weight Stresses
Stresses due to weight loads acting on a supported pipe can be estimated through the use
ofbeam theory. The simplest method of estimating pipe stresses due to weight is to first
consider the pipe as being a continuous run, with supports located at constant intervals (this
is a somewhat accurate model ofpiping traveling horizontally, mounted on racks, and with
a minimum ofin-line components):

l l
~e

l L

1 e--+-e~
Figure 2-4

Elementary beam theory can be used to determine stresses in a member due to loading on
that member. Normally the member considered is one-dimensional, homogenous with
respect to cross-sectional and material parameters, and restrained in a number of degreesof-freedom atone or bothends. This model can only be usedifthe effects examined are limited
totwo adjacent support points and the straightrunofpipebetweenthose support points. The
question is what beam stress equation should be used?
Bearn theory states that ifboth support points are pinned (free to rotate):

w
JJHHHHHBB BBUBBB!!.
Figure 2-5
The maximum moment in the beam is in the center of the span, and has a value of:

w1 2/8

Mmax

maximum moment in the beam, in-lb

uniform weight of pipe, fluid, insulation, etc., lb/in

length of beam, in

M max

where:

2-10

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Ifboth ends are fixed, or rigid (restrained against rotation):

~ 11/1II1Il!!!!Il III I!! 11111 Il ~


Figure 2-6
The maximum moment is at the ends ofthe span, and has a value of:

Mma

= w1 2/12

Which formula is more appropriate? Examining a typical pipe support detail:

Figure 2-7
The clamp/pin/rod hardware allows rotation of the pipe, therefore simulating a pinned
connection. However, if an spans are of identicallength and loading, the reaction of the
adjacent pipe span prevents rotation at the support, therefore simulating a fixed connection.
The true condition is somewhere in between, so a compromise approximation is reached:

Mmax = w1 2/10
with the location of the maxim um moment being somewhere between the ends and the center
(i.e., anywhere) on the span.

2-11

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Ofcourse, there sometimes are concentrated loads (valves, flanges, etc.)in the pi ping system.
The effect ofthese on the pipe stresses can he estimated as weil. For pinned connections:
p
lOI

"!"

C*J

LS.

1 ..

b----j
h

.1

Figure 2-8
The maximum moment is located at the point ofloading, and has a value of:

Pab!l

longer portion of span, in

shorter portion of span, in

Mmax
Where:

For fixed connections:

..-t-I-----

a -----t---

~I--------e------~

Figure 2-9
The maximum moment is located at the end nearer to the load, and has a value of:
Mmax

pa2b!l2

In either case (or actually some case in between), the additional stress (MIZ) due to
concentrated loads should be added to the stress from the uniform load in order to determine
the total stress in the pipe. Or, examining the formulas above, it is evident that, as the
shorter portion of the span (b) approaches zero length, the moment, and therefore the stress,
approach zero as weIl. This points to an important rule of design - if supports are placed
as near as possible to concentrated loads, the effect ofthese loads from a stress point ofview
may be neglected. (They must still be considered for the support loads, of course.)

2-12

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.2.2 Use of Standard Weight Spans


Implementation ofthe preceding analysis provides a simple way to design for weight loading.
The engineer may first support all concentrated loads in the system as closely as possible,
reducing the stresses due to those loads to near zero. Next, converting the formula
Mmax = w1 2/10 into its corollary:

(10 Z SalI / w)1/2

LalI

allowable pipe span for weight loading, in

section modulus of pipe, in3

SalI

approximate allowable stress ofpiping material for weight stresses (Sh, less
pressure stresses, divided by intensification factor, for example), psi

LalI
Where:

If the piping system is then supported, such that no straight span exceeds Lall, the engineer
can be sure that allowable weight stresses are not exceeded in the system, and no analysis
per se need be done.
In order to save even the brief time required to calculate LaU, the Manufacturer
Standardization Society of the Valve and Fitting Industry has calculated allowable
piping spans for various piping configurations, and published them in their standard MSS
SP-69 (Figure 2-10). They have calculated the maximum allowable piping weight spans
based upon the following criteria:
1

the pipe is assumed to have standard wall, with insulation,

the maximum moment is calculated as Mmax =wI 2/10,

no concentrated loads are present,

there are no changes of direction in the spans, which are assumed to run in the
horizontal plane,

the maximum allowable stress is assumed to be 1500 psi, combined bending and
shear,

maximum deflection of the span under load is limited to 0.1", and

stress intensification factors of components are not considered.

Due to the low allowable stress value used, there is sufficient factor of safety that this
standard span may he applied to a wide range of piping configurations.
If the engineer supports a piping system such that no span in the system exceeds the
standard spans listed in the table, it is virtually certain that the system is adequately
supported for weight loading. However, it is rare that a piping system has no concentrated

2-13

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

loads, consists of only horizontal runs with minimal changes in direction, etc. Therefore,
standard practice dictates that standard spans be applied subject to the following four
caveats:
1

Supports should be located as close as possible to concentrated weights. The


theoretically best location for a support is directly on the concentrated load;
however, this is usually impractical.

A developed length of 3/4 of the standard span or less should be used when the
piping run changes direction in the horizontal direction, in order to minimize
eccentric moments. The theoretically best location for a support is on an elbow;
however, this is not recommended due to the bend stiffening and increased local
stresses associated with attachments on a bend.

2-14

TABLE 3.

MAXIMUM HORIZONTAL PIPE HANGER AND SUPPORT SPACING


3:

~....

'"d

1
NOMINAL PIPE
OR
TUBESIZE

t\:)

.....
1

01

l'
~

.....

COPPERTUBE

WATER
SERVICE

VAI'OR
SERVICE

ft

ft

ft

ft

1/4

2.1

2.4

I.S

I.S

J/8

2.1

2.4

I.S

1.8

1/2

2.1

2.4

I.S

1.8

WATER
SERVICE

VAPOR
SERVICE

2.1

2.7

I.S

2.1

2.1

2.7

1.8

2.4

1 1/4

2.1

2.7

2.1

8
9

2.7

1 1/2
2

2.7

12

J.7

2.4

.10

3.0

10

3.0

\J

4.0

2.4

21/2

Il

J.4

14

4.3

2.7

J/4

STD WT STEEL PIPE

FIRE
OUCTILE
PRO
..ON
TECTION PAESSlIRE

::l!
or-

:~
tri

1":11:1

g;.a
as

i~

-tri

~~
ut

12

3.7

15

4.6

10

3.0

II
13
14

J 1/2

13

4.0

16

4.9

Il

3.4

15

4.6

14

4.3

17

5.2

12

3.7

16

4.9

16

4.9

19

5.8

13

4.0

18

5.5

~
r-

17

5.2

21

6.4

14

4.3

20

6.1

:!l

19

24

7.3

16

4.9

23

7.0

10

22

26

7.9

18

5.5

25

7.6

19

5.8

28

8.5

12

23

5.8
6.1
7.0

30

9.1

14

25

7.6

32

9.8

16

27

8.2

35

10.7

18

28

8.5

37

20

30

9.1

39

11.3
Il.9

24

32

9.8

42

12.8

30

33 10.1

44

13.4

3.4

6
psrlRoru

"t'I

~ooj.~t.I
zO~

1'1--

...

. ::1:

",

~
X

1ft
III",

>::
"'n

~z

~e
~S;
~~

'"III

i
~

zZO
......
...

. ::1:>

l'IX

III'"

>::
"'n
~z

>!i

Si

800j0

~I
00

"'0

j!g

ASBESTOS
CEMENT

ra

1ft

2:

CAST
IRON
SOIL

ra

4.J

:z:

Q~~ l''~;:'
goi
59
ozz:z:- 300jiC

4.0

ooj

>"t'I
n2:
::1: tri

Si!!3
r::~

~:s
2:;g

>g;
~Q

~~

>"t'I

... 0

~g

a~
trl

z
OC')
"1113
g

a~

ai!
2: tri

>'"

ilia

~a
1110

~n

~n

"'2

QG
~

"'2:

Qa

r-

'"III

=;;
a:
>

1ft

!ii
>

~
)III

tri

)III

rA
)III

;
!C

'"C
CJ

10

Il

GLASS

PLASTIC

FIBERGLASS
RJ:IN
FORCED

~OD

en ..,

l'I~

:IIIr-

~
0-

za:
->
!",X

'"

j
~

1=

1:lE
>
Z
c
~

"'~
triO

~i

~6
."lE

8~
Zl"

"'>
"'z
>c
ooj..,
c>
'i:!:l
c
)III

...

tri

)III

rA
:11:1

$q

rA
)III

{3
CI

!C

!'>

c)III

i~

i
~

:1
'"rA
)III

~~

-z
Oc
z_

)III

~
~

00
00

j....

:IIIr-

!!;::
'"III!C

r:n

1'10

ooj:!

(1)

00

r:n

(1)

>
zg
>

'"

10

."

'""II
i
~
0

C'2:)

>
~

. NOTE: (1) FOR SPACING SUPPORTS INCORl'ORATING TYPE 40 SHIELDS, SEE TABLE S.
(2) OOB NOT APPLY WHERE SPAN CALCULATIONS ARE MADE OR WHERE THERE ARE CONCENTRATED LOADS BE1WEEN SUPfORTS SUCH
AS FLANGB, VALVES, SPECIALTIES, ETC., OR CHANGES IN DIRECTION REQUiRING ADDmONAL SUPI'ORTS.

s.I:S

00

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The standard span doesn't applyon risers, since no moment (and thus no stress)
develops regardless of the riser length. The number and location of supports
should be determined by the location and strength of building steel. However,
it is preferable to locate supports above the center ofgravity oflong risers in order
to prevent toppling.

Support locations should be selected as close to building steel as possible in order


to simplify support configuration.

The steps involved in supporting a piping system for sustained loads can he illustrated with
an exam pIe. In Figure 2-11, the system consists of a 12" diameter, standard schedule steel
pipe filled wi th water, wi th a design pressure of 150 psi, and a design tem perature of 3500 F,
which runs hetween two equipment nozzles.
The engineer first must determine the standard span for the system. For 12" diameter, water
filled pipe, the standard span is shown in MSS SP-69 to he 23 feet. For changes of direction,
3/4 of this span is 17 feet-4 inches.
Next, the engineer locates supports. The first concern is to locate them near concentrated
loads - supports should he located as close as possible to the two valves (for example, near
node points 20 and 70). The first ofthese is optional, depending on whether the nozzle at
node point 10 is assumed to act as an anchor, and whether it is desirable to minimize the
nozzle loads on the equipment.
The next concern is the placement of supports on the riser. Assume that the capacity of the
building steel dictates that the weight of the riser be split hetween two supports. It is
recommended that one ofthese be placed above the center ofgravity ofthe riser (for example,
15 feet below the top of the riser).
Now supports can be located elsewhere in the system, starting at the nozzle at node point
10. A support was located near node point 20 earlier; we now want to locate the next one
downstream within the standard span. It is evident that pipe changes direction within 23
feet, so the developed length to the next support should be maintained as less than 17 feet4 inches. The next run ofpipe accommodates a full 23 foot run, so two supports can be located
between node points 30 and 40. The line of action ofthe supports on the riser provide support
to the end of the horizontal 30-40 run, so no additional support is required at node point 40.
Support locations can he continued to he selected in this manner until alilocations meet the
selection criteria; one solution is shown in the Figure 2-12.
Once completed, what does this accomplish? By using the standard span criteria, the
engineer can assume that the maximum stress in the piping system due to weight loading
does not exceed 1500 psi. Therefore, substituting this value for the weight component ofthe
stress equation:
Ssus

PA/Am + 1500 = 150(113.1)/14.58 + 1500 = 2664 psi < 20,000 psi

2-16

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

12" DIA - STD SCH PIPE


MAT'L - A106 GR B
FLUID - WATER
PRESSURE - 150 P~
TEMP - 350 DEGREES F
ELBOWS - LONG RADIUS
INSULATION - 2" CS
VALVES - 150# GATE VALVES (WT =826#)
NOZZLES (ANCHOR POINTS) @1 0 & 90
Sc = 20,000 PSI
Sh = 20,000 PSI
THERMAL CYCLES <7000

Figure 2-11
12" DIA - STD SCH PIPE
MAT'L - A106 GR B
FLUID - WATER
PRESSURE - 150 PSI
TEMP - 350 DEGREES F
ELBOWS - LONG RADIUS
INSULATION - 2" CS
VALVES - 150# GATE VALVES (WT=826#)
NOZZLES (ANCHOR POINTS) @10 & 90
Sc = 20,000 PSI
Sh = 20,000 PSI
THERMAL CYCLES <7000

PROPOSED
HANGER
LOCATION

Figure 2-12

2-17

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Piping sag is not a problem, since dis placement is limited to 0.1 inches.

Therefore the engineer has demonstrated that this piping system meets the
sustained stress criteria, without having to do any actual "work".
This can be confirmed by actually doing an analysis of the supported system. The results
in Figure 2-13 show that the maximum sustained stress actually calculated for the
configuration shown in Figure 2-12 by CAESAR n is 2418 psi, showing that the shortcut
analysis is reasonably accurate, yet conservative. The CAESAR n analysis also shows a
maximum vertical dis placement under weight of 0.0046", which is also conservative.

LICENSED TO: TETRACOM SERVICES


CAESAR II DISPLACEMENT REPORT
CASE 2 (SUS) W+P1
NODE
10
20
22
28
29
30
34
36
38
39
40
44
46
48
49
50
55
60
70
72
78
79
80
85
90

10/1 13269 Ver 3.18

PAGE:1

FILE:SUPT01
DATE:NOV 4.1992

- - - - -Transl ati ons (in. ) - -------Rotations(deg. ) - DX


DY
OZ
RX
RY
RZ
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0001
.0005
.0024
.0034
.0034
.0032
.0009
-.0014
-.0024
-.0024
-.0023
-.0015
-.0006
-.0005
-.0004
-.0001
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000

.0000
.0000
.0000
-.0040
-.0046
-.0039
.0000
.0000
-.0012
-.0008
-.0005
.0000
.0000
-.0005
-.0009
-.0016
.0000
-.0024
-.0010
.0000
-.0001
.0000
.0001
.0000
.0000

.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
-.0002
-.0009
-.0067
-.0073
-.0012
-.0004
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000

2-18

.0000
.0000
.0010
.0024
.0034
.0052
-.0065
.0075
.0004
.0030
.0027
.0013
-.0012
-.0032
-.0041
-.0017
-.0010
.0042
.0042
.0029
-.0003
.0007
.0004
.0004
.0000

.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
-.0001
-.0002
-.0003
-.0004
-.0004
-.0005
-.0005
-.0005
-.0005
-.0004
-.0004
-.0004
-.0004
-.0003
-.0003
-.0003
-.0002
-.0001
.0000
.0000
.0000

.0000
.0000
-.0017
-.0044
-.0031
-.0024
-.0022
-.0015
-.0012
-.0011
-.0010
-.0007
-.0004
-.0003
-.0002
-.0002
-.0001
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0003
-.0010
-.0012
.0000

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

LICENSED TO: TETRACOM SERVICES


CAESAR II
STRESS SUMMARY
CASE 2 (SUS) W+P1

10# 13269 Ver 3.18


FILE:SUPT01
DATE:NOV 4,1992

PAGE: 10

*****CODE STRESS CHECK PASSED


PIPING CODE: B31.3 (1990)
HIGHEST STRESSES: (lb./sq.in.)
CODE STRESS %:

2418.

@NODE

34

BENDING STRESS:

1255.

@NODE

34

54.

@NODE

22

AXIAL STRESS:

1300.

@NODE

46

3D MAX INTENSITY:

2631.

@NODE

22

TORSIONAL STRESS:

ALLOWABLE:

20000.

Figure 2-13
A further implication of this approach is that in order to eliminate a stress or deflection
problem due to weight loadings, the best solution is usually to reduce the unsupported span
of the piping- i.e., add more supports.

2.2.3 Consideration of Nozzle Loads


The previous discussion has primarily concerned the effect of supports on system stresses.
The engineer is also interested in determining loads on supports and nozzles, in order to
select the appropriate support hardware, to check the overloading of equipment, or to
calculate vessel stresses.
Areview of the restraint loads shows that the hanger loads are on the order of2000 to 3000
pounds. These loads would be used as an upper limitfor the selection ofthe support hardware
- for example, the rods, clamps, brackets, supporting steel, etc. must be capable ofresisting
these loads at a minimum.
A review of the weight load (Y-force) on the nozzle at node point 10 (see Figure 2-14) shows
a relatively small load, of only 237 pounds, which should be acceptable for most types of
equipment. However, closer inspection shows that the sign is positive, indicating that the
piping system is pushing up on the support, rather than down. This seems unnatural for a
gravity load, and in fact is due to the unbalanced elbow at node point 30 pivoting about the
hanger at node point 22. Therefore, even though the nozzle load is low, this is not an
optimally supported system.

2-19

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

LlCENSED TO: TETRACOM SERVICES


CAESAR II
RESTRAINT REPORT
CASE 2 (SUS) W+P1

lOf! 13269 Ver 3.18


FILE:SUPT01
DATE:NOV 4,1992

NODE

FX

FY

Forces(lb. )
Fl

10
22
34
36
44
46
55
72
85
90

O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.

237.
-2024.
-2300.
-2190.
-3014.
-3054.
-1606.
-2044.
-803.
-604.

-l.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
l.

--- Moments(ft.lb.)
MY
Ml

MX

-3.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.

397.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
3l.

o.

O.
O.
-3.

-100.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
ll10.

PAGE:

TYPE
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid

ANC
+Y
+Y
+Y
+Y
+Y
+Y
+Y
+Y
ANC

Figure 2-14
The system support can probably be improved by moving the hanger a bit closer to the elbow
to reduce pivoting - but how close is enough? Figure 2-15 shows the restraint loads for a
configuration with the restraint at node point 22 moved 2'0 closer to the elbow (i.e., 3'0 from
the end of the valve). The sign is now correct (indicating a reasonably balanced system), but
the load on the nozzle is now 495 pounds, larger than before. It is not certain that this is an
improvement.

lOf! 13269 Ver 3.18


FILE:SUPT01
DATE:NOV 4,1992

LlCENSED TO: TETRACOM SERVICES


CAESAR II
RESTRAINT REPORT
CASE 2 (SUS) W+P1

- - - - Forces(lb. )
NODE
10
22
34
36
44
46
55
72
85
90

FX
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.

FY
-495.
-1348.
-2224.
-2219.
-3005.
-3055.
-1606.
-2045.
-804.
-603.

Fl
-l.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
l.

----

MX
239.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
30.

MY
4.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
5.

Figure 2-15

220

PAGE:

- - Moments (ft. lb. ) - -

Ml
17l.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
ll09.

TYPE
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid

ANC
+Y
+Y
+Y
+Y
+Y
+Y
+Y
+Y
ANC

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

However, this exercise demonstrates that support and nozzle loads may be
tailored by adjusting the locations of the supports. The best location for the hanger
may be estimated by interpolating between the two results, in order to minimize the load
acting on the nozzle. This shows that the best (where ''best'' is defined as minimizing Ydirection weight force on the nozzle at node point 10) location for the hanger is:
d

1.0 - (3.0 - 1.0) x 2 x (237) / (-495 - 237)

distance ofhanger from valve, ft

= 1.648 ft = 1'-7-3/4"

Where:
d

Analyzed Case #1

237#

( 1" - 7 - 3/4" )

Location

Distance of Support
from Valve, Feet

--+-----+--......::.;0:--+------1
3.0

/
Interpolation Une

-495#

'1
Analyzed Case #1

Figure 2-16
Tuning nozzle loads may also be done by varying the support loads, rather than the support
locations. This is done by refusing to allow the system weigh t to settle on its own, but rather
by forcing weight unbalance at certain support locations. In this way, ifthe support at node
point 22 is underloaded, the system is less likely to push up on the support. For example,
if the support at node point 22 only takes -1725 pounds, the shortfall will be split up between
the nozzle at node point 10 and the support at node point 32, with the bulk ofthe shortfall
going to the nozzle, which is doser. This shortfall, of approximately -300 pounds, will reduce
the upward load at node point 10 by approximately 225 pounds (with the support at node
point 34 being reduced by the remaining 75 pounds), down to approximately zero pounds.
(Proof of this is left to the reader.)
The load at selected supports can be forced to be unbalanced through the use ofpre-Ioaded
springs (i.e., the loads are set to something other than the naturally distributed weight load),
thus influencing the resulting loads on the nozzles. This is most easily done by releasing
degrees-of-freedom at anchor points during the restrained weight phase ofhanger design,
as discussed in Section 2.4 of these seminar notes.

2-21

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.3 Designing For Expansion Loads


Note: It must always he remembered that the engineer must consider the RANGE
of expansion stresses (between the cold and hot conditions of the pipe, for
example) when considering expansion loadings. The absolute stress value is not
a particularly meaningful parameter when discussing expansion stresses, due to
the shakedown (self-springing) effect.
2.3.1 Magnitude of Thermal Load
A piping system, when heating up, normally tries to expand against its restraints, resulting
in internaI forces, moments and stresses:
p

Figure 2-17
The axial force generated in the above configuration can be estimated to be the axial force
required to compress the pipe back to its originallength after it has been allowed to grow
freely. Its free growth is:

Figure 2-18
A

cd

Where:
A

thermal axial extension ofunrestrained pipe, in

ex

linear thermal expansion of material from ambient to operating tempera


ture, in/in

length of pipe, in

2-22

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The axial force required to compress that growth is:

1~1 ..

e----.l-I

Figure 2-19
~

Pli AE

axial compression of pipe under load, in

compressive load on pipe, lb

cross-sectional area of pipe, in 2

modulus of elasticity ofpipe material, psi

Where:

Equating the deltas, the axial force can be estimated as:


00

PlIAE, or: P = AEa.

Considering a rather benign operation - a 12-inch diameter, standard wall pipe (A = 14.58
square inches, E = 29E6 psi) operating at 3500 F (a. = 1.88E-3 in/in) - the axialload is
calculated as:
P

= 14.58 x 29E6 x 1.88E-3 = 800,000 pounds

From the point ofview ofmost piping codes, there is no stress, since no moment is produced
in the axial run (although the codes do state that the possibility of buckling must be
considered); however, this is not a good design.
An alternate is no restraint at one end, allowing the pipe to grow unimpeded; therefore no
load develops. However this is not good design either, since the pipe must normally attach
to sorne relatively fixed piece of equipment, and cannot usually be floating in space.
What is the solution to this problem? It is necessary to have sorne restraint on the system,
but too much may cause excessive forces, moments, and stresses. Looking at the examples
above, allowing no movement produces a force of about 800,000 pounds. Allowing 100% of
the pipe's desired free movement causes no force. Interpolating, ifwe could devise a means
by which the piping system remained intact, yet allowed 99.8% of the pipe's desired free
movement, the developed force would be approximately:
(1.0 - 0.998) x 800,000 = 1600 pounds
This is a much more manageable situation.

2-23

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.3.2 Guided Cantilever Method


One proposed means of allowing nearly all of the pipe's free movement (while still holding
the system together) is to provide adjacent, perpendicular legs to absorb the thermal growth
through bending, as shown in Figure 2-20.

10 '-0

12" cp STD
Les @350F

10'-0

~
Cold

Hot

Figure 2-20

Each leg can he modeled as a guided cantilever. According to beam theory:


,i

Pl3 / 12EI = cd

P1I2

--r"""=-

P
~

PI ...... 3 /

= PI

Figure 2-21

2-24

12EI

= ex

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Solving for P: P

=12EI

d /13

= 6EI d /12
SE = 6EI d /12Z = 6ER d /12

Solving for M: M
Solving for SE:
Where:
l

moment ofinertia of pipe cross-section, in'

length of leg absorbing thermal growth, in

= section modulus of pipe cross-section, in3

I/R
R

outer radius of pipe, in

Note that the calculated expansion stress range SE is independent of the wall thickness of
the pipe (on a system-wide basis). Therefore, increasing (or decreasing) the pipe wall is
usually not an adequate solution to an expansion stress problem. This equation also points
out that the stress range decreases with the square of the length of the absorbing leg, so the
longer the leg absorbing the displacement, the lower the stress range.
For the configuration shown in Figure 2-20:
d

1.88E-3 x (10 x 12) = 0.23"

SE

6 x 29E6 x 6.375 x 0.23 / (10 x 12)2 = 17,700 psi

An expansion stress range of 17,700 psi is normally not a problem, however it must he

rememhered that this equation did not take into account the stress intensification factor
(SIF) at the elbow at the top of the leg. Considering an in-plane stress intensification factor
for a long radius hend oftypical SIF value of2.8, this would result in a stress range of about
49,600 psi, which is probably excessive for typicallow carbon steel applications. (Note that
this value is actually conservative, since the guided cantilever model does not take into
account the fact that thejunction ofthe two legs will rotate some under the load, and further
neglects the additional flexibility of the elbow.)
Against what do we compare the 49,600 psi stress range? We compare it against SA, which
is:
SA

f[1.25 (Sc + SH) - Sil, or, conservatively:

f(1.25 Sc + 0.25SH)

For a typicallow carbon steel (A106 Grade B, for instance) and a typical piping code (B31.3,
for instance), Sc and SH are both 20,000 psi, giving a conservative value for SA of30,000 psi
(the non-conservative value of SA cannot he calculated without knowing the sustained stress
S} at the point of interest).
The expansion stress range can he approximated for any run of pipe using the guided
cantilever equation shown above, as long as the displacements to be absorbed are known.
2-25

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.3.3 Refining the Madel Through the Use of Restraint Stiffnesses


What if the calculated expansion stress range is too high? How can we reduce it?
Consider the initial example, with the pipe fully anchored at its ends. What would happen
in reallife? The restraints would probably bend sorne under the enormous load, allowing
sorne piping expansion, which would then reduce the internalload (since expansion loads are
selflimiting). What happens if the bending of a support - i.e., its flexibility - is explicitly
considered in the analysis? (Normally a pipe stress program by default considers a restraint
to be "infinitely rigid". For exam pIe, CAESAR n's default restraint stiffness is in the range
of1E12 pounds per inch.)
If the restraint actually has a lateral stiffness of 10,000 pounds per inch (instead of1E12),
the thermal growth is partially absorbed by the pipe and partially absorbed by the restraint:

- - - t._.

due to
pipe leg

t::.
t::.

= PL~3/12EI

due to
support

+ P/10000

P = t::./(L~3/12EI + 1/10000)
M
t::. L/2(L~3/12EI + 1110000)
SE = t::. L/2(L~3/12EI + 1/1 oooo)/Z

)
Lateral Stiffness
of Support = 10000 lb/in

Figure 2-22

For a 12" diameter standard wall pipe, the calculation is as follows:


1

279.3 in4

Z = 43.8 in3

SE

0.23 x 120/ [2(1203 / (12 x 29E6 x 279.3) + 1110000) x 43.8]

2675 psi

2-26

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

This significantly reduces the stress range (from the previous value of 17,700 psi) - not
through any actual modification, but simply through a refinement of the model. From this
we can gain two insights:
1

It is sometimes a good idea to provide actual restraint (and nozzle) stiffnesses in


the model- the doser to reality the model becomes, the more accurate are the
results. Refinement of the model may save the cost ofmodifying piping systems
which initially appear to be over stressed.

If a system really is over stressed, a potential fix may be the introduction of


flexibility at the restraints, either by removing restraint or by providing less than
infinitely-rigid restraints (or gaps).

Restraint stiffnesses may he calculated through any means and then entered by hand, or
simulated in the piping model through the use ofstructural or pipingelements. Vessel nozzle
stiffnesses may be calculated manually using Welding Research Council Bulletin 297 or
sorne equivalent. Modeling ofrestraints using CAESAR II's structural modeler and use of
WRC Bulletin 297 are discussed in Section 3 of these course notes.

Note that it is best not to selectively enter flexibilities for some restraints and not
for others. This willresult in the inaccurate distribution ofloads, resultingin nonconservative results.

2.3.4 Use of Expansion Loops


In the event that model refinement is not sufficient to solve the problem (i.e., there is a real
problem, and notjust one on paper), something must be done. Re-examining the equation
for the guided cantilever model:

It is evident that the stress analyst cannot easily change the terms 6, E, R, or delta. This
leaves only l, the length of the leg absorbing the thermal growth. This can be done through
the addition of an expansion loop. In this case, the thermal growth is partially absorbed by
each of the legs running orthogonally to the thermal growth:

P(120)3/ 12EI + P(240)3 / 12EI

P (1203 + 2403) / 12EI

12EI Ll / (1203 + 2403)

SE

6ER LlI / (1203 + 2403)

Ll

2-27

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

/'>,
/'>,

=
=

P(120)~3/12EI + P(240)~3/12EI
P(120~3 + 240~3)/12EI

~10'-O

10'-0

10'-0

Figure 2-23
The expansion stress range in each ofthe legs is linearly proportional to the length ofthat
leg, so:
SEl

SE2

6 x 29E6 x 6.375 x 0.23 x 240/ (1203 + 2403 )

3937 psi

6 x 29E6 x 6.375 x 0.23 x 120/ (1203 + 2403 )

1918 psi

The stress range calculated in the longer leg is only 3937 psi (note that the maximum
expansion stress is found in the longest leg resisting the displacement), compared to 17,700
psi without the loop. Generically, the stress range in a legj, due to thermal expansion in a
direction perpendicular to that of leg j, is:

Where:
SEj

stress range in a legj Oegj must be orthogonal to the direction of the thermal
growth to be absorbed), psi

lj

length of leg j, in

li

length ofleg i (where leg i represents each leg helping to absorb the thermal
growth; normally, aIl legs running orthogonally to the thermal growth), in

Therefore, the calculated stress range should always decrease if expansion loops are added
in any direction perpendicular to a direction of thermal growth, since the denominator in the
expression for the expansion stress will increase.

2-28

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.3.5 Simplified Expansion Stress Check


The concept that addition ofexpansion loops reduces the expansion stress range in a system
is recognized by the B31.3 code (and others). This is codified in the requirement that
expansion analysis need not be explicitly done for a system meeting the following conditions:
1 -

the system is all of the same size, material, etc.,

2 -

the system has no branches, and consists of only a single run between two
anchors,

3 -

there are no intermediate restraint points (note that hangers are traditionally
excluded from consideration as restraints), and

4 -

D y / (L - U)2 < 0.03


Where:
D

pipe outer diameter, inches

y =

resultant thermal growth to he absorhed, inches

L =

totallength of piping, feet

straight line distance between anchors, feet

The term (L - U) represents the amount of extra pipe (i.e.,loops) in the system. Examination
of this equation reveals that, after factoring through constants, it is simply a form of the
guided cantilever stress equation:

This simplified check can be illustrated by applying it to the system shown in Figure 2-12.
It is clear that this system meets the first three criteria - the system is aIl of the same size,
material, etc.; the system has no branches, and consists of only a single run between two
anchors; and there are no intermediate restraint points except hangers. For the fourth
requirement:
D

12.75 in

[(11+12)x12x1.88E-3)2+(50x12x1.88E-3)2+45+33)x12x1.88E- 3)2]1/2
x-growth
y-growth
z-growth

2.154 in

11 + 45 + 50 + 33 + 12 = 151 ft

Dy / (L - U)2

= 12.75 x 2.154/ (151- 95.46)2 = 0.0089 <

2-29

0.03

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Therefore the system illustrated in Figure 2-12 need not he explicitly analyzed for expansion
stresses.
How accurate is this simplified expansion stress check? Based upon the ratio of 0.0089 to
0.03 = .2968, one can infer that this system is stressed to approximately 29.68% of its
allowable stress. Assuming a low carbon steel of type A106 Grade B or similar and fewer
than 7,000 expected cycles, the allowable stress ofthe system at 3500 F can be conservatively
estimated as:
f(1.25 Sc + 0.25SH) = 1.0(1.25 x 20,000 + 0.25 x 20,000) = 30,000 psi
This would imply that the maximum expansion stress in the system is somewhere in the
range of:
SEmax

0.2968 x 30,000 = 8903 psi

Figure 2-24 shows the actual maximum expansion stress found in this system through an
actual CAESAR II stress analysis - 9051 psi (within 1 %), which demonstrates the accuracy
(at least for this particular case) ofthis simplified method.

LICENSED TO: TETRACOM SERVICES


CAESAR II
STRESS SUMMARY
CASE 3 (EXP) D3(EXP)=D1-D2

ID# 13269 Ver 3.18


FILE:SUPT01
DATE:NOV 4,1992

PAGE: 10

**** CODE STRESS CHECK PASSED


PIPING CODE: B31.3 (1990)
HIGHEST STRESSES:

(lb./sq.in.)

CODE STRESS %:

90S!.

@NODE

48

BENDING STRESS:

90S!.

@NODE

48

90.

@NODE

50

330.

@NODE

46

9252.

@NODE

48

TORSIONAL STRESS:
AXIAL STRESS:
3D MAX INTENSITY:

ALLOWABLE:

48681.

Figure 2-24

2.3.6 Stress Reduction through Use of Expansion Joints


In extreme cases, expansion joints may be added to a system in order to increase flexibility
when there is insufficient room for a loop. Expansion joints resemble bellows and provide
very flexible pipe legs within very short leg lengths.

2-30

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Pipe
,-

\) Corrugations
expand and
contract

8ellows

Figure 2-25
Use of expansion joints is usually a last resort solution since expansion joints present
maintenance problems due to their fatigue failure mode. (lt should he noted that expansion
joints may on occasion actually offer an economical solution in extreme cases, such as when
the alternative is expansion loops ofvery large diameter pipe ofexpensive material such as
alloy or stainless steel.) Expansion joints also present problems due to the fact that they
cannot transmit tension through their wall. This problem is discussed in Section 2.1.5.
Since the failure mode of expansion joints is fatigue, the relative expansion displacements
hetween the start and end ofthe expansion joint must be checked against the manufacturer's
allowables. Note that the allowables provided will not he absolute values, but will be based
upon a specifie number of cyclic applications. The manufacturer must always provide a
fatigue curve or sorne other type of adjustment factor in order to determine the allowable
displacementforadifferentnumberofcycles. Forexample,amanufacturermayrequirethat
the allowables be divided by a factor based upon the numher of load cycles:

Factor

Cycles
1

0.49

200

0.56

1000

0.81

3000

1.00

15000

1.38

If the manufacturer provides allowable displacements in the axial, bending, and lateral
directions, aIl three movements should be evaluated using a linear interaction formula:
~act

}Cact

1ract

<= 1.0

2-31

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Where:
Xact

actual axial dis placement of expansion joint, in

eact

actual bending angle of expansion joint, degrees

Yact

actuallateral displacement of expansion joint, in

Xall

allowable axial dis placement of expansion joint, in

Sall

allowable bending angle of expansion joint, degrees

YaIl

allowable lateral displacement of expansion joint, in

Ablorption 01 Axial M_enl

AbIorption 01 Anguler Ralalion

Absorption 01 Laierai Movemenl

Figure 2-26

AbIorption 01 Multl-DilKtiona1

(Rnu"ant) Lateral Deflection

In the event that the manufacturer only provides allowable axial movements, the other two
displacements may he converted to equivalent axial displacements. In that case, the
following requirement must be met:
Xact + 0.00872665 De act + 3 DYact / 1 <= Xall

Where:
D

equivalent internal diameter of expansion joint, in

distance from inner edge of convolution to outer edge of convolution on


opposite side of expansion joint

flexible length of expansion joint, in

Expansion joints are especially weak in torsion, so this type ofloading should be kept to a
minimum.
Means of modeling various expansion joint configurations is discussed in Section 3 of this
document.

2-32

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.3.7 Expansion Stress -

Other Solutions

Often expansion stress problems are due to the use offittings with large stress intensification
factors (SIF). In these cases, it may be possible to upgrade fittings to those with lower SIF
values. For example, miters can be upgraded to bends, which can be further upgraded to
bends with longer radii of curvature. Unreinforced fabricated tees can be upgraded to
reinforced fabricated tees, which can be further upgraded to welding tees. Threaded pipe or
socket weld connections may be upgraded to butt welds. SIFs are discussed in more detail
in Section 1.3 ofthese seminar notes.
Modification ofthe restraint configuration may also solve expansion problems. For exam pIe,
in most cases, removing restraints increases flexibility, decreasing expansion loads. Limit

stops may be used to allow some movement, thus reducing internaI generation of expansion
loads. Strategically placed restraints can be used to force thermal growth from areas ofhigh
stress to are as of lower stress.

2-33

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.4 Hanger Design


As seen in Section 2.2, as more restraint is provided to a piping system, weight stresses
decrease. Conversely, Section 2.3 demonstrated that as restraint is remoyed from a system,
expansion stresses decrease. This contradiction must be resolved through some type of
compromise.

Likewise, in systems supported only with rigid supports, it is possible that the pipe might
lift off of some supports and lock up against others once it thermally expands. This is
demonstrated through a review of the restraint loads during the operating load case for the
system shown in Figure 2-12, which shows that the pipe lifted off of the supports at node
points 36, 44, and 72 (rendering them inactive) and had a partiallock up at node point 55,
overloading the support.

LICENSED TO: TETRACOM SERVICES


CAESAR II RESTRAINT REPORT
CASE 1 (OPE) W+T1+P1
NODE
10
22
34
36
44
46
55
72
85
90

FX
-22.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
22.

IDfl 13269 Ver 3.18


FI LE: SUPT01
DATE:NOV 4,1992

--- Forces(lb.)
FY
FZ
1074.
-3023.
-253I.
O.
O.
-4940.
-6238.
O.
-1143.
-602.

505.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
-505.

MX
676.
O.
O.

o.

O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
-18I.

-- Moments(ft.lb.)
MY
MZ
-4700.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.

o.

-5200.

325.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
1103.

PAGE:

TYPE
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid
Rigid

ANC
+Y
+Y
+Y

+Y
+Y
+Y
+Y
+Y
ANC

Figure 2-27
It would be preferable if the pipe could move to its new position and, at the same time, onto
its supports; or even, if the support could move with the pipe. One solution is a weight and
pulley assembly:

Figure 2-28

2-34

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The drawback to this is that the assembly is bulky, and requires restraint design for twice
the pipe load.
The mechanical implementation of this concept is the constant spring, or constant effort
support (Figure 2-29). This support has an internal pivot arm attached to a spring; as the
pipe moves up or down, the moment arm about the pivot and the spring force vary inversely,
creating a constant moment about the pivot, and therefore a constant force acting against
the pipe weight. The drawback of constant springs is that they are often too expensive for
the application; therefore they are usually used only when pipe movements are very large.

Figure 2-29
2.4.1 Variable Spring Hanger Design Basics
A less expensive alternative is a variable spring hanger, in which the spring load varies
somewhat as the pipe moves. From the analysis of the system shown in Figure 2-12 it was
evident that some change in the support loads as the pipe goes from the cold to the hot
condition is tolerable from a stress point ofview. The trick is to design the system with an
acceptable load range.
A variable spring hanger (Figure 2-30), pre-set to some load, provides support throughout
the range ofpipe movement; as noted above, there is some change in load as the pipe moves
from cold to hot position. As the pipe moves up, the load plate on the spring moves up,
allowing the spring to decompress, thus decreasing the load which the spring puts on the
pipe. As the pipe moves down, the load plate on the spring also moves down, further
compressing the spring, and thus increasing the load of the spring on the pipe.

2-35

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Figure 2-30
The objectives of spring hanger design are to choose a spring which:
1

will provide the weight support load necessary to balance the pi ping system after
the pipe has moved from its cold (installed to its hot (operating) position,

permits the total movement ofthe pipe from its cold to hot position, and

does not cause an excessive expansion stress range in the pipe as the spring load
ranges from its cold to hot load.

Since the variable spring hanger load changes as the pipe moves from its cold to its hot
position, and one objective of hanger design is usually to provide the weight support load
necessary to balance the piping system in its hot position, it is necessary to install the spring
with an unbalanced "cold load". This unbalanced load can be determined by:

CL

= HL + k L1 th

CL

cold load (unbalanced installation load of spring), lb

HL

hot load (desired target load to support balanced weight at spring location),
lb

spring constant of variable spring use d, lb/in

il th

travel, or expected thermal movement of pipe at spring location, going from


installation to operating, where up is positive, in

Where:

2-36

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.4.2 Load Variation


Under certain circumstances, specifications may recommend that the relative load change
be minimized, by limiting the Load Variation to aval ue such as 10% or 25%. Load Variation
is defined as:
Var

1 HL - CL 1 / HL = 1 k Ll th 1 / HL

Load Variation (ratio of 0.0 to 1.0)

Where:
Var

Since the hot load and thermal movement are dictated by the piping system configuration,
the variability of an individual spring can be controlled only by varying the spring rate. Most
manufacturers provide springs with three (or more) different spring rates per load size,
recommended for short-range (0 to 1/2 inch), mid-range (0.5 to 1 inch), long-range (1 to 2 inch)
displacements. Since all springs in a given load size support the same range ofloads over
their total travel, the spring rate (and therefore the variation) of a long range spring is
typically one-half ofthat of a mid-range spring, which in turn is one-halfthat of a short range
spring.
The use of a spring load variation criteria is normally a holdover from an earlier era, when
it was used as justification for not including spring stiffnesses in expansion loading cases.
If the spring stiffnesses are included in the analysis (as is normally the case with
CAESAR II), load variation criteria may probably be considered to be an unduly restrictive
requirement.

2.4.3 Hanger Selection Table


Springs are selected from a table such as that shown in Figure 2-31. This table shows the
load capacities within the workingranges of each spring size, and the spring constants of the
short-, mid-, and long-range spring series for each ofthe sizes. Knowing the hotload, thermal
movement, and variability requirement, the process in selecting a spring from the table is:
1 -

Calculate the maximum permissible spring rate as:


k max

Var HL / 1 Ll th 1

2 -

Determine the spring load size by finding the hot load in one ofthe columns of
the hanger selection table.

3 -

For that size spring, select the spring series with a spring rate less than or equal
to that calculated above.

4 -

Calculate the cold load (from CL = HL + k Ll th) and verify that the cold load also
falls within the working range ofthe spring.

5 -

Ifthis is not the case, then try again with a different spring series of the same
size, or a spring of an adjacent size.

2-37

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

This process may he illustrated by an example. Assume that the target hot load of a spring
is computed as 613 pounds, the computed expected travel from cold to hot positions at that
point is 1.5 inches up, the load variation limitation is 20%, and the spring manufacturer
provides the selection table shown in Figure 2-31:
1 -

The maximum permissible spring rate is:


k max = 0.20 x 613 /

1.5

= 82 lb/in

2 -

The hot load of 613 pounds is within the range of spring load size 7 (with a
recommended range from 392 to 672 pounds), as shown in the selection table.
Therefore, a spring of this size is a preliminary candidate for selection.

3 -

Looking at the bottom three lines of the column for size 7 shows that the only
springwith a stiffness helow the permissible springrate is the long-range spring,
with a stiffness of 56 lb/in.

4 -

For this spring, the Cold Load would be:


CL = 613 + 56 x 1.5 = 697 lb
This load is outside of the recommended range ofthe spring (but does fall within
the total range of336 to 728 pounds, which should really only be used in extreme
circumstances). Therefore, the size 7 spring should not be used.

5 -

It is now necessary to go through the calculation again, trying another spring.


The hot load of 613 pounds also fans within the range of a size 8 spring
(recommended range from 525 to 900 pounds), making this size also a candidate
for selection. Looking at the spring rates for the size 8 spring, again only a longrange spring has a stiffness (75 lb/in) below the permissible rate.

The Cold Load calculation is:


CL = 613 + 75 x 1.5

= 726 lb

This load is within the recommended range of the spring; therefore a long-range,
size 8 spring pre-set to a Cold Load of 726 pounds must be specified.

2-38

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

..........
Ag.

....
fig.

fig.

12 0

83 81 lOS 141
118 841011 147
118 .114 153
71 91 118 1511
0
74 96 123 185
7888 127 110
54 7'11 101 131 178
sa 81 lOS 138 182
v. sa 84 108 140 188
50 87 111 144 1114
81 88 115 149
83 112 118 153
\1085 115 122 158 '2
87 .7 125 182 217
et 100 128 1811
71 102 132 171
'1(073 105 135 175
74 108 138 178
78 110 142 184 247
78 113 146 1811
1
80 Il. 1411 1SC1
82 118 152 197 j284
84 121 155 201
88 123 159 208
114 118128 lez 210 282
811 129 1116 214
-111 131 1118 2111
.. 113 134 172 223
_ 95 137 176 228
43
44
48
48
50
52

"..

,....

21011

Il

"
450

10

"

12

13

14

15

1.

l i t 252 336
lIDO 780 1020 1350 1800 2400 3240 4IiOO
197 283 350 489 1!2!5 813 1083 14015 1875 2500 3375 4888
488 S!iO 845 110S 1483 l11!iO 2IlOO 31510 4875
501 875 878 1148 151. 2025 2700 31545 5083
525 700 1110 1190 1575 2100 2800 37110 5250
544 ~ 1M3 1233 1831 2175 2900 3915 S438
238 315 420 583 750 1/75 1275 1888 2250 3000 4050 5825
244 3211 434 581 77S 100811318 1744 2325 3100 4185 5813
252 338 448 IlOO 800 1040 1380 1800 2400 3200 4320 eooo
2eO 347 482 819 825 1073 1403 18511 2475 3300 4455 8188
288 357 478 838 850 1105 1445 1913 2550 3400 4580 lI37S
1_
1 _ 2825 3500 4725 11583
858 675 1138 '
1170 1530 2025 2700
2114 378
675
48eO 8750
278
3118
1203 1573 zoel 2775
291 138t 518
4885 l1li38
2991399 532 713 950 1235 11115 2138 2850 3800 5130 7125
3071410 548 731 975 1288 111S11 21114 2825 3900 5285 7313
315420 5110 750 1000 1300 1700 2250 3000 4000 5400 7500
323 431 574 719 1025 1333 1743 230S 3075 4100 55315 7888
331 441 5Il8 1B8 1050 13115 1785 2383 3150 4200 SII10 7875
339 452 802 aoe 1075 1311B 1828 2419 322S 4300 5805 11083
347482 B16 825 1100 1430 1670 2475
4400 5IMO B250
354 473 830 844 1125 1483 1913 2531
4500 11075 8438
3821.483 844 883 1150 1485 1956 2588 3450 4800 8210 81125
1988 2844 3525 4700 8345 8813
37014114 IISII 881 1175
3781 seM 872 900 1200 '5110 2040 2700 3IlOO 4900 84110 9000
388 515 688 1118 1225 15113 20113 2758 3875 4900 11815
3114 525 700 SCIa 1250 1825 2125 2813 3750 5000 8750 8375
402 536 714 966 1275 1868 21l1li 2l18li 3825 5100 688S 11S113
2210 21125 3900 5200 7020 9750
410548 728 875 1300

l30e

---..,In.

208 273 384


213 284 378
221 54 392
228 305 40S

=
=
~
12

...

_ _ 1iH

wMdng

;r:

::

,_ 1:
,_
8pItng _ _ -

.,88

17

:::
S!iOO
6750
1000
7250
7500
7750
l1OOO

1.

20

1/750
10000
10250
10500
10750
11000
11250
11500
11750
12000
12250
12500
12750
13000

22

1OS10 14'00 18750 25005


11053 14888 19631 28017
11496 15275 203'3 27089
1111C1B 15883 21094 28131
8320 12380 111450 21675 211173
12823
17038 226S6 30215
9SS2
l1li85 13265 17825 23438 31258
10317 13108 18213 24219 322118
IOSS0 14150 18800 25000 33340
101182
18388 25781 343112
11315 lS035 1l1li75 2eII3 35424
11847 15477 20583 27344
118110 15e20 21150 28125 37508
12312 1113e2 21738 281108 38549
12845 18805 22325 211888 385111
12977 17247 22e13 304et 4CMI33
13310 171110 23IiOO 31250 41875
13842 1.,32 24088 32031 42717
13975 18575 24e75 32813 43759
14307 111017
33!iIN 44801
14840 1lI4II0
34375 45843
141172 111802 28438 3151sa 48885
15305 20345 Z7025 3I5IICI8 47112e
1S1137 20787 27513 387111 4l1li88
151170 21230 28200 37500 50010
111302 21872 28788 38281 51052
Il1t13S 22115 29C!75 3lIOII3 52094
ll111t17 22567 2l1li83 38844 53136
17300 23000 305SO 40825 54178

7990
8322
886S
8t67

:: ,_

:=
::

21

fig.

fig.
0

V.

==

.... ....
0

1011

1011

'1(0

11011

114

21011

11o'l

Il

1'1(0

31011

lb. pel' ln.

30 42 54 70 114128 188 224 300 400 520 880 900 1200 1600 21110 3000 4000 5320 7080 Il4OO 12500 18670
15 21
7

10

27 35 47 63 84 112 150 200 260 340 450 800


13

17 23 31

800

1080 1500 2000 2880 3540 4100 tl250 6335

42 56 75 100 130 170 225 300 400 540 750 1000 1330 1710 2350 3125 4167

Figure 2-31

2.4.4 Hanger Design Process - Restrained Weight, Free Thermal, and More
The procedures described above assume that the hot load and thermal movement required
for spring selection are already known. How does the engineer calculate the hot loads and
thermal movements? The procedure for the entire hanger design process is as follows:
1 -

Pick out support locations using standard span criteria, and do a weight
analysis, assuming that there are rigid Y-restraints at each location. This
analysis is called the "restrained-weight" analysis. The weight loads distributed
to each of the restraint during this analysis are used as the hot loads during
spring selection.

2 -

Next, remove the restraints from the support locations, and do a thermal
expansion analysis. This analysis is called the "free-thermal" analysis. The
thermal movements at each of the support locations are used as the thermal
travels for selecting the springs. (Note that due to the technical effects of possible
non-linear effects in the system, CAESAR II performs not a true "free-thermal"
load case, but rather a load case called "operating for hanger travel", which
includes the effects of thermalloads, weight loads, and the spring hot loads
calculated in the restrained weight case. Since the piping weight loads and the
spring hot loads essentially cancel each other out, this effectively results in a
thermal only load case, but with non linear effects considered.)

2-39

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3 -

Using the hot loads calculated from the restrained-weight case and the travels
calculated from the free-thermal case, select a spring for each location from the
spring selection table as described above. Use the spring constant to determine
the required cold load (pre-set hanger load) for installation.

4 -

Alter the model to reflect the presence ofthe springs by adding ares traint at each
support location with a stiffness equal to the spring constant ofthe spring, and
by adding the pre-set spring load (cold load) as a force active during the sustained
load case. Then re-analyze allload cases in order to get the effects ofhaving the
actual springs present.

The four steps ofthis procedure (except the locating of the supports) are done automatically
by CAESAR II whenever the user designates a hanger (i.e., a candidate for spring hanger
design) in a piping system
2.4.5 Restraint Placement Using Distance ta First Rigid Criteria
If the above procedure is followed exactly, it is likely that almost all support locations will
show some vertical movement, and will therefore require springs. For economic reasons, it
is best to try to limit the number of springs by using rigid supports at locations with small
movements.

How can this be done? The analyst can potentially impose zero movement at points where
it is safe from an expansion stress point ofview; ifthere is no vertical pipe run between points
of zero growth, all supports along that run should have zero growth as well. For example:

-r---~i~n:1
)
Down
Three Supports
with No Uplift

)
Position
Four Supports
with Uplift

Figure 2-32
The question is where can rigid restraints be placed without causing expansion problems?
If the expansion displacement is known at a given point, the minimum distance to the first
rigid restraint can be calculated using the guided cantilever stress formula:
S

6ERA /1 2 , so:

Imin

(6ERd /

SaU)1/2

2-40

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Where:
lmin

= minimum distance to the first rigid restraint from a point ofknown vertical
dis placement, in

SalI

= an approximate allowable expansion stress value, based upon SR, Sc, f, any
intensification factors present, and the generallevel of expansion stresses
present in the system prior to addition of the rigid restraint (often a nominal
value such as 10,000 psi is used), psi

This can be illustrated by an example. In the system depicted in Figure 2-12, there are eight
hanger locations. If the procedure described in Section 2.4.4 is followed to the letter, there
will certainly be thermal growth at aIl ofthese locations, so eight springs will be selected.
In order to reduce this numher, sorne engineers impose a rigid displacement criteria - for
example, if the displacement at the hanger location is less than sorne value (such as 0.1
inches), they will select a rigid rod rather than a spring. (Note that this procedure is not foolproof, since using rigid rods at locations such as the tops of risers or near equipment nozzles
may cause lock-up or lift-off despite having "free-thermal" displacements ofless than 0.1
inches; therefore application of a procedure such as this must he reviewed carefully.) The
reader can confirm that re-running this problem with a rigid displacement criteria of 0.1
inches actually leads to a reduction in springs used, with only five selected.
The engineer can do better than that by pre-selecting potential hanger candidates through
the use of the distance-to-first-rigid criteria. AlI of the vertical thermal growth in this
problem is generated by the riser between node points 40 and 50; we can calculate that
growth as:
il = 50 x 12 x 1.88E-3 = 1.13 in

The engineer can direct part of this growth upward, to be absorbed by the horizontal portion
between node points 10 and 40, and the rest ofit downward to be absorbed by the horizontal
portion between node points 50 and 90, by requiring a rigid restraint at one ofthe hanger
locations on the riser. Which ofthese two hangers is a better candidate for a rigid support?
Since the expansion stress is inversely proportion al to the square of the lengths of the
resisting legs, it is logical to direct the greater part of the thermal growth upward, since a
quick check reveals that the spans from node point lOto 40 are longer than the spans between
node points 50 and 90. Therefore, the hanger at node point 46 should be selected as the rigid
support, and the other one (at node point 44) must be a spring. This will force a thermal
displacement of(35 /50) x 1.13 = 0.79 inches upward, and a displacement of(15 / 50) x 1.13
= 0.34 inches downward.
Looking at the portion of the system from node point 10 to 40, one first considers the hanger
located at node point 36. A rigid support may be placed here if the span from node point 36
to 40 is long enough to absorb the displacement of 0.79 inches, or, if the distance from node
point 36 to 40 is greater than the calculated distance to the first rigid, which is (using SalI
= 10,000 psi):
lmin

= (6ER il / SaIl )1/2= (6 x 29E6 x 6.375 x 0.79 / 10,000)1/2


= 296 in = 24'-8

2-41

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The distance between node points 36 and 40 is only 13 feet, which exceeds the calculated
distance to the first rigid, so the support at node point 36 must he a spring. Looking at the
next support point, at node point 34, the distance from the riser is 36 feet, exceeding the
allowable distance to the first rigid. This indicates that a rigid support may be placed at node
point 34 without causing undue expansion problems. Next, since the pipe is being restrained
vertically at node point 34, there are no imposed displacements at the nozzle at node point
10, and there are no risers hetween node points 10 and 34, alilocations between the nozzle
and the restraint will also have no vertical thermal growth. This me ans that a rigid support,
rather than a spring, may be used at node point 22 as weIl.
The lower part ofthe piping system must absorb only 0.34 inches. The minimum distance
to the first rigid required to absorb this dis placement is:
lmin

6ER il / Sall)1/2 = (6 x 29E6 x 6.375 x 0.34/10,000)1/2

194 in = 16'-2

The distance between the riser and the hanger location at node point 55 is 11'-4, which is
wi thin the minimum distance to the first rigid. Therefore, the support at this location should
he a spring. The distance from the riser to the support at node point 72 is 25 feet, which
exceeds the minimum distance criteria, and may therefore he a rigid support. This rigid
support holds the pipe to a zero vertical displacement, which when considered with the
anchor at node point 90, and the lack ofrisers in-hetween, means that the hanger at node
point 85 may also be a rigid support.
By pre-declaring these supports to he rigid supports, the engineer limits the number of
possible spring hanger candidates in this case to a maximum ofthree, a savings on hardware
heyond that achieved though use of the rigid rod displacement criteria method. It should be
noted that declaring that a support to he a rigid support does not mean that it must be
constructed as a two-way restraint; ifthere is no net uplift force, it may be built as a simple
rodhanger.

2-42

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

DISTANCE TO

20'-0

RIGID----r~

>16'-2~
\.\~Cl

\.\~l>.

DISTANCE TO FIRST RIGID

Figure 2-33

2.4.6 Notes on Hanger Design


1

In the event that a system which carries a fluid with a specific gravity less than
1.0 is to be hydro tested, the springs will generally have to remain pinned during
the hydro test. The hanger hardware (clamps, rods, etc.) and supporting
structure will have to he selected and/or designed to withstand the hydro test
loads, which will normally he the controlling design loads for these supports.

When specifying the spring hanger's Hot and Cold Loads, the anticipated weight
of additional hardware should be added to the loads calculated by CAESAR II,
especially if it is expected to he significant (such as in the case of large stock
clamps or a trapeze assembly made of structural steel). The spring must also
support the hardware, and if this is not considered when specifying the spring
parameters, the piping weight loading will he unbalanced by the weight of the
hardware.

Horizontal movement at hanger locations must he considered when designing a


support in order to assure that the pipe does not move 80 far that i t falls off of the
support. Additionally, support manufacturers typically limit the range of a
hanger rod's arc in to values such as 60, where the arc can be calculated as:
Arc

= Tan-! (horizontal movement / rod length)


2-43

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

In cases where the horizontal movement is especially large, it may be advisable


to install the support in an offset position to minimize the deviation of the line
of support action from vertical in both the cold and hot positions.
4

In systems where installation is difficult due to flange fit-up problems caused by


unbalanced cold loads, it may be preferable to adjust the springs in the field to
carry the hot load once the system has been started up. In cases where nozzle
operating loads are not critical, and fit-up problems are more of a concem,
CAESAR II can provide Cold Load Design, where the weight loads are balanced
in the cold, rather than the hot, condition.
CAESAR II provides the option of calculating both the "theoretical" and the
"actual" cold loads for springs. The theoretical cold load is the load to which the
spring should be preset prior to installation (usually this is done at the factory,
and the springis pinned tokeepitat this value). This is the load which the spring
will exert on the piping system in the cold condition, as long as there is no vertical
displacement ofthe system at this location. Since the cold load is almost always
unbalanced vs. the piping weight load, there will be a net load on the system at
this location in the cold condition. Ifthis net load is large, or the piping system
is very flexible, the system may displace under the load, leading to extension or
compression ofthe spring, and a corresponding change in the load plate reading.
The new readingofthe spring load is what CAESAR II calculates as the "actual"
cold load. Or more simply, the "theoretical" cold load is the cold load to be specified
in the factory order of the spring, while the "actual" cold load is an approximation
ofthe reading ofthe spring load after pulling the pins upon initial installation.
The actual installed load case is important if the springs are to be adjusted or
checked in the cold condition, or if the spring's cold load is being set in position,
rather than at the factory.

Excessive use of spring hangers may create a dynamically unstable (low natural
frequency) system due to lack of restraint stiffness. These systems have
essentially no horizontal support, and typically small vertical stiffnesses resisting movement in the Y direction. Note that constant effort spring supports have
no dynamic effect on a piping system.

Selected hanger locations may actually hold the pipe down during the restrained
weight case due to unbalanced parts ofthe system pivoting about other supports.
CAESAR II flags these with a warning during the analysis and reports them as
zero load constant effort supports in the hanger table during output. When this
occurs, the offending supports should be removed, or the support locations in the
vicinity should be reconsidered.

There are special provisions to consider when cold spring and hanger design exist
in the same job. Cold spring should be omitted from the restrained weight case,
and included in the operating load case for hanger travel. The actual installed
load case should be run with the cold spring in order to determine the installed
hanger settings in the presence of cold spring. It is the user's responsibility to
verify that the displacements during the actual installed case are still within the
manufacturer's recommended load range. Problems usually only arise when

2-44

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

there is significant cold spring in a vertical run of pipe in the vicinity of one or
more spring hangers.
9

In a liquid filled line, the springs may he installed when the system is empty. In
this case it is necessary to ignore the "actual" cold load, and in some cases it may
be preferable to adjust the springs in the field to carry the cold load once the
system has been filled.

2.4.7 CAESAR Il Hanger Design Control and Options


CAESAR II provides a number ofuser specified options for controlling its automatic hanger
design. The control options may, for the most part, be applied to the system globally, or at
specific locations. These options are fully descrihed in the CAESAR II U ser's Manual, but
are discussed to some extent here:
Actual cold load calculation - This is described in more detail above. The user should
specify Yes, if:
1

The spring installation load is to he adjusted with the pipe resting on the spring
and free to move vertically otherwise (i.e. there isn't a steel strap around the
spring base and the load flange, preventing movement of the load flange when
the spring is adjusted in the cold position).

The piping adjacent to the spring is very flexible and/or the stiffness ofthe spring
is very high.

Fluid fled systems are installed and set empty, and the user wishes to know the
empty installation load.

Use short range springs - CAESAR II's hanger design algorithm first tries to select for
an application a short range spring, followed by a mid-range, and then a long range, spring.
On some construction sites short range springs are considered specialty items, and are only
used where available spring installation clearance is small and where travel from cold to hot
is small. In these cases, the user may instruct the design algorithm to bypass consideration
of short range springs (and start with mid-range springs frrst) unless space limitations
require it.
Allowable Load Variation - As noted above, this is computed as:
Var = 1 CL - HL 1 / HL = 1 k A th 1 / HL
The maximum possible load variation inherent in recommended ranges of the spring tables
approaches 100% when the Hot Load is less than the Cold Load, and is approximately 50%
when the Hot Load is greater than the Cold Load. Typical values for the permissible load
variation range from 10% to 25%. A constant support may he forced at a location by
specifying a minuscule load variation requirement at that location.

Rigid Support Displacement Criteria - Where feasible, rigid supports are considered
preferable to springs supports, for reasons of economy (purchase, installation, and mainte-

2-45

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

nance) and vibration prevention. Therefore, if a rigid support can be chosen instead of a
spring at a location, the engineer will usually want this to occur.
One definition of a spring support is: "a restraint that supports a given load through some
thermal travel". If the thermal travel is zero, or very small, then it is hypothesized that a
rigid support can he used in place of the spring. This is indeed true providing that the
surrounding pipe is relatively flexible as compared to the rigid rod.
The extent to which rigid supports are chosen can be controlled by this criteria. At any
support location where the vertical displacement calculated during the operating load case
for hanger travel is less than the specified Rigid Support Displacement Criteria, a rigid rod
will be selected and used in subsequent load cases.
Note that this may not be desired at spring locations in the vicinity ofpumps or other rotating
equipment or on risers, since this may result in high nozzle loads or thermallockup/liftoff
of the support. It is best ifthis criteria is used in conjunction with some pre-design of support
locations, such as that discussed in Section 2.4.5 of these seminar notes.

Free AnchorslRestraints - Often a major objective ofhanger design is the minimization


of equipment nozzle loads due to weight. This is done by forcing an unbalanced hot load
(usually an overload) at the hanger location nearest to the equipment nozzle. This
unbalanced force pulls on the nozzle, thus relieving it of some of the weight that would
normally fall on it under a natural distribution - ideally, the hanger would be sufficiently
unbalanced to make the load on the equipment nozzle as close to zero as possible. In an
attempt to force this unbalance, anchors at equipment nozzles are often ''freed" during the
restrained weight case, forcing all of its weight to the hot load of the nearest support.
This technique should be used sparingly in those configurations where no hangers are
located within three pipe diameters or so in a horizontal direction from the nozzle being
released. It is also recommended that care be taken when releasing more than just the Ydirection force at a anchor/restraint, as release of additional degrees-of-freedom may cause
gross angular and vertical displacements, resulting in unrealistic hanger design loads.

Manufacturer's Tables - This entry is used to designate the manufacturer of the springs
(and thus the hanger table) to he used, as weIl as certain design criteria relating to selection
of the hangers within this table. The selection criteria include:
1 -

use of maximum (vs. recommended) load range,

2 -

centering of the spring in the table, and

3 -

cold load (vs. hot load) design.

Most hanger vendors provide hanger tables with two ranges defined: 1) a restricted, or
recommended load range, and 2) a maximum allowed load range. In order to provide margin
against analytical uncertainties, it is best to use the recommended range. The maximum
allowed load range may be used in certain situations, such as to permit the use of variable
support hangers instead of the more expensive constant effort support, or when an alreadyowned spring is to be used over a new one.

2-46

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

In cases where the expected analytical uncertaintyis especially high, maximum margin may
he provided by selecting the spring which most closely centers the loads in the hanger table.
Cold load design balances the weight loads in the cold, rather than the hot, condition. This
may he desired in those systems where installation is difficult due to flange fit-up problems
caused by unbalanced cold loads, and where nozzle operating loads are not critical.

Available Space - In certain cases, the distance between the top ofthe pipe and the steel
overhead; or between the bottom of the pipe and the foundation or platform below, govern
the type (and number) of springs which may he used at a specific location. This value may
be specified at individual hanger locations for use in spring selection. Figure 2-34 defines
the available space as used in the CAESAR II spring design.

Available clearance
for hanger. (Input
positive number
for hanger available
space.)

Available clearance
for cano (Input
negative number for
Cab available space.)

--1;.-

j
Figure 2-34

The available space option together with the "number of springs allowed" option lets the user
design multiple spring support systems.

2-47

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Number of Allowed Springs - Ifthere is physicaUy more than one spring can at a given
hanger location, that numher may be specified here. Likewise, the maximum number of
springs that the user will permit may be specified (in the event that CAESAR II has to split
the load in order to meet space criteria). In the case of multiple springs, CAESAR II will
split the load evenly among aU springs.
User Defined Operating Load - In some piping configurations the program selected
operating (or hot) load on the spring doesn't unload the equipment nozzle sufficiently to
satisfy manufacturers aUowables. In these situations the user can force a hot load (higher
or lower), overriding the program calculated value in an attempt to tune weight distribution
and bring the equipment loads within the allowables. The user's entry in this case should
normaUy be a variation of the value initially proposed by the program spring selection
algorithm. Before adjusting the operating load the user should determine if a preferable
course of action is freeing the problem nozzle during the restrained weight case (as discussed
above).
Old Hanger Redesign - In cases where part of a piping system is redesigned, it is
preferable that the hanger design algorithm re-select the existing springs in the system
wherever possible. Where they can be re-used, new load ranges may he identified for them,
and only a readjustment ofthe load flange in the field may be required. Where the existing
springs can't be used, new ones will be recommended. The Old Ranger Redesign capability
allows the user to do this.
Multiple Load Case Spring Hanger Design - This option is useful whenever the piping
system has multiple thermal states that are sufficiently different such that the results from
each thermal state should he considered when doing the spring hanger design. Figure 2-35
illustrates this idea:

Figure 2-35

2-48

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The hanger at "A" should he designed with the main pump running, and the hanger at "B"
should be designed with the backup pump running. Once the springs are designed for their
respective thermal cases they are inserted into the piping system and the various operating
conditions run to check for stress or equipment overloads.
The options available in CAESAR II for combining data from the various design load cases
are shown below:
1

Design per thermalload case 1

Design per thermalload case 2

Design per thermalload case 3

Design for maximum operating load


Design for maximum travel

5
6

Design for average load and average travel

Design for maximum load and maximum travel

2-49

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.5

Designing For Occasional Loads (Static Equivalent of Dynamic


Loads)

As noted earlier, piping systems must he designed to withstand primary and secondary
loadings. Sustained loads were discussed as beingthe most common types ofprimary loads.
There are additional requirements for the evaluation of occasionalloads, or primary loads
which are present for short time durations, typically 1% to 10% of the total operating time.
Failure criteria are typically the same for occasionalloads as for sustained loads, except that
creep failure is not a concern for occasionalloads. Because of this, the allowable levels for
the absolute sum of sustained and occasional stresses are the same as those for sustained
loads, but increased by a factor (typically 15% to 33%). For example, looking at the B31.1
equation for occasional stresses:

Slp + 0.75 i Ma/Z + 0.75 i MlIZ < k Sh


Where:

longitudinal pressure stress, psi

stress intensification factor

Ma

resultant moment on cross-section due to sustained loads, in-lb

section modulus of pipe cross-section, in3

Mb

resultant moment on cross-section due to occasionalloads, in-lb

occasional stress factor

1.2 for loads present less than 1% of time

1.15 for loads present less than 10% oftime

Basic allowable stress in hot condition

Slp

Sh

Typical of these types ofloads are wind loads, earthquake loads, and quickly applied loads
(reliefvalve, fluidhammer, etc.). These are dynamic (meaningthat they change as afunction
of time) loads, and are therefore discussed in greater detail in Sections 4 and 5 of these
seminar notes. However, the easiest (but less accurate), and therefore most common means
of analyzing dynamic loads is usually to model them as static (meaning that they are
constant throughout time) loads, with the magnitude increased to reflect the dynamic load
amplification.

2.5.1 Wind Loading


Wind loading is caused by the loss ofmomentum of the wind striking the projected area of
the pi ping system. The static linear force per foot generated by a steady-state, constant speed
wind load can be calculated as:
f

P eq * S

* D sine
2-50

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Where:
f

"pseudo static" wind force per length of pipe, lb/ft

P eq

equivalent wind pressure, psi

V2 /2g

densi ty of air, Ibm/ft3

0.0748Ibm/ft3 at 29.92 in Hg and 700 F

design velocity ofwind (usually the 100-year maximum wind speed), ft/sec

gravitational constant, 32.2 ft/sec 2

shape factor (or drag coefficient), based upon Reynolds number ofwind and
shape of structure; this typically varies between 0.5 and 0.7, with a value of
0.65 characteristic ofpiping elements, dimensionless

pipe diameter (including insulation), ft

angle oforientation between pipe and wind, where 0 0 represents the pipe axis
parallel to the wind direction

Since this represents the force associated with a steady-state flow of air, the calculated value
is often increased by a gusting factor in the range of 1.0 to 1.3 to account for dynamic effects.
The linear force per foot, f, is calculated for each end of the element and the average taken.
The average is assumed to apply as a uniform staticload over the entire length ofthe element.
ASCE #7 (formerly ANSI A58.1) modifies this concept slightly to consider facility importance, proximity of hurricanes, etc. Its formula for wind load is:

0.00256 Kz (1 V)2

Kz

Exposure coefficient, based upon height above ground level and congestion
oflocal terrain (varies from 0.12 for 0-15 feet height in city environment to
2.41 for 500 feet height in wide open terrain), dimensionless

importance factor, based upon importance of structure and proximity to


hurricane coast (varies from 0.95 for non-essential facility over 100 miles
from a hurricane to 1.11 for essential facility on the hurricane coast),
dimensionless

basicwindspeedCexcludingfrom theaverageabnormallyhigh windloading


events such as hurricanes or tornadoes), from ANSI A58.1 map (rangingfrom
70 to 110), milhr

Gt Cd D sin

Where:

2-51

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

gusting factor, based upon height above ground level and congestion oflocal
terrain (varies from 1.0 for 500 feet height in wide open terrain to 2.36 for 015 feet height in city environment), dimensionless

CAESAR II's ASCE #7 wind input screen requests a number ofparameters, from which the
coefficients of the equation above are determined.

ASCE #7 provides a map of basic wind speeds in the Continental United States. The
following is a crude summary of the map:

Region

Basic Wind Speed

California
Other West Coast Areas
Rocky Mountains
Great Plains
Non-Coastal Eastern U. S.
Gulf Coast
Florida - Carolinas
Mi ami
New England Coastal Areas

70 mph
80 mph
70 mph
80 mph
70 mph
100 mph
100 mph
110 mph
90 mph

ASCE #7 adjusts the importance factor according to the site's Distance from Hurricane
Ocean line. This typically translates into the distance from the east coast or the Gulf of
Mexico in the Continental U .S. Ifthe plant site is greater than 100 miles from either the east
or the gulfcoasts, then a value of 100 miles should be used (no credit may he taken for any
plant site greater than 100 miles from any ofthese hurricane prone areas).
The importance factor is further influenced by the Structural Classification, where the
options are:

CateQor.v

Description

Everything except the options below


Primary occupancy (greater than 100 people>
Essential facilities. i.e. hospitals
Failure represents low hazard

II
III
IV

The exposure coefficient and gusting factor are influenced by the terrain's Wind Exposure
type, where the options are:
1 -

Large city center

2 -

Urban and suburban

3 -

Open Terrain

4 -

Flat coastal areas


2-52

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Wind is a static, horizontal uniform load. Itmay act in any direction, and as such the engineer
has several items to consider:
How many directions should be analyzed for sensitivity to wind?

1
2

Should both positive and negative directions be evaluated?

Should sorne skewed direction be evaluated?

Do nonlinear supports (i.e. horizontal guides with gaps) and/or friction affect the
wind load?

Should the wind act on the piping system in the cold or hot condition?

The logic diagram shown in Figure 2-36 should serve as a guideline when setting up and
analyzing wind load cases to satisfy piping code requirements. (Note: The load cases shown
here only contain the basic analysis components. Other items such as imposed displacements, concentrated loads, etc. may need to he added to the load cases shown above for the
user's particular job.)
DOES THE PIPING SYSTEM
CONTAIN FRICTION,
1-D RESTRAINTS, AND/OR
GUIDES WITH GAPS?

YES

NO~
IS THE MOST SENSITIVE
WIND DIRECTION
OBVIOUS?

YES~
RUN: JOB1
1
(OPE)
2
(SUS)
(OCC)
3
4
(EXP)
5 (OCC)

T+P+W
P+W
WIND
Di - D2
S2+S3

RUN: JOB1
(OPE) T+P+W
2
(SUS) P+W
3
(OPE) T + P + W + WIND1
4
(OCC) D3 - Di
5 (EXP) Di - D2
6 (OCC) S4+S2

NO

RUN: JOB1
1
(OPE)
(SUS)
2
3
(OCC)
(EXP)
4
5 (OCC)

T+P+W
P+W
WINDX
Di - D2
S2+S3

JOB2
(SUS) P+W
2 (OCC) WINDZ
3 (OCC) Si +S2

JOB2 *
1 (OPE)
2
(SUS)
3
(OPE)
4
(EXP)
5 (OCC)

T+P+W
P+W
T + P + W + WIND 2
D3 - Di
S4+S2

*REPEAT THIS LOAD SET FOR ALL OTHER WIND DIRECTIONS (BOTH + AND -) OF CONCERN

Figure 2-36
For nonlinear systems an additional algebraic case may be required to extract the occasional
bending moments from the operating hending moments. In perfectly linear systems an
occasionalload case can he run alone, with this used for the stress component due to the

2-53

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

occasionalload. With nonlinear systems, the effect the occasionalload has on the system is
linked to the effect of the operating loads on the system. The algebraic load cases shown in
Figure 2-36 permits these two effects to be separated.

2.5.2 Earthquake Loading


Earthquakes may be analyzed using either dynamic or static methods. Dynamicearthquake
analyses, which will be covered in depth later, are not discussed here.
Static earthquake loads are determined and applied in a manner very similar to static wind
loads. The static loading magnitude is considered to be in direct proportion to the element's
weight. Earthquake load magnitudes are given in terms of the gravitational acceleration
constant, i.e. g's. If an earthquake is modeled as having a 0.5g load in the X direction, then
a force equal to one-half of the system's weight is applied to the pipe uniformly in the X
direction.
Earthquake static load cases are set up and determined exactly as they are for wind
occasional loads, i.e. by considering the same load case, non linearity, and directional
sensitivity logic. In some cases the client specifies the magnitude of the earthquake loading
in g's and the direction(s). In others, the analysis is left to the sole discretion of the engineer.
It is not unusual to see only X or X-y components ofan earthquake. It is not uncommon to
see Y only components, or X, Y and Z simultaneous components.
When not provided by the client, there are a number of sources for obtaining the seismic gfactors:

Response spectrum: If seismic response spectra are available for the piping system, then,
given the natural frequency of the lowest mode of vibration of a piping system, the analyst
can find a corresponding acceleration from one of the curves. Ifthis acceleration lies on the
right side of the peak, this acceleration may be conservatively used an overall g-factor. For
more information on seismic response spectra, refer to Sections 4 and 5 of these seminar
notes.
Building code: Building codes provide ways to calculate seismic g-factors, based upon
earthquake potential, structure type, and structure fundamental frequency. For example,
the Uniform Building Code and the BOCA Basic/National Building Code calculates:

ZKCT

static equivalent g-factor to use for seismic design, multiples of gravity

seismic coefficient based on earthquake zone, equal to 0.0 for Zone 0, 0.25 or
Zone 1, 0.5 for Zone 2, and 1.0 for Zone 3

structure type constant, ranging from 0.67 to 3.0, dimensionless

0.051T 1/3 , but not greater than 0.1

fundamental period (inverse of frequency) of structure, sec

g
Where:

2-54

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

ASCE #7: This standard calculates seismic g-factors in a manner similar to those of the
building codes, based upon earthquake potential, structure importance, structure type,
structure fundamental frequency, and soil parameters. The requirement is:

= ZIKCSW

Where:

= totallateral force or shear at the base, lb

= seismic zone coefficient:

Seismic Zone

Coefficient, Z

4
3

1
3/4
3/8
3/16
1/8

2
1
0

occupancy importance factor:

Category

Description

Everything except the options below

1.0

II

Primary occupancy -

III

Essential facilities, i . e. hospitals

1.5

IV

Failure represents low hazard

NIA

> 100 people

1. 25

= structure type constant from Table 24 of ANSI A58.1, ranging from 0.67 to
2.5 (use K=2.0 for structures other than buildings)

= 1/(15 Tl/2), not greater than 0.12

= fundamental period (inverse of frequency) of structure, sec

= soil type coefficient from Table 25 ofANSI A58.1, ranging from 1. 0 to 1.5 (note
that the product ofC and S neednot exceed the value 0.14, so this value should
he used as a conservative maximum).

= total dead load

The "g'" factor can be found be dividing both sides ofthis equation by W, so:
g

= V/W=ZIKCS

2-55

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

For piping, the generic equation for the maximum g-factor is:
g

Z (1.0) (2.0) (0.14)

and, for the various values of Z:

Seismic Zone

Product

g-load

(1)(1)(2)(0.14)

0.28

(3/4)(1)(2)(0.14)

0.21

(3/8)(1)(2)(0.14)

0.105

(3/16)(1)(2)(0.14)

0.0525

(1/8)(1)(2)(0.14)

0.035

2.5.3 Quickly Applied Loads


Loads that are applied near-instantaneously, and then remain constant for a reasonable
duration oftime, such as fluid hammer and relief valve loads, effectively are applied with a
DynamicLoadFactor(dynamicmultiplier)betweenO.Oand2.0. Thisisevidentbyassuming
the worst case - no damping and instantaneous application of a constant force - and
performing a time history analysis of the dynamic equation:
M x(t) + K x(t)

= F(t)

Equating energies (where the kinetic energy added to the mass is Fx( t), while the crumpling
energy of the spring is Kx(t)2/2):
Fx(t) = Kx(t)2/2, or Kx(t) = 2 F(t)
The term Kx(t) represents internally induced forces/moments within the system. The DLF
is the ratio of the induced forces to the applied forces, or K x( t)max / F( t), which in this case
has its maximum value of2.0. It is often highly conservative to apply twice the calculated
force as a static load, but this is still often done. As the load ram p-u p time (such as the opening
time of a relief valve) increases, or the load duration decreases (such as fluid hammer in a
short piping leg), the DLF will decrease as well. In order to take advantage of the "true"
(reduced) DLF, it is necessary to perform a dynamic analysis, such as a time history analysis
or a response spectrum analysis. In lieu of a dynamic analysis, the user can only estimate
a DLF, estimate the applied load, and apply a concentrated static force equal to the DLF
times the applied load to the piping system.

Fluid Hammer: It is not always so easy to calculate the applied loads. One method of
estimating fluid hammer loads is described in Crocker & King's Piping Handbook as:
F

= P c dv A /144g

2-56

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Where:
F

fluid hammer force (exclusive ofDLF), lb

density offluid, Ibm/ft3

62.4 for water

0.0003 for saturated steam at atmospheric pressure

1.85 for superheated steam at 10000 F and 1500 psig

speed of sound in a fluid, ft/sec

for liquid: 12 [g Ef / (1 + D Ef / tEp)]

approximately 3000-4000 ft/sec for water in typical pipe sizes

for gas: (kgRT) 1/2

approximately 2000-2500 ft/sec for steam in typical pipe sizes

acceleration gravity, ft/sec 2

Ef

bulk modulus of fluid, psi

approximately 300,000 psi for water and other fluids

inside diameter of pipe, in

wall thickness ofpipe, in

Ep

modulus of elasticity of pipe material, psi

ratio of specifie heats for gas, dimensionless

1.3 for steam, 1.24 for ethylene, 1.27 for natural gas

gas constant, ft-Ib/lbm-oR

85 for steam, 55.1 for ethylene, 79.1 for natural gas

temperature of gas, oR

dv

change in fluid velocity causing fluid hammer, ft/sec

internaI area of pipe, in2

Relief valves: Relief valves are used in piping to provide an outlet on those occasions when
pressure builds up beyond that desired for safe operation. When the pressure setting is

2-57

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

reached, the valve opens, allowing sufficient fluid to escape from the piping system to lower
the pressure. This discharge initiates ajetforce, which must be resisted by the piping system.
Valve opening time and duration of the jet load affect the dynamic response of the system,
thus affecting the developed loads.
Reliefvalve jet loads are normally provided by the valve manufacturer. Ifthis is not the case,
the loads can he estimated by a thorough thermodynamic analysis. This methodis discussed
in detail in Section 5 of these course notes.
In lieu of thermodynamic and dynamic analyses, the B31.1 code provides a means of
estimating the discharge force (as an equivalent static force) of a relief valve venting steam
to atmosphere. The force is estimated as such:

DLF (M V 1 g + P A)

static equivalent discharge force, lb

DLF

dynamic load factor (as calculated helow), dimensionless

mass flow rate from valve x 1.11 (factor of safety), Ibm/sec

fluid exit velocity, ft/sec

[(2gJ)(ho - a) 1 (2b - 1)]1/2

conversion constant, 778.16 ft-Ib/Btu

ho

stagnation enthalpy ofsteam, Btu/lbm

a,b

=. steam constants as per following table:

Where:

Steam conditi on

a (Btu/lbm)

b (dimensionless)

Wet, <90% quality

291

11

Saturated, >90% quality

823

4.33

Superheated

831

4.33

gravitational constant = 32.2 ft/sec 2

static pressure at discharge, psig

[M (b - 1) 1 A b ][ 2J (ho - a)/g(2b - 1) ]1/2 - Pa

2-58

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

internaI area of dis charge pipe, in2

Pa

atmospheric pressure = 14.7 psi


M, V, P, A
F

token at this
location

--

W =Weight of
entire assembly

Figure 2-37
The dynamic load factor (DLF) is used to account for the increased load caused by the sudden
application of the dis charge force. (Note that DLFs are discussed in great detail in Sections
4 and 5 ofthese seminar notes.) For the purposes ofthis estimate, the DLF varies between
1.1 and 2.0, depending upon the rigidity of the valve installation and the opening time ofthe
valve. If the piping system is relatively rigidly restrained, the DLF can he calculated by
fin ding the natural period ofvibration ofthe valve installation, treating it as a single degreeof-freedom oscillator:

0.1846 [ W H3 / g E 1]112

natural period of vibration, sec

weight of relief valve installation, lb

distance, run pipe to center of outlet pipe (see Figure 2-36), in

gravitational constant = 386.4 in/sec2

modulus of elasticity ofpipe material, psi

moment ofinertia ofinlet pipe, in4

T
Where:

Next, the ratio of the valve opening time, to, to the fundamental period of vibration of the
valve installation, T, should be found. This ratio is then used to determine the DLF from the
chart in Figure 2-37. (Note that in the event that the opening time is not known, a
conservative value of 2.0 for the DLF should be used.)

2-59

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2.2

2.0

1.8
u...

c5

1.6

1.4

1.2

0.1

r--- rl'- i'-

0.2

0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

2.0

4.0 6.0 8.0 10

Ratia af volve apening time ta periad af


vibration toiT

Figure 2-38

2-60

20

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes


Section 3
Table of Contents

3.0

Modeling And Analysis Of The Piping System .......................................................... 1

3.1

Computer Representation Of Basic Elements ........................................................... 2

3.2

Piping Configuration Modeling Techniques ............................................................. 19

3.3

Expansion Joint Modeling And Evaluation ............................................................. 20


3.3.1

Expansion Joint Stiffnesses .......................................................................... 20

3.3.2 Evaluation of Expansion Joint Allowable Movements ................................ 23


3.3.3 Use of the ERATE Program .......................................................................... 25
3.3.4 Modeling ofUnbalanced Pressure Force ...................................................... 28
3.3.5 Modeling ofTie Rods ...................................................................................... 35
3.3.6 Expansion Joint Assemblies .......................................................................... 35
3.4

Piping Nozzle Evaluation .......................................................................................... 43


3.4.1 Equipment Nozzle Load Analysis ................................................................. 43
3.4.1.1 NEMA SM23 Standard for Steam Turbines ................................. 44
3.4.1.2 API 610 Standard for CentrifugaI Pumps ..................................... 49
3.4.1.3 API 617 Standard for CentrifugaI Compressors ........................... 54
3.4.1.4 API 661 Standard for Air Cooled Heat Exchangers ...................... 54
3.4.1.5 HEl Standard for Closed Feedwater Heaters ............................... 57
3.4.2 Calculation ofVessel Stresses Due to Nozzle Loads .................................... 59
3.4.2.1 Calculation ofVessel Stresses Due to Nozzle Loads ..................... 60
3.4.2.2 Running a Sample WRC 107 Calculation ...................................... 65
3.4.2.3 Evaluating Vessel Stresses ............................................................. 75
3.4.2.4 Completing the Sample Calculation .................................. :........... 83
3.4.3

Estimation ofVessel Nozzle Flexibilities ...................................................... 84


3.4.3.1 Use ofWRC Bulletin 297 ................................................................ 86
3.4.3.2 Modeling Nozzles for Flexibility Calculations ............................... 92

3.5

Restraint Modeling .................................................................................................... 97


3.5.1 Restraint Types .............................................................................................. 97
3.5.1.1 Anchor .............................................................................................. 97
3.5.1.2 Restraint .......................................................................................... 98
3.5.1.3 Spring Hanger ................................................................................. 99
3.5.1.4 Hanger ........................................................................................... 100
3.5.1.5 Support .......................................................................................... 100

3.5.1.6 Snubber .......................................................................................... 101


3.5.1.7 Sway Brace .................................................................................... 103
3.5.2

Non-linear Effects ........................................................................................ 103


3.5.2.1 Friction ........................................................................................... 103
3.5.2.2 One-Way Restraints ...................................................................... 104
3.5.2.3 Gaps ............................................................................................... 104
3.5.2.4 Large Rotation Restraints: ........................................................... 105
3.5.2.5 Bi-linear Stiffnesses ...................................................................... 107

3.5.3 Evaluation of Restraint Stiffness ................................................................ 108


3.5.3.1 Use of the Structural Steel Modeler ............................................. 112
3.5.4 Use of CNODES When Modeling Restraints ............................................. 116
3.6

Miscellaneous Topics ............................................................................................... 118


3.6.1

Consideration ofCold Spring ...................................................................... 118

3.6.2

Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic Pipe .............................................................. 122

3.6.3 Underground Pipe ........................................................................................ 124


3.6.3.1 Modeling Soil Restraint ................................................................ 126
3.6.3.2 Automated Underground Piping Modeler .................................... 128
3.6.4 Jacketed Pipe ............................................................................................... 130
3.6.5 Flange Leakage Analysis ............................................................................ 132
3.6.5.1 Equivalent Pressure Calculation ................................................. 132
3.6.5.1 Flange Leakage Analysis Module ................................................ 133

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.0 Modeling And Analysis Of The Piping System


The first two sections ofthese seminar notes have served to give the user an overview of the
requirements of pipe stress analysis. This section presents the task on a detailed level,
presenting ideas for modeling of various piping configurations and explaining specific
analyses which may be performed to evaluate individual piping components.
Included in this section is information on the following subjects:
1

Computer representation ofbasic elements

Piping configuration modeling techniques

Expansion joint modeling and evaluation

Nozzle evaluation, including evaluation of equipment loads, determination of


nozzle/vessel stresses, and estimation of nozzle/vessel connection flexibilities

Piping restraints/structural modeling

Miscellaneous topics (coldspring, underground pipe, plastic pipe,jacketed pipe,


flange leakage analysis, etc.)

3-1

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.1 Computer Representation Of Basic Elements


Pipe stress analysis computer software algorithms are based upon certain assumptions.
These assumptions serve to make the computer model (and its corresponding analytical
results) only an approximation of reality. In many cases this approximation may be
sufficiently close to reality to fall within the tolerances, margins, and factors of safety of the
problem to be an adequate representation, while in other cases the user may find itnecessary
to refine the model through more detailedmodeling. This section describes the assumptions
used in the computer algorithms in order that the user may more fully understand the
limitations (and the potential work-arounds) of the system. The "stiffness method"
algorithm, which is used to perform the actual analysis done by CAESAR II and other
prominent pipe stress/structural computer programs is described in detail in Section 6 of
the se seminar notes.

o
@
~

Arbitrary Cross Section

Pipe Cross Section

Structural Cross Section

"Stick" Member

Figure 3-1
Piping basic elements are modeled as centerline, or "stick" members. These elements are
defined by two node points (one at the "from" end, and the other at the "to" end), each with
fixed spatial coordinates and six degrees of freedom (three translational and three rotational). The elements are further defmed by a constant (non-varying along the element
length) set of stiffness parameters (i.e., material and cross-sectional properties). Response
of the elements under load is governed according to recognized strength of material

3-2

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

relationships (as described in Section 6 ofthese notes), subject to certain limiting assumptions. These assumptions, described on the followingpages, govern the relationship between
the mathematical model in the computer and the actual pipe existing in the power plant or
refrnery.
AlI elements remain stable under load (local buckling of cross-sections is
ignored):

48" 00

0.375" Wall

Local Buckling of Cross Section

Section A-A

Figure 3-2

Plane sections remain plane:

Center of Bending

Figure 3-3
The computer algorithm assumes that points A and B (of Figure 3-3) always lie on the same
cross-sectional plane, whether in the deformed or the undeformed state.

3-3

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

:~

0
F

L'

Figure 3-4
In reality, the moment F x L (in Figure 3-4) does not produce a uniform "plane-

sections-rem ain-plane" bending load at the cross-section A-B, since it causes


local warping.
3

Hooke's Law is applicable across all fibers of the cross-section:

Compressive Normal Stress

"---.. Tensile
Normal
Uniform Bending Stress

Pipe Shoe W/Saddle

(Normal stresses very


linearly from the neutral
axis)

Saddle inhibits uniform bending and


extension along ail fibers at the cross
section.

Figure 3-5
4

Hooke's Law is applicable throughout the entire load range:

Stress Distribution
Remains Unear

... Not Plastic

Figure 3-6

3-4

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

5 -

Moments and forces applied to the beam are assumed to act about the neutral
axis:

Should not be
modeled as:
(Unless the F * L
moment can be
assumed negligible)

Figure 3-7
6

Element cross-sections do not ovalize under load (except as adjusted for bend
elements):

-0-

~CTLA-A

This ovalization will make the pipe more flexible,


i.e. the pipe will bend easier. Ovalization of this
type for straight pipes is not considered.

Figure 3-8

The stresses at the ovalized section are intensified due to:


1
2

reduction in section modulus, and


-

added local plate bending in the top and bottom fibers.

3-5

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Applied loads are not affected by the deformed state of the structure (P-delta
effect):

Np

6. =

F - -..-

0.25 in

1000 lb

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Figure 3-9
In reality, there will be an addition al moment applied to the system, equal to the
load times its displaced distance from the neutral axis ofthe structure (i.e., 1000
pounds x 0.25 inches = 250 in-lb). The computer software models this load as
strictly a force with no applied moment.
8

Rotational deformations of the system are assumed to be small:

Sterling
From
y

Sequentiel 90 Rotetions About Z, Y, end X-Axes


About Y
About X
About Z
y

,~, ,~, /~, /~,


Sterling
From
y

Sequentiel 90 Rotetions About Y, X, end Z-Axes


About Y

About X

About Z
y

,~, /~, /~, ,~,


Figure 3-10

3-6

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Node point rotations are added vectorially by the computer software. This is not
a valid representation of reality for large rotations, as demonstrated in Figure
3-10 for three 900 rotations.
9

Boundary conditions are assumed to respond in a linear fashion:

Non-Linear
Restraint Response
Different for Up and
Down Loads (OneWay Restraint)

Linear
Restraint Response
Constant Throughout
Load Range

Figure 3-11
The stiffness algorithm cannot solve for non-linear restraint conditions, such as
one-directional restraints, bi-linear restraints (soil or bottomed out springs),
friction, etc. However, CAESAR II does include a procedure which overcomes
this limitation; see point 8 below.
These limitations are of the most concern when modeling the following situations (pointers
for increasing accuracy in each situation are also given):
Large Diameter/thin wallpipingorducts: In thiscase,itisadvisabletominimize
localized loadings by distributing them with pads or saddles, or do plate buckling
analysis (preferably with finite element software) when the loads cannot be
altered.

Localized stress conditions not explicitly covered by an SIF, i.e. a saddle: The
portion of the pipe impacted by the saddle may be modeled as a rigid element,
while saddle/piping local stresses may be estimated through the use of finite
element analysis or through the use ofWelding Research Council Bulletins, such
as 107 and 198.
Pipe connections to thin walled vessels: The flexibility of the connection may be
modeled by a flexible element (such as that generated using Welding Research
Council Bulletin 297), while stresses in the pipe and vessel may be estimated
through the use offinite element analysis orthrough the use ofWel ding Research
Council Bulletins 107 and 297.

Highly corrosive systems (especially when subjected to cyclic loadings): Corrosion of a pipe results in an irregular cross-section which is usually modeled by
using the uncorroded cross-section for load generation (weight and thermal
forces), and the fully corroded cross- section for calculation ofthe section modul us

3-7

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

(stress calculation). Corrosion is much more dangerous under fatigue loadings


due to the fact that it provides many more opportunities for crack initiation; in
order to compensate, a low cyclic reduction factor should be used to match the
allowable expansion stress range to the fatigue curve for a highly corroded
material.
5

Elbows: Elbows ovalize significantly when subjected to bending loads. This can
be accounted for by increasing the flexibility ofthe elbow element in the computer
model and multiplying the calculated stress by a stress intensification factor
(this is done automatically by most programs such as CAESAR II). Code defined
"flexibility factors" for bends have been determined theoretically and verified
experimentally.

t--_~dline

= "\

Flange .A" 1

r - rnean raJ

p:l

th: r

(From BS 806-1975)

~tion

cross

Figure 3-12
The flexibility and stress intensification factors of bends must be reviewed in
those cases where ovalization is inhibited (such as when the elbow is stiffened
by flanges or welded attachments). The piping codes provide correction factors
for bends with one or two flanges, but omit geometries such as shown in Figure
3-13.

(A)

(8)

(C)

Figure 3-13
These attachments almost certainly affect the flexibility, and more importantly,
the stress intensification factors for the bends. The factors for heavily stiffened
bends, such as that shown in Figure 3-13(A), could he estimated using finite
element analysis, or stiffness could he increased by modeling the elbows as

3-8

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

flanged, or simply as straight pieces ofpipe (with increased stress intensification


factors applied). In less pronounced cases such as those shown in Figures 3-13
(B) and (C), deviations from the response of an unstiffened bend is usually
ignored.
6

Loadings which produce stresses which are weIl outside of the code allowable
ranges: These loads will tend to produce stresses weIl beyond the material yield
stress, stresses in the buckling range, large dis placements resulting in significant P-delta loads, or large rotations Oeading to inaccurate results). This limits
programs such as CAESAR II as accurate analysis tools throughout the full
range of potential loadings. However accuracy is not affected for those loads
which are ofmost interest to the engineer- code allowables are based upon the
fact that the analysis being done assumes linear material response.

Non-linear boundary conditions: The effects of non-linear restraints must be


simulated through an iterative process aimed at convergence of the non-linear
restraints inlegitimate states-forexample, with the pipe liftedoffataone-way
support (and with the support function removed from the analysis), or with the
pipe sliding along a frictional restraint (and with an appropriate force applied
along that line of action in the analysis). This process is activated (during static
analysis) automatically when a non-linear effect is detected by CAESAR II.

Non-homogenous elements: As noted, piping elements are modeled as stick


elements ofconstant cross-section and material properties. In certain cases, such
as with reducers, which have a variable cross-section, this is not a valid
representation. An element such as this is usually modeled as a single, or as a
series of elements, each having average parameters. For example, a l2x8
standard wall reducer may be modeled as a 10-inch standard wall pipe Capproximately the average of the inlet and outlet pipes), or as two segments, with outer
diameters and wall thicknesses interpolated hetween the two. When using those
codes which define a stress intensification factor for reducers, one would have to
he calculated and specifically applied at that location.

Rigid elements: Rigid elements, such as valves and flanges are most difficult to
model due to the inability to represent their geometry, and their stress distribution with stick elements. Therefore, pipe stress software cannot be used to
accurately determine the effects ofthe piping system on rigid elements. Analysis
of these components is best left to fmite element analysis, test, or other
recognized methods. However, the effects of the rigid elements on the piping
system can he simulated by providing an element ofhigh relative stiffness in the
model (it is always more important to adequately model relative stiffnesses than
absolute stiffnesses when constructing a model). This is done by providing an
element with sufficiently large cross-section, and having the defined weight of
the rigid item. In CAESAR II, a rigid element is modeled as having:
a) aninsulationfactorof1.75Ccompared tothematchingpipe), unless a zero
weight rigid Ca modeling construct)
b) fluid weight of the matching pipe added, unless a zero weight rigid
c) the same inside diameter and 10 times the wall thickness ofthe matching
pipe
3-9

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.2 Piping Configuration Modeling Techniques


Piping may he modeled in varying detail, depending upon how much accuracy is required.
This section looks at the various ways (providing corresponding degrees ofaccuracy) in which
sample piping configurations might he modeled.
Consider the following geometry, of a large diameter pipe supported hy a dual spring
assemhly:

J
1\

Vl
L

50" diameter

1/2" wall
-.J ____
_
4 trunnion support
shown. (Typ. both sides)

Figure 314

Simplest Method:

50" diameter pipe


Flexible Restraint
K
at centerline
K =2 Kspring

Figure 315
Limitations:
1

local stress calculations not considered for 50" pipe

stiffness of trunnions not considered

torsional resistance due to the restraint pair is not considered (see Figure 3-16)

local flexihility of the shell of the 50" pipe is not considered

3-10

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Figure3-1G
More Accurate:

Rigid element - zero weight


Kspring

Kspring

Figure 3-17
Limitations:
1

local stress calculations not considered for 50" pipe

stiffness of trunnions not considered

local flexibility of the shell of the 50" pipe is not considered

Most Accurate:

Ksheillocal (WRC 297)

Kshell local (WRC 297)

~-------il,...------____

Pipe element

/ 'modeling trunion
Kspring

Rigid element - zero weight


Length = 1/2 00

Figure 3-18

3-11

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Limitations:
1

local flexibilities and stresses only as close as WRC 297 and WRC 107 bulletins
(see discussion in this Section 3.4 of these seminar notes)

Looking at another configuration, a he avy-wall forged WYE fitting:

Figure 3-19

Simplest Model:

Incoming pipe with branch


properties coded to intersection

~point.
Apply SIF's forwelding tee here.
Incoming pipe with header~
properties coded to ~ intersection point.

Figure 3-20
Limitations:
1

weight offorged fitting probably underestimated considerably

rigidity of forged fitting probably underestimated considerably

stress intensification factors may be too conservative

3-12

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

More Accurate:

Rigid elements whose


cumulative weights
equal that ot the torged
titting and tlanges.

Figure 3-21

Limitations:
1

no provision for stress calculations in forging, but this isn't usually a problem,
because ofthe extra heavy wall of the fitting would ensure that the connecting
pipe would probably fail first. Any questions regarding load capacity should
probably be directed to the fitting manufacturer

Most Accurate:

Rigid element
modeling tlange.

Figure 3-22

3-13

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Comments:
1
2
3

the flexibility ofthis model will he more accurate (but only marginally so for a
heavy fitting)
-

stresses (unintensified) will be computed at the crotch; however, there will be


sorne unknown intensification factor existing at the crotch
this model probably does not yield any significant im provement overthe previous
one

One of the most common types ofpipe support is shown in Figure 3-23:

6" dia. std. wall


stanchion

Figure 3-23

Simplest Model:

V" direction restraint applied


at the bend point shown.

Figure 3-24

3-14

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Limitations:
1

flexibility of the stanchion is not included in the model

the point of application of the stanchion is not at the correct location on the bend
curvature

pipe may lift off of (or lock up with) modeled support due to thermal expansion
between centerline of horizontal run and point of application on riser

stiffening effect on bend of stanchion not considered

local stresses at stanchion not considered

More Accurate:

~ Pipe between

nodes Cand D
with properties of
stanchion

Figure 3-25

Limitations:
1

stanchion doesn't act at the proper point on the bend curvature

stiffening effect on bend of stanchion not considered

local stresses at stanchion not considered

3-15

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Most Accurate:

41.4 deg. For Long Radius Bend


48.2 deg. For Short Radius Bend

R(1 - cosa )--....-4

L
LL U1'
-SiOO}

el

Use WRC107 To Calculate


Local Stresses

Aa

Ct

:'-------

Pipe Element Between


Points "B" and C".
Restraint at Stanchion Node "C"

Figure 3-26
Limitations:
1

points A and B aren't exactly at the same location (this can be resolved using
CAESAR n's "OFFSETS" feature, but other pipe stress software may have a
difficult time with this)

modeling the stiffening effect of the stanchion on the bend through the use of a
single flange bend is an approximate solution

local stresses at the stanchion are only as accurate as WRC 107 bulletin

A few configurations which illustrate solutions to potentially tricky modeling situations


follow below:
The distance L in Figure 3-27 may become important if the gap on the guide closes and there
is a horizontal restraint force which will cause a torsional moment to exist in both members.

3-16

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Centerline of the pipe "stick" model

L
Centerline of the structural 'stick" model

Figure 3-27
Because the elbow in Figure 3-28 connects directly to the equipment flange and the
equipment flange is anchored, the stiffness ofthe model in this local region is very high. If
the stanchion connects at A and the equipment centerline is at B, the differential thermal
growth of the elbow between those points could put enormously high loads on both the
stanchion and the equipment model. This is also in reality, a difficult problem to design for.
Unless the user is willing to put a spring at the stanchion location, the differential thermal
growth in this small area might result in large nozzle loads.

A
Rotating Equipment Centerline

Figure 3-28
In the Figure 3-29, a small, but heavy process monitor and actuator is mounted on the line.
The rigidity, weight, and moment due to the offset is best modeled using a weightless rigid
element going from the centerline of the pipe out to the center of gravity of the process
monitor, at which point a small rigid element with the weight ofthe equipment should be
modeled. The rigidity ofthe body of the monitor (within the pipeline) should be modeled as

3-17

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

a rigid as weIl. (Note that some engineers may prefer to model the effects ofthis equipment
by applying a force equal to the weight and a moment equal to the weight times offset at the
centerline ofthe pipe. This approach, although acceptable for static analysis, is absolutely
incorrect for dynamic analysis, and should therefore be avoided since it cannot be promised
that no dynamic analysis will he conducted on a system in the future.)

Pump
Figure 3-29
In Figure 3-30, the large 18 inch line comes directly from a flue-gas furnace, passes through
a small exchanger and enters a waste heat boiler. This is a very stiffsystem relative to the
vessel connections. Therefore, instead ofmodeling the connections as rigid anchors (which
would give the same relative stiffness to the restraints and to the piping), WRC Bulletin 297
should he used to estimate and model the nozzle flexibilities. This method will provide the
best approximation of the distribution of the piping loads to the vessels.

Soiler

--~~--~--~~

~ ~umace

Soiler and fumace nozzle flexibilities?


(This is a very tight. stiff system)

Figure 3-30

3-18

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

In Figure 3-31, rectangular ducting connects the two separators, which are rigid relative to
the ductwork. In order to size each spring for i ts share ofthe distributed weight ofthe whole
assembly plus the connected piping, it is best to simulate the stiffness of the duct through
the use of an equivalent structural member or piping element.

User defined cross


section in structural

Separator

~{!Sprin9

stee'

Pi'"' ' ' '

"Ri9idElem7
!
Separators
modeled as pipe

Location

Figure 3-31
An angle valve could be modeled as shown in Figure 3-32. It may be necessary to model it
as three rigid elements if the weigh t of the operator is significant in com parison to the valve
body.

Figure 3-32
The following sections of these seminar notes provide more detailed methods for modeling
and analyzing specifie components of the piping model.

3-19

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.3 Expansion Joint Modeling And Evaluation


Expansion joints are used when it is necessary to provide a large amount offlexibility in a
small space. Expansion joints are constructed out of sheet metal, which, after rolling and
welding to for a cylinder, has convolutions (also called corrugations) formed in it via either
hydraulic pressure or rolling. Expansion joints may vary in terms of the number and type
of convolutions, the material, the number of plies, all ofwhich effect the pressure capacity,
the stiffness, and the allowable movement.

Figure 3-33
For the most part, these details are taken care ofby the expansion joint manufacturer. A
typical expansion joint piping design proceeds:
The decision is made to use an expansion joint in the piping system. (In many
design problems the joint is used to protect a sensitive piece of equipment from
excessive nozzle loads.)

Based upon the design temperature and pressure, a standard expansion joint is
selected from a manufacturer's catalog. The properties ofthat bellows are then
inserted into the piping model.

Ifthe bellows reduces loads and stresses as intended then the range ofexpansion

movements on the bellows must be checked. For each bellows there is a limit to
the cumulative axial, bending and lateral displacement that can be absorbed by
the joint without excessively deforming the convolutions or causing fatigue
failure. These limits are presented in different ways in different manufacturer' s
catalogs, but are always functions of the number of applied cycles, bellows
material properties and convolution shape. Where excessive displacement is a
problem, increasing the number of convolutions can be the solution.
4

Once the bellows movement is within the allowable range of movements, the
design is completed. A competent expansion joint manufacturer should be able
to provide assistance throughout the design stage as required.

3.3.1 Expansion Joint Stiffnesses


Each particular combination of material, thickness, and convolution geometry has a
different axial spring rate (per convolution) associated with it. Bending and lateral
convolution spring rates can be computed from the axial spring rate.

3-20

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The behavior of a bellows under load is described by the following equations:

Where:
F

axial force in each convolution (also the axial force throughout the entire
bellows), lb

axial stiffness per convolution, lb/in

= NKax
N

number of convolutions in the joint

Kax

total expansion joint axial stiffness, ib/in

ex

axial displacement per convolution, in

X/N

total axial dis placement of joint, in

Mr

bending moment in each convolution (also the bending moment supported by


the entire bellows), in-lb

is the effective diameter of the joint (equal to the inside diameter plus the
height of one convolution), in

er

axial displacement per convolution resulting from a rotation of the convolu


tion,in

(rxD)/(2N)

bending rotation of single convolution, radians

= fD

Where:

ey /

(2 1)

Where:

shear force in each convolution (also the shear force supported by the entire
bellows), lb

3-21

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

axial displacement per convolution resulting from a lateral deflection of the


convolution.

3Dy/(NI)

totallateral displacement of the joint, in

length of the bellows, in

ey

These expressions can easily be converted into stiffness and flexibility coefficients:

F/x

Bending Flexibility: MIr

(1/8) (Kax) (D2)

Lateral Stiffness:

(3/2) (D2) (Kax) / (12)

Axial Stiffness:

Kax

V/y

These stiffness values are provided in most manufacturer's catalogs. In the event that the
manufacturer only gives axial stiffness, the other two can be calculated once the effective
diameter and length are known. (Note that torsional stiffnesses are not usually provided,
since unprotected expansion joints are not designed to carry torsionalloads and may fail
catastrophically if inadvertently exposed to even moderate torsional moments.)

Note however that the bending flexibility coefficient should not he used in any
piping program. The bending stiffness that should be used is exactly four times
the hending flexibility.
This is because the so-called bending flexibility is calculated by applying a moment (M r ) to
the free end of an expansion joint and observing its end rotation (9). A computer model,
however, expects a bending stiffness to be the ratio of the applied moment to the angular
rotation at the end of an expansion joint that is fixed against translation - i.e., a
representation of guided cantilever. This angular stiffness for a guided cantilever expansion
joint model is calculated as:

Mrfr

(Kax) (D2) /2

FLEXIBILITY

STIFFNESS

Figure 3-34
Some pipe stress programs only offer "point", or zero-Iength expansion joint models. (In
CAESAR II the user can define "fmite length" or ''point'' expansion joints.) There is a
difference in terms of how the two models are entered. As seen above, for finite length
expansion joints, the lateral and bending stiffnesses are related by the equation:

3-22

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Bending Stiffness

M!r = Kax x D2/2

=V/y x 12/3

Lateral Stiffness x 12/3

Because ofthis exact relation, and since the length is known, the user can only enter one of
these two values. CAESAR II computes the other value using this equation. For a "point"
expansion joint, the length is unknown, so aIl three stiffnesses must be definedfor the model.

Example: Consider an expansion joint with the following parameters:


Nominal diameter = 4 in
Effective Area = 19.6 in2
Kax (from manufacturer) = 316 lb/in

Bellows Length = 4.447 in


The expansion joint stiffnesses are calculated as:
M!r

(1/8) (Kax) (D2)

[4 x 19.6/ pi

M!r

(1/8) (4.9955 2 ) (316) = 985.7 in-lb/rad = 17.2 in-Ib/deg.

]1/2

= 4.9955 in

The bending stiffness to use in a piping program would be:


4 x M!r
V/y

4 x 17.2 = 68.8 in-Ib/deg

(3/2) (D2) (Kax) / (12)

(3/2) (4.9955 2 ) (316) / (4.447 2 ) = 598.14 lb/in

3.3.2 Evaluation of Expansion Joint Allowable Movements


Since the failure mode of expansion joints is fatigue, the relative expansion displacements
hetween the start and end ofthe expansionjoint must be checked against the manufacturer's
allowables. Note that the allowables provided will not be absolute values, but will he based
upon a specifie number of cyclic applications. The manufacturer must always provide a
fatigue curve or some other type of adjustment factor in order to determine the allowable
displacement for a different number of cycles.
Occasionally, the manufacturer provides allowable movements only for axial displacements.
In this case, the equations given in Section 3.3.1 can be used to calculate an equivalent axial
displacement from lateral and rotational displacements:
Er

R D / 2 , or:

Er

0.00872665

eD

3-23

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3DY/l

Er

total equivalent axial displacement due to rotation, in

total rotation on expansion joint, radians

effective diameter of expansion joint, in

total rotation on expansion joint, degrees

Ey

total equivalent axial displacement due to lateral displacement, in

totallateral displacement on expansion joint, in

length of expansion joint, in

Ey
Where:

Therefore, movements on an expansion joint are acceptable if:

x + Er + Ey <= Xall, or:

x + 0.00872665 D e +

3 DY /1 <= Xall

Where:

actual axial displacement of expansion joint, in

Xall

allowable axial displacement of expansion joint, in

Example: Assume that the expansion joint used in the example from Section 3.3.1 must
be checked for its range of applied expansion displacements. The following parameters
apply:
Number of Convolutions = 12
Manufacturer's allowable axial displacement (for 3000 load cycles) = 1.43 in
The expansion joint runs between node points 120 and 125, with the axis of the bellows
coincident with the global X-axis, in the stress analysis model. The range of expansion
displacements (assume that fewer than 3000 cycles are expected) from the stress analysis
output are shown below:

NODE

DX

DY

OZ

RX

RY

RZ

120

0.3

0.25

0.0

0.0

1.23

0.03

125

-0.1

0.12

0.0

0.0

-0.02

0.89

3-24

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Now it is necessary to compute the relative dis placements between the ends ofthe expansion
joint. This is often not a simple task since the rotations ofthe expansionjoint ends can cause
lateral translations which don't produce axial deformation of the joint. In the event that
displacements and rotations are small, and the expansion joint runs along a global axis, the
relative dis placements of the expansion joint can he fairly closely approximated:

x
e

= (DX1-DX2) = 0.3 - (-0.1) = 0.4 in


=

[(RY1-RY2)2+(RZ1-RZ2)2]1/2=[(1.23-( -0.022+(0.03-0.89)2]1/2 = 1.52 0

[(DY1-DY2)2+(DZ1-DZ2)2]1/2 = [(0.25-0.12)2+(0.0-0.0)2]1/2 = 0.13 in

Using the interaction formula, the range of expansion movements is checked as:

x + 0.00872665 D e +

3 DY / l <= Xalh or:

0.4 + 0.00872665(4.9955)1.52+3(4.9955)(0.13)/4.447 = 0.904 in <= 1.43 in

3.3.3 Use of the ERATE program


For more complex configurations, the relative expansion joint end displacements can be
evaluated using an auxiliary routine (accessible from the WRC 297/SIFlFlange option of
CAESAR fi). Full instructions for the use ofthis routine are found in the CAESAR fi U ser's
Manual.
This routine requires 23 data items (with a single value per line), describing the orientation,
length, and end displacements of the expansion joint; from this, it calculates the relative
displacements. The required items are described below:
1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Il
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

Nodei
Nodej
N
L
D
Xi
Yi
Zi
X'~

Zj
-

node number of "from" end of the expansion joint


node number of "to" end of the expansion joint
number of convolutions in the expansion joint
flexible length of the expansion joint
effective diameter of the expansion joint
node i's X-coordinate
node i's Y-coordinate
node i's Z-coordinate
node j's X-coordinate
node j's Y-coordinate
node j's Z-coordinate

DXi
DYi
DZi

RXi
RYi
RZi
DX'J
DYj

DZj
RX'J
RY'J
RZj

3-25

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The input for the current example is shown in Figure 3-35.

EJMA EXPANSION JOINT RATING


Node Number for "FROM" end ...............
Node Number for "TO" end ..............
Number of Convolutions ................
Flexible Joint Length ............. (in.)
Effective Diameter ................. (in.)

120.000
125.000
12.000
4.447
4.996

X Coordinate of "from" end ............. (in.)


Coordinate of "from" end ........... (in.)
Z Coordinate of "from" end ............ (in.)

.000
.000
.000

X Coordinate of "to" end .......... (in.)


Coordinate of "to" end ......... (in.)
Z Coordinate of "to" end .......... (in.)

4.447
.000
.000

X Displacement of "from"
Displacement of "from"
Z Displacement of "from"
X Rotation of "from" end
y Rotation of "from" end
Z Rotati on of "from" end

end ........ (in.)


end ......... (in.)
end ......... (in.)
......... (deg)
........ (deg)
......... (deg)

.300
.250
.000
.000
1.230
.030

end ........ (in.)


end ......... (in.)
end .......... (in.)
............ (deg)
............ (deg)
............. (deg)

-.100
.120
.000
.000
- .020
.890

X Displacement of "toN
Displacement of "to"
Z Displacement of "to"
X Rotation of "to" end
y Rotation of "to" end
Z Rotation of "to" end
y

More

<Esc>Compute <?>Help <Keypad>


Figure 3-35

3-26

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Output for this problem is shown in Figure 3-36.

EJMA EXPANSION JOINT RATING

More

OUTPUT:
AXIAL DISPLACEMENTS PER CORRIGATION
Axial
Axial
Axial
Axial

Displacement
Displacement due to Lateral
Displacement due to Rotation
Displacement TOTAL

.033
.044

.006
.083

RELATIVE MOVEMENTS OF END "i" WITH RESPECT TO END


(Local Joint Coordinate System)
Relative
Relative
Relative
Relative

Axial Displacement. "x"


Lateral Displacement. My"
Bending. "theta" (deg)
Torsion (deg)

.401

.158
1.517
-.019

RELATIVE MOVEMENTS OF END "i" WITH RESPECT TO END


(Global Piping Coordinate System)
Relative
Relative
Relative
Relative
Relative
Relative

"j"

X Displacement
Y Displacement
Z Displacement
Rotation about X (deg)
Rotation about Y (deg)
Rotation about Z (deg)

"j"

-.399
-.132
.095
.000
1.250
.860

<Esc>To Exit <?>For Help <Keypad>

Input Output

More

Figure 3-36
Results - e(total) - are given in terms of equivalent axial displacement per convolution
- in this case, 0.083 inches per convolution. The accuracy of the initial estimate (done
without the benefit ofthe ERATE program) of an equivalent axial extension of 0.904 inches
can be determined by multiplying 0.083 times 12 convolutions, for a total equivalent
extension of 0.996 inches (an error of approximately 9%). It can he seen that the bulk of the
error is due to the underestimation of the lateral displacement (see x, y, theta, tors - the
total axial, lateral, rotational, and torsional displacements respectively on the bellows as a
whole) on the expansion joint - the estimate was 0.13 inches, while ERATE calculated it
asO.158inches. Thisisimportant,sincelateralloadingisverycritical. Additionally, without
the use of a calculational aid such as ERATE, the lateral displacement will be the most
difficult to estimate, especially as the rotational angle increases.
Torsion on the expansion joint should be approximately zero. Ifnot, it is recommended that
the acceptability of the bellows for the torsionalload be verified by contacting the expansion
joint manufacturer.

3-27

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.3.4 Modeling of Unbalanced Pressure Force


Normally pressure in a pipeline is absorbed by tension in the pipe walls:

Figure 3-37
12 inch nominal diameter pipe, standard wall (Di = 12 in), P = 250 psi
Axial Tension = Area x Pressure = pi/4 di2p

= pi/4 (12 2) (250) = 28,274 lb


Due to the axial flexibility of expansion joints, they are incapable of carrying this large axial
load. Due to the larger internaI diameter of the convolutions of the expansion joint, the
pressure thrust force is calculated from an effective diameter, which is:

Where:
Deff

effective diameter ofbellows, in

Di

internaI diameter of expansion joint (or pipe), in

internaI height of one convolution, in

The unbalanced pressure force is therefore:

P (pi/4) De#

Fp

pressure thrust force, lb

system pressure, psi

Fp
Where:

The pressure force is actually developed at the point where the pressure encounters the first
metal area perpendicular to the axis ofthe expansion joint - for example, a capped end or
a change in direction. The distribution of the pressure thrust loads in a number of
configurations is shown in Figures 3-38 through 3-42.

3-28

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Pressure thrust loads in untied, unanchored expansion joints:

~_.E~: ]10

"

End is blind flange

Tl

tension in bellows walls (tending to blow the bellows apart), lb

P (pi/4) DetF

tension in pipe wall

Figure3-3S

Pressure thrust loads in anchored expansion joint installation:

~,

" T2

Flanged end anchored

tension in bellows walls, lb

Tl

compression in pipe wall, lb

T2

totalload on anchor, lb

P (pi/4) DetF

Figure 3-39

3-29

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Pressure thrust in tied expansion joint:

:'~~iF -- -Tl

T~~
Ts

tension in bellows, lb

Tl

tension in pipe wall, lb

T3

tension in tie bars, lb

Tl

--9i
Tl

Tl

Il
\

Figure 3-40

Pressure thrust loads in rotating equipment without tie bars (ends anchored):

tension in bellows, lb

Tl

compression in pipe on either side of expansion joint, lb

T2

pressure load on impeller and on inside of elbow, lb

T4

=
=

reaction load on pump base and on anchor, lb

P (pi/4) DetF

Figure 3-41

3-30

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Pressure thrust loads on rotating equipment with tie bars:

Tl

T2

T3

tension in bellows, lb

tension in pipe on either side of expansion joint, lb

P (piJ4) Di 2

pressure load on impeller and on inside of elbow, lb

P (piJ4) Di 2

tie bar load, lb

P (piJ4) De~

Figure 3-42
Note that there are no reaction loads (T4) when tie bars are used.
Most pipe stress programs such as CAESAR II automatically calculate the unbalanced
pressure thrust load and simplify the model by applying the entire magnitude at either end
of the bellows. In most cases, this is an adequate approximation of the actual situation.
Greater modeling accuracy can be achieved by disabling the application of pressure load at
the bellows (by defming an effective diameter as 0.0), and calculating and applyingthe thrust
load manually to the model as so:
Apply the force T - Tl at the ends of the bellows.
Apply the force T2 - Tl at the locations identified by the T2 arrows.
Expansionjoint, tie rod, and reaction loads T, T3, and T 4 will be calculated correctly by
the program.
In any event, even though the tension/compression in the pipe wall may not be completely
accurate in the default computer model, the load tending to open the bellows will be; this is
usually a much more critical detail to consider when designing a system to absorb the
pressure thrust. It is left to the user to confirm that this is normally not a major design issue.

3-31

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.3.5 Modeling of lie Rads


Ifrestraints are not used to absorb the unbalanced pressure load, it must be handled by tie
rods. These are tension-carrying rods attached to either end of the expansion joint, which
prevent the ends from pulling apart. Since tie bars assure that there is no pressure reaction
from the expansion joint, tie rods can be modeled in two different ways:
implicitly, by omitting both the tie-rods and the pressure load from the model,
or

1
2

explicitly, by including both the tie-rods and the pressure load in the model.

Assuming that the tie rods absorb 100% of the load, the net effect ofboth ofthese models on
the piping system are the same.

Implicit Model of Tie Rods:


The first case noted above is obviously the simpler ofthe two. Omitting the tie rods is possible
if there is no pressure load on the bellows; this can be omitted by defining an effective
diameter equal to 0.0 for the expansion joint.
Tie rods, besides absorbing the pressure load, also prevent extension and compression of the
bellows under piping operating loads. Therefore, when the user leaves the tie bars and
pressure thrust out ofthe model, it is also necessary to set the axial stiffness ofthe expansion
joint to be essentially rigid (or actually to the total axial stiffness ofthe tie rods, which is AE/
1). If the axialload on the expansion joint is tensile then the surrounding pipe is trying to
stretch the tie bars even further. Ifthe axialload on the expansionjoint is compressive, then:
1

If the compression is less than the pressure thrust load, there is not a problem.

If the compression exceeds the pressure thrust load, then the tie rods will be in
compression. The compression must be checked to ensure that it is not so great
that it buckles the tie bars. If the tie rods are tension only (i.e., lock nuts are
placed only on the outside ofthe expansion joint flanges) then some redesign is
required, either:
a) put nuts on the tie bars on both sides of the expansion joint flanges, or
b) redesign the piping system so that the compressive load is not so great.

Explicit Model of Tie Rods:


When explicitly modeling the tie rods, the pressure load is included in the model by defining
an effective diameter for the expansion joint.
The tie rods can be modeled by using a structural element (of the same cross-sectional area
as the tie rods) to connect the two ends of the expansion joint. The structural element used
could be a pipe, a rigid element, or a user-defined structural steel element.

3-32

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

In the event that a single pipe element is used to represent the tie rods, the best way to provide
the same axial stiffness as the tie rods is to leave the diameter equal to the diameter of the
attached piping and set the wall thickness approximately equal to:

(N/4) Drod2 / Do

number of tie bars

Drod

diameter or tie rod, in

Do

outer diameter of pipe element, in

t
Where:

If a rigid element is used to model the tie rods, again the diameter should be set to that of
the attached piping; the wall thickness should be set to:
t

(N/40) Drod2 / Do

The rigid element should be given a weight equal to the total weight of aU of the tie rods,
which, if made of steel, is approximately:

N (0.283) L (pi/4) Drod2

total weight of tie rods, lb

length of tie rods, in

W
Where:

The tie rods are modeledin CAESAR II to resistonly axialloads through the use ofrestraints
with "CNODEs" (other nodes in the system to which a restraint is connected). Consider the
expansionjointltie rod assembly shown in Figure 3-43. The bellows element is modeled as
running between the two node points 5 and 10. The tie rod element is then run from node
point 5 to node point 20, using the same delta-coordinates as for the expansion joint. This
puts node points 10 and 20 at a coincident location, without any actual attachment. The
attachment is provided by placing a restraint at the far end of the tie rod (node point 20) in
the direction of the expansionjoint axis, in this case the Y direction. Placement of a restraint
here in this manner restrains node point 20 (the end of the tie rod) against a rigid point in
space; this can be adjusted by defining the restraint node point 10 as a CNODE. This means
that node point 20 is not restrained against a point in space, but rather that it cannot move
in the global Y-direction relative to node point 10 - the end of the expansion joint - an
effective representation of a tied expansion joint.

3-33

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Tie bars designed to


take compressive or
tensile loads axially.

J!j)
~~
-

"""""::iilif1
'1

,~
~

.... -

Figure 3-43
The tie rods should be set to the ambient temperature, if they are outside of the piping
insulation, or to a temperature doser to the operating temperature ifthey are inside ofthe
insulation.
Tie rods may also be modeled in a more complex fashion, using multiple rigid elements, as
shown in Figure 3-44. In this model, loosening of the nuts on the rods due to rotation of the
expansion joint flanges will be simulated.

2025
3025---<1.. -~~.... 1025
4025

15

Figure 3-44
As noted, tie rods must be checked for potential buckling loads after the analysis is complete.
Or alternatively, they may be designed to take tension only. This is done by placing locknuts
only on the outside of the flange, as shown in Figure 3-45. In this case, the expansion joint
is prevented from extending by the nut, while the flange can move freely during joint
contraction. This configuration can be modeled in CAESAR n by using one-way restraints
(or even gaps, ifappropriate) between the end of the tie rodelement and the CNODEs. For
example, if the tie rod shown in Figure 3-42 was tension only, it would be modeled by placing
a +Y restraint at node point 20, with 10 as the CNODE, indicatingthat the end of the tie rod
cannot move down against the expansion joint (but can move up).

3-34

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Possible free
movement of
tie bar end:.,:

Rigid element from


centerline of pipe to
centerline of tie bars.
TENSION ONLY TIE BARS

Figure 3-45
Complex expansionjointltie rod models are cumbersome to build and check, but where hot,
large diameter tight piping systems are being analyzed they yield the most accurate model.
This is especially true where tie rods are long and not designed for compression. In these
cases a slight rotation of the expansion joint can put one side ofthe tie rods in compression
and the other side in a greater tension.

3.3.6 Expansion Joint Assemblies


Expansionjoints may be used in a number of different types of assemblies, based upon the
application. Various assemblies are described and sample models thereof are shown. (Note
that CAESAR II provides an expansion joint modeling feature which can automatically
build many of the expansion joint assemblies shown here. It is accessed by pressing J at the
piping input spread sheet.)

3-35

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Ringe Joints:
Hinge expansion joints are shown in Figure 3-46.

SINGLE HINGE EXPANSION JOINT

DOUBLE HINGED EXPANSION JOINT

;HingeArm\

r--/
l

[1[1

fi -

_ /
Hinge Pi/"

][

Center Hinge Arms


/ Hinge Pin

ilU

"'-

'Hinge Pin

Figure 3-46
The hinges restrict angular rotation of the beIlows to a single plane, and may be used in a
single- or double-hinged configuration, the latter ofwhich comes as a single unit. When using
a pair of single hinged joints, the joints should be placed as far apart as possible to reduce
angular rotations as weIl as forces and moments. In most cases, the hinges are designed to
pass through the full pressure thrust load, so there is no need for tie rods. In some cases, the
hinge connections may be slotted to permit axial displacement of the bellows, however, then
the pressure thrust must be absorbed by adjacent anchors. A typical hinge application is
shown in Figure 3-47. Note that the piping system requires bending in one plane only.

..

J:'''~::~
1 .. ;..( .. 1

_ - - -- -- -- -- --- _....
PG

EOU"MfNT

'L
1

1
1

"", 1

7'
~

7""

,', !~~
,

..

~---

'----.;;;r
DIA

Figure 3-47

3-36

~
lA

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

A computer model for a single hinge expansion joint is shown in Figure 3-48.

Hinge axis

Rigid elements, weight of each equal


to 1/2 total hinge assembly weight.

d&~.~--~~==~.C=~~-4~
Remember: Hinges are
almost always used in pairs.

40

44

45 46

47

50

Figure 3-48
A zero-Iength expansion joint is placed between node points 45 and 46. The axial, lateral and
torsional stiffnesses ofthe expansion are set to rigid (lE 12), with the hending stiffness taken
from the manufacturer's catalog (or calculated from Deff2 Kax / 2. The effective diameter
for the pressure thrust may be set to zero. The bending restriction is modeled by placing a
rotational restraint, in the direction perpendicular to the axis of the pipe and the hinge, at
node point 45, with a CNODE at 46. Halfofthe weight of the hinge hardware is assigned
to each of the rigid elements, as it may he important for hanger design and/or equipment
loadings.

Gimbal Joints:
Gimbal expansion joints are shown in Figure 3-49.

~HingePin

l} gTI

U/Gimbal Ring

r--~~,,!11'i nngepln l
,

(
"

\..1-

1 1
1 1

-i 1 )

1 1\'--1
'1

L:J

r-+P

1 1

Il

11
..l' Il
S=r i IlflfJ i ~ U
1

1 Ir

1 Il.

11

1.1

t--

1
1
1

141. 1!

1015-1020 Bellows

t o'I' U

1
L.....I

25-30 Gimbal
1035-1040
Bellows

ANGULAR AND TRANSVERSE

Figure 3-49

3-37

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Gimbals are designed to permit angular rotation in any plane. The hinges and gimbal ring
are capable of absorbing axial pressure or vacuum loads, dead weight ofadjacent piping, and
torsional moments. Like hinges, if gimbals are used in pairs, they should be located as far
apart as possible to maximize absorbed dis placement, and reduce rotation and forces and
moments. A typical gimbaljoint application is shown in Figure 3-50. Note that the piping
system requires bending in two planes.

~ss
.....

PG

Figure 3-50
A computer model for a gimbaljoint, such as the first one shown in Figure 3-49 is very simple
to build - one simply defines an expansion joint with rigid axial, lateral, and torsional
stiffnesses, and a bending stiffness equal to that ofthe actual expansionjoint used, since the
gimbal is free to bend in all directions. (Rigid elements with weights equal to the weight of
the gimbal assembly may be included as weIl.) Sometimes, however, a gimbal may be used
in conjunction with hinges, as shown in the diagram ofthe angular/transversejoint in Figure
3-49. A computer model for something like this is more complex to build - one solution is
shown in Figure 3-51.
~20

3~~

1---4 .---~.
2530

1040 45

1020

Figure 3-51
The hinges/gimbal are modeled as the rigid series of elements running from 10 to 45 along
the top ofthe figure, while the bellows and spool piece are modeled as the elements running
along the bottom of the figure.

3-38

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Element 10 to 15 is a rigid element, having a length equal to the distance from the face of
the inlet flange to the axis of the first hinge, with a weight equal to approximately onequarter of the total weight of the hinge/gimbal hardware (note that fluid and insulation
weigh t is automatically added to non-weightless rigid elements, so that should be considered
when assigning a weight to these elements). The hinge (element 15 to 20) is modeled as a
zero-Iength expansion joint with rigid (lE12) axial, lateral, and torsional stiffnesses, and a
bending stiffness of 1 (which is effectively zero). The hinge is restricted to one-directional
rotation by restraining node point 15 rotationally about the X-axis, with a CNODE of20.
Element 20 to 25 is another rigid element, having a length equal to the distance from the
axis of the first hinge to the mid-point ofthe gimbal, and again a weight equal to one-quarter
of the total hardware weight. The gimbal (element 25 to 30) is a zero-Iength expansionjoint
with rigid axial, lateral, and torsional stiffnesses, and a bending stiffness of1 (unrestricted
by any restraints). Element 30 to 35 is a third rigid element, having a length equal to the
distance from the mid-point of the gimbal to the axis of the second hinge (again with onequarter of the total hardware weight). The second hinge (element 35 to 40) is modeled in the
same way as the first, except that the rotational restraint applied at node point 35 is about
the Y-axis, with a CNODE of 40. The final rigid element, from node point 40 to 45, has a
length equal to the distance from the axis ofthe second hinge to the face of the outlet flange,
and provides the fmal quarter of the hardware weight. Since neither the hinges nor gimbals
are internally pressurized, the expansion joints which are used to model them should be
given effective diameters of zero as weIL
The expansion joints and spool piece will be modeled from node point 10 to 45 as weIl,
indicating that the centerlines of the two assemblies are coincident, but connections are
present only at the end points. Elements 10 to 1015 and 1040 to 45 are rigid elements with
the length and weight ofthe two end flanges. Elements 1015 to 1020 and 1035 to 1040 are
finite length expansion joints modeled with the exact properties of the actual bellows used
(including effective diameter). Element 1020 to 1035 is modeled as a normal pipe element,
representing the spool piece between the two expansion joints.

Universal Joints:
A univers al expansion joint is shown in Figure 3-52.
Universaljoints consist oftwo unrestricted expansion joints flanking a spool piece. They are
usually used to absorb large lateral movements in any direction. By increasing the length
of the center pipe the amount of lateral displacement absorbed can be increased, with a
corresponding reduction in the lateral forces and hending moments. In most cases univers al
joints are tied to prevent the pressure from blowing apart the assembly. (When a univers al
expansion joint must absorb axial movement other than its own axial growth, an untied
univers al should he used - in that case, adjacent restraints must be designed to handle the
pressure thrust.) A center support may be provided on the tie rods to help support the weight
of the center piece, to provide limit stops for the displacement, and/or to reduce the length
of compressive rods (and the corresponding tendency of the rods to buckle).

3-39

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

UNIVERSAL EXPANSION JOINT

Figure 3-52
A simple model of a universal expansion joint is shown in Figure 3-53.

Zero length expansion joints with axial,


lateral and torsiorial stiffnesses rigid,
and no pressure thrust.
Ambjent Temperatyre 1

~~

.006

Expansion joint stiffnesses inserted


between the zero length elements:
5-1005 &
6-1006

Figure 3-53

3-40

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Since the tie rods isolate the pressure loads and thermal axial growth of the joint from the
remainder of the system, the assembly can be simply modeled by calling the effective
diameter of the bellows zero, the axial stiffness of the bellows rigid, and the temperature of
the assembly ambient. Elements 4 to 5 and 1006 to 7 are rigid elements (with the weight
of the tie rods, etc.), elements 5 to 1005 and 6 to 1006 are expansion joints with effective
diameters ofzero, axial stiffness ofrigid, and bending and lateral stiffnesses as determined
from the manufacturer. Element 1005 to 1006 is simply a pipe element representing the
spool piece. The totallength of the elements from node point 4 to node point 7 should be the
same as the length of the tie rods, and, as noted above, the assembly should all be set to
ambient temperature.
More complex models involve entering as accurately as possible the bellows, tie rods, and
all supporting mechanisms. These models are very cumbersome to build but will give the
most accurate representation of the loads, movements, and other conditions in and around
the joint. More complex univers al joint models are shown in Figure 3-54.

J(x

1002

/i
1~==I=*lH'~---r

:J"

Use double acting


restraint with gap and
connecting nOde~

Gap to limit lateral


1 deflection 1.5"

1036

1030
1003

1003

Figure 3-54

3-41

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Other expansion joint configurations may he modeled by modeling various combinations of


hellows, hinges, gimbals, tie rods, limit stops, andother hardware as shown in these figures.
A more accurate (and more likely correct) representation ofthe real configuration can usually
he achieved with a more complex model. When modeling the assembly, total hardware
weight must be considere d, including internaI or external sleeves and bellows end connection
details, in addition to the items noted above.

3-42

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.4 Piping Nozzle Evaluation


Often piping configurations that are acceptable by stress criteria are limited by the loads
which they place on connected equipment and vessels.
Piping loads on the nozzles of equipment such as pumps, compressors, turbines, and heat
exchangers may have the tendency to deform or overstress equipment casings, overload
hearings, or cause shaft binding. Normally manufacturers should provide allowable nozzle
loadings to which their equipment may be subjected, or they may reference industry
standards, such as NEMA SM-23 (Steam Turbines), API 610 (CentrifugaI Pumps), API 617
(Centrifugal Compressors), API 661 (Air Cooled Heat Exchangers), or HEl (for Closed
Feedwater Heaters). These standards provide look-up tables or simple calculations which
serve as a common reference for equipment vendor and engineer.
Piping attached to vessels induces stresses in the vessel walls, in the form of membrane and
bending stresses. These stresses must he evaluated against the requirements ofthe ASME
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Division 2. Calculation of stresses in a vessel
wall is difficult without a finite element analysis; the hest means of doing a hand calculation
is to use aids such as Welding Research Council (WRC) Bulletin 107 "Local Stresses in
Spherical and Cylindrical Shells due to External Loadings".
Piping attached tovessels may also tend to bend, buckle, orotherwise deform the vessel wall,
permitting some displacement or rotation of the connection under load. Therefore, totally
rigid restraint models may not be accurate representations ofpiping to vessel connections.
Flexibilities of the connection should be estimated when possible; this can he done with the
assistance ofliterature such as Welding Research Council Bulletin 297 "Local Stresses in
Cylindrical Shells Due to External Loadings on Nozzles - Supplement to WRC Bulletin No.
107".
The three types of possible analyses which may be done on nozzles - evaluation of
equipment loads, calculation ofvessel stresses, and calculation ofpiping/vessel connection
flexibili ties - are described in this section.
3.4.1 Equipment Nozzle Load Analysis
The most accurate means of evaluating a piece of equipment for anticipated nozzle loads is
to perform a test. In lieu of a test, the next best method may be a finite element analysis,
if operability failure (as opposed to stress failure) can he accurately determined from the
model. In the absence of either ofthese, the engineer can often specify that the equipment
meet a recognized standard, which provides for evaluation ofnozzle loads. This standard,
which may provide look-up tables or simple calculations, becomes a common reference
hetween the manufacturer and the engineer - a promise that the equipment can stand at
least a certain set ofloads, which the engineer can then ensure that the piping loads remain
below. It should be noted that these loads are minimum loads - in most case, the standards
do not provide a means of actually evaluating the capacities of individual pieces of
equipment.
Equipment can be modeled in the pipingproblem in a number ofways. The nozzles can be
considered to he rigid anchors, or entire pieces of equipment can be built-up from an

3-43

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

assemblage ofrigid elements, with varying degrees of complexity. In either case the forces
considered when evaluating the equipment are those forces which the pipe stress analysis
shows are acting at the equipment connection. The load cases for which the nozzle loads are
to be checked are the greater of those from the cold and the hot cases - that is, from the
sustained and the operating load cases (except when cold spring is considered, in which case
the cold case would be sustained plus the effects of cold spring).
Typically suction, discharge and extraction lines are included in separate pipe stress models.
Once all of the loadings on a particular piece of equipment have been computed, the
equipment can be evaluated to determine whether these loads are acceptable (i.e., in
accordance with the governing standard).

CAESAR II provides the ROT program, which may be accessed from the main menu, to
automatically evaluate piping nozzle loads against the requirements of a number of these
standards. Equipment (and standards) covered include:
1

Ste am Turbines Standard SM23

National Electrical Manufacturer's Association (NEMA)

CentrifugaI Pumps - American Petroleum Institute (API) Standard 610, 6th


and 7th Editions

Centrifugal Compressors - API Standard 617

Air Cooled Heat Exchangers - API Standard 661

Closed Feedwater Heaters - Heat Exchange Institute (HEl) Standard

In order to use this program, the user is required to enter some description ofthe equipment
(geometry, nozzle sizes, etc.) and the applied loads. Specific requirements ofthese standards
(and the corresponding use of the ROT program) are described below.
3.4.1.1 NEMA SM23 Standard for Steam Turbines

NEMAStandard SM23 requires that ste am turbines be evaluated by two sets of simple force/
moment calculations. The two types of computations are used to satisfy:
1

individual nozzle allowables

cumulative equipment allowables

First, the loads on each individual suction, discharge, and extraction nozzle must satisfy the
equation:
3F + M< 500D
Where:
F

resultant force on the particular nozzle, lb

3-44

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

resultant force on the particular nozzle, ft-lb

nominal pipe size of the connection, in

Ifthe loads on the individual nozzles are acceptable, the cumulative load on the equipment
from all nozzles must be checked next. Cumulative equipment allowables require that forces
and moments on aH connections he resolved at the discharge nozzle; the absolute magnitude
ofeach of the force and moment components must then fall below a multiple of De, as:
Fx <= 50 De
Fy<= 125 De
Fz <= 100 De

Mx <= 250 De
My <= 125 De
Mz <= 125 De
Fe + M e /2 <= 125 De

Where:
Fx

total X-force (from ail nozzles) on the equipment (where the X-axis is defined
as being parallel to the equipment centerline), lb

Fy

total Y-force (from ail nozzles) on the equipment (where the Y-axis is
coincident with the direction of gravity), lb

Fz

total Z-force (from all nozzles) on the equipment (where the Z-axis is defined
by the right hand rule form the other two), lb

Fe

total resultant force acting on the equipment, lb

Mx

total X-moment (from forces and moments on aH nozzles) acting on the


equipment, resolved about the discharge nozzle, ft-lb

My

= total Y-moment (from forces and moments on aH nozzles) acting on the


equipment, resolved about the discharge nozzle, ft-lb

Mz

= total Z-moment (from forces and moments on aU nozzles) acting on the


equipment, resolved about the discharge nozzle, ft-lb

Me

= total resultant moment acting on the equipment, resolved about the dis
charge nozzle, ft-lb

De

diameter of an opening whose area is equal to the sum of the areas of aU


individual equipment nozzles, in

3-45

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

An example of a NEMA SM23 analysis is shown in Figure 3-55. In this example, the turbine
is modeled as a series ofrigid elements, so both the discharge and suction nozzle loads appear
on the same pipe stress analysis output.

20

10

HEADER 'TIE-IN" 4"

2~-3

30~IL T~'~55

35:i<,50

TURBINE MODELED AS
THREE RIGID ELEMENTS

45

............t

"\

1:--~ TURBINE
...............

Figure 3-55
The forces and moments acting on the elements connected to the turbine (excerpted from the
CAESAR II output for this piping system) are shown below:

NODE

FX

FY

Fl

MX

MY

Ml

30

-108

-49

-93

73

188

603

35

108

67

93

162

-47

-481

50

-192

-11

369

-522

39

55

192

-63

11

78

117

-56

Since the sign conventions of these forces is that of forces acting on the elements, it is
necessary to reverse the signs to get the forces and moments acting on the turbine nozzles
at points 35 and 50, or:

NOZZLE LOADS AT
TURBINE NODE

FX

FY

Fl

MX

MY

Ml

35

-108

-67

-93

-162

47

481

50

192

-7

11

-369

522

-39

3-46

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

When running the NEMA portion of the ROT program, there are two input spreadsheets
upon which descriptive and load data must be entered, which in this case would be fIlled out
as shown in Figure 3-56.

NEMA SMZ3 Input Data

EquipMent ID

NEMATl

Suction Nozzle Node NUMber .........


Suction Nozzle NOMinal DiaMeter ...... <in.>

35.0000
4.0000

Discharge Nozzle Node NuMher ........


Discharge Nozzle NOMinal DiaMeter ...... <in.)

50.0000
8.00130

Factor for NEMA Allo~ables <1.85 for API 617)


EquipMent Centerline: 1-X. Z-Z ......

1.013130

................

Extraction Nozzle ul Node NuMher


Extraction Nozzle ul NOMinal DiaMeter ... <in.)

................

Extraction Nozzle uZ Node NUMber


Extraction Nozzle uZ NOMinal DiaMeter ... <in.)

PgUp/PgDn/HoMe/End-Change Page

[Escl-Exit

NEMA SMZ3 Input Data

EquipMent ID

[Ftl -Execute

= NEMATl

X Distance FrOM Discharge to Suction .... (in.)


Distance FroM Discharge to Suction ... (in.)
Z Distance FroM Discharge to Suction ... (in.)

-34.0000
.0000
15.0000

'i

X Force Acting on Suction Nozzle ...... (lb. )


Force Acting on Suction Nozzle ...... (lb. )
Z Force Acting on Suction Nozzle ..... (lb. )

-108.0000
-G7.000ll
-93.0000

X MOMent Acting on Suction Nozzle .... (ft. lb )


MOMent Acting on Suction Nozzle ...... (ft. lb. )
Z MOMent Action on Suction Nozzle ...... (ft.Ib.)

-lG2.0000
47.0000
481.0000

Force Acting on Discharge Nozzle ..... (lb. )


Force Acting on Discharge Nozzle ....... (lb. )
Force Acting on Discharge Nozzle . (lb. )

192.0000
-7.0000
11. 000ll

MOMent Acting on Discharge Nozzle .. (ft. lb. )


MOMent Acting on Discharge Nozzle ... (ft. lb. )
MOMent Acting on Discharge Nozzle ... (ft. lb. )

-3G9.0000
522.0000
-39.0000

'i

'i

X
't

Z
X
'i

PgUp/PgDn/HoMe/End-Change Page

sel-Exit

Figure 3-56

3-47

[Fil -Execute

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The program then proceeds to check the loading on each nozzle, and then resolves the loads
about the discharge and checks the cumulative loading on an equivalent nozzle, as described
above. The two page NE MA output report for this particular example is shown in Figure 357. The results first show that the discharge nozzle passed (only reaching 30.4% of the
allowable), the suction nozzle passed (reaching 49% ofthe allowable), and the cumulative
load passed, with the highest summation load (Z-moment) reaching only 56% of the
allowable. If the turbine had failed, the symbol **FAILED** would have appeared in the
"STATUS" column next to the load combination that was excessive.
Nozzle

Node

Diameter Diameter
(Nom)
(USED)

(i n. )

(i n. )

(i n. )

8.000
4.000

8.000
4.000

.000
-34.000

.000
.000

(i n.

DISCHARGE
SUCTION

50
35

Distance From Discharge Nozzle


Z
(i n.

.000
15.000

Individual Nozzle Calculations


Node

Nozzle

Components
Resultants
(lb. & ft.lb.) (lb. & ft.lb.)
FX=
FY=
FZ=

192
-7
11

F=

MX=
MY=
MZ=

-369
522
-39

M=

640

FX=
FY=
FZ=

-108
-67
-93

F=

157

MX=
MY=
MZ=

-162
47
481

M=

MX(About dis. noz. )=


MY(About dis. noz. )=
MZ(About dis. noz. )=

83
-398
189

DISCHARGE

50

SUCTION

35

Values/Allowables
3F+M

1216

500*D(used)

4000

192
% of ALLOW.

30.40

3F+M

980

500*D(used)

2000

% of ALLOW.

49.00

509

Summation Calculations.
Diameter Due to Equivalent Nozzle Areas. OC =
Nozzle Loads Summations
( 1b. &

Allowables

8.94 in.
% of ALLOW.

ft. 1b. )

SFX
SFY
SFZ
FC(RSLT)

84
-74
-82
138

50*DC =
125*DC =
100*DC =

447
1118
894

18.79
6.62
9.17

SMX
SMY
SMZ
MC(RSLT)

-447
170
631
792

250*DC =
125*DC =
125*DC =

2236
1118
1118

20.00
15.25
56.51

535

125*DC =

1118

47.85

FC + MC/2 =

Figure 3-57

3-48

Status

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.4.1.2 API 610 Standard for Centrifugai Pumps


Analysis of pump nozzle loads is covered by API Standard 610 "CentrifugaI Pumps for
General Refinery Service". The requirements of the 6th edition, issued in January of 1981,
and those of the 7th edition, issued in February, 1989, can be evaluated using CAESAR II's
ROT program. The requirements of the two editions differ slightly; those ofthe 6th edition
are described first:

API Standard 610 basically presents reference tables ofnozzle loads which a specified size
pump nozzle must be good for. The 6th edition of the standard provides separate allowables
for two types of support/base plates:
1

heavy duty

standard

The "heavy duty" pump is typically a reinforced standard pump which can withstand higher
piping loads. (The criteria necessary to meet the requirements of a heavy duty base plate/
support are discussed in paragraph 2.4.6 of API 610, 6th Edition.) AlI force components
acting on each nozzle of a heavy dut y pump must be less than two times the value shown in
Table 2 for that specific load component. For pumps with heavy duty base plates, this is the
only requirement. A copy of Table 2 (from the 7th edition) is shown in Figure 3-58.

Table 2-Nozzle Loadings


Note: Each value shown below indicates a range from minus that value to plus that value; for example,
160 indicates a range from -160 to +160,
Nominal Size of Nozzle Flange (inches)
ForcefMoment'

160
200
130
290

240
300
200
430

160
130
200
290

240
200
300
430

200
130
160
290

300
200

Each top nozzle

FX
FY

FZ
FR
Each side nozzle
FX
FY

FZ
FR
Each end nozzle
FX

FY
FZ
FR
Each nozzle

MX
MY
MZ

340

MR

460

260
170

240

430
700
530
350
950

10

12

14

16

320
400

560
700

260
570

1200
1500
1000

1010

850
1100
700
1560

2200

1500
1800
1200
2600

1600
2000
1300
2900

190C
230(
150C
330(

560
460
700
1010

850
700
1100
1560

1200
1000
1500
2200

1500
1200
1800

1600
1300

190C
150C

2000

230C

2600

2900

330(

700
460
560
1010

1100
700
850
1560

1500
1000
1200
2200

1800
1200
1500
2600

2000

230C

1300
1600
2900

150C
190C
330(

1700
1300
870
2310

2600

3700

4500

2800

3400
2200

4700
3500

540C

1900
1300
3500

460

320
260
400

570
400

260
320
570
980

740
500
1330

1800
5000

6100

2300

6300

400C
270C
720C

F = force, in pounds; M = moment, in foot-pounds; R = resultant. See Figures 1-5 for orientation 01
nozzle loads (X, Y, and Z).

Figure 3-58

3-49

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The "standard" API 610 pump has a slightly more complex scheme for compliance:
In no case shall any of the individual force or moment components on either the

suction or discharge nozzles exceed twice the allowable value for the component
as shown in Table 2.
2

Providing that the first is satisfied, the pump passes ifthe resultant forces and
moments on both the suction and discharge nozzles are within the allowables
given in Table Cl, shown in Figure 3-59 (note that resultant allowables are
included in Table 2 of the 7th edition).

Table C-1-Suggested A1lowable Resultant Forces


and Moments (for Vendor's Standard Baseplates)
Resultant
ForceIMoment

Nominal Size of Nozzle FlInge (iDches)

2
430
690

640

860

1400 2000

6
I~
3~

10

12-

2300 2700 2900


5200 6600 8200

NOTE: Fr = resultant force. iD pounds; Mr = resultant moment. in


foot-pounds.
- For lizes Jarger ibID 12 incbes. allowable resultants should he mutuaUy
agreed upon by the purchuer IDd the vendor.

Figure 3-59
3

Ifthe pump passes the first requirement, but fails the second, the pump may still
pass ifboth conditions described below are satisfied as weIl:

CONDITION 1 CRITERIA
a) The ratio ofthe appliedresultantforce to the allowable resultantforce from Table
Cl for each nozzle is less than or equal to 2.
b) The ratio of the applied resultant moment to the allowable resultant moment
from Table Cl for each nozzle is less than or equal to C; where C=2 for nozzles
6 in. and smaller, and C=(D+6)/D for nozzles larger than 6 in.
c) For each nozzle, the sum of the force ratio and the moment ratio found in (a) and
(b) above must be less than 2.

CONDITION 2 CRITERIA
The summation ofthe forces and moments from both the suction and the dis charge nozzles,
taken about the base point (which is the intersection of the shaft axis and the pedestal
centerline), must he less than the sum ofthe force and moment resultant allowables for both
the suction and discharge taken from Table Cl.
The 7th edition ofthis standard modified the requirements to a small extent. The differences
in the 7th edition are:

3-50

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

this edition does not recognize separate provisions for heavy duty baseplates; the
methodology for evaluating any pump under this edition is the same as that for
as standard base plate pump under the 6th edition

different allowables are provided for vertical in-line pumps that are supported
only by the attached piping

there is no difference in the allowables for tension and compression loading on


top nozzles

the allowables for larger diameter nozzles have been increased in some cases

Tables 2 and C-l have been combined into a single Table 2

An example of an API 610 analysis (if evaluating under the 6th edition, the pump is
considered to have a standard baseplate) is shown in Figure 3-60. For this example, the
suction and discharge piping were analyzed in separate models - the 8-inch suction piping
was analyzed in ajob called ''1NLET3" and the 6-inch dis charge pipe was analyzed in ajob
called "DISCH3". In both cases the pump nozzles were modeled as anchors. The forces and
moments acting on these anchors, as printed in the CAESAR fi output report, are the nozzle
forces and moments (with the same sign) that should he entered into the rotating equipment
input spreadsheets. These reactions are shown below:

REACTION LOADS AT
PUMP NODE
FX
305
50

507
105

FY

FZ

MX

MY

MZ

-111

-231
490

3950
46

2861
-51

2189
-201

30

..-----=:::D
CONTINUE ON WITH
JOB "DISCH3"

c=-------.
CONTINUE ON WITH
JOB "INLETS"

SUCTlON~ ~~__
/

305 (ANCHOR)

50 (ANCHOR)

~~SE

1_'-_3--l-JJ

BASE
POINT

3-51

POINT

Z~X
9'

PUMP FRONT VIEW


(LOOKING ALONG 'X')

Figure 3-60

1--11'

PUMP SIDE VIEW


(LOOKING ALONG
NEGATIVE 'Z')

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

When running the API 610 portion of the ROT program, there are three input spreadsheets
upon which descriptive and load data must be entered, which in this case would be filled out
as shown in Figure 3-61.

API G1B Input Data

EquipMent ID = G10T1

Base Point Node NUMber ......................... .


Base Plate Type: l-Standard. 2-Heavy Dut Y ...... .

100.0000
1.0000

Suction Nozzle Node NuMber ..................... .


Suction Nozzle Type: I-Top. 2-Side. 3-End ...... .
Suction Nozzle NOMinal DiaMeter ............ <in.)

305.0000
3.0000
8.0000

Discharge Nozzle Node NUMber ................... .


Discharge Nozzle Type: 1-Top. 2-Side. 3-End .... .
Discharge Nozzle NOMinal DiaMeter .......... <in.)

50.0000
1.0000
5.0000

Factor for Table 2 Allowables ..............


Factor for Table Cl Allowables ................. .
EquipMent Centerline: 1-X. 2-2. 3-~ ........... .

1.0000

EquipMent ID

API G10 Input Data


SUCTION

Nozzle Data Entry


X..... <in.)

Nozzle Orientation
Base Point to Nozzle

Cin.)
2 ..... Cin.)

-11.0000
.0000
.0000

X..... <lb.)
<lb. )

-111. 0mm

Z .... <lb.)

-231.0000

(ft.lb.)
.. (ft.lb. )
Z.. (ft.lb.)

3350.0000
2851.0000
2189.0000

~ .....

Forces on Nozzle

MOMents on Nozzle

X..

~PI

EquipMent ID

G10 Input Data


DISCHARGE

G10T1

507.0000

= G10T1

Nozzle Data Entry

Nozzle Orientation
Base Point to Nozzle

X <in.)
y (in.)
Z (in.)

Forces on Nozzle

X... (lb.)
Y..... <lb.)
Z ..... <lb.)

MOMents on Nozzle

X (ft.lb.)
y (ft.lb.)

Z <ft.lb.)

Figure 3-61

3-52

.0000
15.0000
-9.0000
105.0000
30.0000
490.0000
45.0000
-51.0000
-210.0000

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The program then performs the compliance check, as described above. The two page API 610
output report for this particular example is shown in Figure 3-62. The results first show the
status of the individual nozzle checks - each of the load components on both the discharge
and the suction are within twice the Table 2 allowable; however, the resultant moment on
the suction nozzle exceeds the allowable from Table C-l. Because ofthis failure, Conditions
1 and 2 must he checked. Since both of the se conditions are satisfied, the pump meets the
requirements of API 610 - despite the one failure.
INPUT DATA'
BASE POINT NODE
1BB
BASE PLATE TYPE
STD.
SUCTION
TYPE
END
DISCHARGE TYPE
TOP
SHAFT PARALLEL TO X AXIS

-------------------------------------NOZZLE

NODE

DISCHARGE
SUCTION

DIAMETER

SB
3B5

DISTANCE FROM BASE POINT


~

(in. )

X
( in. )

(in. )

Z
(in. )

6.BBB
8.BBB

.BBB
-l1.BBB

15.BBB
.BBB

-9.BBB
.BBB

-----------------,

LOAD COMPARlSON UITH THE ALLOUABLES IN TABLE 2 ( FACTOR =

-------NOZZLE

-------------NOZZLE LOADS
Z><ALLOUABLES

NODE
(

--------DISCHARGE

SB

a ft. lb.)

lb.

~=

FZ=
MX=
M'/=
MZ=

SUCTION

3B5

% OF ALLOU.

FROM TABLE Z
lb. a ft.lb.>

-----------

FX=

FX=

lBS
3B
498

UZB
7BB
9ZB

9.38
4.Z9
53.26

46
-51
-21B

34BB
26BB
1749

1.35
1.96
12.B7

14BB
17BB

23.B5
7.93
13.59

5ZBB
3BBB
26BB

75.96
75.29
B4.19

FZ=

587
-111
-231

MX=
M'/=
M2=

395B
2B&1
ZlB9

~=

1.BB

---------22BB

---------

STATUS

--------

RESULTANT LOAD COMPARISON WITH THE ALLOWABLES IN TABLE Cl ( FACTOR =


NODE

NOZ2LE

NOZZLE LOADS

( lb.
DISCHARGE
SUCTION

ALLOWABLES
% OF ALLOW.
FROM TABLE Cl
ft. lb.) ( lb. a ft. lb.>

SB

FR=
MR=

5BZ
Z2B

15BB
35BB

33.47
&.31

3B5

FR=
MR=

56B
5345

Z3BB
52BB

24.78
IBZ.B1

Resultant applied MOMent on

1.B8)

STATUS

""FA 1 LED""

Suetion Nozzle

IS WITHIN ONE AND TWO TIMES THE ALLOWABLES FROM TABLE Cl.
THE PUMP MA~ STILL SATISF~ API61B REQUIREMENTS IF
CONDITIONS #1 AND #Z BELOW ARE MET.
CONDITION #1
NOZZLE

NODE

DISCHARGE

SB

UALUE
(Fa'Fr>+(Ma~Mr)

CONDITION
=

Fa'Fr
Ma'Nr
SUCTION

3B5

(Fa'Fr)+(Ma~Nr>

Fa,yr
Ma'Nr

.4B
.33
.B6
1.28
.25
1.B3

< or =
< or =
< or =

STATUS

2.BB
2.BB
2. BB

< or = 2. BB
< or = 2.BB
<

or =

1.75

CONDITION #2
SUMMATION OF APPLIED FORCES
MOMENTS AT THE BASE POINT

MAXIMUM APPLIED LIMIT AS


DESCRIBED IN APPENDIX C

7121

125BB

Figure 3-62

3-53

STATUS

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.4.1.3 API 617 Standard for Centrifugai Compressors


The requirements ofthis standard are identical to those ofNEMA SM23, except that all of
the NEMA SM23 allowables are increased by 85%. Therefore it is not necessary to discuss
this standard here.

3.4.1.4 API 661 Standard for Air Cooled Heat Exchangers


The API 661 Standard for Air Cooled Heat Exchangers for General Refinery Service covers
the allowable loads on the vertical, collinear nozzles found on most single- or multi-bundled
air cooled heat exchangers. The types ofnozzles which may be checked are those which are
labeled "9" in Figure 3-63.

uge"d
1. Tubesheet
2. Plu, sheet
3. Top and bouom plates
4. Endplate

~.

9. Noule

Tube

6. Pus partition

10. Side frame

7. Stiffener

II. Tube spacer


12. Tubesupponcr.....membcr

8. Plu,

13. Tube keeper


14. Vent
I~. Drain
16. IMtrument connection

Figure 5-Typical Construction of a Tube Bundle with Plug Headers

Figure 3-63

API 661 has the following two requirements:


1

each nozzle in the corroded condition shall be capable of withstanding the


following moments and forces (referenced as Figure 8 values):

(lb)

Nominal
Diameter

FX

FY

FZ

MX

(ft-lb)

MY

MZ

1
2
3
4
6
8
10
12
14

100
150
150
500
750
1200
1500
2000
2500

150
200
250
400
750
2000
2000
2000
2500

100
150
300
500
600
850
1000
1250
1500

50
70
200
400
800
1100
1250
1500
1750

70
120
300
600
1500
3000
3000
3000
3500

50
70
200
400
1050
1500
2000
2500
3000

3-54

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

the sum of the forces and moments on each fixed header (i.e. each individual
bundle) will be less than 1500 pounds transverse to the bundle, 2500 pounds
axial to the bundle, and 3000 pounds axial to the nozzle centerline, while the
allowed moments are 3000, 2000, and 4000 foot-pounds respectively (referenced
as Table allowables)

The input to the API 661 portion ofthe ROT program is relatively self-explanatory; typical
input screens are shown in Figure 3-64 and the output report is shown in Figure 3-65.
API 661 Input Data

EquipMent ID

= H661

Inlet Nozzle Node NUMber .. ( Optional ) .......... .


Inlet Nozzle NOMinal DiaMeter ....... (in.)
Outlet Nozzle Node NUMber.( Optional ) ......
Outlet Nozzle NOMinal DiaMeter ........ (in.)
Figure 8 Force/MoMent Multiplier ........
Resultant Force/MoMent Multiplier .......
Tube Bundle Direction ( 1-X, z-z ) .............. .

API 661 Input Data


SUCTION

EquipMent ID

= H661

Nozzle Data Entry

Nozzle Orientation
(in.)

18.0000

X..... (lb.)

Z . (lh.)

100.0000
--302.0000
50.0000

X (ft.lb.)
(ft.lb.)
Z (ft. lb. )

203.0000
300.0000
2300.0000

'f . . . . .

Forces on Nozzle

'f

MOMents on Nozzle

'f

Figure 3-64

3-55

(lb.)

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

API Standard 661 1987 2nd Edition

File
Date
TiMe

User Entered Description :


Suction Nozzle Node NUMber
Discharge Nozzle Node NUMber

2B

Suction Nozzle NOMinal DiaMeter


=
Discharge Nozzle NOMinal DiaMeter
User Entered Figure 8
User Entered For~MoM.
Tube Bundle Direction

8
8
.BB
.BB

Allo~able
Allo~able

Units For This Analysis

in lb ft.lb . in.

Suction
't

Distance

H661
DEC 16.1992
11: 6 pM

Figure 8
Values

Force li MOMent
Ratios

Status

18.121

X
't

Force
Force
2 Force

1121121.121
-31212.121
5121.121

12121B.
2121121121.
85B.

.1218
-.15
.B6

PASSED
PASSED
PASSED

MOMent
MOMent
2 MOMent

2B3.B
3BI2I.B
Z3121121.B

1113121.
3BBB.
151313.

.18
.113
1.53

PASSED
PASSED
FAILED

Discharge

Figure 8
Values

X
't

't

Distance

Force li MOMent
Ratios

Status

-18.121

Force
Force
Z Force

21213.13
23.13
-2ZZ.B

12BB.
2121121B.
8513.

-.26

PASSED
PASSED
PASSED

MOMent
MOMent
Z MOMent

3BB.12I
3BI2IB.12I
3121Z.121

11BB.
3121121121.
15121121.

.27
1.BB
.ZB

PASSED
PASSED
PASSED

X
't

X
't

.17
.131

[Enterl-Continue
Resultant

Force~MoMent

Check

Resultant

Table

Allo~able

Ratios

Status

X
't

Force
Force
Z Force

3B3.B
-279.13
-172.13

25BB.
3I21BB.
15BB.

.12
.B9
.11

PASSED
PASSED
PASSED

MOMent
MOMent
Z MOMent

911.13
33BI2I.12I
2756.5

2I21BB.
4BBB.
3BBB.

.46

.82
.92

PASSED
PASSED
PASSED

X
't

Overall Loading status

MM

FAILED

MM.

[Enterl-Continue

Figure 3-65

3-56

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.4.1.5 HEl Standard for Closed Feedwater Heaters

The HEl Standard for Closed Feedwater Heaters provides a method for evaluating the
allowable loads on shell type heat exchanger nozzles. This method is a simplification of the
WRC Bulletin 107 methodology (discussed in Section 3.4.2 ofthese seminar notes), in which
the allowable loads have been linearized to show the relationship between the maximum
permitted radial force and the maximum permitted resultant bending moment. If this
relationship is plotted (using the moment as the abscissa and the force as the ordinate) a
straight line can be drawn between the maximum permitted force and the maximum
permitted moment. Then, plotting the actual combination of applied force and moment, if
these loads fall outside of the line, the nozzle is considered to fail, while ifit falls inside of the
line, it is considered to pass.
The maximum permitted force and moment is calculated from dimensionless parameters
based upon the shell geometry; these parameters have been linearized for lookup by
CAESAR II's ROT program.
A sample input to the HEl portion of the ROT program is shown in Figure 3-66. Note that
the program automatically calculates and includes the pressure thrust load (internaI area
ofthe pipe times the internaI pressure) whenever the entered design pressure is greater than
zero.

EquipMent ID = HEITl

HEl Nozzle/Uessel Input Data

Design Pressure (P) .................. (lb./sq.in.)


Nozzle Outside DiaMeter .................... (in.)
Shell Outside DiaMeter ................... (in. )
Shell Thickness (T) ........................ (in.)
Material ~ield Strength (Sy) ......... (lb./sq.in.)
Material Allowable stress (Sa) ....... (lb./sq.in.)
MaxiMUM Radial Force ............... (lb.)
MaxiMUM CircuMferential MOMent .......... (ft.lb.)
MaxiMUM Longitudinal MOMent .............. (ft.lb.)

[Esc]-Exit

PgUp/PgDn/HoMe/End-Change Page

150.0000
30.0000
75. 7500
.7500
31500.0000
17500.0000
Z0000.0000
8333.3330
1. 0000

[FU -Execute

Figure 3-66
The output report corresponding to this input is shown in Figure 3-67. Note that the nozzle
failed for this application, since the load combination fell outside of the allowable load
combination line.

3-57

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Heat Exchange Institute (Nozzle Loads 84) File


Date
TiMe
User Entered Description

HEITl
DEC 16.1992
1B:44 pM

User Input Ualues


Design Pressure
Nozzle Outside DiaMeter
Shell Outside DiaMeter
Shell Thickness
Material ~ield Strength
Material Allowable stress
MaxiMuM Radial Force
MaxiMuM CircuMferential MOMent
MaxiMUM Longitudinal MOMent
Pressure Thrust Load

15B.BB
3B.BB
75.75
. 75
315BB.BB
175BB.BB
2BBBB.BB
8333.33
1. BB
9569B.95

IbJsq. in.
in.
in.
in .
IbJsq. in.
IbJsq. in.
lb.
ft. lb.
ft. lb.
lb.

[Enter] - Continue

DiMensionless ParaMeters Selected


Alpha
Beta
GaMMa
Delta
SigMa

44B.BB
.35
5B.BB
34B.BB
11BB.BB

COMputed Force / MOMent Allowables:


Frf
MrCM
MrlM
MrM

=
=
=

53213.78
5B337.35
86B81.13
5B337.35

lb.
ft. lb.
ft. lb.
ft. lb.

MrM

444B4.
The Max allowed force for the input MOMents
Note. applied force includes pressure thrust if P > B. B.

lb.

The nozzle FAILED in accordance with this analysis procedure.


An "x" outside the shaded region shows failure.
[Enter] - Continue

Figure 3-67

3-58

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.4.2 Calculation of Vessel Stresses Due to Nozzle Loads


Loads from piping attached to vessels induce stresses in the vessel walls, in the form of
membrane and bending stresses. These stresses normally must be evaluated against the
requirements of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Division 2.
Accurate calculation of stresses in a vessel wall is difficult without a finite element analysis;
the best means of doing a calculation otherwise is to use a reference which parameterizes
results of finite element analyses. The most common reference of this type is Welding
Research Council Bulletin 107.
Section VIII Division 2 ofthe ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code provides fairly detailed
rules for allowed stress in nozzle junctions and vessels. A synopsis of the elastic code rules
are outlined here in order to provide sorne rules ofthumb by which to analyze stresses in the
vessel, at a junction:
1

Section AD-160.3 contains two conditions to determine if a fatigue analysis may


be ignored for nozzles. The second ofthese, Condition BP is summarized below:
a) The expected design number offull-range pressure cycles does not exceed
the number of allowed cycles corresponding to an Sa value of 4Sm on the
material fatigue curve, where Sm is the allowable stress intensity for the
material at the operating temperature.
b) The expected design range of pressure cycles other than startup or
shutdown must be less than 1/4 the design pressure times (Sa/Sm), where
Sa is the value obtained on the material fatigue curve for the specified
number of significant pressure fluctuations.
c) The vessel does not experience localized high stress due to heating.
d) The full range of stress intensities due to mechanical loads (including
piping reactions) does not exceed Sa from the fatigue curve for the
expected number of load fluctuations.

If fatigue analysis is not required, then Appendix 4 states that the following
limits must be satisfied:
a) General pressure membrane stress intensity must be less than Sm.
b) Primary membrane plus primary bending stress intensity must be less
than 1.5Sm.
c) Primary plus secondary stress intensity must be less than 3Sm.

Note that the 3S m limit applies to the range of stress intensity. The quantity 3Sm is defined
as three times the average of the tabulated Sm values for the highest and lowest
temperatures during the operation cycle. In the determination of the maximum primaryplus-secondary stress intensity range, it may be necessary to consider the superposition of
cycles of various origins that pro duce a total range greater than the range of any of the
individual cycles. The value of3Smmay vary with the specific cycle, or combination of cycles,
being considered since the temperature extremes may be different in each case.
3-59

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

In pipe stress terminology, this can be approximated as:

The sum of the pressure stress intensity in the vessel and the local sustained
stress intensity at the nozzle connection, computed using WRC 107, must be less
than 1.5Sm.

The sum of the pressure stress intensity in the vessel, the local sustained stress
intensity at the nozzle connection, and the local expansion stress intensity at the
nozzle connection, computed usingWRC 107, must be less than 3S m (where Sm
is the average of the Sm at the operating and installed temperature).

Because it is often difficult to include pressure in the localloading condition in a WRC 107
analysis, and because the area reinforcement requirements are supposed to take care of the
pressure stress requirement at the intersection, it may sometimes be convenient to simplify
the se requirements to the following:
1

The local sustained stress intensity at the nozzle connection, computed using
WRC 107, should be less than 0.5S m.

The sum ofthe local sustained stress intensity at the nozzle connection and the
local expansion stress intensity at the nozzle connection, computed using WRC
107, must be less than 2.0S m.

This is based upon the worst case assumption that the full value of Sm is used to satisfy the
pressure stress; this leaves 0.5Sm to satisfy the local stresses from the sustained external
loads. The same rationale can be applied to the second requirement as weIl, leaving 2.0Sm
to satisfythe local stresses from the sustained and expansion externalloads. Ifthese reduced
allowables are not satisfied then the engineer should review the magnitude of the pressure
loading and revert back to considering it within the full local stress analysis.

3.4.2.1

Calculation of Vessel Stresses Due to Nozzle Loads

The Welding Research Council Bulletin No. 107 (WRC 107) has been used extensively since
the mid 60's by design engineers to estimate local stresses in vessel/attachment junctions.
Welding Research Council Bulletin 107 is a parameterization of the results of a set finite
element analyses examining stresses in vessels due to loaded attachments. WRC 107
contains equations and non-dimensional curves (based upon parameters such as ratios ofthe
nozzle to vessel diameter and the vessel diameter to vessel thickness) which are used to
extract coefficients for the calculation of stresses in the vessel wall at the point of attachment.
Note that WRC 107 computes stresses in the vessel shell at the nozzle/vessel interfacestresses in the nozzle wall (which in sorne cases can be higher than the stresses in the vessel
wall) are not computed. Stresses in the nozzle wall may become greater than the stresses
in the vessel wall as the tlT (nozzle to vessel thickness) ratio becomes less than one.
WRC 107 may be used to analyze cylindrical or spherical vessel at attachments. The
attachments may be round, square, or rectangular; the round and square attachments may
be solid or hollow (i.e., a round hollow attachment represents a pipe or nozzle connection),

3-60

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

while only solid rectangular attachments (Lugs) are considered - the nozzle thickness does
not effect the calculation. Appendix B to WRC 107 provides information on weldment stress
intensification factors. Applications include vessel nozzles, pipejunctions, welded lugs and
trunnions.
The techniques introduced in this bulletin were updated and extended in WRC Bulletin 297,
which may be used in a similar way as that explained here.
The convention adopted by WRC 107 to define the applicable orientations ofthe applied loads
and stresses for both spherical and cylindrical vessels are shown in Figure 3-68.

V1
(or ~ )

VL
u

Mf

Mf

Stress positions A. B. C. 0
u - on outside surface
1- on inside surface

Stress positions A. B. C. 0
u - on outside surface
1- on inside surface

LOAD AND STRESS ORIENTATIONS


ON CYLINDRICAL SHELLS

LOAD AND STRESS ORIENTATIONS


ON SPHERICAL SHELLS

Figure 3-68 WRC Local Coordinates

The WRC 107 bulletin is used as follows. Based upon various dimensional ratios of the vessell
nozzle configuration, the engineer selects 12 dimensionless parameters from as many
different figures in the bulletin. These 12 parameters are used with local loads in 15
equations to calculate 80 different stresses - circumferential membrane, circumferential
bending, longitudinal membrane, longitudinal ben ding, and shear stresses (in two directions) at each of eight locations in the vessel. These eight locations are the at the inner and
outer edges (identified by the subscripts 1and u respectively) ofthe vessel, at the 00 ,90 0 , 1800 ,
and 270 0 azimuth (identified as Figure 3-68 locations A, D, B, and C respectively) around the
nozzle.

3-61

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

It has also been a common practice to use WRC 107 to conservatively estimate vessel shell
stress state at the edge of a reinforcing pad, if any. The vessel wall stress at the edge of a
nozzle reinforcing pad can be obtained by considering a solid plug (solid inclusion), whose
outside diameter is equal to the O.D. of the reinforcing pad, subjected to the same nozzle
loading.

Before attempting to use WRC 107 to evaluate the stress state of any nozzle / vessel junction,
one shall always make sure that the geometric restrictions limiting the application ofWRC 107
are not exceeded. These are dependent on the configuration and curves used (see AppendixA.2
ofWRC 107 for details). The CAESAR II WRC 107 module notifies the user when the bounds
of the curves are exceeded.
The WRC 107 method should NOT be used when the nozzle is very light or when
dimensionless parameters fall outside the limits oftheir respective figures. The parameters
in the WRC 107 figures should not be unreasonably exceeded. Output from the WRC 107
program includes the figure numbers for the curves accessed, the curve abscissa, and the
values retrieved. The user is urged to check these outputs against the actual curve in WRC
107 to get a "feel" for the accuracy ofthe stresses calculated. For example, ifparameters for
a particular problem are al ways near or past the end of the figures curve data, then the
calculated stresses may not be reliable.
The WRC 107 program can be actived from the Main Menu. The user will be prompted for
a job name as shown in the figure below.

JobnaMe

Entr~

Enter AttachMent/Shell ID --}


FILENAME, 6 Characters MaxiMuM
[Enter]-Default<= EXP14

Mter the user selects WRC 107 option, the processor will request an input file name, this
entry will also be used for the subsequent output files. The user is then presented with a list
of the current units used by CAESAR II. Input for an existing WRC 107 calculation data will
always be referred to in its original units setting. Ifthese units are not acceptable, a different
unit set must be identified using the DATABASE configuration.
The input data is accumulated by the processor in six spreadsheets. The first sheet is a title
block, the second and third sheets colle ct the vessel and the nozzle (attachment) geometry
data, respectively. The nozzle loading is specified on the last three spreadsheets, according
to specific load cases, which are sustained, expansion and occasional cases. These loads are
found in the CAE SAR II output restraint load summary under the corresponding load cases.

3-62

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The WRC 107 specific input coordinate system has been incorporated into the program. The
user only needs to define two vectors specified on the geometry data sheets. The first vector
defines the direction of the centerline of the vessel where postitve is from "B" to "A". The
second vector defines the direction of the piping/nozzle orientation, with the positive
direction of this vector pointing from the nozzle connection towards the vessel centerline.
Note, these two vectors must be perpendicular to each other. There is no need to convert the
CAESAR II globalloads to the local WRC 107 orientation.
Notice that the curves in WRC Bulletin 107 coyer essentially aIl applications ofnozzles in
vessels or piping; however, should any of the interpolation parameters, i.e. Beta, etc. fall
outside the limits of the available curves, sorne extrapolation of the WRC method must be
used. The current default is to use the last value in the particular WRC table. If one wishes
to control the extrapolation methodology interactively, you may do so by changing the WRC
107 default from "USE LAST CURVE VALUE" to "INTERACTIVE CONTROL" in the
Computation Control option located inside the Configure-Setup module of the MAIN
MENU. Once again, data beyond the limits of the bulletin curves should be treated with
skepticism.
The following page was reprinted from WRC Bulletin 107 to illustrate how the specified data
is used to calculate the stress intensitites at the eight points on the vessel around the nozzle.
In the event that a reinforcing pad is defined around the nozzle, the corresponding vessel
stresses at the edge of the reinforcing pad will be calculated automatically using the rigid
plug assumption discussed earlier.

3-63

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

_., .....,...

1:. ~"L.

g ...........,.
L._M_..
T...............
_L.oo",
__ L ....

" z ___

J".

..,

IIC,: _ _ ift.11h

1I1.:' _ _ lftoolft.o
III,
1", Ibo
VC,="--~

=__

(J

VL::--I\.

v..... .......

................

(0.175)

~:..

::--

s..... c:..c.....l_ 4w ..:

2. G.....,

v.........e.......

+=--

.) .......... IM4. ""

.) -

T _ _ _ 1.

'.1:1 _ _ 1

1.=

..........

- - R.,.

IIOTI: bter.llr.nl ...., .. I


IC,,""'CI .1.1. Il,,,

- - 1

teft ...

.-i_

CUINDRICAI.. SHELL

1) When t ; O. S c larqest absolute ~qnitude of either


S - l/2 [Ox+O~:!: {(ex - Of)2 + 4t2"Jor I(o~ - 0,)2 + 4't Z
2) When 't '" 0, S

largest al/solute Jna9nitude of either

S - 0x' 0, or COx -

0,'

3-64

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.4.2.2 Running a Sample WRC 107 Calculation


The example problem which follows goes through a comprehensive local stress analysis of
a vessel/nozzle using WRC 107 criteria.
y
Positive Axes for WRC 107

l;:z
WRC 107 Example Problem

Node Numbers in the Piping Model

Node Numbers Around


Nozzle Junction

local stiffness of the vessellnserted


between nodes 55 and 56

Node Numbers Around Nozzle Junction


Figure 3-69 Node Numbers in the Piping Model

3-65

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

In the figure, the user may also notice that there are two nodes occupying the same space
at the nozzle/vessel surface junction: nodes 55 and 56. An anchor at 55 with a connecting
node at 56 could be used to model the local vessel flexibility as "rigid". The anchor could
then be replaced with a WRC 297 local vessel flexibility model, and the job be rerun to get
a good idea of the "range" of loads and displacements that exist in the system around the
vessel nozzle. In either case, the various restraint loads (forces and moments due to
sustained, expansion and occasional loads) can be obtained from the appropriate
CAESAR II restraint report. These loads reflect the action of the piping on the vessel. The
sustained and expansion restraint report of the "rigid" anchor model are shown in Figure 370. For purposes of illustration, both the global system loads and the corresponding local
WRC 107loads are summarized in Figure 3-71.

CAESAR Il
RESTRAINT REPORT
CASE 2 (SUS) W+P1

Sustained~

FilE: EX107
DATE:JUN 19, 1987

WRC 107 EXAMPlE PROBlEM


RIGID ANCHOR VESSEl MODEl

---------- Momemts(ft.lb.) ----------

;;------- Forc:lb.)---------FZ

MX

MY

MZ

55
70
5

-26.
-26.
26.

-1389.
-22216.

32.
32.

-65.
355.

127.
288.

4235.

O.

O.

-1296.

o.

O.
O.
O.
O.

-32.

5
5
5

O.
O.
O.
O.
O.

O.
O.
O.

O.
O.
O.
O.

O.
O.
O.

14233.

96.

O.
O.
O.
O.
O.

O.

-661.

-156.

O.
O.

TYPE
RIGID ANCHOR
RIGID ANCHOR
DISPL. REACTION
DISPL. REACTION
DISPL. REACTION
DISPL. REACTION
DISPL. REACTION
DISPL. REACTION

Sustainedpiping loads on the


vessel in global coownates

Expansion piping loads on


the vessel in global coordinates
CAESAR Il
RESTRAINT REPORT
CASE 3 (EXP) 03 (EXP) = 01-02

Expansion~
NODE
55
70
5
5
5

---------- Forces(lb.)--------FX

WRC 107 EXAMPlE PROBlEM


RIGID ANCHOR VESSEl MODEl

FilE: EX107
DATE: JUN 19, 1987

---------- Momemts(ft.lb.) ----------

FY

FZ

MX

MY

MZ

TYPE

6573.
8573.
-8573.

23715.
23715.

-5866.
-5866.

31659.
-44599.

-5414.
-34744.

-52583.
-282611.

O.

O.
O.

-23715.

O.
O.

O.

5866.

O.
O.
O.

O.
O.
O.

O.
O.
O.

Restraint Report from CAESAR II


Figure 3-70

3-66

RIGID ANCHOR
RIGID ANCHOR
DISPL. REACTION
DISPL. REACTION
DlSPL. REACTION

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

SUMMARY OF RESTRAINT LOADS ON THE VESSEL


(lb)
Y

(lb)
X

(lb)
Z

(tUb)
MX

(tUb)
MY

(ft. lb)
MZ

SUSTAINED

-26

-1389

32

-65

127

4235

EXPANSION

8573

23715

-5866

31659

-5414

-52583

WRC107LOCALCOMPONENTS
FORCE
P(+X)

FORCE
VL(-Y)

FORCE
VC(+Z)

MOMENT
T(-X)

MOMENl MOMENT
MC(+Y)
ML(+Z)

SUSTAINED

-26

1389

32

65

127

4235

EXPANSION

8573

-23715

-5866

-31659

-5414

-52583

Global to Local Loads


Figure 3-71

The total sustained axialload on the nozzle may not be reflected in the restraint report. A
pressure thrust load will contribute an additional axial load to the nozzle. The pressure
thrust force always tends to push the nozzle away from the vessel. For example, with a
pressure of 275 psi over the inside area of the 12 inch pipe, the total P load becomes:
P

-26 - P(A)

-26 - 275p (12 2 ) / 4

-31,128

The P load may be adjusted automatically for the input by CAESAR II's WRC 107 module,
if the user so requests.
The actual preparation of the WRC 107 calculation input can now begin. One of the most
important steps in the WRC 107 procedure is to identify the correlation between the
CAESAR II global coordinates and the WRC 107 local axes. The CAESAR II program
performs this conversion automatically. The user will, however, have to identify the vectors
defining the vessel as well as the nozzle centerline. The following figure is provided to
illustrate the definition of the direction vectors of the vessel and the nozzle.

3-67

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

NOZZ_E DIRECTIOr--;VECTOR
-..--

--e

.. - . A

VESSE~

DI~ECTION

VECTOR
y

------. x
Figure 3-72
Notice that in order to define a vessel direction vector, the user first needs to designate the
output data points (A->D) as defined by the WRC 107 Bulletin. Note that the line between
data points B and A defines the vessel centerline (except for nozzles on heads, where the
vessel centerline will have to be defined along a direction which is perpendicular to that of
the nozzle). Since, in the vessel/nozzle configuration shown, pointAis assigned to the bottom
of the nozzle, the vessel direction vector can be written as (0.0, -1.0, 0.0), while the nozzle
direction vector is (1.0, 0.0, 0.0). The nozzZe direction vector is aZways defined as the vector
pointing {rom the vesseZ nozzZe connection to the centerZine ofvesseZ.
The program first prompts the user for the entries of geometric data describing both the
vessel and nozzle, followed by spreadsheets for loadings. The values of the geometric entries
in this example are shown in the following printouts from the program.

3-68

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

URC 187 Analysis

Shell'AttachMent ID = EXP14
UESSEL DATA SHEET

Uessel Hode HUMber (Optional) .....


Uessel Type: 1-Cylindrical, Z-Spherical ..

&0.0000
1.0000

Uessel Outside DiaMeter (D) .


Uessel Thickness (T) ......

119.8250
0.&250

Uessel Centerline Direction Cosine (UX)


Uessel Centerline Direction Cosine (UV)
Uessel Centerline Direction Cosine (UZ)

-1. 0000

Cold S. I. AlloL.!able (SMC) .......


Hot S. I. AlloL.!able (SMh) ........ 1...

PgUp'PgDn'HoMe'End-Change Page

URC 187 Analysis

[Escl-Exit

20000.0000
20000.0000

[F1l -Execute

Shell'AttachMent ID

[?l-Help

EXP14

HOZZLE DATA SHEET


Hozzle Hode HuMber .....
Hozzle Type: I-Round HolloL.!, Z-Round Solid,
3-Square HolloL.!, 4-Square Solid,
5-Rectangular Solid ....

55.0000

Hozzle Outside DiaMeter (d or Z*CI) .... (in.)


Hozzle Thickness (t) .... (in.)

12.7500
0.3750

Hozzle Centerline Direction Cosine (HX)


Hozzle Centerline Direction Cosine (HV)
Hozzle Centerline Direction Cosine (HZ)

1.0000

1.0000

ParaMeter for Rectangular AttachMent (CZ) (in.)


Reinforcing Pad Uidth (U) (in.)
Reinforcing Pad Thickness (Tl) ... (in.)

PgUp'PgDn'HoMe'End-Change Page

[Escl-Exit

[Fil -Execute

Vessel and Nozzle Data


Figure 3-73

3-69

[?l-Help

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The user may enter up to three sets of loadings representing Sustained (SUS), Expansion
(EXP), and Occasional (OCC) load cases. The program automaticaIly performs the stress
calculation ofeach of the load cases consecutively. In the present case, we only have to be
concerned about the sustained and thermal expansion cases. The loads are shown in the
foIlowing two screens. The user can elect to leave any input ceIls blank ifthey are found not
applicable. After checking aIl the entries made, the user should press [Ft] to initiate the
analysis.

URC lB7 Analysis

Shell/AttachMent ID = EXP14

GLOBAL FORCES/MOMENTS (SUS)


Global Force Fx .................... (lb.)
Global Force Fy ....................... (lb. )
Global Force Fz ..................... (lb.)

-21).0fl00
-1389.0000
32.0000

Global MOMent Mx ................ (ft. lb.)


Global MOMent My .................... (:Ft. lb.)
Global MOMent Mz .................... (:Ft. lb.)

-1)5.0000
127.0000
4235.0000

InternaI Pressure (P) .............. (lb./sq.in.)


Include Pressure Thrust: l-Ves/De:Fault, B-No ...

275.0000
1.0000

PgUp/PgDn/HoMe/End-Change Page

URC lB7 Analysis

[Escl-Exit

[Fll -Execute

[1l-Help

Shell/AttachMent ID = EXP14

GLOBAL FORCES/MOMENTS (EXP)


Global Force Fx ........................ (lb.)
Global Force Fy ....................... (lb.)
Global Force Fz ...................... (lb.)

8573.0000
23715.0000
-581)1).0000

Global MOMent Mx ..................... (:Ft. lb.)


Global MOMent My ................... (:Ft. lb.)
Global MOMent Mz .................... (:Ft. lb.)

31G59.0000
-5414.0000
-52583.0000

PgUp/PgDn/HoMe/End-Change Page

[Escl-Exit

Nozzle Loads
Figure 3-74
3-70

[Fll -Execute

[1l-Help

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

After the input echo, the parameters extracted from the WRC 107 figures are printed on the
screen. This step is similar to determining the data hy hand. These non-dimensional values
are comhined with the nozzle loads to calculate the two normal stresses and one shear stress.
The stresses will he reported on the outer and inner vessel surfaces (upper & lower,
respectively) of the four points A, B, C & D located around the nozzle. The program provides
the normal and shear stresses and translates them into stress intensities which can he used
for comparisons against material allowahles.
The output of the stress computations are shown in the four pages shown in Figure 3-75. As
the output shows, the largest expansion stress intensity (117475 psi) occurs at the outer
surface of point B (Bu).
WRC 107 Stress Ca1cu1ations
Attachment/She11 ID = EXP14

Page =

Date = Mar 6, 1996


Time = 2:02 pm

1 of

Vessel Stresses @ Nozzle Junction


DESCRIPTION:
Vessel Node:
60
Vessel Type: Cyl indri cal
THIS IS INPUT TITLE PAGE FOR CAESAR II
VesselOri.: 0.00,-1.00, 0.00
APPLICATION GUIDE, EXAMPLE NO.14.
<Normal ,Mo
WRC 107 STRESS CALCULATION AND ASME SEC.VIII
Nozzle Node:
55
Nozzle Type: Round-hollow
DIV.2 STRESS SUMMATIONS.
Nozzle Ori.: 1.00, 0.00, 0.00
Pressure
275.0
Ib./sq.in.
Nozzle Loads

Dimensions

Vessel Mean Rad.


Vessel Thickness
Noz. Outside Rad.
Nozzle Thickness

Rm=
T =
ro =
t =

59.688
0.625
6.375
0.375

in1
in1
in1
in1
1
1

(SUSTAINED)

Axial
Force P
Circ. Sh. Force VC =
Long. Sh. Force VL =
Circ.
Moment MC =
Long.
Moment ML=
Tors.
Moment MT=

Parameter(s) used in the Interpolation of Dimensionless Loads:


Gamma =

95.50
Dimensionless Loads for Cylindrical Shells
Beta

Curves read for


N(PHI)
M(PHI)
N(PHI)
M(PHI)
N(PHI)
M(PHI)

/
1
/
/
/
1

( p/Rm )
( P )
( MC/(Rm**2 *
*
( MC/(Rm
( ML/ (Rm**2 *
*
( ML/(Rm

N(x)
M(x)
N(x)
M(x)
N(x)
M(x)

/
/
/
/
/
1

( p/Rm )
( P )
( MC/(Rm**2
( MCI (Rm
( ML/(Rm**2
( ML/(Rm

Figure

Value

Beta)
Beta)
Beta)
Beta)

0.093
0.093
0.093
0.093
0.093
0.093

4C
2Cl
3A
lA
3B
lB

14.994
0.059
3.449
0.085
10.793
0.035

Beta)
Beta)
Beta)
Beta)

0.093
0.093
0.093
0.093
0.093
0.093

3C
1C1
4A
2A
4B
2B

12.082
0.097
5.631
0.045
3.511
0.051

Stress
N(PHI)
M(PHI)
M(PHI)

Points C & D (March 1979)


0.093
/ ( p/Rm )
0.093
1 ( P )
* Beta) )
1 ( ML/(Rm
0.093

3C
1C
1B1

12.082
0.094
0.035

N(x)
M(x)
M(x)

/ ( p/Rm )
/ ( P )
1 ( ML/ (Rm

4C
2C
2B1

14.994
0.060
0.052

*
*
*
*

* Beta) )

0.093
0.093
0.093

Figure 3-75

3-71

-31128.
32.
1389.
127.
4235.
65.

lb.
lb.
lb.
ft.lb.
ft.lb.
ft.lb.

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Date = Mar 6, 1996


Time = 2:02 pm

WRC 107 Stress Calculations


Attachment/Shell ID = EXP14

Page =

2 of

Vessel Stresses @ Nozzle Junction


Stress values at
(lb./sq.in.)

Type of
<Normal, Mono>
Stress
Circ.
Circ.
Circ.
Circ.
Circ.
Circ.

Memb.
Bend.
Memb.
Bend.
Memb.
Bend.

Loadl
P
P
MC
MC

-Pl

-Q

-Pl

-Q

ML -Pl
ML -Q

Total Circ. Stress

Au

Al

Bu

Bl

Cu

Cl

Du

Dl

12510 12510 12510 12510 10081 10081


28242 -28242 28242 -28242 44865 -44865
-25
-25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-358
358
0
-2635 -2635
2635
2635
0
0
-4938
4938
4938 -4938
0
0

10081 10081
44865 44865
25
25
-358
358
0
0
0
0

33179 -13429

54563 -34451

55329 35117

10081 10081 10081 10081 12510 12510


46473 -46473 46473 -46473 28748 -28748
0
0
0
0
-41
-41
0
0
0
0
-190
190
857
-857
-857
857
0
0
-7325
7325
7325 -7325
0
0

12510 12510
28748 -28748
41
41
190
190
0
0
0
0

48372 -29924

41489 16387

Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.

Memb.
Bend.
Memb.
Bend.
Memb.
Bend.

P
P
MC
MC
ML
ML

-Pl

-Q

-Pl

-Q

-Pl

-Q

48325 -18035

Total Long. Stress

64736 -42860

41027 -16089

VC -Pl
VL -Pl
MT -Pl

2
0
4

2
0
4

-2
0
4

-2
0
4

0
-110
4

0
-110
4

110
4

0
110
4

Total Shear Stress

-106

-106

114

114

48372

29924

64736

42860

54563

34451

55329

35117

Shear
Shear
Shear

Stress Intensity

Figure 3-75 (Cont.)

3-72

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Date = Mar 6, 1996


Time = 2: 02 pm

WRC 107 Stress Calculations


Attachment/Shell ID = EXP14

Page

3 of

Vessel Stresses @ Nozzle Junction


Vessel Node:
60
Vessel Type: Cylindrical
VesselOri.: 0.00, 1.00, 0.00

DESCRIPTION:
THIS IS INPUT TITLE PAGE FOR CAESAR II
APPLICATION GUIDE, EXAMPLE NO.14.

Nozzle Node:
55
Nozzle Type: Round-hollow
Nozzle Ori.: 1.00, 0.00, 0.00

WRC 107 STRESS CALCULATION AND ASME SEC. VIII


DIV.2 STRESS SUMMATIONS.

Dimensions
Vessel Mean Rad.
Vessel Thickness
Noz. Outside Rad.
Nozzle Thickness

Rm=
T
ro
t

Nozzle Loads
59.688
0.625
6.375
0.375

in1
in1
in1
in1
1
1

(EXPANSION)

Axial
Force P
Circ. Sh. Force VC
Long. Sh. Force VL
Circ.
Moment MC =
Long.
Moment ML
Tors.
Moment MT =

8573.
-5866_
-23715.
-5414.
-52583.
-31659.

Parameter(s) used in the Interpolation of Dimensionless Loads:


95.50

Gamma

Dimensionless Loads for Cylindrical Shells


Beta

Curves read for

Figure

Value

Beta)
Beta)
Beta)
Beta)

0.093
0.093
0.093
0.093
0.093
0.093

4C
2C1
3A
lA
3B
lB

14.994
0.059
3.449
0.085
10.793
0.035

Beta)
Beta)
Beta)
Beta)

0.093
0.093
0.093
0.093
0.093
0.093

3C
1C1
4A
2A
4B
2B

12.082
0.097
5.631
0.045
3.511
0.051

Stress Points C & D (March 1979)


0.093
N(PHI) 1 ( p/Rm )
0.093
M(PHI) 1 ( P )
M(PHI) 1 ( MLI (Rm
* Beta) )
0.093

3C
1C
1B1

12.082
0.094
0.035

0.093
0.093
0.093

4C
2C
2B1

14.994
0.060
0.052

N(PHI)
M(PHI)
N(PHI)
M(PHI)
N(PHI)
M(PHI)

1 ( p/Rm )
1 ( P )
1 ( Mcl (Rm**2 *
*
1 ( MCI (Rm
1 ( ML/(Rm**2 *
*
1 ( MLI (Rm

N(x)
M(x)
N(x)
M(x)
N(x)
M(x)

1 ( P/Rm )
1 ( P )
1 ( MC/(Rm**2
1 ( MC/(Rm
1 ( MLI (Rm**2
1 ( MLI (Rm

N(x)
M(x)
M(x)

1 ( p/Rm )
1 ( P )
1 ( MLI (Rm

*
*
*
*

* Beta) )

Figure 3-75 (Cont.)

3-73

lb.
lb.
lb.
ft.lb.
ft.lb.
ft.lb.

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

WRC 107 Stress Calculations


Attachment!Shell ID = EXP14

Date
Time

= Mar

6, 1996
2:02 pm

Page

4 of

Vessel Stresses @ Nozzle Junction


Stress values at
(lb. !sq. in.)

Type of
Stress

Au

Al

Du

Dl

Circ. Memb. P 'Q 1 3445 3445 3445 3445 2776 2776 2776
7778 7778
7778 12356 12356 12356
Circ. Bend. P 'Q 1 7778
Circ. Memb. MC 'Q 1
0
0
0
0
1076
1076 -1076
0
0
0 15282 -15282 -15282
Circ. Bend. MC -Q 1
Circ. Memb. ML -Q 1 32728 32728 -32728 -32728
0
0
<Nor
Circ. Bend. ML -Q 1 61318 -61318 -61318 61318
0
0

2776
12356
-1076
15282
0

Loadl

Bu

BI

Cu

Cl

Total Circ. Stress


Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.

Memb.
Bend.
Memb.
Bend.
Memb.
Bend.

P
P
MC
MC
ML
ML

-Q
-Q
-Q
-Q
-Q
-Q

Total Long. Stress


VC -Q
VL -Q
MT -Q

82823 -24257-105269

32923

1226

-4626 -31490

23786

-2776 -2776 -2776


12799 -12799 12799
0
0
0
0
0
10647 10647 -10647 -10647
90954 -90954 -90954 90954

-3445
-7917
1758
8120
0

-3445
7917
1758
-8120

-3445
-7917
-1758
-8120
0

-3445
7917
-1758
8120
0
0

86026 -70284 -117176

90330

-1484

-1890 -21240

10834

468

0
1894
-2380

-1894
-2380

0
-1894
-2380

-2776
-12799
0

-2380

-468
0
-2380

468
0
-2380

-2380

0
1894
-2380

Total Shear Stress

-2848

-2848

-1912

-1912

-486

-486

-4274

-4274

Stress Intensity

87691

70459 117475

90393

2879

4709

33038

25069

Shear
Shear
Shear

-468

Figure 3-75 (Cont.)

3-74

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.4.2.3 Evaluating Vessel Stresses


The ASME Section VIII, Division 2 code provides for a fairly elaborate procedure to analyze
the local stresses in vessels and nozzles. Only the elastic analysis approach will be discussed
in this manual. The user should always refer to the applicable code if any of the limits
described in this section are approached, if any unusual material, weld, or stress situation
exists, or ifthere are non-linear concerns such as the material's operation in the creep range.
The first step in the procedure is to determine if the elastic approach is satisfactory. Section
AD-160 contains the exact method and basically states that if aIl of the followingconditions
are met, then the elastic approach is sufficient and fatigue analysis need not be done:
a) The expected design number of full-range pressure cycles does not exceed the
number of allowed cycles corresponding to an Sa value of 3Sm(4S mfor non-integral
attachments) on the material fatigue curve. The Sm is the allowable stress intensity
for the material at the operating temperature.
b) The expected design range of pressure cycles other than startup or shutdown must
be less than 1/3 (114 for non-integral attachments) the design pressure times (S/Sm)'
where Sais the value obtained on the material fatigue curve for the specified number
of significant pressure fluctuations.
c)

The vessel does not experience localized high stress due to heating.

d) The full range of stress intensities due to mechanical loads (including piping
reactions) does not exceed Sa from the fatigue curve for the expected number ofload
fluctuations.
Once the user has decided that an elastic analysis will be satisfactory, the comprehensive
approach as used in the CAESAR II local stress evaluation is appropriate. This method will
be described in detail below, after a discussion of the Section VIII Div. 2 Requirements.

3-75

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

ASME Section VIII Division 2 Elastic Analysis of Nozzle

Ideally in order to address the local allowable stress problem, the user should have the
endurance curve for the material ofconstruction and complete design pressure / temperature
loading information. If any of the elastic limits are approached, or ifthere is anything out
of the ordinary about the nozzle/vessel connection design, the code should be carefully
consulted before performing the local stress analysis. The material Sm table and the
endurance curve for carbon steels are given in this section for illustration. Only values taken
directly from the code should be used in design.
There are essentially three criteria that must be satisfied before the stresses in the vessel
wall due to nozzle loads can be considered within the allowables. These three criteria can
be suIDmaried as:
Pm <kSmh

Where P ID, Ph Pb, and Q are the general primary membrane stress intensity, the local
primary membrane stress intensity, the local primary bending stress intensity, and the total
secondary stress intensity (membrane plus bending), respectively; and k, Smh, and Smavg are
the occassional stress factor, the hot material allowable stress, and the average material
allowable stress intensity (Smb + Sme) / 2.
Due to the stress classification defined by Section VIII, Division 2 in the vicinity of nozzles,
as given in the Table 4-120.1, the bending stress terms caused by any externalload moments
or interal pressure in the vessel wall near a nozzle or other opening, should be classified as
Q, or the secondary stresses, regardless of whether they were caused by sustained or
expansion loads. This causes Pb to disappear, and leads to a much more detailed
classification:

P - General primary membrane stress intensity (primarily due to internaI presID

sure);
Local primary membrane stress intensity, which may include:
Membrane stress due to internaI pressure;
Local membrane stress due to applied sustained forces and moments.

Q -

Secondary stress intensity, which may include:


Bending stress due to internal pressure;
Bending stress due to applied sustained forces and moments;
Membrane stress due to applied expansion forces;
Bending stress due to applied expansion forces and moments
Membrane stress due to applied expansion moments

3-76

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Each of the stress terms defined in the above classifications contain three parts: two stress
components in normal directions and one shear stress component. To combine these
stresses, the following rules apply:
1) Compute the normal and shear components for each of the three stress intensities, i.e. Pm, Ph and Q;
2) Compute the stress intensity due to the Pm and compare it against kSmh;
3) Add the individual normal and shear stress components due to Pmand Pl;
compute the resultant stress intensity and compare its value against 1.5k~;
4) Add the individual normal and shear stress components due to Pm, Ph and Q,
compute the resultant stress intensity, and compare its value to against 3Smavg '
5) If there is an occasionalload as well as a sustained load, these types may be
repeated using a k value of 1.2.
These criteria can be readily found from Figure 4-130.1 ofAppendix 4 ofASME Section VIII,
Division 2 and the surrounding text. Note that the primary bending stress term, Pb, is not
applicable to the shell stress evaluation, and therefore disappears from the Section VIII,
Division 2 requirements.
Under the same analogy, the peak stress limit may also be written as:
Pl + Q + F < Sa
where: F represents fatigue stresses.
The above equation need not be satisfied, provided the elastic limit criteria of AD-160 is met
based on the statement explicitly given in Section 5-100, which is cited below:
"If the specified operation of the vessel meets all of the conditions of AD-160, no analysis for
cyclic operation is required and it may be assumed that the peak stress limit discussed in 4135 has been satisfied by compliance with the applicable requirements for materials, design,
fabrication, testing and inspection ofthis division."

3-77

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1995 SECnON Il

T.... ZA

TAlLEZ-'
SEcnON Ill. CLASS 1 AND SEtnON VIII, DIVISION 2
DESIGN STRESS INTENSITY VALUES S. FOR FERROUS MATERIALS

Lm.

NonIIIII

e..--

No.
C

PI'DCIICI ....

Sar."p,W1d._

sNo.

..45

K01700
1(01700

ElA
SlA
A

1(02504
1(Q2504
1(02!O1

C
C
C-Si

WlcL_

S"'5)

Smls.DiIIe

S"'5)
SA-1Clf>

Sar,_

8
q

C
C
C
C

10
11

12
l3
14

Plaie

SA-215
SAo",
SAoU3

C-Un

17
lB
19
20

C-Si

Pla
5m1S.DiIIe

5 ... 516
SA-524

5 .....71
5 .....71

WId..,.

e-w.-si

Wld.1I.

WId.JI!Ie

C-Si
C-Si

W1d.

C-U~Si

WId.
WId.DiIIe

p-

5 .....72
5 .....7Z
5 .....7Z
5 .....72

21

C-U....si
C-U....si
C-$i
":-Si

c.inoJs

S"'U1
5 ...Z16

29

';-Si

F_

SA411of>

JO

C-U....si
C-Si
C-Si
C
C-MII

25
2110
27

n
32
33
34

35
3&
37

38
39
40
41
42

Plaie" . . . . . . . . .

F.......

SA-)5O

Bar._

SAo352
SA-IIoIIoO
S..... 75
SAo765

c.tDille

F. . . . .

C-M~Si

Pla
Pla

C-Si
C-UneSi
C-4I....si
C-Si
C-u..-$i

C-Si

C~i

>2

KOZIOI
K03001
KO:JOOI
KOHOl
KO)OOl

>2

55

KOllOO
KOUOK02IOI
KOZm

Il
CAS5

cas
AS5
B55
C55
E55

5"'"

SMrf>Z

F.......

c-.

KOZZOO
KOZ2OO

SA-,,.
SA-".

C~i

S"'515

in.

50
B

B
A50
55

Wld.DiIIe
Smls. .....
WId._
S...... _

C-U"

S ...ZI5
5 .....72
5 .....75

C-MII
C-MII

lS

23
24

sar._

WId.*

5 .....75

SA-W

110

21
2Z

Pie
Plaie

SIW
~

SM72

SmIS._

CImI

CGIIIlJ
T_

UNS ND.

45

f>

10. .

AI.,
DIIi9I

S.....75
5A415

T.""

A
WCA
1

KOZI01
K02OO1
K01100
KOZZOZ
I(OZ_
K01701
1(0)502
J02!02
K03_

WCA

Ka_
J02504
J025o-

IloO
1

KOlO46

LFl

LCA

IloO
IloO

WId.
WId."
WId.III11C

SA-SU.
5 .....71
S.....71
SA-671

C860
CCIIoO
CEIIoO

WId. JI!Ie
WId._
WId.DiIIe

$M72
S.....72
S.....72

CIIoO
EIIoO

B60

IloO

K02401
K02100
K02401
K02100
K02402
K02401
K02100
K02402

.,u

Example Material Table (For Values of Sm)


Figure 3-76

3-78

P-ND.

'ND.-

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

PARl'D-MlOPIkIES

T..... 2A

TABLE2A
SEC1ION III, CLAIS 1 AND SECTION VlIL DMSION Z
DESIGN STRESS INTENSI1Y VALUES S. FOR FERROUS MATERIALS
MIlL

T_

LiIR
No.

S--.

.,.....
MIL

5.......

AcIIIIIC-...... r.... LiIIIIIs

bI

4S
4S
45

22.5

NP

700

24

700
700

7DO

48
48
48

30

700!SPn
700!SPn

HP

70CI

50
50

2S
Z7

7DOCSPn

50
50

27

10

27

11

55

27.5

700
700
700CSPn

12

55
55
55

700
700
700

700

700

NP

16

55
55

30
30
30
3D
30

700

7DO

4
5

6
7

1
CJ

13

14
15

24

JO
JO

CSl
CS-l

Gu
G4,521
G4, 0. "

700

csa

G4,1iZ1

7DO
7DO

CS-l
CS!
CSl

GZI
GZl
G4.621
G4.G5,GI
G21

NP

NP

NP

700

NP
700

CS-l

7DO

cs-z

IIP

17

5S

3D

70CI

II

55

NP

7DO
7DO

19

55

20

55

JO
JO
JO

700
700

NP
NP

21

55

30

22

JO

2l

55
55

24

S5

3D
3D

700
700
700
700

NP
NP
NP
NP

25

sa

J'

700CSPn

2.
27

SI

40

NP

fIG
fIG
fIG

30

JO

700
700
700

7DO
7DO
7DO
7DO

za

29
3D
31

32

33
]4

3D

JO
JO

fIG
fIG
fIG

30

fIG
fIG

JO
JO

700
700
700
700CSPn

GZI
GZI
G4.GZ1

CSZ

G4.GZI
G4

cs.z

GZI
GZI

700
700

CS-z
CS-z

700

19

fIG

32

40

fIG

41

fIG
fIG

li
li

700

N'
NP

J2

700

NP

~.GZI

G4.&21

cs-z

42

CS-z

c:s.,

NP
NP

3.

J2

G4.G5.GI
' G5.GI
G4.Iii5.GI
G4.65.GI

7DO

700
700
700
700
700

l2

' 621
GZl
G4.65.GI
G4.G5.GI

CSZ
CS-Z
csz

fIG
fIG
fIG
loCI

CS-2
CS.z

104.521
G4
104,&21
G4,&21
G4

700

36
37

35

CSZ
CS-z

700
7DO

NP

.....

CIIM
No.

YIII-2

GI

,......

EzIInIII

(N' ...........

(Spr . . . . .~

HP
NP
NP

G4.GZ1

G4.GZl
G4.1ii5, GI
G4.65.'"
G4.65. ...
G4.Iii5.GI
G G5.GI
G4.65.GI

269

Example Material Table (For Values of Sm)


Figure 3-76 (Cont.)

3-79

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1995 SECTION D

T.... U.

TULEn
SECTION m, CLASS 1 AND SEcnON VIII, DIVISION 2
DESIGN STRESS INTENSITYVALUES S. FOR FERROUS MATERIAU

DaiIJa sans I/IWIItr, !IIi (....... .., 1000 .. Clll..-1IIil.... MetIt Til....... "F, NIt CIdI9
L.itIf
No.

3
4

,.

7
8

.,
10
11
12

13
14
15
le.

1.
17

19
20

21
2Z
ZJ
24

Z5
2e.
27

21
29

:JO
31

32
J3
)4

35
36
)7

3.
39
40
41
42

-2010 100

150

200

2SO

300

4ClO

soo

1303

600

OSO

700

15.0
15.0
15.0

13.7
14.c.
15.0

12.9
13.7
13.7

12.1

11.1

14.2
14.2

12.9
12.9

11.'

10.9
11.6

11.9

ll.b

10.lI
n.5
11.5

160
16..0
16..0

16.0
10.0
16..0

16.0
16.0
16..0

16.0
16.0
16..0

16.0
le O
16..0

14.8
14.1
14.8

t4.5
14.5
14.5

14.4
14
14.4

16.7
16.7
10.1
110.7
18.3

15.2
16.4
16..4
16..4
16..7

14.8
16.0
16..0
16..0
lU

14.3
15.4
15.4
15
15.7

13.5
14
14
14
14.9

12.3
13.3
13.3
13.J

13.6

12.1
13.1
13.1
13.1
13.3

12.0
13.0
13.0
13.0
13.2

18.3
lllo3
11.3
11.3
11.3

lU
18.3
11.3
lU
lU

17.7
17.7
17.7
17.7
17.7

17.2
17.2
17.2
17.2
11.2

110.2
110.2
16..2
16.2
110.2

14.1
14.1
14.1
14.1
14.1

14.5
14.5
14.5
14.5
14.5

14.4
14.4
14.4
14.4
14.4

11.3
lU
lU
lU

11.3
11.3

lU
11.3

17.7
17.7
17.7
17.7

17.2
11.2
17.2
17.2

16..2
16..2
110.2
16..2

14.1
14.1
14.1
14.1

14.5
14.5
14.5
14.5

14.4
14.4
14
14.4

lU
18.3
lU
lS.J

lll.J
lU
lU
18.3

17.7
17.7
17.7
17.7

17.2
17.2
17.2
17.2

16..2
110.2
16.2
16..2

14 .
14.1
14..
14"

14.5
14.5
14.5
14.5

14.4
14.4
14.4
14

19.3
19.3
20.0
20.0
20.0

19.3
19.3
lU
11.3
11.3

19.3
19.3
17.7
17.7
17.7

19.3
19.3
17.2
17.2
17.2

19.3
19.3
16.2

lU
lU

17.7
19.3
14.1
14.1
14..

17.4
19.3
1 .5
14.5
14.5

17.3
19.2
14.4
14.4
14.4

20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0

18.3
lU
11.3
18.3
18.3

11.7
17.1
17.7
17.7
17.7

17.2
17.2

lU
lU

17.2
11.1
17.Z

110.2
110.2
110.2

14"
14..
14
14.1
14.8

14.5
14.5
14.5
14.5
14.5

14.4
14.4
14.
14.4
14.4

20.0
20.0
20-D
20-D

18.9
11.9
18..
18.9
18.9

lU
lU
lU
lU
lU

17.3
17.3
17.3
17.3
17.3

15.8
U.I
l5.I
15..

l5.5
lS.5
l5.5
lS.5

20.0

19.5
19.5
19.5
19.5
19..5

15.5

20.0
20.0
20.0

19.5
19.5
19.5

11.9
111.9
11.9

lU
lU

17.3
17.3
17.3

15.1
l5.8
15.8

15.5
15.$
15.5

lU

1.5.1

750

l.S.4

15..
15..
15.4
U.4
15.4

15..
15.4

270

Example MateriaI Table (For VaIues of Sm)


Figure 3-76 (Cont.)

3-80

800

850

900

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

_:

.UE . . . ....
IZIT_
' ......
' _
_ _ . _ ..... _ _ _ .. _ _
1
Z I.._
U1S ._
.'l1Il11L

>

...
i

z~

.,;:;

.~

::~

1
3:

.,>>
Z

...
'0

_..FIG. 5-110.1 DESIGN FATIGUE CUIIVU FOR CA_. LOW ALLOY. SERIES 4XX, KIION ALLOY STEELS AllO
"110" TEIISILE STEELS FOR TEMPERATURES NOT EXCEEDING 7IIII'F

Example Fatigue Curve (For Values of Sa)


Figure 3-77
Procedure to Perform Elastic Analyses of Nozzles
The procedure for checking stresses in vessel shells using WRC 107 can be summarized as
follows:
Step 1 -

Check that no geometric limitations invalidate the use ofWRC 107;

Step 2 -

IfWRC 107 is applicable, check to see whether or not the elastic approach as
outlined in Section VIII, Division 2, AD-160 is satisfactory;

Step 3 -

Compute the sustained, expansion and occasionalloads in the vessel shell


due to the applied nozzle loads. Consider the local restraint configuration in
order to determine whether or not the axial pressure thrust load
(P * Ain) should be added to the sustained (and/or occasionalloads). If desired
by the user, this thrust load will be automatically calculated and added to the
applied loads.

Step 4 -

Calculate pressure stresses, Pm, on the vessel shell wall in both longitudinal
and circumferential (hoop) directions for both sustained and occasional cases.
Notice that two different pressure terms are required in carrying out the
pressure stress calculations. P is the design pressure of the system (sustained), while Pvar is the DIFFERENCE between the peak pressure and the
design pressure of the system, which will be used to qualify the vessel
membrane stress under the occasionalload case. Note that the Pm stresses
will be calculated automatically if a pressure value is enter by the user.
3-81

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Step 5 -

Run WRC 107 to calculate the Ph and Q stresses as defined earlier. Note that
the local stresses due to sustained, expansion and occasional loads can be
computed simultaneously.

Step 6 -

Various stress components can be obtained from combining the stress


intensities computed from applyingthe sustained, expansion and occasional
loads. These stress intensities can then be used to carry out the stress
summations and the results are used to determine acceptability of the local
stresses in the vessel shell. Notice nowCAESAR II can provide the WRC 107
stress summation module in line with the stress calculation routines

Under the above procedure, the equations used in CAESAR II to qualify the various stress
components can be summarized as follows:
P m(SUS) < Smh
P m(SUS + DCC) < 1.2Smh
P m(SUS) + Pl(SUS) < 1.5Smh
Pm(SUS + OCC) + Pl(SUS + DCC) < 1.5(1.2)Smh
P m(SUS + DCC) + Pl(SUS + OCC) + Q(SUS + EXP + OCC) < 1.5(Smc + Smh)

3-82

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.4.2.4 Completing the Sample Calculation


Once the stress intensities are computed, the user can elect to use the WRC 107 stress
summation routine to compare the computed stress intensities against the stress allowables
as required in Appendix 4 of ASME Section VIII, Division 2.
The WRC 107 stress summation routine can be activated from the WRC 107 Menu. The
stress summation will be performed automatically after the user identifies the problem
name of the stress calculation. A sample output is given below.
WRC 107 Stress Summations
Attachment/Shell ID = EXP14

Date
Time

=
=

Mar 6, 1996
2:03 pm

Page = l of 1

Vessel Stress Summation @ Nozzle Junction

Type of
Stress Intensity

Stress values at
(lb. /sq. in.)

Au

Location

Al

Bu

B1

Cu

Cl

Du

Dl

Circ.
Circ.
Circ.
Circ.

Pm
Pl
Q
Q

(SUS)
(SUS)
(SUS)
(EXP)

26125 26125 26125 26125


0
0
9875
9875 15145 15145 10056 10056 10106 10106
23304 23304 33180 33180 44507 -44507 45223 -45223
82823 -24257-105269 32923
1226 -4626 -31490 23786

Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.

Pm
Pl
Q
Q

(SUS)
(SUS)
(SUS)
(EXP)

0
0
0
9224
9224 10938 10938
39148 - 39148 53798 -53798
86026 -70284-117176 90330

Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear

Pm
Pl
Q
Q

(SUS)
(SUS)
(SUS)
(EXP)

2
4
-2848

2
4
-2848

-2
4
-1912

-2
4
-1912

0
-110
4
-486

-110
4
-486

110
4
-4274

110
4
-4274

S.1. Pm (SUS)

26125

26125

26125

26125

12994

12994

12994

12994

S.1. Pm+P1 (SUS)

36000

36000

41270

41270

25463

25463

25545

25545

143059 100299

52607

47992

55893

39087

34819

20533

S.1. Pm+P1+Q (TOTAL)

Max. S.1.
S.1. Allowab1e
(lb. / sq. in. )

Type of
Stress Intensity
S.1. Pm (SUS)
S.1. Pm+Pl (SUS)
S.1. Pm+P1+Q (TOTAL)

12994 12994 12994 12994


12469 12469 12551 12551
28558 -28558 28938 -28938
-1484 -1890 -21240 10834

26125
41270
143059

20000
30000
60000

Result

Fai1ed
Failed
Failed

Figure 3-78
Since the present nozzle loading will cause stress intensities that are not acceptable to the
ASME Section VIII, Division 2 criteria, it will have to be corrected. One way of dealing with
this type of situation is to adjust the nozzle loading at its source, while the other option might
be to reinforce the nozzle connection on the vessel side either by increasing the vessel
thickness or by adding a reinforcing pad. The same analysis procedure can be repeated until
the final results become acceptable. Note that once a reinforcing pad is seZected, the program
will automatically compute the stress state at the edge of the pad as well as at the edge of the
nozzZe.

3-83

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.4.3 Estimation of Vessel Nozzle Flexibilities


As noted previously, piping attached to vessels can bend or otherwise deform the vessel wall,
permitting some displacement or rotation of the connection under load. Therefore, totally
rigid restraint models may not be accurate representations of piping to vessel connections
- for example, they will probably be highly conservative when calculating nozzle loads
during the expansion loading case. Where possible, a more realistic stiffness for the
connection should be estimated when possible. One means of doing this is to use the Welding
Research Council Bulletin 297 "Local Stresses in Cylindrical Shells Due to External
Loadings on Nozzles - Supplement to WRC Bulletin No. 107", which published in August
1984 as an update to WRC Bulletin 107. This update expanded upon the work done for the
evaluation of stresses in two normally intersecting cylindrical shells, but also parameterized
finite element analyses done to predict nozzle flexibilities.
As note d, vessel flexibilities usually reduce loads and stresses in the piping system, so use
ofthem is generally less conservative than using completely rigid intersections. However,
in some configurations, where the use offlexibilities redistributes loads to rotating equipment, their use may be more conservative (and more realistic). An example is shown in
Figure 3-80.

To Rack

Pump Suction

Figure 3-80

With the connection at node point 5 modeled as rigid, the loads from the thermal growth of
the rack piping are taken by the nozzle and kept off of the pump battery. However, if the
nozzle is truly flexible, it will deform, loading up the pump flanges. It may be necessary to
perform a sensitivity study ofthe model to shed light on the true condition ofthe system. The
results ofmodeling a system with rigid and flexible nozzles may fall in one ofthree regions,
as shown in Figure 3-81.

3-84

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

x - Rigid Nozzle Model


o - Flexible Nozzle Model
Stress

x x

o
00

Region 1

Region 2

Region 3

- Case Studies

Figure 3-81

In Region 1, stresses are high for both models - the model is insensitive to vessel flexibilities.
A redesign of the piping or reinforcement at the intersection is needed. (This is mostly the
case with smaller diameter piping and heavy vessels.)
In Region 2, stresses are high in the rigid model and low with the flexible model, indicating
that the job is very sensitive to local flexibility. In this case it is necessary to take a closer
look at the intersection:
1

Are the dimensionless parameters weIl within the limits of the theory? If not,
vessel calculations may be way off.
Is the nozzle truly an isolated nozzle? Ifnot, stresses near the nozzle could be
much higher.

In most cases ofthis type the WRC 297 stiffnesses are so much smaller than the
rigid stiffness the user can adjust the WRC 297 results toward stiffer junctions,
(i.e., greater wall thicknesses, smaller radii) without affecting the piping
solutions. Manytimes even a WRC 297 junction 10 to 100 times stifferthan what
is normally calculated will still produce similar results. In these cases the analyst
can comfortably put more confidence in the WRC 297 solution providing (1) and
(2) above are answered in the affirmative.

Is the local vessel model very sensitive to changes (i.e., if the "L" dimensions
change, or if the reinforcing pad is left out do the stiffnesses change very much)?
If so, then it is necessary to build a range of solutions to study the parameters
that effect the model and try to extract the results that are most in line with the
assumptions that surround each parameter being varied.

Are other stresses (i.e., those due to pressure) high? If other stresses are high
then the room for error is small.

3-85

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Is the material highly susceptible to cracking or corrosion? In this case, the room
for error is also small.

In Region 3, stresses for both models are low. In this case there is probably no problem, need
for concern, nor need for extensive time and energy to be devoted to modeling of the nozzles.

3.4.3.1 Use of WRC Bulletin 297


WRC 297 indicates that a typical nozzle flexibility is equivalent to the flexibility of 3 to 13
elbows concentrated as a point spring at the junction of the pipe with the vessel. It is the
opinion of the developers that the results of the WRC 297 flexibility calculations are within
one order of magnitude of the exact flexibility solution, where the exact solution is defined
by a plate finite element analysis of the model geometry.
The bulletin provides for calculation of flexibilities in the three directions shown in Figure
3-82. AlI other directions (i.e., torsional, longitudinal shear, and circumferential shear) are
considered to be rigid.

Circumferential moment

-~f--~

Axial

Figure 3-82
WRC 297 limits configurations to the following conditions:

d/D < 0.5


dit> 20

20 < Dtr < 2500

3-86

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Where:
d

outside diameter of nozzle, in

mean diameter of vessel, in

thickness of nozzle, in

thickness of vessel, in

The particular checks on the nozzle diameter and thickness are not that critical when dealing
with flexibilities (i.e., solid plugjunctions are not that much more or less flexible than hollow
nozzle junctions). The effect ofreinforcing pads should be considered if the width of the pad
is at least 1.65(DT/2)l/2. In that case, the vessel wall should be increased to Twall + Tpad.
The WRC 297 nozzle stiffnesses come from three values extracted from the two curves shown
in Figures 3-83 and 3-84. These values (a, MrJ(ET3 e ), and Mc/(ET3 e are based upon
the following geometric parameters:
equivalent vessellength L
A

L / (DT)1/2

(d/D)

thickness ratio

(D/T)l/2
T/t

Where:
Ll, L2

unstiffened length of vessel on each side of nozzle, in

3-87

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

...
...

<fi

oc

'"1

,.

!!!

~
;;

.6

~
Q

.3

i..
g

il
~

1S

Figure 3-83

3-88

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

."

fi

r
!II

1
~

1
1
!!.

i-

Figure 3-84

Mter fin ding a , Mr/CET3 8 ), and Mc!CET3 8 ), the nozzle stiffnesses are calculated as:
Kax

4.95 a E T2 (D2 A )-112 lb/in

KL

Mr/(ET3 8 ) x ET3 x 2pi/360 in-lb /deg

Re

Mc!CET3 8 ) x ET3 x 2pi/360 in-lb /deg

This can be illustrated with an example problem. The dimensions are shown in Figure 385 for a nozzle/vessel combination made of a material with a modulus of elasticity of 29E6
psi.

3-89

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

d - 18 in.
t = 0.25 in.

-----+------~~~----~~--------~~

0 =48in.
T = 0.25 in.

L2
130 in.

225 in.

Figure 3-85
The first step is to check the WRC 297 limitations in order to determine whether it can apply
to this situation:
d/D

dit

= 18 1 0.25 =

72> 20

DIT

dIT

= 18 1 0.25 =

18/47.75 =

47.75/0.25

0.377 < 0.5

191 < 2500

72> 5

Therefore this nozzle/vessel configuration meets the requirements of the WRC 297 bulletin.
The stiffness calculations are:
L

= 8L1L2 1 [L 11/2 + L2112]2 = 8(130)(225)/[130 1/2+225 1/2]2 = 335.7 in

= LI (DT)1I2 = 335.71 (47.75 x 0.25)112 = 97.2

= (d/D) (DIT)1/2 = (18/47.75) (47.75/0.25)1/2 = 5.21

T/t

= 0.25 1 0.25 = 1.0

From Figure 3-83,= 5.0 (based on A and A)

Kax

= 4.95 a E T2 (D2 A )-112


= 4.95 x 5.0 x 29E6 x 0.25 2 x (47.75 2 x 97.2)-112 = 95,290 lb/in

From Figure 3-84, the curves are off of the scale for the longitudinal moment, so KL can be
assumed to be rigid.

3-90

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

From Figure 3-84, for A = 100, T/t = 1.0, and


Mc!(ET3 e)

= 5.21,

3.7.

Mc!(ET3 e ) x ET3 x 2pi/360

3.7 x 29E6 x 0.253 x 2pi/360

= 29,262 in-lb/deg

CAESAR II provides a feature, accessed from the Kaux menu of the input spreadsheet,
whereby the user may define nozzle and vessel parameters for a WRC 297 flexibility
calculation. If a nozzle has been defined in the input, during error checking CAESAR II
automatically performs the WRC 297 calculations, including lookup of the stiffness parameters from the digitized curves. A zero-length element with the calculated stiffnesses is then
automatically inserted into the piping model at the nozzle location between the pipe and the
vessel. The CAESAR II input and stiffness calculations (produced during input error
checking) for the Figure 3-85 example are shown in Figures 3-86 and 3-87 respectively.

WRC 297

N022LE/VESSEL

FLEXIBILIT~

SPREADSHEET

Nozzle Node NUMber ............................. .


Vessel Node NUMber (Optional) .................. .
Nozzle
Nozzle
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel

Outside DiaMeter ...................


Wall Thickness ...................
Outside DiaMeter ...................
Wall Thickness ....................
Reinforcing Pad Thickness .........

(in.)
(in.)
(in.)
(in.)
(in.)

Dist. to stiffeners or head ............... (in.)


Dist. to opposite side stiffeners or head . (in.)
Vessel centerline direction vector
X
....... .
Vessel centerline direction vector
~
....... .
Vessel centerline direction vector
2
....... .
Vessel TeMperature (Optional) ........... (Deg. F)
Vessel Material # (Optional) ............ (1-17)

F1 - (or Esc) to Exit

Figure 3-86

3-91

5.000

18.000
.250
48.000
.250

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

WRC NOZZLE DATA FOR NODE


TERMINOLOG~:

Dl - distance to stiffner or head


DZ - distance to opposite side stiffner or head
L - unsupported length of cylindrical shell,
L = 8CD1)CDZ) / [ sqtCD1) + sqtCDZ) ] ** Z
D - Mean diaMeter of vessel
T - wall thickness of vessel
d - outside diaMeter of nozzle
t - wall thickness of nozzle
& - capital "laMbda", & = L / sqtc DT )
j - "laMbda", j = Cd/D) * sqt( D/T>
Dl
L =
D =
d
&

CAUTIONS:

URC 297

130.000
335.699
47.750
18.000
97.161

DZ
T/t =
T =
t
j

ZZ5.000
1.000
.Z50
.Z50
5.Z10

LaMbda Cj) Greater than Z.0 produces approx. rigid


junctions for longitudinal bending.
The following cOMbinations can produce rigid axial junctions:
j>1.6 &=10 / j>Z.5 &=Z0 / j>4.0 &=50 / j>6.Z &=>100

N022LE CALCULATIONS

URC N022LE NODE

UESSEL DMean(in.)=
N022LE O.D. (in.)=

5
UESSEL THK. (in.)=
N022LE THK. (in.)=

47.75e
18.eee

.25e
.25e

AXIAL TRANSLATIONAL STIFFNESS


(Ib./in.)=
173528
LONGITUDINAL
BENDING STIFFNESS Cin.Ib./deg)= leeeeeeeeeeee
CIRCUMFERENTIAL BENDING STIFFNESS (in.Ib./deg)=
27353
ANGLE BETUEEN N022LE
LENGTH (L) (in.) =
CAPITAL LAMBDA
=

& UESSEL CENTERLINES(deg)=


335.699
97.161

THICKNESS RATIO
SMALL LAMBDA

ge.eeee
=
=

1.eee
5.210

<C> TO CONTINUE
<P> TO PRINT

Figure 3-87
3.4.3.2 Modeling Nozzles for Flexibility Calculations

N ozzle flexibilities are most often modeled by describing two separate entities - the piping
system and the vessel, and then connecting them with the zero-Iength WRC 297 flexibility
element. Therefore there will be two node points at the exact same location in the space the node representing the surface ofthe vessel, and the node representing the nd ofthe pipe.
This usually means using a rigid element to represent the radius of the vessel.

3-92

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Various examples of how to model nozzle to vessel connections are shown in Figures 3-88,
3-89, and 3-90.
Figure 3-88 represents the simplest model. In this case, there are no thermal movements
imposed from the vessel, and the overall stiffness ofthevessel is insignificant when compared
to the localized flexibility. Accordingly, the vessel proper is not modeled, but is represented
by an anchor with the WRC 297 stiffnesses.

A Il

:'\.
~

/1-------1mr-------""""'\

~\l

AA

~V'v

Pipe element running


/away from vessel

.,

610

Point located on
vessel surface

WRC 297 Flexibilities

WRC 297 Flexibilities

Figure 3-88
In this model, the user defines a vessel flexibility at node point 5 (with no vessel node point
defined). This causes CAESAR II to insert a flexibility element between node point 5 and
an infinitely rigid point in space (effectively a flexible anchor). Element 5 to 10 is defined as
a normal pipe element. Note: The user should not put any anchors, restraints or non zero
displacements at any WRC 297 nozzle or vessel nodes. CAESAR II inserts all the necessary
restraints and/or anchors into the model to define the nozzle/vessel connection (i.e., 3
translational restraints and 3 rotational restraints).
A more complex model is shown in Figure 3-89. In this case the radius ofthe vessel is modeled
as a weightless rigid element. This incorporates the effect of the radial expansion of the
vessel on the piping system; also, other thermal expansion of the vessel may be entered as
imposed displacements at node point 5. This model, as does the previous one, still assumes
that the overall stiffness of the vessel is insignificant when compared to the localized
flexibility.

Vertical movement of vessel


at the nozzle's elevation ..

ct

20
1
Figure 3-89
3-93

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

In this model, element 5 to 10 is coded as a weightless rigid, with the length equal to the outer
radius of the vessel, and the material and temperature that ofthe vessel. Thermal growth
at the centerline of the vessel at the elevation of the nozzle is calculated and imposed at node
point 5. A nozzle is defined at node point 15, with a vessel node of 10, so a WRC 297 flexibility
element is automatically inserted between these two nodes. Element 15 to 20 is defined as
a normal pipe element.
An even more complex model is shown in Figure 3-90. In this case the entire vessel is modeled
using pipe and weightless rigid elements, and anchored at its base. This automatically
incorporates the effect of aIl thermal expansion of the vessel, as weIl as its overall stiffness,
on the piping system.

20
25 & 30 at same point in
space at vessel surface

1
15-===.

~_

25 30

35

10

Figure 3-90

In this model, the vessel is built of three pipe elements going from node point 5 to 20. The
diameter, thickness, material, and temperature of the elements are the same ofthose of the
portion of the vessel which they represent (for example, element 5 to 10 may represent an
ambient skirt). An anchor is coded at node point 5 to represent the base anchorage of the
vessel. Element 15 to 25 is a weightless rigid, with the length equal to the outer radius of
the vessel, and the material and temperature that of the vessel- this provides the radial
growth of the vessel. A nozzle is defined at node point 30, with a vessel node of25, so a WRC
297 flexibility element is inserted here. Element 30 to 35 is entered as a normal pipe element.
Flexibilities of configurations not explicitly covered by WRC 297 may be approximated using
the bulletin - the results, although not completely accurate, will probably be more accurate
than using rigid connections. For example, using WRC 297 for a pipe attachment to the head
of a vessel may yield adequate results when choosing values ofD, LI, or L2 as shown in Figure
3-91. Because this is an extension ofthe WRC 297 application, the user may wish to perform
a sensitivity study of the effects of selecting different values of these dimensions.

3-94

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

-f f-d

Tray Elevation

D (?)

Figure 3-91
In the event that the nozzle is not normal to the vessel surface, WRC 297 may still give
For example, one me ans ofmodeling a hillside nozzle is shown in Figure
3-92. Element 30 to 35 should be modeled as a weightless rigid, with a length equal to the
outer radius ofthe vessel, and the outer diameter, wall thickness, material, and temperature
equal to those ofthe vessel. WRC 297 flexibilities are calculated and inserted between node
points 35 and 40. Element 40 to 45 is a 1/4" long pipe element (with the same properties of
the nozzle) extending along the same line as element 30 to 35. Element 45 to 50 is the pipe
nozzle connection itself. Note: The idea of the 1/4" long nozzle element is to properly orient
the local vessel flexibilities with respect to the axial, longitudinal and transverse vessel
directions.
reasonab~e results.

3-95

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

_---+-1'"

""'-45

~d,t

50

Figure 3-92

This same idea can be used to model a lateral branch connection, as shown in Figure 3-93.
In this case, the WRC 297 flexibilities are inserted between node points 110 and 115, and
element 115 to 120 is the 1/4" long element used to orient the local axes.

105

Figure 3-93

3-96

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.5 Restraint Modeling


One ofthe most important parts of any finite element analysis, be it piping, structural, plate
or volumetric, is the accurate description of the boundary conditions. This is also one of the
areas of the model most ripe for potential errors, due to the large variety of restraint
configurations available, and possible user myopia. It is extremely important that aIl
degrees of freedom actually restrained by a pipe restraint be coded in as restrained in the
pipe stress analysis model; it is equally important that only those degrees of freedom
actually restrained be coded in as restrained. Furthermore, with today's modern programs,
it is also often necessary to indicate the potential non-linear effects (friction, gaps closing, liftoff, change in stiffness, etc.) of a restraint as it goes through a state change as weIl. Finally,
the analyst must also consider the effects on the system of explicit modeling of restraint
stiffnesses as weIl.

3.5.1 Restraint Types


Typically encountered supportlrestraint types (the names used here are approximate since
terminology varies in the industry) are described on the following pages, along with a
simplistically described means ofmodeling them. It should be noted that what appears as
a single restraint may in actuality consist of a combination of more than one of the types
described here.

3.5.1.1 Anchor
An anchor is a restraint which fully restrains the pipe; i.e., in aIl degrees offreedom - three
translations and three rotations. An anchor is anywhere these degrees of freedom are
restrained - it may be explicitly built for restraint purpose, it may be a by-product of a
connection to an equipment nozzle, or it may be due to a construction practice such as
grouting a wall penetration through which the pipe travels. Examples of anchors are shown
in Figure 3-94. Anchors may be defined in CAESAR II by entering a type of Anchor, coding
in six individual restraints (X, Y, Z, RX., RY, and RZ), or using a WRC 297 nozzle stiffness
(see Section 3.4.3 of these seminar notes).

'~
'Atlached ta
Pump F~ange

Figure 3-94

3-97

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.5.1.2 Restraint
The term restraint, although technicaIly applicable to any of these boundary conditions of
the piping system, coIloquiaIly is confined to those restraints which have a relatively rigid
stiffness, and restrain the pipe in a direction other than sim ply in the downward direction
(i.e., a hanger, support, etc.). Restraints may act in more than one degree of freedom (but
less than six, which would be an anchor). Restraints may be classified yet further in terms
oftheir direction - for example, axial restraint, or guide (a restraint in both directions of the
horizontal plane when applied to a riser, or in the lateral direction when applied to a
horizontal run), or in terms oftheir function (for example, limit stop, where a gap is closed
as the pipe moves, before the restraint kicks in). Restraints may consist almost entirely of
manufacturer's hardware (i.e., clamp and sway strut assemblies), or may be built up of
structural steel. Restraints are coded in CAESAR II as various combinations of restrained
degrees offreedom (X, Y, Z, RX, RY, and RZ). Restraints in a skewed direction can be defined
with direction cosines (or direction vectors) - i.e., 0.707, 0, 0.707 is equivalent to 1,0,1.
Friction can be activated by defining a Mu value (coefficient of sliding friction) for the
restraint (Mu values for steel on steel typicaIly range on the order of 0.3). Friction is
represented by applying a force equal to Mu times the restraint load on the pipe along the
direction of movement.
Examples ofrestraints are shown in Figures 3-95 through 3-97. Figure 3-95 shows a simple
restraint, consisting of a sway strut. A sway strut, due to the pins at the brackets, aIlows
the pipe to move lateraIly (to the strut). The clamp aIlows the pipe to rotate in any direction.
Therefore, the strut restrains only in one degree offreedom (i.e., Z). The radius of gyration
of the strut is sufficient to prevent buckling, so the strut restrains in both directions of the
degree offreedom. Since the pipe does not rub against anything as it moves, friction is not
modeled.

Figure 3-95
Figure 3-96 shows three restraints built up of structural steel. In (a), the restraint is only
in a single degree offreedom (Y), but in two directions (both up and down). In (b), lateral
restraint is added as weIl, giving a two degree offreedom restraint. In (c), lugs are welded
to the pipe to provide axial restraint, creating a restraint in three degrees of freedom (not
an anchor, since the pipe is free to rotate about three axes). In these cases (although the third
case is moot), friction should be modeled, since the pipe would rub against the restraint ifit
moves.

3-98

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

'==

()
(al

( bl

------

(c)

il

(1

Se<;t/On AA

Figure 3-96
Figure 3-97 shows a restraint in four degrees offreedom - X, Z, RX, and RZ, since the lugs
prevent lateral translation of the pipe, and the double lugs resist any moments about the Xor Z-axes. This restraint should also be modeled using friction.

Plpe---+

Concrete
Eltlatlng wall aleeve

Figure 3-97

3.5.1.3 Spring Hanger


Spring hangers may be variable or constant spring hangers. Springs are engineered
hardware, which permit movement of the pipe (by providing less than rigid restraint) and
apply an upward force to the pipe. Variable springs are modeled as a combination of a
vertical, two-way restraint with a stiffness equal to that of the spring constant, and an
external force (equal to the spring pre-Ioad) acting in the +Y direction. Constant springs are
modeled as only an external force (equal to the spring pre-Ioad) acting in the +Y direction,
since the spring constant is effectively zero. Modeling of spring hangers are extensively
discussed in Section 2.4 of these seminar notes, so they are not discussed further here.
3-99

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.5.1.4 Hanger
The most common type of restraint is that which rigidly resists weight; in other words it only
acts against the downward movement of the pipe. Because it is the most common type, it
merits two names - hanger and support. A hanger is specifically a rigid restraint, resisting
only downward pipe movement, with a point of attachment above the pipe, that is, using
a rod hanger assembly of some type. Typical hangers are shown in Figure 3-98. These are
coded in CAESAR II as +Y restraints (where - or + preceding the restraint direction
indicates one-way restraint), indicating that the restraint acts in the +Y direction against
the pipe. Since the pipe has no structure to rub against, friction is not modeled.

"

'0. 0

"

Figure 3-98

3.5.1.5 Support
Supports are those restraints which rigidly resist only the downward movement of the pipe,
with the point of attachment below the pipe, that is, either with the pipe resting on a
structure, or with an intervening saddle or trunnion. Typical supports are shown in Figure
3-99. These are coded in CAESAR II as +Y restraints, indicating that the restraint acts in
the +Y direction against the pipe. Under certain circumstances, it may be desirable to model
the trunnion or saddle with a rigid construction element (in order to consider the offset ofthe
friction load, for example). Since the pipe slides against the structure, friction should be
modeled (unless a roller, as in Figure 3-99f, or a teflon slide pad, is used).

3-100

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

(a)

( b)

(c)

(d)

If)

(e)

Types of sliding supports: (a) insulation protection


saddle; (b) trunnion; (c), (d), (e) various types of saddles; (f)
roller support.

Figure 3-99

3.5.1.6 Snubber
A snubber is a type of engineered hardware which, due to its internaI mechanisms, offers no
resistance to slowIy applied (i.e., static, such as weight or thermal) Ioads, but Iocks up and
acts as a restraint when loads are applied quickly (i.e., dynamic loads such as earthquake
or fluid hammer). There are two types ofsnubbers - hydraulic and mechanical- which
are shown in Figures 3-100 and 3-101 respectively. Snubbers are modeled in CAESAR II
by defining the restraint as XSNB, YSNB, or ZSNB (or with direction cosines). Any restraint
defined as such is made inactive duringthe weight and thermalload cases, but activated for
uniform load, wind, or any dynamic loads. Snubbers are discussed further in Section 5 of
these seminar notes.

3-101

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

- ReseNoir
Pivot-

,. . . Snubber valve

- Clevispin
Piston rod eye

Figure 3-100

Step-up
gearing

Figure 3-101

3-102

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.5.1.7 Sway Brace


A sway brace (shown in Figure 3-102) is a specific type of engineered hardware, which
appears to be a variable spring attached to a sway strut. It is usually used to tune the natural
frequency of a system away from a resonance, by altering the stiffness term in the equation
of dynamic motion. The sway brace is modeled as a restraint in a single degree offreedom,
with a stiffness equal to the spring rate ofthe sway brace's variable spring. Since the sway
brace is normally attached with a clamp, no friction would be modeled.

1
1
Figure 3-102

3.5.2 Non-linear Effects


A restraint is said to be non-linear ifits response is not constant throughout its entire load
range. Examples of non-linear effects are friction, one-way restraint, gaps, large rotation
restraints, and bi-linear stiffnesses. A system with non-linear effects cannot be solved
explicitly by the structural algorithm used; CAESAR II solves them through iteration until
an acceptable solution is found. Problems with a large number ofnon-linear restraints may
take quite a while to converge, or may not converge at aIl. In this case, the user must
judiciously review the system in order to determine which ofthese effects may be excluded,
or which convergence tolerances may be changed.
Various non-linear effects are discussed below.

3.5.2.1 Friction
Friction may be present whenever the pipe can move, and in the process of moving, rub
against a restraint. As noted earlier, the maximum magnitude of the force resisting sliding
is equal to Mu times the restraint force, where Mu is the dynamic (i.e., sliding) coefficient of
friction. The frictional force is applied along the direction of the pipe movement.
This is a non-linear effect, and requires an iterative solution, since applying a friction load
to the piping system alters the results, changing the load at the restraint and the direction
of pipe movement. Therefore, friction will have to be calculated again, and re-applied to the
system, again changing the results. This continues until the frictionalload is unchanged,

3-103

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

within a tolerance (which can be adjusted by the user). In the event that there are numerous
frictional restraints, this process may take a while (or may even not converge).
Friction restraints have two states: sliding and not sliding. The restraint is not sliding if the
force tending to move it is less than F times Mu. The restraint is sliding ifthe force tending
to move it exceeds F times Mu.
Friction is activated at a restraint in CAESAR II by entering a non-zero Mu value.

3.5.2.2 One-Way Restraints


One-way restraints are restraints which are active only along half of the range of a specified
degree offreedom. The most common application ofthese are hangers and supports, which
prevent the pipe from moving down, but permit it to move up. Another example of a one-way
restraint is a limit stop bumper, where a pipe expands axially until it bumps up against a
restraint. Another example may be an accidentaI restraint - such as where the pipe may
have been installed touching a column or penetration on one side, but not the other.
One-way restraints obviously have two states - active or not active. The restraint is active
if it is acting on the pipe, and inactive if the pipe has moved away from it. Analysis of oneway restraints require the following type ofiterative solution: the analysis is done with the
restraint active. If the restraint load is in the direction of the one-way restraint, the analysis
is completed. If the load is in the opposite direction of the restraint, the restraint is removed
from the model, and the analysis is redone. Then the pipe's movement at that location is
checked - if it is away from the restraint, the analysis is complete. If it is towards the
restraint, the restraint is re-inserted into the model and the process continues. Again, ifthere
are more than one one-way restraints, it may be a lengthy process.
One-way restraints are coded in CAESAR II by placing a sign (+ or -) in front of the degree
offreedom being restrained. The sign convention is that direction in which the restraint acts
on the piping system (i.e., a +Y support acts upward on the pipe, so the pipe cannot move
down).

3.5.2.3 Gaps
Gap restraints are those restraints which do not touch the pipe upon installation (and
therefore are not active), but are close enough to the pipe that they may become active during
the normal movement of the pipe. The gaps may have been installed intentionally (such as
in a limit stop), unintentionally (such as when a structural steel support is not fit up closely
to the pipe), or simply by chance (such as when a pipe runs through a wall penetration).
Examples of gap restraints are shown in Figure 3-103.

3-104

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

z-l

x
, 2.5"

, 0.275"

Figure 3-103
Gap restraints have two states - closed and active or open and inactive. Analysis ofthese
restraints require an iterative solution similar to that of one-way restraints: the analysis is
initiaUy done without the restraint. The pipe's movement at that location is checked - if
it is insufficient (or in the wrong direction) to close the gap, the analysis is complete. Ifit is
sufficient to close the gap, an imposed displacement is put on the pipe to close the gap, the
restraint is reinserted into the model, and the analysis is redone. The results are then
rechecked - ifthe load on the restraint is in the right direction (tending to further close the
closed gap), the analysis is complete. Ifit is in the direction where it is trying to reopen the
gap, the imposed displacement and the restraint are removed and the system is reanalyzed.
This process is repeated until the status of aU gaps converge.
Gap restraints may be entered with friction, which further complicates the non-linear
solution (since the friction wiU act at the gap restraint once the gap at the closes and the
restraint begins to work, but not otherwise). In the event that gaps are unequal on either
side of the pipe (as in the penetration in Figure 3-103), the gap restraints may be entered
as multiple one-way restraints, each with unique gaps.

3.5.2.4 Large Rotation Restraints:


A large rotation restraint is a restraint which rotates away from its originalline of action due
to a pipe movement in a direction orthogonal to the originalline of action. This may occur
when the restraint is provided by a rod or a strut and the orthogonal displacement is large.
Since the length of the rod must remain constant, the rotation from the originalline of action
is:

sin- 1 (il / L)

3-105

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Where:

angle of rotation from originalline of action

orthogonal displacement of pipe, in

length of rod, in

Since the length of the rod must remain constant, the pipe will be forced to travel through
the arc defined by the rod rotating about its point of attachment to the structure. This is
illustrated in Figure 3-104. Note that the effect of the swing is much more pronounced when
using short rods.

Thermal

Elevation change
forced on the pipe.

Figure 3-104

3-106

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

These types of restraints are solved by initially doing the analysis with the restraints acting
along their as-installed line of action. Mer the analysis is complete, the movement of the
pipe at that location is noted. Based upon the movement of the pipe orthogonal to the line
of action of the restraint, a new position on the arc of the restraint is calculated. The
component ofthat position representing forced displacement along the line of action of the
pipe is then used as an imposed displacement for the next analysis. Mer this analysis, the
position of the pipe is checked again, the new position on the arc is recalculated, and the
process is repeated, until the line of action of the restraint (and the position of the pipe) is
unchanged (within a tolerance, which can be set by the user) from one analysis to the next.
Large rotation restraints are entered in CAESAR II through the use of the term XROD,
YROD, or ZROD. The direction in which the rod runs from the pipe is designated by the sign
(+ or -, where no sign is taken to be the same as +). This type of support can be used to model
supports where load bearing is sensitive to the angle of the line of action.

3.5.2.5 Bi-linear Stiffnesses


Restraints with bi-linear stiffnesses maintain a constant stiffness up until a specified loading
is achieved, at which point the stiffness changes. These can be used to represent bottomedout springs (through the normal range of the spring the stiffness is the spring constant, but
once the spring compresses completely, the support essentially becomes a rigid hanger); soil
supports (clay normally has constant stiffness until its ultimate load bearing capacity is
reached, at which point the clay liquefies and offers virtually no resistance); and plastic
hinges (a model where pipe or restraint yields throughout the cross-section). An example of
a pipe in a soil trench, along with a graphic representation of the restraint response is shown
in Figure 3-105.

PIPE IN A TRENCH:

Lx
Ultimate Lateral Load = 120,000 lb.
Estimated Lateral Stiffness = 60,000 Ib./in.

Ultimate Vertical Load = 240,000 lb.


Estimated Vertical Stiffness = 533,333 Ib./in.
Vertical bilinear soil spring model:

Lateral bilinear soil spring model:


Ultimate
Load

Force

Force

-----4=======+ Y

-----Jf-----. X
K1
Ultimate
Load
(120,000)

Ultimate
Load
(240,000)

Figure 3-105
3-107

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The iterative technique used for these restraints is explained below. The analysis is first
do ne using a linear restraint with the first stiffness (KI)' The restraint load (F) is then
checked, ifit is less than the transition load (Fy), then the analysis is complete. Ifnot, sorne
modification is done to the model. First, a CNODE is added at the end of the restraint. A
displacement equal to Fy/KI and a force equal to Fy are imposed on the CNODE, with a
corresponding -Fy placed on the restrained point. The stiffness of the restraint is then
changed to the second input stiffness K2, and the system is reanalyzed. The restraint load
is then re-examined, and the process is repeated until the status of aIl restraints converges.
Bi-linear restraints are entered in CAESAR II through the use of the designation X2, Y2,
Z2, RX2, RY2, or RZ2. The user is also required to enter the two stiffnesses, as weIl as the
ultimate, or transition, load. This type ofrestraint is discussed further in Section 3.6.2 of
these seminar notes.

3.5.3 Evaluation of Restraint Stiffness


In Section 2.3.3 ofthese seminar notes the significant effect that restraint stiffnesses may
have on the piping system was described. Assuming restraints are rigid (when they are far
from rigid) can lead to grossly conservative designs, possibly resulting in the unnecessary
modification of the system. However, assuming that restraints are rigid cannot always be
counted on to pro duce conservative solutions in a complex piping system, either. It is
therefore often necessary to refine pipe stress analyses through the use ofestimated restraint
stiffness. Section 3.4.3 provided one means of doing this, using techniques for estimating an
accurate stiffness for piping to vessel anchors.
If the stiffness is not entered by the user, CAESAR II defaults restraints to rigid - i.e., to
have a stiffness (translational or rotational) of 1.0E12 lb/in or in-Ib/deg. In many cases, this
is an extreme overestimate. For example, the stiffness of the "typical" restraint shown in
Figure 3-106, can be conservatively estimated to be the stiffness ofthe bending of the W4X13
wide flange and the extension of the 1-inch diameter rod under load.

1"CP/,

Rad

Figure 3-106

3-108

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The stiffness of the support is calculated as the inverse of the displacement of the support
under a one pound load at the pipe, or (for this particular case):

Where:
k

stiffness of restraint, lb/in

LI

length of wide flange, in

El

modulus of elasticity ofwide flange material, psi

moment of inertia of wide flange, in4

L2

length of rod, in

area of rod, in2

E2

modulus of elasticity of rod material, psi

For this example, the stiffness is:


k

1 / [36 3/(3 x 29E6 x 11.3) + 36/(29E6 x pi/4)]

20,392 lb/in

This stiffness is far from 1E12. However the impact ofmodeling a restraint such as this as
rigid depends on the characteristics ofthe piping system, since the true goal is to simulate
a reasonable estimate of the relative stiffness ofrestraints to pipe. It is best to be concerned
about modeling stiffnesses at restraints which obviously do not appear to be "rigid" relative
to the pipe. Examples of anchors that should probably be modeled with a less than rigid
stiffness are shown in Figures 3-107 and 3-108.

3-109

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

+ - The vessel nozzle is probably


a very poor anchor here.

The vessel nozzle is probably


a very rigid anchor here.

k------?~~======::-

Figure 3-107

Ta have called this point an anchor,


and left the structure out of the
model would not have been very
accu rate.

Figure 3-108
The basic question that should be posed when reviewing restraints for possible modeling of
the stiffness is "What is the relative stiffness of the restraint compared to the pipe and the
loads being applied?" Influential factors include:

3-110

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Large, hot, thick walled pipe usually has high axial stiffness and large loads,
implying that impacted restraints may be less than rigid in comparison.

Alternatively, for small bore pipe, a restraint ofvirtually any stiffness probably
appears to be rigid in comparison - when analyzing a 2-inch diameter line,
results may not change noticeably even if the restraint stiffnesses are entered
as 10,000 lb/in or 1E12 lblin.

Restraints in structures or buildings located high above grade may be affected


by the flexibility of the building frame.

It is often difficult to build structures which can "rigidly" restrain moments. This
is due both to the low torsional resistance of open sections, and due to the fact
that structural members cannot be loaded in the strong axis for aIl three
rotational directions. Performing the analysis using more realistic, flexible
moment restraints will most likely cause the restraint to rotate slightly,
transferring the moment load elsewhere in the system, and potentially dissipating it.

Connections at the top oftall towers may be flexible due to the lateral flexibility
of the structure.

Soil anchors are cumulatively stiff, but locally very weak. It is common to
continue buried pipe models for several hundred feet after the pipe has become
buried. It is only after this distance that a "cumulative" (virtual) anchor is
considered to have been formed. Waterhammer loads at buried elbows can cause
pipes to "kick out" of the ground. In this case the local soil strength is smaIl, and
the localload is very high. (Where this is considered a problem, concrete blocks
and supports are poured around elbows that are part oflong elbow-elbow pairs.)

It is unrealistic to selectively model in restraint stiffnesses. For example, given


three identical restraints in a row, if the center one has its true stiffness modeled
and the other two do not, the analysis will force load away from the restraint at
the center and toward those on the ends (which will not be the case in reality).
It must be remembered when trying for accurate relative stiffness that the
stiffnesses must be accurate not only relative to the pipe, but also relative to other
supports.

In general, it is safe to say that the results of most analyses will increase in
accuracy as the modeled restraint stiffnesses increase in accuracy.

Restraint stiffness can be calculated manuaIly, as was done for the restraint shown in Figure
3-106 and simply entered into CAESAR II when coding in the restraint. An alternative is
to construct a partial model of the restraint as part of the piping system, using either pipe
elements or structural members. For example, the flexibility oftall vessels can be modeled
with pipe elements down to the foundation. In the case of structural steel models, often
including only a small part of the model is sufficient to improve the behavior of the restraint.
Complex structural steel models may be incorporated in to the piping system using the
structural steel modeler, accessible from CAESAR II's main menu.

3-111

eOADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.5.3.1 Use of the Structural Steel Modeler


Elements of structural steel members may be incorporated into the model of the piping
system through the use of the structural steel modeler. These elements may vary from a
single member (such as a saddle, welded to the pipe), to a complete restraint structure, to
a complete model of the building steel. The steel may be modeled in order to include the
stiffness ofthe structure in the analysis, or inorderto calculate the loads on the steel for stress
analysis ofthese members (which can be done through the AISe unity check, accessible from
CAESAR II's main menu).
In general, constructing a structural model is very similar to constructing a piping modelthe same information is required: geometric layout, element cross sections, material
parameters, boundary conditions, and loading. Internally, the calculations made are
identical for the structure as for the pipe. The only major differences (aside from the actual
process ofproblem coding) are:
1

Almost aIl joints between piping elements are assumed to be fixed connections
(i.e., aIl three forces and aIl three moments are transferred between adjacent
piping elements). In steel structures, the connections may transfer only selected
loads between adjacent elements, depending upon the actualjoint construction.
For example, the clip anglejoint shown in Figure 3-109 is one ofthe most common
connection types - it is assumed to transmit forces, but no moments. Moment
connections require welding of the flanges of the wide flange, since moments are
carried in the flanges and shear is carried in the web. Therefore the user must
be careful to accurately model the internaI connections between members. (Note
that the default connection provides full fixity.)

I~
1

B-llI~

1
1

F"mIITI!;3

!,~

~~-/~!

Figure 3-109

3-112

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Structural members perform very similarly to pipe elements except that the
structural elements are not symmetric about their member axis; in fact,
structural elements are usually weak for loading in one direction and strong in
another. This means that the local orientation ofthe element is very important.
Element orientation is specified through the use of the ANGLE parameter,
which specifies the angle which the element is rotated away from its "standard"
orientation. In CAESAR II's structural modeler, "standard" orientation is
defined as follows:
a) for elements running in the horizontal plane (beams), the element's weak
axis coincides with the global Y-axis
b) for elements running in the vertical plane (columns), the element's strong
axis coincides with the global Z-axis
c) for elements running in a skewed plane (bracing), the projection of the
element's weak axis on the vertical plane coincides with the global Y-axis

Correct orientation of elements can be easily checked by using the structural modeler's PLOT
commando
CAESAR II's structural modeler uses keyword input, which may be entered interactively
or through a file. Commonly used keywords are listed below:

HELP
DEL
EDIM
EDIT
ERR
FIX
LIST
LOAD
MATID
PLOT
QQUIT
QUIT
SECID
STAT
UNIF

Gives help
Repeats last command
Deletes input
Defines structural element
Leaves interactive for full screen edit mode
Error checks input
Defines restraint conditions
Lists input
Defines concentrated loads
Defines material properties
Plots structure
Exits model building mode, does no error checking,
does not build analysis files
Exits model building mode, does error checking, builds
analysis files
Defines cross sectional properties
Gives current model status
Defines uniform loads

Where more data is required for a command, the program prompts the user for it.
The program includes over 900 standard steel shapes, the properties of which may be
accessed byname. Three databases are available-the 1977 AISC, 1989 AISC, and the 1991
German (DIN) standards. The user may enter the specifie cross-sectional parameters for
non-standard shapes.

3-113

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

A sample problem, showing co ding of a pipe rack, is shown in Figure 3-110. The
accompanying input illustrates the use the most common keywords to define a model.

1015
SECID = 1, W8X1 0
;Define column cross section as #1
SECID = 2, W6X9
;Define beam cross section as #2
MATID = 1, YM=29E6 POIS=.3 G=11 E6 DENS = .283
DEFAULT SECID = 1
EDIM 1005 1010 DY=12-0
EDIM 1010 1015 DY=12-0
EDIM 1035 1030 DY=12-0
EDIM 1030 1025 DY=12-0
DEFAULT SECID = 2
EDIM 1015 1020 DX =5-0
EDIM 10201025 DX=5-0
EDIM 1010 1030 DX=10-0
FIX 1005 ALL
FIX 1035 ALL

.-----~~-----.

1025

12'-0"
;Define ail columns
1010

1030

;Define ail beams

12'-0"

W8x10

1005

1-

10'-0"

1035

-1

Figure 3-110
Note that a no de point (1020) must be placed along a structural member whenever an
intersection with the piping system is to occur. The structure is included in the piping
problem by entering the file name through an option of the Kaux menu. The pipe is then
attached to the structure by usingthe attachment no de point on thestructure as the restraint
CNODE.
Many structures (such as building frames or continuous racks) have a high degree of
repeatability. The user can take advantage of this through the use of no de and element
generation commands.
For example, the large structure shown in Figure 3-111 can be created using generation
commands. The process is to first define one corner node, then fill a single column line of
nodes, then sweep the line of nodes out into an area pattern, and finally sweep the area
pattern up into a volume pattern of nodes, each step of which takes a single commando
Elements can then be generated in a similar manner.

3-114

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

188

@Fill
VoluMe

~3
@Fill Line

_____ ,)

(!) First

Node

Figure 3-111

The entire structure can be entered using only 14 commands to define the geometry, crosssectional properties, material properties, and boundary conditions:
SECID 1 W14Xl20
SECID 2 WI0Xl2

COLUMNS
BEAMS

MATID 1 YM=30E6 POIS=0.3 G=11E6 DENS=0.283

DEFINE MAT'L PARAMETERS

NODE
NGEN
NGEN
NGEN

FIRST CORNER NODE


LINE OF NODES 1 THRU 5
LINE INTO AREA PATTERN
AREA PATTERN INTO VOLUME

1
(1) LAST=5 NODEINC=l DX=10-0
1 TO 5 LAST=30 NODEINC=5 DZ=15-0
1 TO 30 LAST=180 NODEINC=30 DY=22-0

EGEN 1 TO 31 LAST=60
DEFAULT SECID=2
EGEN
EGEN
EGEN
EGEN

31 TO
(151)
31 TO
(271)

GENINC=30 GENLAST=180

GENERATE ALL COLUMNS


DEFAULT SECTION TO BEAMS

32 LAST=35 GENINC=30 GENLAST=155 : GENERATE ONE X-Y SIDE


: GENERATE OTHER X-Y SIDES
(170) LAST=180 GENINC=5
36 INC=5 LAST=56 GENINC=30 GENLAST=176 : ONE Z-Y SIDE
REMAINING Z-Y SIDES
(295) LAST=180 GENINC=l

FIX 1 TO 30 ALL

: FIX ALL BASE NODES

3-115

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.5.4 Use of CNODES When Modeling Restraints


As discussed elsewhere in these seminar notes, CNODES (short for connecting nodes) are
used with a restraint whenever a point in the piping system is retrained against another
point in the system. The CNODE point may be physically on a vessel, a steel structure, or
another piece of pipe; or it may be a fictitious node which can be used to model a wide range
of system behaviors, such as settlement.
For example, pipe on pipe supports can only be modeled using CNODES. One example is
shown in Figure 3-112. In that figure, no de point 30 rests on a saddle, which fits with an
arc (unwelded) to the pipe at node point 225. Because the saddle is welded to the branch line
and partially wraps around the pipe at node point 225, node point 30 cannot move down or
in the Z-direction, but can move up and can slide in the X-direction -relative to node point
225. Ifthis restraint is simply coded as a +Y and Z restraint, with Mu=0.3, at node point 30,
this would indicate restraint against a rigid point in space. This is obviously incorrect; the
model can be rectified by placing a CNODE of225 on both the +Y and Z restraints. This will
permit node point 30 to move freely relative to rigid points in space, but provides restraint
relative to node point 225.
A further example is shown in Figure 3-113. Node point 65 is supported from the overhead
pipe at node point 195. The rod shown can handle tension only. Therefore node point 65 can
move freely relative to rigid points in space, but is constrained against moving down relative
to node point 195. The restraint is therefore specified as a +Y restraint at node point 65, with
a CNODE of 195. Note that it doesn't matter which node is the connecting node as long as
the proper relationship between the nodes is maintained; i.e., the restraint could be specified
equally correctly as a -y restraint at node point 195, with a CNODE of 65.

saddle free to slide


mu = 0.3

Figure 3-112

3-116

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Figure 3-113
CNODES can also be used to accurately model the effect ofsettlement. In Figure 3-114, the
pipe rests on the ground at node point 95. The ground at this point is expected to settle in
the -y direction; the pipe may or may not settle with it dependingon the stiffness ofthe nearby
pipe. This configuration can be modeled with a +Y restraint at node point 95, with a CNODE
of1095 (friction is optional). The settlement displacement of -0.325 inches in the Y-direction
is then imposed at node point 1095. This allows node point 95 to either lift-off, or to settle,
according to the configuration of the piping system as a whole .

..-J---...;.----=---t
Figure 3-114

3-117

0.325'

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.6 Miseellaneous Topies


This section contains discussions of special modeling situations, such as cold spring, plastic
pipe, underground pipe, jacketed pipe, and flange leakage analysis.

3.6.1 Consideration of Cold Spring


Cold spring is the process of offsetting (or pre-Ioading) the piping system with displacement
loads (usually accompli shed by cutting short or long the pipe runs between two anchors) for
the purpose ofreducing the absolute expansion load on the system. Cold spring is used to:
1

hasten the thermal shakedown of the system in fewer operating cycles

reduce the magnitude ofloads on equipment and restraints, since often, only a
single application of a large load is sufficient to damage these elements

Note that no credit can be taken for cold spring in the stress calculations, since the expansion
stress provisions of the piping codes require the evaluation of the stress range, which is
unaffected by cold spring (except possibility in the presence of non-linear boundary
conditions, as discussed below). The cold spring merely adjusts the stress mean, but not the
range.
Many engineers avoid cold spring due to the difficulty of maintaining accurate records
throughout the operating life of the unit. Future analysts attempting to make field repairs
or modifications may not necessarily know about (and therefore include in the analysis) the
cold spring specification.
Due to the difficulty of properly installing a cold sprung system, most piping codes
recommend that only 2/3 of the specified cold spring be used for the equipment load
calculations.
An example of how to calculate the amount of cold spring necessary to reduce equipment
loads is provided in Figure 3-115.
In the example shown, the pipe expands between the anchor and the equipment,
placing excessive thermalloads on the nozzle. The ide a is to calculate the total
thermal expansion which the pipe wishes to make between the two pumps, and
then to offset the pipe by approximately half ofthat amount through the use of
cut short elements.

3-118

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

10'-0

~.I

~
5'-6

EQUIPMENT
ANCHOR

2'-6

3'-9

Figure 3-115

The cold spring amount is calculated as:

Where:
Ci

length of cold spring in direction i (where i is X, Y, or Z), in

Li

totallength of pipe subject to expansion in direction i, in

=
=

dT

change in temperature, oF

mean thermal expansion coefficient of material between ambient and


operating temperature, in/in/oF

For the case in Figure 3-115, assume that the operating temperature is 1170oF, ambient
temperature is 70oF, and the coefficient of me an coefficient of thermal expansion between
the two for the material is 7E-6 in/in/oF. In that case:
Lx

(13)(12) + 8 + (5)(12) + 6 + (3)(12) + 9 =

431 in

Ly

(5)(12) + (10)(12)+ (2)(12) + 6

210 in

3-119

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Lz

(30)(12) + (23)(12) + 7

643 in

Cx

(112) (431) (7E-6) (1170 - 70)

1.659 in

Cy

(1/2) (210) (7E-6) (1170 - 70)

0.809 in

Cz

(112) (643) (7E-6) (1170 - 70)

2.475 in

Therefore, one of the pipe runs in the X-direction should be cut short by approximately 1-5/
8 inches, one of the runs in the Y-direction should be cut short by approximately 3/4 inches,
and one of the runs in the Z-direction should be cut short by approximately 2-112 inches, as
shown in the figure.
Note that the (1/2) in the equation for the cold spring amount is used such that the mean
stress is zero. In some cases it is desirable to have the operating load on the equipment as
close to zero as possible. In this latter case the (1/2) should be omitted. The maximum stress
magnitude will not change from a system without cold spring, but will now exist in the cold
case rather than the hot.
AlI pipe stress programs provide very specific methods of modeling cold spring. As of this
writing (Version 3.18), CAESAR II provides two methods of specifying cold spring. (This is
scheduled to change with Version 3.20 of the program, when cold spring will be more easily
manipulated as a separate loading case.)
In the first method, elements may be specified as being made of cut short or cut long
materials. Cut short de scribes a cold sprung section ofpipe fabricated short by the amount
of the cold spring, requiring an initial tensile load to close the final joint. Cut long describes
a cold sprung section ofpipe fabricated long by the amount of cold spring, requiring an initial
compressive load to close the final joint. The software models cut shorts and cut longs by
applying end forces to the elements sufficient to reduce their length to zero (from the defined
length) or increase their length to the defined length (from zero) respectively. (It should be
remembered to make the lengths ofthese cold spring elements only 2/3 oftheir actuallengths
to implement the code recommendations.) This is effectively what occurs during application
of cold spring. The end forces applied to the elements are then included in the basic loading
case F (for force), whereby they can be included in various load combinations.
The drawback to this method occurs when other forces are present, such as applied external
forces or spring hanger loads. In this case, the cold spring forces cannot be segregated from
these other forces in the basic load case F. Therefore, the second method of modeling cold
spring is more appropriate - using a second (or third) thermal case to represent the effects
of cold spring. In this way the effects of cold spring can be isolated from all other loadings
through the specification of the extra thermal case. This is done as follows:
1

model the system as normal, but use at least one element with a length and
direction corresponding to the specified cold spring (the same as in the first
method, but make it of the same material as the pipe, not of a special cut short
or long material)

apply the normal operating temperatures to all elements ofthe model as thermal
load case Tl - this represents the expansion of the system during operation

3-120

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

create thermalload case T2 representing only the effects of the cold spring - for
this case:
a) all non-cold spring elements are given a temperature equal to ambient
b) all cut short elements are given an alpha value (instead of a temperature)
of -0.6667, representing a shrinkage of 2/3 of its defined length
c) all cut long elements are given an alpha value of 0.6667, representing an
expansion of 2/3 of its defined length

Note that in order to enter an alpha value on the order of 0.6667, the alpha tolerance value
of the CAESAR II setup file will probably have to be changed. For more information on
changing the alpha tolerance, and modeling cold spring in general, the user is referred to the
CAESAR II User's Manual.
When analyzing a system with cold spring, a different set of load cases should be run.
Assuming that the cold spring load case is T2 (as described in method 2 above), the following
load cases probably constitute a good recommendation:

Load Case 1- P+W+F+T2 (OPE) - This is effectively a "cold operating" case - i.e., it
represents the piping system in the cold condition, but includes both primary (P+W+F)
and secondary (T2) loads, so it cannot be used for stress purposes. The reactions from
this load case should be used for checking the restraint and equipment loads.
Load Case 2 - P+W+F (SUS) - This is a sustained case from the point ofview that only
primary loads are considered, and should therefore be used for checking the system
sustained stresses. However, ifthere are non-linear effects such as one-way restraints,
gaps, etc. present in the system, the restraint configuration should be examined to verify
that it is a true representation of the restraint status during hot or cold operation.
Load Case 3 - P+W+F +Tl +T2 (OPE) - This is the hot operating case, representing the
piping system after thermal expansion. It is not used for stress purposes, but again the
reactions from this load case are used for checking the restraint and equipment loads
(they should be checked for the maximum loads from the cold or hot operating case).
Load Case 4 - D1- D3 (EXP). This is the algebraic difference between, or the range of
loading through which the pipe goes when heating up between, the cold and the hot
cases. Therefore this is the expansion case, and is used to check the expansion stress
requirements ofthe codes. Note that for completely linear systems, the expansion range
(i.e., the difference between load case 3 and load case 1) is Tl, eliminating the effect of
the cold spring.
Care must be exercised when running cold spring and hanger design simultaneously. Cold
spring in vertical runs of pipe adjacent to hanger design locations can cause inordinate
weight loads to appear at the hanger positions. Cold spring effects should be omitted from
the restrained weight run and included in the hanger operating run.

3-121

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3.6.2 Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic Pipe


The characteristic ofwrapped fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP) pipe which distinguishes
it from other piping materials is that it is orthotropic - the material has different properties
in the longitudinal and hoop directions - and can therefore not be modeled by the standard
CAESAR II pipe element. This is because of the method by which this type of pipe is made.
For wrapped FRP pipe, the wall thickness is built up by wrapping layers of glass and matrix
at several pre-specified angles about the pipe axis pipe. Twenty to thirty layers, wrapped
at different angles, are usually used to obtain the desired pressure carrying capacity and
bending strength. Because the layers are at different angles, and because the glass/matrix
sheets are only capable ofaxialload carrying capacity, the resulting pipe has different
strength characteristics in the hoop and longitudinal directions. For example, ifthe pipe was
only wrapped at 90 degrees to the pipe axis, the resulting pipe could only contain hoop
pressure stresses, with essentially no resistance against longitudinal pressure or bending
loads. Because there is no standard angle ofwrap, the pipe properties must be gotten from
the manufacturer. Obtaining these properties is fairly straight forward, as there are typical
relationships that are used to calculate global properties based upon the local characteristics
of the glass and matrix, given the angle and the degree of wrap.

Morrix Loyers
(Exaggercieci)

Res!"

MCTrix

Figure 3-116

Note that today a non-wrapped form ofFRP pipe is also available. In this type ofpipe, the
glass, in very small pieces, is enclosed in the matrix, and then sprayed into a piping mold.
This method of construction provides for essentially isotropie properties, as the glass fibers
are oriented at random in the matrix. In this instance, the standard CAESAR II pipe
element can be used. Other plastics, such as PVC, also exhibit isotropie properties, and can
therefore be modeled by the standard element as weIl.
TheCAESAR II plastic pipe element is based upon a model ofwrapped fiberglass reinforced
plastic pipe. When this element is requested, the following addition al material properties
are required:
G

shear modulus of elasticity , which is not necessarily related to


the tensile modulus of elasticity (as for isotropie materials), psi

Eaxial

axial elastic modulus (different from the hoop elastic modulus),


psi

3-122

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Eaxial/Ehoop

* Vb/a

ratio of the axial elastic modulus over the hoop elastic


modulus times Poisson's ratio of a strain in the axial
direction resulting from a stress in the hoop direction,
dimensionless
coefficient of thermal expansion, inlinloF

CAESAR II prompts for these values whenever material #20 (plastic pipe) is selected.
Unless otherwise entered, the following default values are used:
Shear Modulus

80,000 psi

Axial Elastic Modulus

3.2E6 psi

0.15273

Thermal Expansion Coefficient =

12.0E-6 inlinloF

When analyzing plastic pipe, one primarily looks for points where the pipe is undersupported both horizontally and verticaIly. Piping designers used to working with steel pipe
tend to under-support plastic pipe because they often use rules ofthumb and a "design eye"
for the much stronger steel pipe. As a result supports near vertical risers may be placed too
far from the verticalleg, causing excessive bending, and leakage at weakjoints. Horizontal
supports should be provided liberally because they are inexpensive and lightly loaded, and
because they prevent the pipe from buckling or moving into a position that is potentially
dangerous. In fact, any horizontally unsupported line can "walk" its way off of supports, into
neighboring lines, etc., if the designer is not careful. These types of problems seem to be
exacerbated when working with plastic pipe.
PracticaIly, the pressure stresses in plastic pipe should be considered before any flexibility
analysis is done (this is consistent with the way any other pipe stress analysis is done). These
pressures determine the required thickness of the pipe, and the degree ofwrap.
N ext the pipe stress analysis should be done. There are few explicit piping codes or allowable
stresses available for plastic pipe; it is up to the user to determine the appropriate flexibility
and stress intensification factors, load combinations, and allowable stresses. CAESAR II
models flexibility factors for plastic pipe elbows as 1.0, since the hoop modulus is generally
considerably higher than the axial modulus, thus resisting cross sectional ovalization.
Intersections and curved fittings are generally assumed to be approximately three times as
thick as the matching pipe. When this is done an SIF of2.3, a value recommended by CibaGeigy for plastic pipe systems, is typically used. If the user has better stress intensification
factor data, those values may be specified at individual fittings.
It is conservative, and a practical approach, to combine aIl simultaneous loadings together
to determine the maximum stress in the pipe. This includes the effects ofweight, pressure,
and thermal effects. (When pressure is specified in plastic pipe, CAESAR II always
activates the Bourdon pressure effect. This accounts for the displacements due to pressure
elongation of the pipe, which can be significant in plastic pipe.) Preferably, the analysis
results should be reviewed with the plastic pipe manufacturer to verify that the model is
accurate and that the pipe supplied is capable ofwithstanding the stresses, pipe forces and

3-123

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

moments, and restraint reaction loads. Otherwise, the resulting operating stresses (both
code and bending stresses) can then be compared to the maximum allowable stresses as
specified by the pipe manufacturer.
In some cases, the manufacturer does not provide allowable stresses, but rather, maximum
allowable pressures and maximum recommended weight spans. In this case, the user can
convert this information to allowable stresses by proceeding through the steps outlined
below:
1

The user should look up in the manufacturer's specifications the maximum


pressure and allowable weight spanforplastic pipe (oftheappropriate diameter),
filled with water.

N ext a plastic pipe model comprised of straight pipe elements resting on vertical
supports should be built. The model should include at least six equally spaced
supports, with a node point placed at the midpoint of the middle span. The
distance between supports should be equal to the maximum allowed pipe span
obtained from the manufacturer's data.

Making sure that the modeled pipe is filled with water and pressurized at the
maximum allowable pressure (obtained from the manufacturer's data), a weight
plus pressure analysis on the pipe should be run.

The large st code stress and the large st bending stress found on the three node
points of the middle span should then be used as the limits to the operating
bending and code stresses found in the analysis of the actual system.

The real benefit of analysis of plastic pipe is that it helps to eliminate poorly supported
systems that will eventually leak, or will cause distortion problems with the line. Whereas
hot steel pipe can be easily over-supported, plastic pipe typically cannot. The tendency is to
under-support it, or to support it incorrectly, producing large thermal moments at intermediate elbows. Both of these design flaws should be discovered easily with a stress analysis
of the system.

3.6.3 Underground Pipe


Analyzing an underground piping system presents circumstances quite different from those
encountered when analyzing plant piping. The major problem is the accurate modeling,
using point restraints, of the continuous effects of soil-pipe interaction. The pipe-soil
interaction, which resists piping movements and forces, are divided into two categories frictional forces, which must be overcome by pipe sliding against the soil, and pressure forces,
which are caused by the pipe pushing against the soil.
Axial friction force is calculated as the product ofthe soil-pipe friction coefficient and the total
normal force acting around the pipe. An example of a pipe buried in a trench is shown in
Figure 3-117. In this case, the normal force acting on the pipe surface can be simplified as
a top force W (for cases where the soil coyer ranges from one to three times the pipe diameter,
this is approximately equal to the weight ofthe soil above the pipe), and a bottom force, equal
to the weight of the pipe plus the soil above it. Therefore the frictional force offering axial

3-124

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

restraint on the pipe is estimated as:

Mu (W + W + Wp)

axial friction force, lb/in

Mu

coefficient of friction between pipe and soil

Su / 600 (for clay)

Su

Undrained shear strength

density ofbackfiIl soil, Ib/in3

outside diameter of pipe, in

height of soil coyer to top of pipe, in

Wp

weight of pipe and contents, lb/in

= Mu (2p

D H + Wp)

Where:

a. Trenched pIpe

b. Soil pressure

c. Idealized model

Figure 3-117

The soil density and friction coefficient can be obtained from soil tests performed along the
pipe route. Where data is not available, the foIlowing values are typical:
Silt - 0.3

Sand - 0.4

Gravel - 0.5

Clay = 0.6 to 2.4

Pressure forces are caused when the pipe tries to move lateraIly, pushing against the soil.
Three different lateral soil forces normaIly encountered in piping analysis are shown in
Figure 3-118. Each lateral restraint response can be idealized, as shown in Figure 3-118d,
into two response stages: elastic, where the resisting force is proportional to the pipe
displacement, and plastic, where resistance remains constant regardless of displacement.
This type of restraint can be modeled using a bi-linear restraint, specifying an elastic
stiffness, an ultimate load (for the elastic to plastic transition), and a plastic stiffness (which
should be near zero). The soil will not only restrain the pipe against movements, but through
couples, against rotations as weIl.

3-125

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Displacement _
b. Downward

a. Upward

c. Sideward

d. Force displacement

Figure 3-118

The stiffness of the soil restraint (in lb/in per inch of pipe) can be calculated as the product
of the soil modulus of elasticity times the outer diameter of the pipe. In the event that the
soil modulus is not known, the stiffness can be determined from other soil parameters. For
example, for sidewards motion, a passive pressure is created at the front surface of the pipe.
According to L. C. Peng's paper "Stress Analysis Methods for Underground Pipelines"
(published in the May 1978 edition of Pipe Line Industry), the ultimate load and idealized
elastic response can be estimated from various soil parameters, as:
U

= 33.336 x p (H + D) tan2(45+ <p /2)

1/2 x p (H + D)2 tan 2(45+ <p /2)

Where:
U

ultimate load, lb (per inch of pipe)

<p

soil friction angle, degrees

soil elastic stiffness, lb/in (per inch of pipe)

= eD
e

soil modulus of elasticity, psi

In order to sufficiently simulate the continuous effect of soil restraint, it is often necessary
to break underground piping into a finer mesh than would be necessary for plant piping.

3.6.3.1 Modeling Soil Restraint


The following basic outline can be used for modeling buried pipe:
1

At least 200-300 feet of the buried pipe should be included in order to model the
effect of a cumulative anchor

N odes (and associated restraints) should not bespaced further than 20 diameters
apart for pipe greater than 12 inch in diameter, or greater than 30 diameters
apart for 12 inch and under diameters.

3-126

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Contributory area should be calculated for each no de as:

Where:
A

contributory area, in2

Li

length ofthe pipe "i", in

Di

outside diameter of pipe "i", in

number of pipes framing into the node

For example, the contributory area for node 20 of the 12" nominal diameter pipe
shown in Figure 3-119 is calculated as:
A

1/2 (10 x 12 x 12.75 + 30 x 12 x 12.75)

15

= 3060 in2

25

20

10

Figure 3-119
4

The subgrade modulus of elasticity for the type of soil is then determined,
preferably from actual soil tests. In lieu ofbetter information, the following data
(taken from Joseph E. Bowles, "Foundation Analysis and Design", 3rd Edition,
1982) is available:

Sail type

Subgrade modulus Ckips/ft 3 )

loose sand
medium dense sand
dense sand
clay and dense sand
silty and dense sand
clay qu < 4 ksf
clay qu < 800 ksf
clay qu > 1600 ksf

30-100
60-500
400-800
200-500
250-700
75-150
150-300
>300

3-127

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

(where qu is the unconfined compressive strength of the soil)


If otherwise not known, the subgrade modulus, e, can be calculated from
k =
e

eD = 33.336 x r (H + D)2 tan2(45+


(33.336 / D) x r (H + D) tan 2(45+

<1>

<1>

/2), or:

/2)

The effective soil restraint stiffness for each node is calculated by multiplyingthe
contributory area for each node times the soil subgrade modulus.

Lateral restraints (and possibly rotational restraints representing restraint


force couples) with the calculated stiffnesses should then be inserted into the
piping model at the appropriate nodes.

Next the density of the pipe should be set to zero, since the weight ofburied pipe
is uniformly supported along its length. Weight loads in buried pipe do not cause
deflections, stresses, or forces in the pipe. (Note that this step should be skipped
when doing dynamic analysis of underground pipe, since the mass distribution
is important in the dynamic analysis.)

Any axial stops in the form oflarge flanges or concrete anchors, designed to resist
the thermal expansion of buried pipe, should then be coded into the model. If
these are present, it is recommended that the restraint stiffnesses calculated
above be reduced by approximately 25% in order to yield more conservative
anchor loads.

3.6.3.2 Automated Underground Piping Modeler

CAESAR II provides an automatic underground pipe modeler, accessed from the main
menu, which markedly simplifies this modelingprocess. The underground modeler provides
two services to the user:
If soil properties are not known, or if a good mathematical model of the soil is not
available, CAESAR II provides a default soil model that may be used to
approximate "typical" soil support characteristics.

Given soil support stiffnesses either from user input or from the default model,
CAESAR II distributes the buried restraint stiffnesses over the buried part of
the piping system. This is probably the most useful part of the buried pipe
modeler. Properly breaking down the model into a finer element mesh and
distributing restraints over the piping system is a very time consuming task to
do accurately by hand, which the buried pipe modeler can do in seconds. The
distribution of restraint stiffnesses over lateral bearing lengths, transition
lengths, and over axial bearing lengths is described in detail in the CAESAR II
user's manual.

Sel dom are soil properties known very accurately. Often there is absolutely no quantitative
data available on the soil at the site. In these situations, the default soil model will probably
provide as good an estimate of the actual soil properties as any. This model is based on a

3-128

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

combination of data available from a variety of sources (many from research on driven piles).
After evaluating this data, it was determined that there was insufficient accuracy to
differentiate between the horizontal and vertical soil restraint stiffnesses.
Intuitively, it seems plausible that the downward stiffness of a buried pipe will be greater
than both the lateral and upward stiffnesses, and the lateral stiffnesses will be greater than
the upward stiffness, which will vary according to the buried depth. When there is good soil
data and a good soil model available, it should be used in place ofCAESAR II's default soil
model. These numbers can be input directlyto the buried pipe modeler. This improved model
can take into account the differences among lateral, upward, and downward distributed soil
stiffnesses.
The underground piping modeler provides the user the opportunity to enter the following soil
properties:

FRICTION COEFFICIENT
SOI L DENSITY
BURIED DEPTH TO TOP OF PIPE
FRICTION ANGLE
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH
OVERBURDEN COMPACTION MULTIPLIER
THERMAL EXPANSION COEFFICIENT
TEMPERATURE CHANGE (Installed to operating)
Note that the overburden compaction multiplier is a degree of compaction of the backfill, and
is calculated by multiplying the Proctor Number (a measure ofbackfill efficiency defined in
most soils textbooks as a ratio ofunit weights) by 8. The underground pipe modeler defaults
to a value of the overburden compaction multiplier of8; this results in somewhat conservative restraint stiffnesses. Under common practice, this value is often reduced to somewhere
in the range from 5 to 7.
From this data, the underground pipe modeler calculates the axial friction loads, the
transverse ultimate load and elastic stiffness, and automatically inserts the appropriate
restraints, adding additional nodes as necessary. A diagram of a pipe for which soil restraints
were generated by the underground piping modeler is shown in Figure 3-120.

3-129

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Figure 3-120

3.6.4 Jacketed Pipe


Jacketed piping can be idealized as two piping systems running along coincident Iines in
space. The two piping systems are oftwo different sizes, so the smaller runs inside of the
Iarger. The internaI pipe contains the piped fluid, while the outer pipe (the jacket) is used
for protection or to carry a heated fluid to warm that in the inner pipe.
An example ofjacketed pipe is shown in Figure 3-121.

3-130

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Internai Support Between Core

Welded swage used as


/ e n d c ap .

Shrink fit or welded end


cap.

RIGID RaD SUPPORT

and Jacket. (Spider)

Do (CORE)
Di (JACKET)

' \ BLaCK FITTING

Ep

(5) - Core pipe Il ange face.

~@-I-e
l''::'L.----O
~
~

(10) - End Cap connection between core and jacket.

(15) - Point of flexible internai support between core


and jacket.
(20) - Node for the action of the rigid rod and for the
monitoring of the displacements between the core
and the jacket. This displacement should never
be greater than (Di(Jacket)-Do(Core) ) / 2.

Figure 3-121

Jacketed piping systems are modeled by running the jacket elements directly on top of the
core elements where the two are concentric. InternaI supports (spiders) offer negligible
resistance to relative bending and axial displacement, so rigid restraints should be placed
between the inner and outer pipe (for example between node points 15 and 1015) only in the
local Y-and Z-directions. The end caps connecting the core to the jacket ofthe pipe are usually
much stiffer than either the core or the jacket. For this reason at end cap locations (node

3-131

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

points 10 and 25), the inner and outer pipes should share the same node point (i.e., node
points 1010 and 1025 should not be used) - this ensures that the rotations and displacements are identical for the two pipes at these locations.
.
The +y support acting on the jacket at node point 1020 does not cause any restraint to be
inserted between nodes 20 and 1020. Node 20 is included in the model so that interference
with the outside diameter can be checked at the 20-1020 cross section. Should there be
concerns about interference, a restraint with a gap equal to the clearance between the inner
and outer pipes can be entered. If a load develops at that restraint, this indicates an
interference.
The specific modeling process is fairly simple. The inner pipe is modeled first, with the user
taking care to place a node point at each location where there is an internaI spacer support.
Next the inner pipe is duplicated using the element block copy feature (accessed with the List
hot key from the input spreadsheet). The entire run of the inner pipe should be copied, with
a suitable node increment to ensure that no nodes are duplicated between the two copies.
The second copy becomes the outer pipe. It is necessary to first change the diameter and wall
thickness (and possibly the fluid density and temperature) of the pipe on the first screen of
the outer pipe; these changes propagate through. N ext the user must go through and change
the bend radii of each of the elbows in the outer pipe. The first and last node numbers of the
outer pipe should then be changed to the same node numbers as those of the first and last
point of the inner point - this serves to connect the inner to the outer pipe, a fact that can
be confirmed by using CAESAR II's PLOT option.
Finally, the internaI supports are modeled by placing guides (and vertical supports on
horizontal runs) at each of the support points on the inner pipe, with CNODES to the
corresponding points on the outer pipe. Any pipe restraints are then placed on the outer pipe
only.

3.6.5 Flange Leakage Analysis


AB noted in Section 2.1.3 ofthese seminar notes, pressure design offlanges is a complex task
- flange design becomes even more difficult when piping loads are considered.

3.6.5.1 Equivalent Pressure Calculation


Traditionally, analysis of flanges under piping loads has been done by converting piping
loads to an "equivalent pressure", which can then be added to the actual system design
pressure, the sum ofwhich is then compared to the ANSI Standard B16.5 "Pipe Flanges and
Flanged Fittings" allowable pressures at temperature (see Section 2.1.3). Piping loads are
converted to equivalent pressure by applyingthe pipe forces and moments over an equivalent
gasket area and an equivalent gasket section modulus respectively, as follows:
Ptotal =

P + Pe

Pe

4 x F / (pi G2) + 16 x M / (pi G3)

3-132

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Where:
Ptotal

"total pressure", to be compared to ANSI B16.5 allowables, psi

system design pressure, psi

Pe

equivalent pressure due to pipe loads, psi

axial piping force on flange, lb

diameter at gasket load reaction, in

resultant piping bending moment on flange, in-lb

This method is widely recognized to give highly conservative results, indicating failure in
flanges which actually have quite a bit ofreserve strength. However, it has long been used
due to the lack of any easy method for evaluating flanges under piping loads.
One alternative is to perform a flange analysis according to the requirements of Section VIII,
Division I of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. However, these calculations are
only intended to assure that the flange will not be overstresssed by the necessary joint
tightening loads that are required for a leak tight joint.
The problem with these stress calculation methods is that they hold piping loads, which
usually cause leakage failure in flanges, to standards for pressure and tightening loads,
which usually have a different failure mode - stress failure. Stress calculation methods fail
to address the deformation of the flange and its effect on gasket compression and leakage.
The basic problem offlange leakage is a complex one not readily availing itselfto analysis.
Facing selection, gasket type, operating temperature, and initial fitup loads are aIl factors
that are either difficult or impractical to evaluate analytically.

3.6.5.1 Flange Leakage Analysis Module


CAESAR II provides a tool which simplifies this analysis, a flange analysis module accessible from the WRC 297, SIFS, FLANGES submenu - which allows the user to
evaluate leakage offlanges under load - a more realistic analysis process than performing
an equivalent pressure analysis. The flange analysis module also automates the ASME
B&PVC Section VIII, Division I flange stress calculations.
The CAESAR II flange leakage model assumes that the user has aIready selected the
gasket, has a flange design, and has analyzed the piping flexibility to compute the forces and
moments exerted by the piping on the flange (possibly including the effects due to fitup
tolerance, which can be done using restraints with CNODES and imposed forces or
displacements).
The ASME codes eliminate sorne of the decisions involving leakage by the publication of the
gasket "m" factor. The "m" factor is the leak pressure ratio - the ratio of the pressure on
the gasket required to prevent leakage, to the line pressure, times a factor of safety. These
values are currently the subject of close scrutiny by many organizations, but the existing
values have been use with a reasonably successful design history. It is with the "m" factor

3-133

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

that the CAESAR II flange leakage calculation starts and upon which it depends. It is
recommended that the user aim for an "m" factor greater than 1.0. This should provide a
safety factor greater than 2.0, and is consistent with other safety factors used in pipe stress
analysis. If the flange analysis module predicts an "m" factor less than 1.0, then the loads
on the flange should probably be reduced.
The flange modeler determines the initial pressure on the gasket due to the tightening of the
bolts, and the loss of pressure on the gasket due to the line pressure and the forces and
moments acting on the flange. If the resulting pressure on the gasket (i.e., the initial minus
alllosses) exceeds the gasket factor "m" times the line pressure, then the flange is considered
to be "safe".
There are a great many different types offlanges, facings, an gaskets. For the purpose ofthe
flange modeler, an of these were generalized into a single model for leakage. Once this
was done, the critical variables affecting leakage were retained in the analytical model, and
the unnecessary variables were eliminated. It was determined that the deformation of the
annular plate forming the flange, in conjunction with the deformation ofthe bolts and gasket,
when subjected to bending, pressure, and axial forces were the critical variables to be
evaluated.
Various simplified elastic models were tested and a final model agreed upon that most closely
correlated the results from finite element analyses of several typical flange configurations
subject to bending and axial loads. Loads on the gasket were predicted within 15% for
standardly dimensioned flanges, and other calculated values were within similar tolerances.
The modeler also confirmed leakage of numerous flanges in actual plant applications as weIl.
The basic flange deformation modes assumed to contribute most significantly to the
unloading of the gasket are shown in Figure 3-122.

3-134

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

"

/lloment
DiltribuUon

Gaaket

BoIt.
Load

a:::::D

.---------rv:-r-2"7"""":lv,~1-r-"7"""":l7~1"'""'7i
;;
Guket
SWfne
and ReacUon

PA

BoIt SUffness .... !if}

BoIt.
Load

ADgular

RotaUon

])ue

To Moment

AD Remain ellsenUally

vertical for bendiDg


and Dial type loadll

\
\

BoIt
Force

Figure 3-122

3-135

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The limitations of the model are that:


1

The gasket reaction and stiffness are concentrated at a point load at the center
of the gasket loading area.

The boIt reaction and stiffness are concentrated at a single point and is assumed
to be uniformly distributed around the annular plate which models the flange.

The pipe/hub interface is assumed to be flexible enough to allow rotation at the


flange inner diameter at the point around the circumference where the bending
moments produce a maximum stress in the pipe, so that the absolute rotation at
the flange inner diameter is zero.

The gasket is assumed to be fairly stiff, so that the flange rotational stiffness is
of the same order of magnitude as the gasket stiffness.

These analyticallimitations imply other more practical "usage" limits:


1

Full face gaskets cannot be modeled.

Leakage at self-energizing gaskets cannot be predicted.

Leakage for flanges with ring-type joints cannot be predicted.

Shear load effects on leakage are ignored.

The effect of the hub and pipe wall are not variable, and so are considered only
approximately.

Leakage analysis for joints made up of flexible gaskets should not be attempted,
since the effect ofvery flexible gaskets on leakage tends to be a function offactors
other than the flexibility of the annular flange plate and boIts.

Complete instructions for the operation of the flange leakage analysis module are provided
in the CAESAR II U ser's Manual. A brief description if given here.
The data screen for the module is broken into two sections. The first section contains the
input required for the leakage calculations, while the second section contains the additional
input required for making the ASME Section VIII, Division 1 stress calculations.
The flange leakage module permits (much of the data is optional) entry of the following
information:
Flange dimensions:

FLANGE INSIDE DIAMETER


FLANGE THICKNESS
Dimensional data for standard flanges (along with their bolts and gaskets) can be accessed
from a built in database in the program.

3-136

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

BoIt data:

BOlT CIRClE DIAMETER


NUMBER OF BOlTS
BOlT DIAMETER
BOlT INITIAL TIGHTENING STRESS
The boIt initial tightening stress can be estimated as:

= 12 x T / (K d)

S
Where:
S

preload stress, psi

boIt torque, ft-lb

nut factor (as per the Standard Handbook of Machine Design, Figure 3-123)

nominal diameter of boIt, in

23.30

ST ANDARD HANDBOOK OF MACHINE DESIGN

TABLE 235 Nut Factors

NUl factor

Source

Lubricant or coating on the fastener


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
1 1.
12.
13.
14.
15.

1
5
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4

Cadmium plate
Zinc plate
Black oxide
Baked on PTFE
Molydisulfide paste
Machine oil
Camaba wax (5% emulsion)
60 Spindle oil
As rcccived steel fasteners .
Molydisulfide grease
Phosphate and oil
Copperbased anti seize compound
As received steel fasteners
Plated fasteners
Grease. oil. or wax

Reponed
mean

Reponed
range

0.194-0.246
0.332
0.163-0.194
0.092-0.112
0.155
0.21
0.148
0.22
0.20
0.137
0.19
0.132
0.20
0.15
0.12

0.153~.328
0.262~.398
0.I09~.279

0.064-0.142
0:14-0.17
0.20-0.225
0.12-0.165
0.21-0.23
0.158-0.267
0.10-0.16
0.15-0.23
0.08-0.23
0.161-0.267

Figure 3-123
If not entered, the program defauIts to a boIt prestress of 45000/d 1l2 psi, a typical rule of
thumb applied when field tightening bolts.

3-137

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Gasket data:

EFFECTIVE GASKET DIAMETER


UNCOMPRESSED GASKET DIAMETER
UNCOMPRESSED GASKET THICKNESS
EFFECTIVE GASKET WIDTH
EFFECTIVE GASKET MODULUS
LEAK PRESSURE RATIO
Typical values for the effective gasket modulus are between 300,000 and 400,000 psi for
spiral wound gaskets. The greater the modulus, the greater the tendency for the flange to
leak. Therefore errors on the high side will tend to be more conservative.
The leak pressure ratio is the "m" factor discussed above; the required value for each type
ofgasket is given in Table 2-5.1 of the ASME Section VIII, Division 1 code. It is also accessible
with the program HELP facility.

Load data:

EXTERNALLY APPLIED MOMENT


EXTERNALLY APPLIED FORCE
PRESSURE
For the optional ASME Section VIII, Division 1 stress calculations, the following additional
data is requested:

Flange dimensions:

FLANGE TYPE
FLANGE OUTSIDE DIAMETER
SMALL END HUB THICKNESS
LARGE END HUB THICKNESS
HUB LENGTH
As above, dimensional data for standard flanges can be accessed from a built in database in
the program. Any of eight standard flange types recognized by Section VIII can be selected
from a graphie representation.

Operating and loading data:

DESIGN TEMPERATURE
GASKET SEATING STRESS
Permissible gasket seating stresses are provided in the program HELP facility.

3-138

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Material allowables:

FLANGE STRESS ALLOWABLES


BOLT STRESS ALLOWABLES
STRESS ALLOWABLE MULTIPLIERS
Allowable stresses for both flanges and bolts may be accessed from the program material
database. Certain codes permit increases in the stress allowables in certain circumstances.
The program HELP facility identifies those codes and the corresponding multipliers which
maybe used.
The program provides output in terms of Safety Factors - values of less than one usually
indicate trouble. Sample input and output screens are shown in Figures 3-124 and 3-125
respectively.

3-139

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

FLANGE LEAKAGE/STRESS CALCULATIONS


Flange Inside Dia~eter ........................... (in.)
Flange Thickness ................................. (in.)
Flange Rating COptionaU ............................. .

39.569
4.969

Boit Circle Dia~eter ............................. (in.)


Itu~ber of Bolts ...................................... .
Boit Dia~eter .................................... (in.)
Boit Initial Tightening Stress ............ (lb./sq.in.)

38.599
32.999
1.599

Effectiue Gasket Dia~eter (G) .................... (in.)


Unco~pressed Gasket Thickness .................... (in.)
Effectiue Gasket Width (b) ....................... (in.)
Leak Pressure Ratio (~) .............................. .
Effectiue Gasket Modulus .................. (lb./sq.in.)

33.888
.963
.396
2.759
399999.999

Externally Applied Mo~ent ..... (optional) .... (in.lb.)


Externally Applied Force ...... (optional) ....... (lb.)
Pressure .................................. (l b ./sq . in. )

.999
.999
499.999

The following inputs are required only if the user


wishes to perfor~ stress cales as per Sect VIII Diu. 1
<Esc>To Exit

<?>For Help

<Keypad>

Inputt

Outpllt!

More J.

FLANGE LEAKAGE/STRESS CALCULATIONS


Flange Inside Dia~eter ........................... (in.)
Flange Thickness ................................. (in.)
Flange Rating COptionaU ............................. .

3a.56a
4.969

Boit Circle Dia~eter ............................. (in.)


Itu~ber of Bo 1ts ...................................... .
Boit Dia~eter .................................... (in. )
Boit Initial Tightening Stress ............ (lb./sq.in.)

38.599
32.999
1.599

Effectiue Gasket Dia~eter (G) .................... (in.)


Unco~pressed Gasket Thickness .................... (in.)
Effectiue Gasket Width (b) ....................... (in.)
Leak Pressure Ratio (~) .............................. .
Effectiue Gasket Modulus .................. (lb./sq.in.)

33.888
.963
.396
2.759
399999.a99

Externally Applied Mo~ent ..... (optional) .... (in.lb.)


Externally Applied Force ...... (optional) ....... (lb.)
Pressure .................................. ( l b ./sq . in. )

.999
.999
499.999

The following inputs are required only if the user


wishes to perfor~ stress cales as per Sect VIII Diu. 1
<Esc>To Exit

<?>For Help

<Keypad>

Inputt

Figure 3-124

3-140

Output!

More J.

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

FLANGE

LEA~AGE/STRESS

More t

CALCULATIONS

ASnE Model Seating (Stress).....................

2.74

ASME SECT VIII DIV 1 STRESS MODEL -----------------------CALCULATED STRESSES (lb./sq.in.)


Longitudinal Hub ..
Radial Flange .....
Tangential Flange .
MaxilllulII Auerage .. .
Bolting .......... .

OPERATIHG
3285.

ALLOW
26259.
17599.
17599.
17599.
25999.

3685.

971.
3485.
9619.

SEATIHG
5685.
6379.
1688.
6932.
2683.

ALLOW
26259.
17599.
17599.
17599.
25999.

"*" Indicates Failure for an itelll.

STRESS SAFETY FACTOR: (If less than one then joint


failure is predicted.) (Allowed/Actual)
OPERATIHG
SEATIHG
7.99
4.62
Longitudinal Hub ... .
Radial Flange ...... .
4.75
2.74
<Esc>To Exit

FLANGE

<?>For Help

LEA~AGE/STRESS

Inputl

<~eypad>

More l

Output!

More t

CALCIJLATIONS

CALCULATED STRESSES (lb./sq.in.)


Longitudinal Hub ..
Radial Flange .....
Tangential Flange .
MaxilllulII Auerage .. .
Bolting .......... .

OPERATIHG
3285.
3685.
971.
3485.
9619.

ALLOW
26259.
17599.
17599.
17599.
25899.

SEATIHG
ALLOW
5685.
26259.
6379.
17599.
1680.
17599.
6832.
17589.
25999.
2683.

"*" Indicates Failure for an itelll.

STRESS SAFETY FACTOR: (If less than one then joint


failure is predicted.) (Allowed/Actual)
OPERATIHG
SEATIHG
Longitudinal Hub ... .
7.99
4.62
Radial Flange ...... .
4.75
2.74
Tangential Flange .. .
18.92
19.41
MaxilllulII Auerage .... .
5.92
2.99
2.69
9.32
Bolting ............ .
<Esc>To Exit

1
2
3
4

<?>For Help

STRESS

Longitudinal Hub
Radial Flange
Tangentiel Flange
"axinun Average

5 Bolting

Inputt

<~eypad>

OPEHATINC
3285.
3685.
971.
3485.
9619.

RLLOURBLE
26258.
17588.

17588.
17588.

25888.

Output!
SEATING ALLOUABLE
5685.
6379.
16BB.
6832.
2683.

5 ............_..._ ........

Note<l'

show

the index
~he

valsc;ni:iet'ang .... .. .............................................. .

general location

Dr

the stress.

Figure 3-125
3-141

26258.
17588.

Ib./sq.in

2588B.

Ib./sq.in

Ib./sq.in
1758B. Ib./sq.in
17588. Ib./sq.in

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes


Section 4
Table of Contents
4.0 Introduction to Dynamic Theory ............................................................................... 1
4.1

Characteristics ofDynamic Loads ............................................................................ 2


4.1.1 Variation ofLoad Versus Time - Load Types ............................................. 2
4.1.2 System Response Time Versus Timing ofLoad Change .............................. 9
4.1.3 Lack of System Equilibrium ........................................................................ 14
4.1.4 Movement of Dynamically Loaded System ................................................. 14
4.1.5 Relation of Induced System Loads to Applied Loads .................................. 14

4.2

The Dynamic Equation of Motion ........................................................................... 17


4.2.1 Evaluation of a Single Degree-of-Freedom System .................................... 17
4.2.2 The Dynamic Load Factor ........................................................................... 18

4.3

Evaluation ofMulti-Degree-of-Freedom Systems .................................................. 22


4.3.1

Modal Analysis ............................................................................................. 22

4.3.2 Modal Response Multipliers - Participation Factors and DLFs ............... 25


4.4

Eigensolver Algorithm ............................................................................................. 28

4.5

Accuracy of The Dynamic Model ............................................................................. 36


4.5.1

Mass Point Spacing ...................................................................................... 36

4.6 Types of Analysis ..................................................................................................... 45


4.6.1 Time History Analysis ................................................................................. 45
4.6.2 Seismic Spectrum Analysis .......................................................................... 45
4.6.2.1 Generation of the Response Spectrum .......................................... 46
4.6.2.2 Application to a Multi-Degree-ofFreedom System ...................... 57
4.6.2.3 Modal Results Summation Methods ............................................. 62
4.6.2.4 Combination of Spatial Components ............................................ 64
4.6.2.5 Missing Mass Correction ............................................................... 71
4.6.3 Force Spectrum Analysis (for Impulse Loadings) ....................................... 71
4.6.3.1 Generation of the Response Spectrum .......................................... 72
4.6.3.2 Application to a Multi-Degree-ofFreedom System ...................... 73
4.6.3.3 Summation of Responses .............................................................. 74
4.6.4 Harmonie Analysis ....................................................................................... 74

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

4.0 Introduction to Dynamic Theory


Most of the loads discussed to this point in these seminar notes have been static loads (or in
sorne cases, dynamic loads modeled as static loads). Static loads are those which are applied
slowly enough that the piping system has time to react and internally distribute the loads,
thusremaininginequilibrium. Onceinequilibrium,allforcesandmomentsareresolved(i.e.
the sum of the forces and moments are zero), so the pipe doesn't move.
With a dynamic load - a load which changes quickly with time - the piping system may
not have time to internally distribute the loads, so forces and moments are not always
resolved - resulting in unbalanced loads, and therefore pipe movement. Since the sum of
the forces and moments are not necessarily equal to zero, the internally induced loads can
he different - either higher or lower - than the applied loads.

4-1

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

4.1 Characteristics of Dynamic Loads


Summarizing the major characteristics of static versus dynamic loads:
Static Loads
1

Dynamic Loads

load varies slowly, or does


not vary, with time (weight,
thermal expansion, settlement,
spring loads, etc.)

1 -

load varies quickly with time


(earthquake, fluid hammer,
vibration, relief valve, etc.)

system (internal forces and


restraint loads) always has
time to fully react to the
applied load

system (internal forces and


restraint loads) may not have
time to fully react to the
applied load before it changes

system is always in equilibrium


(sum of forces and moments on
system are zero)

system is not in equilibrium


(sum of forces and moments on
system are not zero)

with no unbalanced forces,


system remains at rest

with unbalanced forces, system


moves, according to F = MA

induced system reactions


(internaI forces and restraint
loads) are equal to applied
loads

induced system reactions


(internaI forces and restraint
loads) are not equal to applied
loads, and may be much higher or
muchlower

The implications ofthese points are discussed in the following sections.


4.1.1 Variation of Load Versus Time -

Load Types

The force vs. time profiles of the dynamic loads most often encountered during the design of
piping are usually one ofthree types - random, harmonic, and impulse. These profiles, and
the load types having them, are described below.
Random: With this type ofprofile, the loadchanges direction and/or magnitude unpredictably
with time, although there may be predominant characteristics within the load profile. Major
types ofloads with random time profiles are:

Wind: Wind velocity causes forces as described in Section 2.5.1 ofthese seminar
notes, that is by the decrease of wind momentum as the air strikes the pipe,
creating an "equivalent pressure" on the pipe. Wind loadings, even though they
may have predominant directions and average velocities over a given time, are
subject to gusting, i.e., sudden changes in direction and velocity. As the observed
time period lengthens, the observed number of changes increases in an unpredictable manner as weIl, eventuaIly encompassing nearly all directions and a
wide range ofvelocities. A typical plot ofwind velocity vs. time is shown in Figure
4-1.

4-2

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

WIND
SPEED
(MPH)

TIME (SEC)

Figure 4-1
Note that to date, almost aU wind design (excluding specialized conditions such
as vortex shedding) is done using a static equivalent of adynamie loading model,
increasing the static load by a "gust factor" to account for potential dynamic
efIects.
2

Earthquake: Seismic (earthquake) loadings, are caused by the introduction of


random motion (accelerations, velocities, and displacements) orthe ground, and
corresponding inertialloads (the mass orthe structure times the acceleration),
into a structure through the structure-to-ground anchorage. The random ground
motion is actually the sum of an infinite number ofindividual harmonie (cyclic)
ground motions. Two earthquakes may be similar in terms of predominant
direction (along a fault, for example), predominant harmonie frequencies (if
certain ofthe underlying cyclic motions tend to dominate), and maximum ground
motion, but their exact behavior at any given time may be quite different and
unpredictable. A typical plot ofearthquake ground acceleration vs. time is shown
in Figure 4-2.

Time, sec

Figure 4-2
(Figure 4-2 from Response Spectrum Method in Seismic Analysis and Desi~ of
Structures by Ajaya Kumar Gupta.)

4-3

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Note in many cases, for simplification's sake, seismic design is done using a static
equivalent of a dynamic loading model, as described in Section 2.5.2 of these
seminar notes, however dynamic simulations of seismic loads are usually more
accurate. Dynamic analysis of earthquake loads is discussed in detail in Section
5 of these notes.

Harmonie: With this type ofprofIle, the load changes direction and/or magnitude following
to a sine profile, ranging from its minimum to its maximum according to a fixed time period.
For example, the load may be described by a function of the form:
F(t)

= A + B sin(Ct + D)

Where:
F( t)

variation of maximum and minimum force from mean, lb

=
=

phase angle, radians

force magnitude as a function of time, lb


mean force, lb

angular frequency, radians/sec

Major types of loads with harmonic time profiles are:


1

Equipment vibration: Ifrotating equipment attached to a pipe is slightly out


oftolerance (drive shaft out of round, for example), it may impose a small cyclic
displacement onto the pipe at the point of attachment, where the displacement
cycle would most likely correspond to the equipment's operating cycle. The
displacement at the pipe connection may be so small as to not even be noticeable,
but dynamically it could cause significant problems. The loading vs. time, which
can be easily predicted once the equipment's operating cycle and variation from
tolerance are known, is shown in Figure 4-3.

Displocement ot
Pump Flonge

time

--

Figure 4-3
Analysis of equipment vibration is discussed in detail in Section 5 of these
seminar notes.

4-4

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Acoustic vibration: Iffluid flow characteristics are changed within a pipe (for
example ifflow conditions change from laminar to turbulent when the fluid goes
through an orifice), slight lateral vibrations may be set up within the pipe. Often
these vibrations fit harmonie patterns, with predominant frequencies somewhat
predictable based upon the flow conditions. For example, Strouhal's equation
predicts that the developed frequency (in cycles/sec, or Hz) of vibration caused
by flow through an orifice will be somewhere between 0.2 V!D and 0.3 V!D, where
V is the fluid velocity (ft/sec) and D is the diameter of the orifice (ft). Wind flow
around a pipe sets up lateral displacements as weil (a phenomenon known as
vortex shedding), with an exciting frequency in the area ofO.lB V!D, where V is
the wind velocity and D is the outer diameter of the pipe. Vortex shedding is
discussed further in Section 5 of these seminar notes.

Pulsation: During the operation of a reciprocating pump or a compressor, the


fluid is compressed by pistons driven by a rotating shaft. This causes a cyclic
change (vs. time) in the fluid pressure at any specified location in the system. If
the fl uid pressures at opposing elbow pairs or closures is unequal, this creates an
unbalanced pressure load in the system. Since the pressure balance changes
with the cycle ofthe compressor, the unbalancedforce changes as weIl. (Note that
the frequency of the force cycle will most likely be sorne multiple ofthat of the
equipment operating cycle, since multiple pistons will cause a corresponding
number offoree variations during each shaft rotation.) The pressure variations
will continue to move along with the fluid, so in a steady state flow condition,
unbalanced forces may be present simultaneously at all elbow pairs in the
system. The load magnitudes may vary, and the load cycles may or may not be
in phase with each other, depending upon the fluid velocity, the distance of each
elbow pair from the compressor, and the length of the piping legs between the
elbow pairs. A typicalloading vs. time profile for pulsation is shown in Figure
4-4.

L
Unbalanced Force
on Elbow Pair

time

--

Figure 4-4
Analysis of pulsation is discussed in detail in Section 5 of these seminar notes.
Impulse: With this type of profile, the load magnitude ramps up from zero to sorne value,
remains relatively constant for a time, and then ramps down to zero again. For rapid
ramping times, this type of profile resembles a rectangle. Major types ofloads with impulse
time profiles are:

4-5

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Reliefvalve: When system pressure reaches a dangerous level, reliefvalves are


set to open in order to vent fluid and reduce the internal pressure. Venting
through the valve causes ajet force to act on the piping system; this force ramps
up to its full value, from zero, over the opening time ofthe valve. The relief valve
remains open (and thejetforce remains relatively constant) until sufficient fluid
is vented to relief the overpressure situation. The valve then closes, ramping
down the jet force over the closing time of the valve. A typical force-time profile
for a relief valve load is shown in Figure 4-5.

Force

Time

Relief
Valve
Opening
Time

Duration lof Load


Mass to Vent
Flowrate

Relief
Valve
Closing
Time

Figure 4-5
In some cases, analysis ofreliefvalve loads is done using a static equivalent of
adynamie loading model, as described in Section 2.5.3 ofthese seminar notes,
however dynamic analyses are usually more accurate. Dynamic analysis ofrelief
valve loadings is discussed in detail in Section 5 of these seminar notes.
2

Fluid hammer: When the flow offluid through a system is suddenly halted at
one point, through valve closure or a pump trip, the fluid in the remainder of the
system cannot he stopped instantaneously as well. As fluid continues to flowinto
the area of stoppage (upstream of the valve or pump), the fluid compresses,
causing ahigh pressure situation at that point. Likewise, on the other side of the
restriction, the fluid moves away from the stoppage point, creating a low pressure
(vacuum) situation at that location. Fluid at the next elbow or closure along the
pipeline is still at the original operating pressure, resulting in an unbalanced
pressure force acting on the valve seat or the elbow.
The fluid continues to flow, compressing (or decompressing) fluid further away
from the point of flow stoppage, thus causing the leading edge of the pressure
pulse to move through the line. As the pulse moves past the frrst elbow, the
pressure is now equalized at each end of the pipe run, leading to a balanced (i.e.,
zero) pressure load on the frrst pipe leg. However the unbalanced pressure, by
passing the elbow, has now shifted to the second leg. The unbalanced pressure
load will continue to rise and fall in sequentiallegs as the pressure pulse travels

4-6

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

back to the source (or forward to the sink). A typical force-time profile for a fluid
hammer load in a single leg is shown in Figure 4-6. The ramp up time (and
corresponding profile) roughly coincides with the elapsed time from full flow to
low flow, such as the closing time of the valve or trip time of the pum p. Since the
leading edge of the pressure pulse is not expected to change as the pulse travels
through the system, the ramp down time is the same. The duration ofthe load
from initiation through the beginning of the down ramp is equal to the time
required for the pressure pulse to travel the length of the pipe leg.
Length of Leoding
Edge Based on
Closing Time

----p r--

Unbalanced
Force

Leg Length
Speed of Sound

Time

1.. ,-1 _
CD

Valve stops the flow at time t=O, and


a compressive pressure wave moves
away from the valve

Valve Closing

(2) At some time t=t1 the high pressure wave, moving


at the speed of sound in the fluid, exists between
two elbow-elbow pairs.
There is an unbalanced
force acting ta the left equal to P
- P
times the Area inside the pipe.
The unbalanced force acts until the pressure wave
passes the second elbow in the pair.

Figure 4-6
Analyses offluid hammer loadings are often done using a static equivalent ofa
dynamic loading model, as described in Section 2.5.3 of these seminar notes,
however these types of analysis can he extremely inaccurate. Dynamic analysis
offluid hammer loadings is discussed in detail in Section 5 ofthese seminar notes.
3

Slug flow: Most piping systems are designed tohandle single-phase fluids (i.e.,
those which are uniformly liquid or gas). Under certain circumstances, however
the fluid may have multiple phases. For example, slurry systems transport solid
materials in liquids, and gases may condense, creating pockets of liquid in
otherwise gaseous media. Systems carrying multi-phase fluids are susceptible
to slug flow.

4-7

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Flow

I~

.. 1

Slug Length
(2-Phase Flow)

Figure 4-7
In general, when fluid changes direction in a piping system, it is balanced by the net force
on the elbow. This force, shown in Figure 4-7, is equal to the change in momentum with
respect to time, or:
F

= dp

1 dt

= pv

A .J(1-cos8)/2

Where:
dp

change in momentum, lb-sec

dt

change in time, sec

fluid density, Ibm/in3

fluid velocity, in/sec

internaI area of pipe, in2

angle of the bend, degrees

Normally this force is constant, and is small enough that it can be easily absorbed through
tension in the pipe wall, to be passed on to adjacent elbows which may have equal and
opposite loads, therefore zeroing the net load on the system. Therefore these type of
momentum loads are usually ignored by the stress analyst. However, ifthe fluid velocity or
density changes with time, this momentum load will change with time as weIl, leading to a
dynamic (changing) load, which may not be cancelled by the load at other elbows.
For example, consider a slug ofliquid in a gas system. The steady state momentum load is
insignificant, since the fluid density of agas is effectively zero. Suddenly the liquid slug hits
the elbow, increasing the momentum load by a factor ofthousands. This load lasts onlyas
long as it takes for the slug to traverse the elbow, and then suddenly drops to near zero again.
A typical profile is shown in Figure 4-8. The exact profile of the slug load depends upon the
shape of the slug - the force can be calculated at any given time from

4-8

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

"/(1-

F = pv 2 A
cosE / 2 , where the A used is the cross-sectional area of the slug
instantaneously impactingthe elbow. The time duration ofthe load depends upon the length
of the slug divided by the velocity of the fluid.
Force
Profile 8ased on

\IU

(~eading Edge of

Profile 8ased on
Trailing Edge of
Slug

~
Time
1..

Slug Length
Velocity of Flow

-1

Figure 4-8
Analysis of slug flow is usually very difficult because the exact shape and length of the slug
is rarely known (and rarely constant). Dynamic analysis of slug loads during two-phase flow
conditions is discussed in detail in Section 5 ofthese seminar notes.

4.1.2 System Response Time Versus Timing of Load Change


Sorne systems may react more or less quickly than others to changing loads. The implication
ofthis is illustrated by the following examples.
Consider a system where the restraint loads respond fully to (and therefore completely
counteract) an imposed load in 25 milliseconds. For the imposed load profile and configuration shown in Figures 4-9a and 4-9b, respectively, the restraint loads would follow a force
versus time profile similar to that shown in Figure 4-9c. This is due to the fact that before
the restraints can fully react to the applied load, the load has been removed. Therefore, the
induced reaction loads (and by extension, the member forces and moments, and stresses) are
much lowerthan wouldoccur under a staticloadofthe same magnitude (each restraint under
a static load would see a reaction equal to -P/2, for a total of -P).

4-9

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Force

10

15

20

25

30

35

Time (Milliseconds)

APPLIED LOAD PROFILE


(a)

IP

li

L.

tR2

tRI
SYSTEM CON FIGU RATION
(b)

Time (Milliseconds)
5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

-PIS
Total
System
Reaction

(R 1 +R2)

-P

Expected Static Response


SYSTEM RESPONSE
(c)

Figure 4-9

4-10

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Now consider a system identical in all respects except that its restraint loads respond fully
to any imposed load in only 1 millisecond. For the imposed load prome and configuration
shown in Figures 4-9a and 4-9b, the restraint loads would follow a force versus time profile
similar to that shown in Figure 4-10 - virtually identical to that of the applied load.
Therefore, when a system responds rapidly to applied loads, the induced reaction loads,
member forces, etc. are approximately the same as those which would occur under the same
static load.

Time (Milliseconds)
5

10

15

20

25

30

Total
System
Reaction
(R1+R2) _P

35

Expected
____ Static
Response

SYSTEM RESPONSE

Figure 4-10
Thepertinentquestionisthen, whatisafastresponsetime,andwhatisaslowresponsetime.
In truth, there is no absol ute answer - what is really important is the relative response time
ofthe system as compared to the rate of change ofthe applied load. For example, what if the
load applied to the system in Figure 4-9 had a duration of 25 seconds, instead of 10
milliseconds? The restraint loads would have sufficient time to fully respond to the applied
load, and the reactions would be the same as for a static load. In fact, a static load is simply
a dynamic load with a duration long enough that aU systems have the opportunity to respond
fully to it.
From the above, it is evident that system response to dynamic loads can produce at least two
possible results, based upon the system response time. Slowly responding systems result in
response loads lower than the applied loads, while rapidly responding systems result in
response loads approximately the same as the applied loads. Whathappens when the system
response is somewhere in between?
Consider the systems described in Figure 4-9 and 4-10 (i.e., with response times of 25
milliseconds and 1 millisecond, respectively), this time loaded with a harmonic load, cycling
between P and -P, with frequency of 1 cycle per 25 milliseconds. The responses of the two
systems are shown in Figures 4-11a and 4-11b. The frrst system again lags behind and fails
to fully develop response loads. The second system responds almost instantly andjust about
fuUy responds to the applied load, as before.

4-11

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Devoloped
Response
(R1 +R2)
p

Applied
Load

(
Time

-p

(a)

Time

Force

r-~4-----~--r-~4-----~~r--++-----~~--~

-p

(h)
Figure 4-11
Now consider a system which has a response time somewhere in the middle - about 12.5
milliseconds. Upon initialloading, the system initially attempts to respond to the load P,
with restraint loads each equal to -P/2. Since the system response lags, it does not fully
develop these restraint loads, but, after 12.5 milliseconds, will have total system response
(restraint loads) of somewhere around -0.7P. Considering the cyclic load, the applied load
on the system will be, at 12.5milliseconds, -P,for a net loadon the systemof-l. 7P(seeFigure
4-12).

4-12

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Applied
Load

p
\
\
\

Force I---'\~t--+--I----t--~ Ti m e
\
25ms
\ \
\.~
Response

\--

-p

\.

.......

Net System Load


(Applied + Developed)

Figure 4-12
The system now attempts to resolve the net load of -1. 7P with two restraint loads of +0.85P.
Assuming that at time T=25 milliseconds, these loads have actually reached only +0.6P (due
to the response lag), or a total of +1.2P, the externalload will now be +P, so the net system
load will be +2.2P, as shown in Figure 4-13.

Net System Load


(Applied + Developed)

2P

Developed Response
(R1+R2)
p

Applied
Load

\
\

Force

-p

1----'\----'1------+---'--.+--1----:.

\
\ \
',j

Ti m e

25ms

\"

Figure 4-13
This net load will then be resisted by total restraint loads (system response) of -2.2P, which
will have reached approximately -1.5P by T=37.5 milliseconds, at which time the load will
have reversed again, creating a net load on the system of -2.5P. Continuing in this way, the
net load on the system will be approximately 2.8P at 50 milliseconds, -3.0P at 62.5
milliseconds, 3.1P at 75 milliseconds, and so forth. The total developed load (total restraint
loads) is shown as a function oftime in Figure 4-14.

4-13

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Devoloped
Response
(R1 +R2) (

2P

"

""

1
1

\
\

Applied
Load

\
Time
Foree I---+-_---;'--I-_+----I-_ _---t;.._+---+-.....
I --+---I---+-_
1

175ms
1

-p

" _.....

1
1
/

Figure 4-14
This may continue until the developed load spirals out of control, and the structure fails.
From this example, it is clear that there is a third possibility for a system response under
dynamic loading - the induced load may far exceed the applied load. This is the type of
response with which the engineer must normally he concerned.

4.1.3 Lack of System Equilibrium


As illustrated above, system response loads (reactions, internal forces and moments, etc.) are
not necessarily equal and opposite to the applied dynamic loads, so the net sum ofthe forces
and moments acting on the system are something other than zero. This means that the
system does not meet the laws of static equilibrium, and cannot be solved using traditional
static solution methods.

4.1.4 Movement of Dynamically Loaded System


Since the sum of the forces and moments acting on a dynamically loaded system may not be
zero, there may be unbalanced loads acting on the system. According to Newton's laws of
motion, an unbalanced force on a system results in motion, due to the acceleration expressed
by F = MA. This information is useful in identifying problems due to dynamic loads - a
simple rule of thumb states that if the piping system is moving, it is heing subjected to a
dynamic load.

4.1.5 Relation of Induced System Loads to Applied Loads


As shown above, the internal system response loads may he quite different than the
dynamically applied externalloads. The response can be classified by calculating the ratio
ofthe system response to the applied load (or to the system response expected for a staticload
of the same magnitude) - this ratio is called the Dynamic Load Factor, or DLF.

This concept is illustrated in Figure 4-15. In Figure 4-15a, a weight rests on a spring, and
the spring compresses 1 inch. In Figure 4-15b, the same weight is suddenly applied to the
spring. In this case, the spring oscillates, eventually coming to rest at the static deflection.
However, initially the maximum deflection overshoots the static compression by an
additional 1 inch.

4-14

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

i
1

Disploced 1" from


Uncompressed
Length

~
~

Ii

Weight ot
Rest

Settles ot
Stotic
Displocement

1. \

,~Time
T

2"1

String is Cut,
Loading the
Spring Instontly

./

\....-----~

1".J

~T

Displocement Path of the Moss

(a)

(b)

Figure 4-15
The Dynamic Load Factor for this case is the maximum dynamic response (2.0 inches)
divided by the static response under the same load (1.0 inch):
DLF

Max. Dvnamic Displacement


Static Displacement

.2...Q

1.0

2.0

In fact, the DLF for an instantaneously applied constant load (not a harmonic or impact load)
is always exactly 2.0. This is easily proven by equating work done by a weight while
compressing a spring with the energy stored by the compressed spring:
WX

= KX2/2, or:

2W

= KX (twiee statie weight load)

Where:
W

weight, lb.

spring compression, in.

= spring stiffness, lb/in

Note: The force in the spring is KX., which, equal ta 2W, is exactly twice the static load, for
a DLF of2.0.
System responses may be classified based upon the value of the resulting DLF. Possible
system responses are:
1)

The system response may be much lower than the applied load. In this case, the
DLF will be much smaller than 1.0. This type ofresponse is called a flexible
response. Example: When one end of a rope lying on the floor is pulled quickly,

4-15

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

most ofthe rope will not feel the pull and will continue to lie undisturhed in the
pile on the floor.
2) The system response may he much higher than the applied load. In this case,
the DLF will he much greaterthan 1.0. This type ofresponse is called a resonant
response. Example: When one end of a whip is swung over a small distance, the
other end of the whip moves in a large arc and cracks with a great force.
3) The system response may be about the same as the applied load. In this case,
the DLF will be approximately equal to 1.0. This type ofresponse is called a rigid
response. Example: When one end ofa baseball bat is swung, the free endfollows
along simultaneously, over roughly the same distance as the batter's hands.
In which of these categories a system's response falls is dependent upon the relation
hetween the system characteristics (system response speed) and load characteristics (force
time profile). A system, in and ofitself, is not flexible, resonant, or rigid. For example, in
the first example above, the rope no longer has a flexible response if the duration of the
applied load is increased significantly - i.e., if someone pulls indefmitely, eventually the
entire rope will get up and follow the pulled end.

4-16

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

4.2 The Dynamic Equation of Motion


As noted earlier, the dynamic response of a system is based upon the dynamic characteristics
of both the system and the load.

4.2.1 Evaluation of a Single Degree-of-Freedom System


Dynamic response can be studied by examining a simple system - that of a single-de greeof-freedom oscillator, as shown in Figure 4-16.

Figure 4-16
The single-degree-of-freedom oscillator consists of a mass M attached to ground by a spring
with a stiffness K and a dashpot with a damping value of C. The spring pulls on the mass
with a force proportional to its extension or contraction (or the displacement of the mass);
the dashpot provides a frictional force proportional to the velocity of the mass. Any
unbalanced force accelerates the mass. The hehavior of a single degree-of-freedom oscillator
can then he descrihed by the dynamic equation of motion:
M

x (t) + C x (t) + K x(t) = F(t)

Where:
M

mass of oscillator, slug

x(t)

=
=

acceleration of mass as a function of time, ft/sec 2

=
=
=
=

velocity of mass as a function of time, ft/sec

x(t)
K

x(t)
F(t)

damping of oscillator, slug/sec or lh-sedft

structural stiffness of oscillator, lb/ft


displacement of oscillator as a function of time, ft
imposed extemal force as a function oftime, lb

This equation cannot he explicitly solved, unless the damping term, C, is zero and the
imposed load is harmonic (i.e., of the form F(t) = asinb(t+c. Therefore, the damping value

4-17

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

is often dropped (since it is usually small) in order to simplify the equation. The equation
can he simplified further by taking the simplest external harmonic load - a load of zero. If
there is no externalload, and dam ping is approximately zero, the equation descrihes the free
vibration of an undamped single-degree-of-freedom oscillator:
M x(t) + K x(t) = 0
Its solution, as a function of time t, is:

x(t)

= Xo

x(t)

= . Xo

sin .JK/M t

(KIM) sin .JK/M t

Where:
Xo

.JK 1M

initial displacement of oscillator, ft

= = natural (angular) frequency, radians/sec


(J)

(note: cyclic frequency in Hz = ro /2rc)


The system characteristics of a single degree-of-freedom oscillator can he completely
descrihed by its natural frequency and its damping value. System response can be
determined once the Dynamic Load Factor (as a function of the natural frequency and
damping value) for the applied load is known.

4.2.2 The Dynamic Load Factor


As mentioned earlier, in most cases the dynamic equation of motion cannot be explicitly
solved for an externally loaded system. The system response can often be estimated through
the use ofnumeric solution techniques, such as a time history analysis, where acceleration,
velocity, displacement, imposed load, unbalanced force, etc. can be calculated through
integration at subsequent time steps. Once these values at all time steps have been
calculated, the maximum response to the imposed load can be determined by multiplyingthe
maximum displacement (occurring at any time throughout the load duration) times the
stiffness K. Dividing this maximum response load by the maximum imposed load gives the
Dynamic Load Factor.

Iftime history analyses are done like this for a number of different types ofloads, and for
systems with various characteristics (expressedin terms ofnatural frequency and damping),
DLF functions for various types ofloads can he estimated. Use of pre-determined functions
simplifies the analysis, since time history analyses need not be redone every time a dynamic
load on a system is evaluated.
For example, the Dynamic Lo~d Factor for a harmoncally applied load, as a function of
damping and natural frequency of the single-degree-of-freedom oscillator has heen discovered to be:

4-18

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

DLF

Where:
DLF

dynamic loading factor (ratio ofinduced to applied dynamic load), dimension


less

Cc

ratio of system damping to "critical damping", where "critical damping"

2 .JK M ,dimensionless (representative values for piping systems typically


range from 0.02 to 0.1)
CO[

forcing frequency of applied harmonic load, rad/sec

COn

natural frequency of oscillator, rad/sec

Note the implications ofthis function when comparing the forcing frequency of the load to
the natural frequency of the oscillator. Approximating Cc as zero, when:
ron

CO[,

the DLF approaches 0 (flexible response)

COn

CO[,

the DLF approaches infinity (resonant response)

COn

CO[,

the DLF approaches 1.0 (rigid response)

As Cc increases, the DLF approaches 1.0 (increasing the flexible response and decreasing the
resonant response). Damping prevents the DLF from ever actually reaching infinity.

A set of curves (for various damping values), in terms ofDLF versus COn can be plotted for
a specific harmonic load, as shown in Figure 4-17. Knowing the natural frequency and
damping of a system, the induced load in the system can be easily determined by reading the
DLF off of the curve and multiplying it by the applied load.

1 % Critical Damping
2% Damping
3% Damping

DLF

10% Damping

1.0

Figure 4-17

4-19

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

This demonstrates that potential problems may occur when the natural frequency of the
oscillator is very close to the forcing frequency of an imposed load.
DLF curves can be estimated for othertypes ofloads as weIl. For example, the instantaneous
DLF of a rectangular load is relatively unaffected by damping, and is:

DLF = 1 - cos Oln t, for t <= td


DLF = cos Oln (t-td) - cos Oln, for t > td
Where:
t

instantaneous time at which evaluation is made, sec

td

duration of rectangular load, sec

The plot of the maximum DLF versus COntcV21t for a rectangular load is shown in Figure 4-18.
Note that as the maximum DLF for this type ofload is 2.0, and as the duration td increases,
the DLF curve moves to the left, exciting lower frequency oscillators.
2.0

1.6

1.2

li
J:

i4:
....

0.8

0.4

1
1

FIt)
Forr
td
r

/1

.,

0.05

0.10

1
0.2

0.5

1.0

2.0

10

(Figure 4-18 from Structural Dynamics Theor.y & Computation by Mario Paz).
An impulse load (such as due to a relief valve, fluid hammer, etc.) is similar to a rectangular
load, except that it may have ramp-up and ramp-down times that are notinstantaneous. The
effect of an extended, rather than an instantaneous ramping time is to lower the maximum
DLF from 2.0.
This is illustrated in Figure 4-19, which shows three force-time profiles, each with different
ramp up times and durations. The corresponding DLF curves are also shown for these
prof:.es, demonstrating that as the force durationincreases, the curve shifts left, encompassing more low-order frequencies; and as the ramp-up time approaches zero, the maximum
DLF nears 2.0.

4-20

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1..35

1.135

. 875

.75

d
)

".

.................

'.,

,,,

.................

'.,

ft

"

r
c
e

n
0
r
l'II
a.
1
i
z
e

..1J4"Ilt---------"lto--<Jllt--~--_.t!."l'JIoJo_-~---------++........

1..
F
0

'.,

.......

'.'

'\"

; ....... .

.
.
.
.
. ...... ." .......... - ...... .
....... . ................
'." ....... , .................
","

".

....... :........ : ................ :. ~PROfH.E 'II~' ....... :........ : ....... ~ ....... .

. 635

.
...... : ....... :. ........ :......... .:....:.PFiOFLE
'Ii::i .

.5

"
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..... -, .................
'., ...... -, ....... "' ....... .

.375
.35

.
.
.
.
...... ................
'." ...... -, ................ .

.135

.
..... -, .................

.8

".

15

.8

38

45

68

75

Ti .... e

".,

...................... " .

185

98
(l'IIsec)

138

135

158

FORCE VERSUS TIME PROFILE


3.
3.7

"."

3.4 ......

','

"

.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

"."

_,

.
.
. ............
. ....
....... ., ................
' . ' .......
"

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

,,"

_,

.....

ft

. ..... . . .................
.
.

'.'

"

:PROF ILE 113

3.1
1.8
1)

L
F

1.5

........:./..... ~ ....... ~ ........ :........ ; ....... ~ ........ :........ ; ....... ; ....... .

:. '1:.
:. +:.
:.
.
.:+
.
.'J'"+.i:.:..+~:+
PROFILE 112 ... :........ : ....... ........ :........ : ....... ....... .

.. .. . . . .. . . . . . [. .. . . . . . ;. . . . ': . . . .
'l'~ ~ ~

.6
.3
.8

..: .......

:. . . . ..

f ....... ; ....... .

il ~~~iE~' ........ , ...... , ..... ,............. ,

1.3 .. .
.9

4" :

:. . . ..

........ ........ .......

:- ....... : ....... ~ ....... .

t . , : l :. l: l. '

+'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,-~~~~~-r~~~~~~

:"8

13

16

38

34

Ma.tural Frequency

3S

33

(Hz)

DYNAMIC LOAD FACTOR VERSUS NATURAL FREQUENCY


Figure 4-19

4-21

36

48

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

4.3 Evaluation of Multi-Degree-of-Freedom Systems


In reality, a piping system is not as simple as a single degree-of-freedom oseillator, but ean
he modeled (at its simplest) as a series ofmasses and springs, as shown in Figure 4-20.

~2

~1

Figure 4-20

4.3.1 Modal Analysis


Ignoring damping, the equations ofmotion deseribing the response ofthis multi-degree-offreedom oscillator are:
[M] {x(t)} + [K] {x(t)}

= {F(t)}, or:

Ml x let) + KI XI(t) - K2 (X2(t) - XI(t


M2 X2(t) + K2 (X2(t) - XI(t

= FI(t)

= F2(t)

For free vibration, these equations reduee to:


[M] {x(t)} + [K] {x(t)}

= fOl, or:

Ml x let) + KI XI(t) - K2 (X2(t) - XI(t

=0

M2 X2(t) + K2 (X2(t) - XI(t = 0, or:


Sinee free vibration is harmonie in nature, these equations ean be solved by substituting:
XI(t) = al sin co t
X2(t) = a2 sin co t
x let) = -al co2 sin co t
x 2(t) = -a2 co2 sin co t
4-22

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

These equations can now be written in matrix form:

[::]

[~]

The solution to this (other than when al and a2 are both zero) is found when the determinant
of the matrix is zero, or:

Using the quadratic equation, this equation has two solutions in 002:
0012

((K1+K2)M2 + M1K2) - [((K1+K2)M2 + M1K2)2 - 4M1M2K1K2 ]1/2


2M 1M2

0022

((K1+K2)M2 + M1K2) + [((K1+K2)M2 + M1K2)2 - 4M1M2K1K2 ]1/2


2M 1M2

Two sets of displacements (an, a21 and a12 , a22) can be solved for relative values by
substituting the two values of 002 into the earlier set of equations:
a21

an [KI + K2 - Ml 001 2] / K2

a22

a12 [KI + K2 - Ml 002 2] / K2

Since these displacements can only be solved for relative to each other, rather than exact
values, they are often unity normalized, with the maximum displacement in each set being
given a value of1.0, and aU other displacements in the set being given relatively lowervalues.
Or, more often these sets of dis placements are normalized using a computationally more
convenient method, caUed mass normalization. This method normalizes the sets of
dis placements such that:
[<I>]T [M] [<I>]

= [1], or:

~]
Where:
[<I>]

matrix ofmass-normalized relative displacements, where columns correspond to sets of displacements, and rows correspond to directions and mass
points

[<I>]T

transpose ofmatrix ofmass-normalized relative displacements

[1]

identity matrix

4-23

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The implication to this analysis is that the displacements XI(t) and X2(t) at any given time
are the sum of two independent cyclic displacement functions:
XI(t)

Cl an sin (J)l t + C2 al2 sin (J)2 t

X2(t)

Cl a21 sin (J)l t + C2 a22 sin (J)2 t

constants of integration, based upon initial conditions

Where:
Cl, C2

Individual equations of dynamic motion can be written for each of the independent cyclic
displacement functions by allocating a proportional share of the system mass and stiffness
to each:

=fl(t)
m2 Z2(t) + k2 Z2(t) =f2(t)

ml Zl(t) + k l Zl(t)

Where:
ml

m2

share of system mass allocated to cyclic function 1

Mlan 2 + M2a 21 2

share of system mass allocated to cyclic function 2

Z let) = acceleration, versus time, through displacement set 1


Z2(t) = acceleration, versus time, through displacement set 2
kl

share of system stiffness allocated to cyclic function 1

k2

=
=
=
=
=
=

share of system stiffness allocated to cyclic function 2

Zl(t)
Z2(t)
flet)

f2(t)

(J)22 m2
relative displacement versus time, through displacement set 1
relative displacement versus time, through displacement set 2
share of system loading versus time allocated to cyclic function 1
anFI(t) + a2IF2(t)
share of system loading versus time allocated to cyclic function 2

4-24

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

ln fact, the free vibration response of any system with N degrees-of-freedom (i.e. mass points
times displacement directions) is the sum ofN independent cyclic functions. Each ofthese
vibration functions are called "modes of vibration" of the system - each one has its own
natural frequency (cOi) and has a single degree-of-freedom, vibrating back and forth about
the set ofdis placements <Pi, The advantage to this is that, since each ofthe modes ofvibration
ofthe system is independent of each other, each mode responds to externalloading in exactly
the same way as does a single degree-of-freedom oscillator.
Therefore, the dynamic response of any system can be determined using modal analysis.
Modal analysis breaks up a complex system into a number of modes of vibration, each of
which can be considered to behave like a single degree-of-freedom oscillator - i.e., having
a unique vibration response. The total response of a system is the superposition of ail
individual modal responses. The specific procedure consists of:
1) Using the formulas described above, solve for the natural frequencies and
normalized shapes of all N modes of vibration in the system.
2) Determine the constants Cl through CN by which each ofthe modal responses are
to be multiplied. These constants are a function ofthe magnitude of the imposed
load, the DLF (corresponding to the frequency of each mode on the DLF curve for
the imposed load), and the mode and load participation factors for each mode
(discussed below).
3) Multiply each mode shape by its corresponding multiplier constant to get each
individual modal contribution.
4) Sum the individual modal responses together to get the total system response.
4.3.2 Modal Response Multipliers -

Participation Factors and DLFs

As noted, a system has one mode of vibration for each degree-of-freedom (translational and

rotational) at each mass point in the model. In reality, systems are continuous, and therefore
have an infinite number of modes of vibration. For example, for a cantilever, the natural
frequency of any ofthese infinite modes of vibration can be calculated as:

Where:

mn
n

E
1

m
L

=
=
=
=
=
=

natural angular frequency of mode n, rad/sec


mode #
modulus of elasticity of cantilever, psi
moment ofinertia of cantilever, in4
unit mass per length of cantilever, slug/in
length of cantilever, in

4-25

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Note that this shows that the natural frequency of the second mode of vibration of the
cantilever is four times that of the first mode of vibration, and the natural frequency of the
third mode is nine times that of the first.
The mode shapes correspondingto the first few modes ofvibration ofthe cantilever are shown
in Figure 4-21. As noted earlier, the actual magnitude ofthe mode shape displacements may
change, but the ratios of dis placements at various points to each other will remain constant.

I<==><
f==>c=><
pc:><=><

1stMode

2nd Mode

3,d Mode

4th Mode

Figure 4-21
We note that with ascending frequencies, more points on the cantilever are tied to their
original position, so higher order modes are tied more tightly to their original position. This
me ans that the higher order modes are less likely to vibrate. Conversely, the lower order
modes are more likely to predominate in the total system response (in the absence ofimposed
loading) than will the higher order modes. (This explains why the free vibration of a system
often seems to resemble the vibration of the first mode, and why people often speak of a
system having a natural frequency, rather than a natural frequency ofthe first mode.) The
measure of the tendency of the mode to get involved in the vibration is called the mode
participation factor, and is calculated (in vector form) for each mode as:

{MPFl

= -{c,I>l T [M]

Where:
{MPFi}=
{c,I>i}

participation factor of mode i, in vector form

= mass-normalized shape of mode i

The degree to which a mode is excited is also influenced by the mode shape and the load
distribution. For example, if the cantilever is loaded as shown in Figure 4-22, the first and
third modes will be excited (since the load occurs at high points ofthose modes), while the
second mode will not be excited at all.
4-26

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1 st Mode

I<=>r<
1

2nd Mode

1
1

P0<
1

3rd Mode

Figure 4-22
This demonstrates the concept of the load participation factor, which is a measure of the
coincidence of the high points of the load to the high points of the mode shape. Therefore,
the mode participation factor is further multiplied by the mode shape, giving the mass
participation factor, r:

Since each mode of vibration behaves as a single-degree-of-freedom oscillator, the modal


response is also based upon the DLF for that mode's frequency under the imposed load. The
final contributor to the modal response multiplier is of course the imposed load itself.
Therefore each of the individual modal responses can he calculated by applying, to the
system, static loads equal to:

Where:
{Fi}

equivalent static load vector induced by mode i

DLFi

dynamic load multiplier for oscillator with frequency COi

{cI>l

mass-normalized shape of mode i

[M]

system mass matrix

{F}

imposed load vector

The results ofthe individualmodalloads are then calculated and summed to provide the total
system response (using one ofthe methods describedlater, in Section 4. 6.2.4 ofthese seminar
notes).

4-27

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

4.4 Eigensolver Aigorithm


The EIGENSOLVER is the solution process whereby a piping or structural system's natural
frequencies and mode shapes are determined. This algorithm uses an iterative method to
solve for successive modes, so itcan take much longerthan would a static solution ofthe same
piping system. Furthermore, solution time increases in a non-linear way with the number
of modes to be extracted. For example, the time to extract ten modes of a typical piping
system using an IBM XT (this would take only a few seconds on a 80486 machine) is shown
in Figure 4-23. One static solution for this model took less than 15 seconds, also using an
XT.
.AtE

la

..
IDa

CAESAR Il EISEILSOlVER (Y2.1C Julv 21. 1986!


(tsc) ta talet lut tiaenDair and continu
FrtQuency 1 =
FrtQuency 2 =
FreQuency 3 =
FrfQufRcy 4 =
FrealltllCY S =
Freallency 6 :;
Freauency 7 =
FrlQUlllcY 8 :;
Freauency 9 :;
FreaUt!llcy Il :;

.97416 Hz.
1.54213 Hz.
2.28722 Hz.
2.78333 Hz.
3.41256 Hz.
3.81449 Hz.
4.35438 Hz.
5.63579 Hz.
6.17498 Hz.
7.38423 Hz.

Elused
ElaDsed
EliDStd
Elu5td
Elusld
Elund
El aDsed
Elused
ElaDsed
ElaDsed

Ti ..
Tiu
Tiu
Tiu
Ti.1
Ti I l
Ti It
Tilt
Ti u
Tilt

= 1: 1:56
= 1: 1: 9
= 1: 1:44
:; 1: 1:46
:; Il 2: 1
= 1: 2:26
= 1: 2:42
1:
1: 3:23
.. 1: 3:41
.. 1: 4:23

Figure 4-23
As noted earlier, associated with each mode is a shape and a frequency, which together define
the system's tendency to vibrate; the mode shape defines the shape the system would like
to take when it vibrates, and the natural frequency defines the corresponding rate of
vibration. The eigensolver returns a set ofthese for each mode, with the dimensionless mode
shape called an eigenvector, and the frequency returned as the square of the angular
frequency (0)2), known as the eigenvalue.

4-28

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Mode #1

=1'
...,

3.412 Hz

I1r

0.974 Hz

......

..
..,.
MIll

Rrst system cantilever


mode in the Z direction.

Opening and closing


of the two Us.

:,. ....

Mode #6

III'

1.542 Hz

3.8144 Hz

IIf
...,

IIOIIS

1
R

1
U--

Rrst system cantilever


mode in the X direction.

Mode #3

III'

2.287 Hz

Two component
"twisting" mode.

Mode#7

...
IW

4.35 Hz

MIll

fIJ

..II!
MIll

,.
cac.

AI.

&1.

Opening and closing of the


two U's. Note that mode 5
was more "rocking" while
this mode is more "stretching".

X-direction swinging
of "U"s opposite ta
one another.

Mode#4

...,

2.783 Hz

Model8

lit'

5.636 Hz

...
Bf

Rrst tarsional mode


of this piping system.

Figure 4-24

4-29

"Twisting" and "pivoting"


about the inside leg of
the U.

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Given the eigenvalue, the modal frequency can be expressed in angular frequency (radians
per second), cyclic frequency (Hz), or period (seconds per cycle):
eigenvalue

= m2 (radians squared per second squared)

angular frequency

cyclic frequency

= m/ 2rr (Hz, or cycles per second)

period

m (radians per second)

2rr / m (seconds per cycle)

Basic mode shapes of a simple piping system, as determined by CAESAR II's eigensolver
are shown in Figure 4-24.
The absolute magnitude of a mode shape dis placement computed by an eigensolver is
unknown, with only the shape being given (i.e. onlythe ratios ofthe displacements at various
degrees offreedom are known for each mode, with these ratios heing constant for each mode).
For example, the eigensolution can only predict that the magnitude of A (as shown in Figure
4-25) is twice that ofB, and four times that ofC, etc.
RISI!'

tolr

NOlIS

~~
...................... _~

lm!
SPICIY

If'
COLOIS
OIIGIIL

IUNI

IIIIX JI

Ingr.

Figure 4-25
One eigenpair can potentially be calculated for each degree of freedom in the model that
contains sorne nonzero mass (node point) and sorne non-rigid stiffness (i.e., is not fully
restrained). CAESAR II, as well as most other pipe stress programs, typically omit
rotational degrees offreedom from dynamic models in orderto simplify the calculation - this
is usually acceptable since rotational modes ofvibration usually have very high frequencies,
and correspondingvery low mode participation factors. Figure 4-26 demonstrates how many
modes can he extracted for sorne simple systems.

4-30

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

10

2 mass points X 6 DOFsjpoint


12 DOFs total
2 X 3 rotational DOFs/point
6 rotafional restraints
3 restrained translational DOFs at node 3

12 -

6 -

=3

potential modes of vibration

5 mass points X 6 DOFsjpoint


30 DOFs total
5 X 3 rotational DOFs/point
15 rot. restraints
8 restrained translational DOFs at nodes 5,20,and 25

30 -

15 -

=7

potential modes of vibration

10

Figure 4-26

Notes on the CAESAR II Eigensolver/Dynamic Analysis:


1) Natural frequencies for more than one mode of a single piping system can be
identical. The two systems shown in Figure 4-27 illustrate this.

}-----------f-------+-~

----.

If)

;~

Fi rst Mode
in "Y" Direction

Second Mode - same natural


frequency, identical mode
shape, but in HZ" direction.

J--x
Z

T
Identical branches will display (4) equal
frequencies in the X. and probably the Z
directions.

Figure 4-27

4-31

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2) Natural frequencies for a system modes can he zero, but this condition results in
the termination ofthe eigensolver. Zero natural frequencies indicate rigid body
motion, as shown in Figure 4-28.

.----=n

~-----,

Piping System with


Y-only Supports

r Suction

F===tF====~f----1\.. Di scha rge

Pump on Teflon
Siide Plates

Pump on Teflor
Siide Plates

Figure 4-28
If there is no friction at the Y-supports or at the pump slide plates, then

theoreticaily, the system could slide horizontally an infinite distance without


causing loads to develop within the system. This is called a "rigid-body" mode
because the whole piping system moves as if it were rigid, i.e. there are no
displacement strains to cause the system to appear flexible.
3) In almost all cases, the eigensolver will detect modal frequencies from the lowest
frequency to the highest. Sometimes, when there is sorne strong directional
dependency in the system, the modes may converge in the wrong order. This
couldcause a problem if the eigensolver reaches the cutoffnumberofmodes (i.e.,
20), but has not yet found the 20 modes with the lowest frequency (it may have
found modes 1 through 18, 20, and 21, and would have found number 19 next).
In this case, the analyst would have proceeded, believing aU modes below the 21st
frequency had been considered in the analysis. CAESAR II checks for this
anomaly using a calculation called a Sturm Sequence Check. This procedure
determines the numher of modes that should have been found hetween the
highest and lowest frequencies found, and compares that against the actual
number of modes extracted. Ifthose numbers are different, the user is given a
warning. To correct this problem the user can either:
a) Ifthe mode cutoffhalted the eigensolution, increase the mode cutoffto the
"negative terms" value reported by the Sturm Sequence Check.
b) Ifthe frequency cutoffterminated the eigensolution, increase the cutoff
frequency sorne smaU amount. This will usuaily allow the lost modes to
fail into the solution frequency range.
c) Fix the subspace size at 10 and rerun the job. Increasing the number of
approximation vectors improves the possibility that at least one ofthem

4-32

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

will contain some component of the missing modes, allowing the vector to
properly converge.
4) Eigensolutions oflargejobs (ajob can he considered "large" ifit has 300 elements
or more, and/or requires that 50 or more frequencies be extracted) may require
special treatment. In these cases, the user should:
a) Set the optimum bandwidth parameters during the problem input phase
using the auxiliary parameter spreadsheet ("K" from the piping input
spreadsheet).
b) Set the subspace size to 12 using the dynamic control parameter spreadsheet.
c) Set "No. to converge before shift allowed" to 4 in the dynamics control
parameter spreadsheet.
d) If the job requires the calculation of more than 100 natural frequencies
the Frequency Space Array number on the control parameter spreadsheet should he increased. In this case a value of 200 or 300 should be
used.
5) CAESAR II's eigensolver will not solve an artificially small job, having 3 or
fewer degrees of freedom. In this case, the program will display a "NOT
ENOUGH DEGREES OF FREEDOM" error message. In this case, the user can
insert an extra element or two in order to create additional degrees offreedom.
Note that this problem might also occur, for example, if the pipe or structural
material density was accidently set to zero.
6) CAESAR II's dynamic analyses are alllinear!!! This means that one-directional
restraints will not lift off and reseat, gaps will not open and close, and friction will
not act as a constant effort force. Therefore, for dynamic analyses, aIl non-linear
effects must be modeled as linear - for exam pIe, a one-directional restraint must
be modeled as either seated (active) or lifted off (inactive), and a gap must be
either open (inactive) or closed (active).

THE PARTICULAR STATUS OF ALL NONLINEAR RESTRAINTS IN A


DYNAMIC RUN 18 DETERMINED FROM A PRIOR STATIC RUN. The user
must tell CAESAR II (using an entry in the dynamic control parameter
spreadsheet) which ofthe static load cases should be used to set the status ofthe
nonlinear restraints in the job.
For example, assume that in the operating load case (#1) the restraint at node
15Iifted-off, while during the sustained load case (#2) the restraint at node 15
was active. In order to perform a dynamic analysis on this job, the user must tell
CAESAR II which ofthe load cases is to be used to set the status ofthe nonlinear
restraints. Ifload case #1 (i.e. the operating case) is used, then the restraint at
node 15 will be completely omitted for the dynamic run. Ifload case #2 (i.e. the
sustained case) is used, then the restraint at node 15 will be modeled in for the
dynamic run. RE8TRAINTS NEVER CHANGE STATUS DURING DYNAMIC
ANALYSES.

4-33

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

A DYNAMICS JOB MUST HAVE APRECEDING STATICS JOB WHENEVER:


a) There are spring hangers to be designed in the job. The static runs must
be made in order to determine the spring rate to be used in the dynamic
model.
b) There are one-directional restraints in the job, i.e. any restraint with a
type preceded by a (+) or a (-) sign.
c) Therearefrictionalrestraintsin the job, i.e. anyrestraints witha nonzero
"mu" value.
d) There are gap restraints in the job.
e) There are "large rotation rod" restraints in the job.
f)

There are bilinear restraints in the job.

7) Modeling of friction in dynamic models presents a special case, since friction


actually affects the damping component of dynamic response, and (as seen
previously) damping cannot be included in the solution of dynamic equations.
Friction can be accounted for in CAESAR fi through the use ofthe FRICTION
FACTOR on the dynamic control parameter spreadsheet. CAESAR fi approximates the restraining effect of friction on the pipe by including stiffnesses
transverse to the direction of the restraint at which friction was specified. The
magnitude of the stiffness due to the frictional effect is computed by:

Fn x

Kfriction

stiffness of frictional restraint inserted by CAESAR fi (lb/in)

Fn

the normal force at the restraint taken from the static solution (lb)

II (mu)

friction coefficient, dimensionless

Fact

FRICTION FACTOR from the control spreadsheet, in- 1


(Typical values range from 0 to 1000)

Kfriction

).l

x Fact

Where:

This factor should he adjusted as necessary in order to make the dynamic model
conform to the real system's response. Entering a friction factor greater than
zero causes these friction stiffnesses to be inserted into the dynamics job.
Increasing this factor correspondingly increases the effect ofthe friction. Entering a friction factor equal to zero ignores any frictional effect in the dynamics job.

4-34

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

normal force @15


= 795 lb
(from static load case)
friction coefficient
(from system input)

= 0.3
=

friction factor
1.0
(trom control spreadsheet)
fricfional stiffness

Figure 4-29

4-35

= 795

= 238.5

X 0.3 X 1.0
lb/in

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

4.5 Accuracy of The Dynamic Model


Previous discussions have indicated that the maximum number of modes that may be
extracted from a dynamic model is dependent upon the number of mass points (normally
mass points and node points are synonymous). Therefore the number of modes that can be
extracted, and for which responses can be determined, is based upon how the system was
modeled. For example, the two systems shown in Figure 4-30 will yield exactly the same
staticresults, butahighlydifferentnumberofmodes,and thereforehighlydifferentdynamic
results.

~---------.

. .

~~----~.---~.~--~.---~.----~.
Figure 4-30
This raises the questions ofhow many mass points should be used in the model in order to
achieve sufficient accuracy, and how many modes should he extracted and summed. The first
of these questions deals with the accuracy of the modal calculations, while the second
question is concerned with at what point does a finite summation sufficiently approximate
an infinite summation.

4.5.1 Mass Point Spacing


The first question is: How many are mass points are enough to get sufficiently accurate
estimates of a system's modes of vibration? CAESAR II's models are lumped mass models,
which assume that halfofthe mass ofeach element is lumped at the element's end nodes.
Consider the calculated natural frequency of a lumped mass model of a cantilever vs. the
exact solution of the frequency ofits frrst mode (as discussed in Section 4.3.2 ofthese seminar
notes):

~-------e.
K=3EI/L3

~A
A A 6 YVY
A A 6 \T'V
A '\{]J
2" \l'Tv
2"

Static Model

Figure 4-31

4-36

Lumped Moss
Model

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

For the primitive model:

(KIM) 112

[(3EI/L3)/mU2] 1/2
(6EIImL4)1I2

angular frequency of system

=
=

stiffness of cantilever, lb/in


3EI/L3

modulus of elasticity of cantilever, psi

moment ofinertia of cantilever, in4

length of cantilever, in

=
=

lumped mass at node point, slug


mU2

distributed mass per length, slug/in

Where:

As seen in Section 4.3.2, for the continuous cantilever, the angularfrequency ofthe frrst mode
of vibration is:

ml = (0.597 rt)2 (EIImL4 )1/2


Therefore the accuracy of the primitive, lumped mass model is:

m / ml = (6EIImL4)1/2 / [(0.597 rt)2 (EIImL4)1/2]


=

61/2/(0.597 rt)2 = .696

Therefore this primitive, lumped mass model produces a modal frequency that is only 69.6%
ofthe true value. Furthermore, the second mode of vibration cannot even he approximated
using this model, since there is no other mass point with a degree offreedom in that direction.
Adding a new node point (mass point) in the center (as shown in Figure 4-32) permits
estimation of the second mode, and provides additional accuracy to the estimate of the first.

..

..

~---------- ~--------

Stotic Model

Lumped Moss
Model

Figure 4-32

4-37

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The chart below shows the ratio (to the exact solution) of the frequency ofthe fIrst mode of
vibration obtained for lumped mass models with various numher of nodes:
Ha.d..e..s.

Ratio (to exact solution)

69.6%
88.5%
93.7%
95.7%
97.9%

3
4
5

10

This shows that the accuracy of the lumped mass model can be increased significantly
through the addition ofjust a few mass points, while further addition ofmany more mass
points, althoughimproving accuracy, provides diminishing accuracy per node. Therefore the
''best'' model provides a balance - with enough mass points for accuracy, but few enough for
computational efficiency. Note that the inevitable inaccuracy in the model can usually be
taken care of through peak spreading (during spectral analysis) or sine sweeps (during
harmonic analysis).
Also evident from this chart is the fact that convergence to 100% accuracy oflumped mass
models is from low to high (as mass points are added). This demonstrates that it is difficult
to accurately design systems to fail within the flexible range of a load function, since the true
modal frequencies, being higher than those calculated, may actually fail within the resonant
or rigid response ranges.
Fortunately, in many cases a large amount ofmass points are not needed, since the modes
ofmost interest (i.e., those with low frequencies) are those representingthe gross movements
of the system, not the cantilever (beam hending) modes.
The effect of the number ofmass points on the solution time and the solution accuracy is
illustrated by modifying the system seen earlier (in Figure 4-23) by breaking i t down into 1foot sections, as shown in Figure 4-33.
Note that mode 10 is the first significantly different mode. This is the fIrst cantilever bending
mode for single elements that existedin the simple mode!. Therefore the addedaccuracymay
he worth the added computational time only if the 10th mode or above contributes
significantly to the solution. (The contribution ofthe extractedmodes as a percent ofthe total
solution can he determined in CAESAR II's active mass report.)
A good rule of thumb to keep in mind is that the frrst 15% of a model's available modes are
usuaily quite accurate, while the remaining 85% of the modes are poorer mathematical
approximations. Therefore sufficient mass points should be used so that the frrst 15% ofthe
potential modes (mass points times translational degrees-of-freedom less rigidly restrained
translational degrees-of-freedom) contribute a large amount (for example 90% or more) of
the total system mass.

4-38

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

IOI.JI;

Et
IISHOII

QUIT

Original Madel Showing Nades

ROtin

Et

"aSI~

QUIT

Refined Mass Madel Showing Nades

Eignesolution for Job with


Extra Mass Nades:

CAESAR Il EI6ENSOlYER (V2.1C Julv 21. 1986!


(HC) tD take lut eioenD.ir and continue.
lst Case Results

FreQuency 1 =
Frtatltllcv 2 =
Frtauencv 3::
FrtautRcv 4 =
FrtauellCv 5::
FrtQutRcv 6 =
Frtaul!llCY 7::
FrtQutRcy 8 =
FrtaUtncv 9 =
FrtautRcy 11::

.97484
1.55619
2.31444
2.81788
3.53281
3.92918
4.43837
5.68892
6.11755
7.94314

Hz.
Hz.
Hz.
Hz.

Hz.
Hz.

Hz.
Hz.

Hz.
Hz.

Elapsed
Elaosed
Elaosed
Elallsed
EliIlIsed
EliIlIsed
EliIlIstd
Elaostd
EliIlISed

Ti.e = 1: 3:210.97406
Till! = 1: 4: 9 1. 54213
Ti. = 1/ 4:59 2.28722
Ti.e" 1: 7: 9 2.78333
Ti." 1: 8: 4 3.41256

Ti.t = 1: 9: 1
Ti. = 1/11/32
Ti.t" 1/13:21
Till! = 1:13:28
EI.ned Ti.e = 1:16: 3

3.81449
4.35438
5.63579
6.07498
7.38423

4: 23

~
4 times as long to run
as first case

Figure 4-33
4-39

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

There have been many criteria developed for lumped mass spacing. For example, the
following recommendations have been excerpted from the paper:

On Mass-Lumping Technique for


Seismic Analysis of Piping
JOHN K. LIN and ADOLPH T. MOLIN
Advanced Engineering Department
United Engineers & Constructors, 1nc.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

ERIC N. LlAO
Stone & Webster Engineering Corp.
Cherry Hill, New Jersey

The lumped mass spacing recommendations given in the paper are:

where
L .. distance between two consecutive lumped
masses, in ft
D outside diameter of pipe, in in.
t
thickness of pipe, in in. ~
W" weight per ~t length of pipe, in Ib/ft

=
=

DESCRIPTION OF METHOD OF ANA LYSIS

In arranging the lump-mass model for seismic analysis


of a truee .dimensional piping system, the spacing of

lumps can easily be determined from Eq. (4). However.


the following ground rules are to be followed:
1) There must be at Jeast onelumpmass between
two supports. First. dividing the length between supports
of the pipe by the spacing oflumps L, one obtains the
number of lumps required for that portion. If it is not an
integer. the next higher mteger shall be used.
2) At least one lump is required in between bends.
Similar to 1 above. if the length between bends is not an
eu ct multiple of the spacing L. the next higher integer
shaU be used.

4-40

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

3) Lumpmass is required wherever there is a coneen.


trated or heavy weight such as valve and flange.
4) Win Eq. (4) includes the weight of the pipe, watec,
insulation, and others when applicable.
S) The distance between the fust lumpmass and a
fIXed end shall be (Lf2). Sinlarly. the masses just next
to a simple support are about a distance of (L/2) away
from the support.
6) The weight of the fust mass next to a fixed end
must .c~nsist of lhat of one half of the fust portion and
one half of the second portion. A diffcrent lumping
mcthod consider the fust mass as repre~nting the cn.
tire f~~ portion in addition to one half of the second
portion may aisa give adcquatc resuit. Howevcr, it is
found that the former approach yields better resuit in
many cases.
7) Similarly, the portion of piping bctween a simple .
support and a lump contributes only one half of its weight
to the lump with the other half of its weight being not
accounted for in piping stress analysis. Aiternatively. the
cntire portion may be lumped into thc mass.
8) Thesimplified lumping formula, Eq. (4), is appli.
cable to a three-dimensional piping system with several
supports.
9) The lumping method can bc extended to a piping
system consisting of several portions each of which has a
differcnt crosS section: D. t. and W.
10) More lumps may be needed for short piping.

to

The following three pages provide mass lumping tables that were generated using the
recommendations ofthis paper. It must be kept in mind that these are only recommendations, and not the absolutely "correct" spacing by any means.

4-41

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

LUflPED "ASS 5PACIN6 1ft.)

IN5ULATION ----}
FLUID 56 ------)
NO" 5th Tht
1 48. .133
1 SI. .179
1 168. .251

1.156

a.1 in.
8.556 1.156

1. 8 in.

IUS6

1.556

1.156

8.156

2.8 in.
1.556 1.856

1.856

3.8 in.
8.556 1.856

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6.8
6.1
6.2

5.B
6.1
6.1

5.7
5.9
6

5.5
5.7
5.B

5.4
5.6
5.S

5.3
5.5
5.B

5.8
5.2
5.4

2 41. .154
2 88. .21S
2 161. .343

8.1
8.1
8.2

7.6
7.8
8.1

7.3
7.6
7.9

7.5
7.7
7.9

7.3
7.5
7.8

7.8
7.3
7.7

3 48. .216
3 81. .388
3 161. .437

9.7
9.7
9.8

9.2
9.4
9.7

S.9
9.2
9.5

9.3
9.5
9.6

S.9
9.2
9.5

4.9
5.4

4.S
5.1
5.4

4.5
4.7
5

4.4
4.7
5.'

4.4
4.7
5.8

7.8
7.3
7.6

6.8
7.1
7.5

6.6
7.8
7.4

6.5
6.8
7.2

6.4
6.7
7.2

6.3
6.6
7.1

8.6
S.9
9.3

8.9
9.1
9.4

S.6
'8.9
9.2

S.3
S.7
9.1

8.4
8.7
9.1

8.2
S.
8.9

B.I
S.4
8.S

11.1
11.4
111.6
18.7

9.6
11.1
11.3
18.5

11.2
11.4
11.6
11.7

9.7
18.1
18.3
18.5

9.4
9.8
11.1
11.4

9.7
18.1
11.3
111.5

9.4
9.8
11.1
18.3

9.1
9.6
9.9
18.1

11.1

11.4
11.7
11.8
12.8

18.8
11.2
11.5
11.8

11.4
18.9
11.3
11.5

11.8
11.3
11.6
11.8

18.5

11.7
11.9

111.6
11.1
11.4
11.7

11.3
11.5

11.1
11.7
11.'
11.3

~.1

4 48.
4 S8.
4 121.
4 168.

.237
.337
.437
.531

11.9
11.8
11.1
11.1

18.3
11.6
18.8
11.9

9.9
11.2
11.5
11.7

11.6
18.7
11.9
11.1

5 48.
5 81.
5 121.
5 161.

.258
.375
.511
.625

12.1
12.2
12.3
12.4

11.4
11.7
11. 9
12.1

11.8
11.3
11.6
11.8

11.8
12.11
12.1
12.2

6 41. .281
6 81. .432
il 121. .562
6 161. .718

13.2
13.3
13.4
13.5

12.3
12.7
13.1
13.2

11.7
12.3
12.6
12.9

12.9
13.1
13.2
13.3

12.1
12.5
12.8
13.8

11.5
12.1
12.4
12.8

12.5
12.8
13.8
13.1

11.8
12.3
12.6
12.9

11.3
11.9
12.3
12.6

12.1
12.5
12.7
12.9

12.1
12.4
12.7

11.1
11.7
12.1
12.4

8 28.
S 31.
6 48.
8 68.
8 SI.
B 1811.
8 128.
8 141.
8 161.

.251
.277
.322
.486
.51111
.593
.718
.812
.986

15.1
15.1
15.1
15.1
15.2
15.2
15.3
15.3
15.4

13.6
13.7
13.9
14.2
14.4
14.6
14.8
14.9
15.111

12.7
12.8
13.1
13.5
13.8
14.1
14.3
14.5
14.6

14.6
14.7
14.8
14.9
14.9
15.8
15.1
15.2
15.2

13.3
13.5
13.7
14.1
14.2
14.4
14.6
14.8
14.9

12.5
12.7
12.9
13.3
13.7
13.9
14.2
14.4
14.5

14.2
14.3
14.4
14.6
14.7
14.8
14.9
15.0
15.1

13.1
13.2
13.4
13.8
14.8
14.2
14.5
14.6
14.7

12.3
12.5
12.7
13.2
13.5
13.8
14.1
14.3
14.4

13.7
13.9
14.8
14.2
14.4
14.6
14.7
14.8
14.9

12.8
12.9
13.2
13.5
13.8
14.8
14.3
14.4
14.6

12.1
12.2
12.5
13.8
13.3
13.6
13.9
14.1
14.3

Iii 28.
18 38.
18 48.
10 61.
10 se.
10 111.
lB 120.
10 148.
18 168.

.25'

16.8
16.8
16.8
16.9
16.9
17.8
17.8
17 .1
17.2

14.8
15.2
15.4
15.8
16.0
16.3
16.4
16.6
16.7

13.7
14.1
14.4
15.8
15.3
15.7
15.9
16.2
16.3

16.3
16.4
16.5
16.6
16.7
16.8
16.9
17.a
17.a

14.6
14.9
15.2
15.6
15.9
16.1
16.3
16.5
16.6

13.5
13.9
14.3
14.9
15.2
15.5
15.8
16.1
16.3

15.9
16.0
16.2
16.4
16.5
16.6
16.7
16.8
16.9

14.3
14.7
15.8
15.5
15.7
15.9
16.1
16.4
16.5

13.3
13.8
14.1
14.7
15.1
15.4
15.7
16.0
16.1

15.4
15.6
15.8
16.1
16.2
16.4
16.5
16.7
16.7

14.'
14.4
14.7
15.2
15.5
15.8
16.1
16.2
16.4

13.1
13.6
13.9
14.6

.31U

.365
.588
.593
.718
.843
1.888
1.125

11.5

4-42

ILl

11.5

14.9

15.3
15.5
15.8
16.8

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

LU"PED "ASS SPACIN6 (ft.)

INSULATION ---- >


a.B in.
FLUID 56 ------} a.ilS6 a.5SB 1.856
NO" Seh Thk
12 28. .251
18.3
15.8
14.5
12 31. .33i1
18.3
16.3
15.1
12 41. .486
18.3
16.7
15.6
12 61. .562
18.4
17.2
16.3
12 88. .687
18.4
17.4
16.7
12 111. .843
18.5
17.7
17.1
12 128. 1....
IB.6
17.9
17.3
12 141. 1.125
18.6
18.1
17.5
12 168. 1.312
18.7
18.2
17.8

8.il56

1.iI in.
8.556

1.156

0.156

2.B in.
0.556

1.156

1.156

17.8
17.9
18.11
18.1
18.2
18.3
18.4
18.5
18.6

15.6
16.1
16.5
17.8
17.3
17.6
17.8
17.9
18.1

14.3
15.0
15.4
16.1
16.5
16.9
17.2
17.4
17.7

17.3
17.5
17.7
17.9
18.8
1B.l
18.3
18.3
18.4

15.3
15.9
16.3
16.8
17.1
17.4
17.6
17.8
18.8

14.1
14.8
15.3
16.1
16.4
16.B
17.1
17.3
17.6

16.8
17 .1
17.3
17.6
18.1
18.1
18.2
18.3

17 .8

3.8 in.
8.556
15.1
15.6
16.8
16.6
16.9
17.3
17 .5
17.7
17.9

1.056
lUI

14.6
15.1
15.8.
16.3
16.7
17.11
17.2
17.5

.251
.312
.375
.437
.S93
.751
.937
1.893
1.258
1.416

19.1
19.2
19.2
'19.2
19.3
19.3
19.4
19.4
19.5
19.6

16.4
16.9
17.2
17.5
17.9
IB.3
18.5
19.7
19.9
19.8

14.9
15.5
15.9
16.3
17.1
17.4
17.9
18.1
18.4
18.6

18.6
IB.7
18.8
19.9
19.8
19.1
19.2
19.3
19.4
19.4

16.2
16.6
17.0
17.3
17.8
IB.l
18.4
18.6
18.B
18.9

14.8
15.3
15.8
16.2
16.8
17.3
17 .8
18.1
18.3
18.5

18.1
18.3
18.5
IB.6
18.8
18.9
19.1
19.2
19.2
19.3

IS.9
16.4
16.8
17 .1
17.6
18.1
18.3
18.S
18.7
18.8

14.6
15.2
IS.6
16.0
16.7
17.2
17.7
17.9
18.2
18.4

17 .6
17.9
18.1
IB.2
18.5
18.7
18.9
19.8
19.1
19.2

15.6
16.1
16.5
16.8
17.4
17.B
18.1
18.4
18.6
18.7

17.5
17.8
19.1
18.3

.2S8
.312
.375
.588
.656
.843
1.831
1.218
1.437

17.2
17.7
18.1
IB.7
19.1
19.5
19.8
21.8
20.2
20.3

IS.6
16.2
16.7
17 .4
18.1
18.6
19.iI
19.4
19.7
19.9

19.9
21.1
21.1
21.2
2i1.4
28.5
21.6
21.6
21.7

1. 593

28.4
21.5
21.5
28.5
28.6
28.6
28.7
21.8
28.8
21.9

21.8

17.8
17.5
17.9
18.5
19.1
19.4
19.7
19.9
2i1.1
21.3

15.5
16.1
16.6
17.3
17.9
18.5
18.9
19.3
19.6
19.8

19.4
19.6
19.7
19.9
21.1
28.3
21.4
21.5
28.6
21.7

16.8
17.3
17.7
18.3
18.8
19.2
19.5
19.8
21.8
28.2

15.3
15.9
16.4
17 .2
17.8
18.4
18.8
19.2
19.5
19.7

18.8
19.1
19.3
19.6
19.9
28.1
21.2
21.4
211.S
28.6

16.5
17.11
17.5
18.1
18.6
19.1
19.4
19.7
19.9
211.1

15.1
15.7
16.2
17.11
17.7
18.3
18.7
19.1
19.4
19.6

18. .258
28. .312
38. .437
48. .562
68. .758
88. .937
188. 1.156
lB 128. 1.375
18 148. 1. 562
18 16B. 1.781

21.7
21.7
21.7
21.8
21.8
21.9
22.8
22.8
22.1
22.2

18.1
18.5
19.3
19.8
28.3
21.7
21.0
21.2

16.2
16.9
17.8
18.5
19.2
19.7
2i1.2
211.5
20.8
21. Il

21.1
21.2
21.4
21.5
21.6
21.7
21.8
21.9
22.8
22.1

17.8
18.3
19.1
19.6
21.2
28.5
20.9
21.1
21.3
21.5

16.1
16.7
17.7
18.4
19.1
19.6
21.1
28.5
28.7
21.8

21.5
21.8

17.5
18.1
18.9
19.4
28.8
21.4
28.7
21.0
21.2
21.4

15.9
16.6
17.5
18.2
19.8
19.5
2i1.0
21.4
28.6
21.9

21.8
28.3
21.7
211.9
21.2
21.3
21.5

17.3
17.9
18.7
19.3
19.8
28.3
28.6
23.9
21.1
21.3

15.8
16.4
17 .4
18.1
IB.B
19.4
19.9
2i1.3
2a.5
21.8

28
28
28
28
28
28
28

22.5
22.9
22.9
22.9
23.8
23.1
23. 1
23.2
23.3
23.4

18.7
19.7
28.4
20.8

16.7
IB.8
IB.9
19.3
28.2
28.8

22.2
22.5
22.6
22.7
22.8
22.9
23.0
23.1
23.2
23.3

18.5
19.5
28.2
20.6
21.2
21.6
22.0
22.2
22.5
22.7

16.6
17.9
IB.7
19.2
28.1
21.7
21.2
21.5
21.9
22.1

21. 7
22.0
22.3

18.2
19.3
21.0
21.4
21.1

16.5
17.7
18.6
19.1
21.8
211.6
21.1
21. 4

21.1
21.6
21.9

18.8
19.1
19.8
2a.2
28.9
21.4

16.3
17 .6
18.5
19.11
19.8
20.5
21. Il
21.3
21.7
21. 9

14 11.
14 21.
14 31.
14 48.

14
14
14
14
14
14

68.
88.
111.
128.
141.
168.

16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16

18.
21.
38.
48.
61.
88.
181.
128.
141.
lb 161.

18
18
18
18
18
18
18

10.
28.
38.
48.
61.
88.
188.
2~ 128.
20 141.
21 168.

.250
.375
.51i1
.593
.812
1.131
1. 281
1,5BI
1. 758
1.968

21. -4

21.6

21. -4

21.B
22.1
22.6
22.7

21.3

21.6
21.9
22.2

4-43

21.11
21.2
21.4
21.S
21.7
21.8
21.9
22.1

22.4

22.6
22.7
22.9
23.0
23.1
23.2

21.5
21. 9

22.1

22.4

21.8

22.6

22.8

21. 6

21.7
21.9

22.1

22.4
22.6
22.7
22.8
23.11
23.1

21.8

22.8
22.3
22.5

14.4
15.1
15.5
15.8
16.6
17 .1

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

lUftPED ftASS SPACIN6 (ft.)

------------------------INSUlATION ----}
B.8 in.
1.1 in.
2.11 in.
3.1 in.
FlUID S6 ------) 1.856 8.556 1.156 11.156 Il.556 1.15e 8.856 a.5Se 1.15S a.a5e B.5se use
NO" Sth Thk ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------22 11. .25'
23.9
19.3
17.3
23.3
19.1
17.1
22.7
18.9
17.1
22.1
18.6
16.B
22 21. .375
24.8
21.5
28.3
18.5
23.1
18.6
23.5
28.1
18.3
22.7
18.2
19.8
22 38 511
24.11
21.2
19.5
23.7
21.8
19.4
23.4
21.8
19.2
23.1
19.1
21.6
22 61. .875 24.1
22.4
21.1
23.9
23.7
2B.9
22.2
21.1
22.1
23.5
21.9
28.8
22 81. 1.125
24.2
22.8
21.8
24.8
22.7
21. 7 23.9
22.6
21.6
23.7
22.4
21.5
22 III. 1.375
24.3
23.1
22.2
24.1
22.2
24.1
22.9
22.1
23.9
22.8
23.'
22.'
22 121. 1.625 24.3
23.4
22.6
24.2
23.3
22.5
24.1
23.2
24.8
22.5
23.1
22.4
22 141. 1.875
24.4
23.6
23.5
22.9
24.2 23.5
22.B 24.1 23.4 22.7
22.9 24.3
22 161. 2.125
24.5
24.4
23.8
23.2
23.2 24.3
23.7
23.1
24.2
23.7
23.6
23.1
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24

.251
.375
.562
.687
.968
1.218
1.531
1.812
2.1162
2.343

25.1
25.1
25.1
25.1
25.2
25.3
25.4
25.4
25.5
25.6

19.9
21.1
22.2
22.7
23.4
23.8
24.2
24.5
24.7
24.9

19.1
2B.4
21.1
22.1
22.7
23.3
23.7
24.1
24.3

24.3
24.6
24.8
24.9
25.1
25.1
25.2
25.3
25.4
25.5

19.7
21.9
22.1
22.5
23.3
23.7
24.1
24.4
24.6
24.8

17.6
19.8
2'.3
21.8
22.a
22.6
23.2
23.6
23..9
24.2

23.7
24.1
24.5
24.6
24.8
25.1
25.1
25.2
25.3
25.4

19.5
28.7
21.8
22.3
23.1
23.6
24.11
24.3
24.5
24.7

17.5
18.9
21.2
21.9
21. 9
22.5
23.1
23.5
23..8
24.1

23.1
23.7
24.2
24.3
24.6
24.8
25.1
25.1
25.2
25.3

19.3
21.5
21.7
22.2
23.1
23.5
23.9
24.2
24.4
24.7

26 11. .312
26 28. .511

2i""

26.1

21.2
22.6

18.9
21.6

25.5
25.7

21.11
22.4

18.8
2'.5

24.9
25.4

28.8
22.2

18.7
2'.4

24.4
25.'

22.'

18.6
2'.3

28 111. .312
28 28. .511
28 3 .625

27.11
27.1
27.1

21.7
23.2
23.8

19.4
21.1
21.9

26.4
26.7
26.8

21.5
23.11
23.7

19.3
21.'
21.8

25.9
26.3
26.5

21.3
22.9
23..5

19.2
28.9
21.7

25.4
26.'
26.2

21.1
22.7
23.3

19.8
21.8
21.6

31 18. .312

38 28. .5111
38 38. .625
38 48. .758

28.8
28.8
28.8
28.1

22.3
23.8
24.5
25.1

19.8
21.6
22.4
23..1

27.4
27.6
27.7
27.8

22.1
23.6
24.3
24.8

19.7
21.5
22.3
23.1

26.8
27.2
27.4
27.5

21.9
23.5
24.2
24.7

19.6
21.4
22.2
22.9

26.3
26.9
27.1
27.3

21.7
23.3
24.'
24.5

19.5
21.3
22.1
22.8

32
32
32
32

18.
211.
38.
41.

.312
.5811
.625
.688

28.9
28.9
28.9
29.8

22.8
24.4
25.1
25.4

21.2
22.1
22.9
23.3

28.3
28.5
28.6
28.7

22.6
24.2
24.9
25.2

21.1
22.'
22.8
23.2

27.7
28.1
28.3
28.4

22.4
24.11
24.8
25.1

28.1
21.9
22.7
23.1

27.1
27.8
28.8
28.1

22.2
23.9
24.6
24.9

19.9
21.7
22.6
23.11

34
34
34
34

11.
21.
311.
48.

.312
.511
.625
.688

29.8
29.8
29.8
29.8

23.2
24.9
25.7
26.8

21.6
22.5
23.4
23.8

29.1
29.4
29.5
29.5

23
24.8
25.5
25.8

21.5
22.4
23.7

28.5
29.11
29.2
29.2

22.9
24.6
25.4
25.7

21.4
22.3
23..2
23.6

28
28.6
28.9
28.9

22.7
24.4
25.2
25.5

28.2
22.2
23.1
23.5

36
36
36
36

ut .312
28. .588
311. .625
41. .758

311.6
31.6
38.7
311.7

23.7
25.5
26.2
26.8

28.9
22.9
23.8
24.6

311.11
3.8.2
311.3
38.4

23.5
25.3
26.1
26.7

21.8
22.8
23.7
24.5

29.4
29.8
30.8
31.1

23.3
25.1
25.9
26.5

28.7
22.7
23.6
24.4

28.8
29.4
29.7
29.9

23.1

25.8
25.8
26.4

28.6
22.6
23.5
24.3

42 211. .5111
42 31. .625
42 48. .758

33.1
33.1
33.1

2b.9
27.B
28.4

24.8
25.1
25.9

32.6
32.8
32.8

26.7
27.6
28.3

24
25.0
25.8

32.2
32.4
32.5

26.6
27.5
28.1

23.9
24.9
25.7

31.8
32.1

26.4
27.3
28.8

23.8
24.8
25.6

II.

2
31.
48.
68.
81.
188.
121.
141.
1611.

17.7

23.3

4-44

32.2

21.6

17.3

IB.7
21.1
28.7
21.8
22.4
23.8
23.5
23.8
24.1

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

4.6 Types of Analysis


There are a number of ways ofperforming a dynamic analysis. These methods are describe,d
in this section.

4.6.1 Time History Analysis


Time history analysis is the most accurate means of performing dynamic analysis, if the
computing power is available. Load data is assembled for a number oftime slices throughout
the duration of the dynamic event. This data is then read in by a computer program which
simulates the dynamic response of the system, solving the dynamic equation of the system
for each time slice. This is done by saving the dynamic parameters (acceleration, velocity,
displacement, etc.) for each node point and each mode of vibration, and integrating these
values over the time slice. The analyst can then review the solutions for ail time slices to
determine the largest displacements, forces, stresses, etc. occurring at any location in the
piping at any time during the course of the load.
This type of analysis is accurate for loads with known force-time profiles, such as relief valve
discharge or fluid hammer, but not for unpredictable loads such as earthquakes. This type
of analysis is also very computer intensive, slow, expensive, and therefore suitable implementations of this method are rare.

4.6.2 Seismic Spectrum Analysis


Time history analyses cannot be performed for seismic loads, since earthquakes cause
random motion. The solution to this is to perform spectrum analysis (also known as the
response spectrum method).
A typical earthquake time history might appear as shown in Figure 4-34 .

.-

Q)

E
Q)

0.
Cf)

Avg 15-30 seconds

Figure 4-34
This time history is the plot of the earth's acceleration as experienced by the piping system
through each ofits supports. The time history plot can be measured using accelerometers
resting on the ground near the earthquake site, as shown in Figure 4-35.

4-45

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

ACCELEROMETERS
MOUNTED TO MEASURE
(' HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL
COMPONENTS
RESPONSE PLOTS
X
-r---~ _ _ _ _ _

L.. _ _ _ _ _

SHOCK
WAVE

JEARTH<--

-~---------------~

Figure 4-35
To try to analyze this complex motion in a time history would be too burdensome.
Additionally, the time-dependent waveform is different for each earthquake, even those
occurring at the same site.
4.6.2.1 Generation of the Response Spectrum
To simplify the analytical definition of the earthquake, it is necessary to get the random
waveform shown above into some simple frequency-content plot. The most predominantly
used frequency-content plot is the response spectrum. A response spectrum for an
earthquake load can be developed by placing a series of single DOF oscillators on a
mechanical shake table (as shown in Figure 4-36) and feeding a "typical" earthquake force
time history (typical for a specifie site) through it, measuring the maximum response
(displacement, velocity, or acceleration) of each oscillator.

4-46

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

."pon'"hA

"a,im"m
For Each of the
Single Degree of
Freedom Bodies

}".,A~ "

:>

A
Response
4'V,V fI~

:>
Time

B
Response

1" .,.. .A.


"'1"

'''''V~V

cp . . ,

Measured
Earthquake
Movemenl

Response

V'

pr ,

:>
Time

Time

Note:

Maximums occur at
diffe,.-ent limes.

Figure 4-36
The expectation is that even though ail earthquakes are different, similar ones should
produce the same maximum responses, even though the time at which they occur will differ
with each individual occurrence. (Responses will be based on the maximum ground
displacement and acceleration, the dynamic load factors determined by the ratios of the
predominant harmonie frequencies of the earthquake to the natural frequencies of the
oscillators, and system damping.) Response spectra for a number of damping values can be
generated by plotting the maximum response for each oscillator. A plot of a set oftypical
response spectra is shown in Figure 4-37 .

.8

.7

1% Critical

.6

Acceleration

CG)

Damping~\

5% Critical Damping f \

.5

10% Critical Damping /

.4

/
/

.3

1
1

.2

)
,//r

\
\
\
\
\

l
'........

---~ .

.1

.2.3

.5

.7

Computed Frequency CCPS)

Figure 4-37

4-47

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Seismie response speetra resemble harmonie DLF eurves, sinee sei smic loads evidenee strong
harmonie tendeneies. For example, as damping value inereases, the system response
approaehes the ground motion. Seismie speetra usually also show strong evidence offlexible,
resonant, and rigid areas. Spectra may have multiple peaks due to filtering by the building
and/or piping system; however multiple peaks are usually enveloped in order to account for
uncertainties in the analysis. Seismic response spectra peaks are typieaily spread to aeeount
for inaceuracies as weIL
The idea behind the generation of the response spectra is that a system's modes of vibration
will respond to the load in the exact same manner as will a single degree-of-freedom
oscillator. For example, the water tower in Figure 4-38 ean be modeled as a single degreeof-freedom oscillator in the lateral direction. Ifits natural frequency is 6 Hz, it would be
expected to displaee a maximum of about 6.3 inches when subjected to the earthquake
creating the accompanying response spectrum.

{f;=

6 Hz

271

6.0

U1
w
I

MAX. DISPLACEMENTS THAT


OCCURRED FOR EACH OF THE
SINGLE DEGREE OF FREEDOM
BODIES. (MAX. VALUES COULD
OCCUR AT ANY TIME DURING THE
EARTHQUAKE.)

5.0
4.0

Vl
1-

w
w
u

:::;:
oct

3.0
2.0

....J

0.
Vl

c;

1.0
123456789
FREQUENCY (HZ)

Figure 4-38
Maximum responses can be plotted in terms of maximum displacements, veloeities, and/or
aceelerations. For example, the response speetra in Figure 4-39 is plottedin terms ofail three
simultaneously.Tripartitecurves,suchasthesetakenfromNuclearRegulatoryGuidel.60,
are fairly common.

4-48

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

0.2

0..

10

FRF NENev, . . (U)

10

100

Figure 4-39
A fairly subtle point concerning the various response spectra is that the displacement and
velocity response values are measured relative to the earth, while the acceleration response
value is measuredrelative to anon-moveable coordinate system. Stiffness and velocity forces
on the structure due to the earthquake are caused by the relative movement of the earth to
the mass, while the inertial force on the structure is caused by the absolute acceleration of
the mass.
Displacement, velocity, and acceleration terms ofthe spectra are aIl related bythe frequency:
d

v/ro =a/ ro2

4-49

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Where:
d

dis placement from response spectrum at frequency ro , in

velocity from response spectrum at frequency ro, in/sec

ro

angular frequency at which response spectrum parameters are taken, rad/


sec

acceleration from response spectrum at frequency ro , in/sec2

For example, at 0.75 Hz (4.712 rad/sec), the response spectrum shown in Figure 4-39 has a
displacement value of 30 inches. The velocity at that frequency is 30 x 4.712 = 141 in/sec,
and the acceleration is 30 x 4.712 2 = 666 in/sec2 .
Note that on the right hand side of the graph the response acceleration becomes constant,
while on the left hand side of the graph the response displacement is constant. The flat right
hand side ofthe response spectrum diagram indicates that there is no dynamic amplification
for oscillators having natural frequencies above some rigid value (in this case around 33 Hz.).
Oscillators with rigid natural frequencies move along with the earth, so the maximum
acceleration of the oscillator is equal to the maximum acceleration of the earth.
The acceleration conforming to the high frequency flat portion of the curve is called the Zero
Period Acceleration, or the ZPA. This is the maximum acceleration that the earth
experiences at any time during the earthquake. The term "Zero Period" is used because a
body with a zero period has an infinitely high frequency, and is certainly in the rigid range
of the earthquake.
The left hand, constant displacement, side of the response spectrum curve indicates that
there is a low frequency cutoffwhere the earth moves too quickly to affect the oscillator (it's
in the flexible range). In this case, the absolute acceleration is near zero, and the relative
displacement is equal to the maximum displacement of the earth.
For all modal natural frequencies below the low frequency (flexible) cutoff:
1) The system forces due to mass acceleration are zero.
2) The relative movement ofthe earth and the mass are the same for all single degree
of freedom bodies below the low frequency cutoff. (This relative movement is
equal to the maximum displacement of the earth.)
For all modal natural frequencies above the high frequency (rigid) cutoff:
1) Ali of the loading on the piping system is due to the acceleration of the masses.
2) There is no relative movement between the masses and their supports due to the
modal component associated with the high natural frequency.
3) Acceleration loadings are purely static and are mode independent.
Nuclear Regulatory Guide 1.60 (published in December, 1973), included on the following six
pages, describes the requirements for constructing design seismic response spectra for
nuclear power plants.
4-50

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

P.t!V'iion 1
Oecember 1973

U.S. ATOP.'lIC ENERGY COMMISSION

REGULATORV GUIDE
DIRECTORATE OF REGULATORY STANDARD.

REGULATORY GUIDE 1.60

DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA FOR SEISMIC DESIGN


OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS
A. INTRODucnON

Criterion 2. "Deslgn Bases for Protection Against


Phenomena." of Appendix A. "General Design
Criteria fClr Nuclear Power Plants." to 10 CFR Part 50.
'U..:enstng of ProduCllon and Utilization Facililies."
requlres. in paM. th31 nuc1ear' power pbnl structures.
systcms. and cllmponents important to safety be
uC~Ip1cd 10 withstancJ the effects of earthquakcs.
r~<lp()seJ Appcndix A, "Seismie and Geologie Siling
Cntcna." 10 10 CFR P:.ttl 100. "Reaetor Site Criteria,"
.... <luld rcquire. in p:lrl. that tl\e Safe Shutdown
brthquak.e (SSE) he defined by response speetra
dllll:sponding ta the expected maximum ground
.1 C ( l'Iera! Illm.
This guide describes a procedure
,lcccplJble ln the AEC Regulatory staff for defining
1 e~ !"lllSe speclra for the seismic: design of nucJear power
plants. The Adviory ('ommittee on Reactor Safeguards
has becn ulOsulted conteming trus guide ~nd has
(ol1urred in the reguiatory position.
~atural

B. DISCUSSION
III order to ~pproxlmate the intensity and thereby
estln14te the maximum ground aeceleration l of the
exoected strongest ground motion (SSE) for a given site.
proposcd Appendlx A 10 10 CFR Part 100 speciftes a
number of required investigations. Il does not, however,
;:wc ;) method lor defining the response spectral
,lH,,:sp<lOing (Q :he expected maximum ground
.iL,,:'!er:J !lon.

TIIe' recllrt.ie

~r"lIlld

accclerallons and response


penvide J basis for Ihe
rall(\/lal 'design 01 ~Irlll.:lures 10 resist earthquakes. The
DcSI~1 I<espoll~e Spcr.:trJ. 1 specificd for design purposes,
,;~n n<: cvc!opcu stallsllc:ally l'rom re~ponsc spectra of
?:lS1 slrllllg-nJotlulI carthqualces (see reference 1). An
,pcCII;1

(\1

p;.I~1

SC'\: (}Cfanlllons

~I

c~rlhqllakcs

Ihe end u( lhe lCulde.

extensive study has been described by Newmark and


8lun'le in rcferences 1. 2. and 3. ACter revie"";ng these
rcferenced documents, the AEC Regulatory staff has
dctcrmined as acceptable lhe following procedure for
del"ining the Design Response Spectra representlng the
effects of the vibratory motion of the SSE. 1/2 Ihe SSE.
Jnd the Operating Basis E2rthquake (OBE) on sites
underiain by either rock or soi! deposlIs and covering ail
frcquencies of interest. However, fOJ unusually soft sites.,
modification to trus procedure will be required.
ln this procedure. the configurations of the
horizontal compement Design Response Spectf3 for ~ach
of the two mutually perpendicular horizontal axes are
shown in Figure 1 of Ihis guide. These shapes agree with
those developed by Newmark, 81ume, and Kapuf in
1 c:ference 1. In Figure 1 the base wOIam eonsists of
threc parts: the bOHom line on the !eft part represcnl~
. the maximum ground di.splacement. the bouom !int on
1he nght part represents 'the maximum acceleration. and
the middle pan de pends on the maxImum veloeit)'. The
horizontal compone nt Design Rc::ponse Spcctra in
Figure 1 of this gUIde correspond 10 a maximum
hurizontal ground acc~/e1Qtion of 1.0 g. The maximum
ground displ:!cement is taXen proportionaJ 10 the
maximum ground acceleration, OInd is sel at 36 illches
fur a ground acc:eleration of 1.0 g. The numerir.:al values
of design displacements, lIelocities, and .ccelera tions for
the horizontal component Des.ign Respons.e Speetra are
obtained by muJtiplying the corresponding values of the
maximum ground dispiacemc/ll ~nd J!:cele~atlor. by the
factors gJ1len in Table 1 of this guide. The dlspla~'cment
region lmes of the Design Rc:sponse Spectra are parallel
III Ihe maxImum ground displacemenl hile :.lI1d ~re
shown on the !eft of Figure !. The velu.: Il Y Teglon Itnes
slupe dowl1ward from a frequenc)! ni 0.25 0.:1" (control
polOt DI to a frequency of 2.5 c;::: :'::lIrol pOlnl C) and
Jre shown at the top. The remalOinJ; IwO sets uf lines
~tween the frequencles of 2.5 cps and 33 <:~ (conlrol
;:Joint A), wlth a break at a frequenr.:y of <; cps (cont roi

4-51

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

e.arthquJte or (2) have physical characleristics th al


could signlfacanlly affeel the speclral pallern of Input
mOUlin, such as bclng underl:ain hy pnur suil cpn"llS.
the prndure descri'~d "hoye will IInt apply. In Uiesc
cases, the DeSign Rcspt>llsc Spectr:1 shuuld he cvelope
mdlvu..lually accnring ln the sile characterislics.

;Joint B). .:onstllut.: the :1cler:llion rcgion (If the


hUIiJunloil Design Respnnsc Spe,u.a. For frcquenclcs

;lIi!her

Ih.1Il

3.1 ..:ps. the

InUIOlUIll

gruund acccleralhlll

;tn.: rl'lll~'SC'I\IS IIIl' l)cslgn R<"p\lnsc Spcctra.


1 il.: vC'rt ...:.ti

..:urr~'!;pul\dlng

,omp,menl [)cslgn Rcspunsc Spcl:lra

lhe maximum nuntuntld "uund


ur 1.0 g arc ~h()wn in Figure 2 of this guide.
The numencal v31ues or design displiCcmcnls, vclocilies.
Jnd J.relcr .. tlllns in these spcctra arc obtaincd by
Illuillplylnl!: lhe correspondang values of the maximum
hcJn:llnla/ gruund motion (aceeleration .. 1.0 g and
dlspl;&l,;ernent = 36 in.) by the factors givcn in Table Il of
IhlS gUide. The dlsplacement region lines of the Design
Response Spectra are par.allel to the maximum ground
J.asplal,;emenl hne and are shawn on the left of Figure 2.
The velocity region Unes sl!)pe downward from a
r~equency of 0.25 c1'5 (control point D) to a frequency
of :U cps (control pomt C) and arc show at the top.
The remaining two sets of Iines between the frequencics
,If .1 ..5 .:ps and 33 cps (control point A). with 1 break at
l!le r"rcquency 0 f 9 cps (c:ontroJ point B), eonstitute the
.i.:.:eicratlltn region of the vertical Design Rcspansc
S p.:.: 1rOi. Il should be noted that the vCrtical Design
Kcspun~ Spectra values are 2/3 thase of the horizontal
f)cSII/.II Responsc Spectra (or frequendes leu than 0.25:
:\H 'requencies tugher than 3.5, tbey are thi: 5amC, while
:11<' ral'" vanes betwcen 2/3 and 1 for frequencies
Xlween 0.2S and 3.5. For frequencies higher than 33
.:ps. the DeSI~ Response Speclra foUow the maximum
pound al,;cderation line.
III

C. REGUlATORY POSITION

un"('IC'ru/lfIn

The horizontal and vertical component Design


Response Spectra in Figures 1 and 2, respecvcly, of tlUs
guide conespond to a maximum horizontal ground
Jcceierallon of 1.0 g. For sites with difrcrent
dcceleration values specified for the daim earthquake,
t he Design Response Spectra should be linarly scaled
(rom Figures 1 and 2 in proportion to the specified
nwumum horizontal ground ac:cderation. For lites that
( 1) are relati't'ely close 10 the epic:entcr of an expected

4-52

1. The horlZOntal component ground Design Response


Spectra. without soUstructure interaction c(reets, of the
SSE, 1/2 the SSE, or the 08E on sites underlain by rock
or by sail should be linearly scaled from Figure 12 in
proportion ta the maximum horizontal ground
acceleration specifw=d for the earthquake chosen. (Figure
1 corresponds to a maximum honzontal ground
ac~leration of 1.0 g and acc:ompanyingdisplacemcnt of
36 in.) The applicable multiplication factors and control
points are given in Table 1. For Sampin, ratios nOl
included in Figure 1 or' Table l, a linear interpolation
should be used.

2. The YCrtical companent ground Design Rcsponsc


Spectral without sastructure interaction efiects, of the
SSE. 1/2 the SSE, or the ODE on sites underlain by rock
or by soil should be linearly scaled from Figure 22 in
proportion to the maximum horizontal ground
Jcceleration specifacd for the eanhque chosen. (Figure
2 is bascd on a maximum horizOllllZ1 ground lZCCele,anOil
of 1.0 g and aceompanying displacemenl of 36 in.) The
applicable multiplication factors and control points are
given in Table Il. For damping ratios not induded in
Figure 2 or Table Il, a linear interpolation should be
uscd.
'This docs not apply to sites which (1) are relativel)' clOIe
to the epicezller of an cxpectcd eanbquake or (2) whic:h hue
ph)'sicaJ c:huac:terisICI tbat coukl sipifacantl)' arfect the
spcc:tll.l mmbinauon
input motioa. The Desipa Rcspoll.le

0'

Spec:tn ror such situ abould be dcYeloped on a c:uo-by-aae

basiL

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

DEFINITIONS
ReapolUr SpccCnlm

a pau, .. l'

mC3RS

'11c

rdaliuMlllp uhtained by In.dyzin[l. eV:llualinll. and

maximum

s.alls1iellly _,"'\Im"'nln, number

respl"SC (aclcrallon. vclodty. ,JI dlsplacemcnl) uf


family of ide.lized sin'e-depee-oC.freedom dlmped
osciUators I l function of natural trcquencies (or
periods) of the osc:illalon to a spcciflCd vibralory
molion input at their supports. WMft obtaiDcd tram.
recorded eart"ake ,record. the laponse spetrum
tends ta be inqular. with 1 number of peaks and

nr indlvidual rcspllOlc

spcctr. dcrivcd rrClm the records of sianifaanl pllt


carl hquakes.

Maximwa (pak) Grauad ,Ac:ceMntioD specified ror


given site mans that valu. of the acceleraon which
corresponds to zero pcriod in the desicn respollse' s~tra
for tbat site. At zero period the
rcsponse .peetra
acceleratioa il tdentical for aD dampin, values and is
equal ln the maximum (peak) l10Uftd acleraUoR
spedfied fcr that lite.

-sn

YIlleys.
lDp Ra~ SpeCUll111 is 1 relatiwly lIftooth

TABLE 1

HORIZONTAL DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA


RELATIVE VALUES OF SPECTRUM AMPLIFICATION FACTORS
FOR CONTROL POINTS

,-"
of

C,ltIcIII
DPnpi..

Amplification Fec:tcn for Conttol Foin.


Acca. . .ion'

A(3I_

I*pl8alnnt' -

ac.CIIIl

Cl2.5 ep

Dlo.a ...

005

1,.0

".96

2.0
5.0
1.0
10.0

1.0

3.54
2.61

5.95
4.25
3.13

3.20
2.50

2.27

2.72

1.88

.1.90

2.28

1.70

1.0

J.o

1.0

2.05

u.xi....
,_tilt........

lI'Ouad

pIIIId dilpllClllMBt 1& eau. propartiDlla1 10 awdaalllll


36 la. for pounclac:cdlntioa of 1.0 payity.

'ACCIIJaaCID lJId 4iapIac:eIacnt unpIific:atioa lac:ton IN takaD froIII


r_lllJll-.lldaaI .... iBnf_l.

4-53

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

TABLE Il

VERTICAL DESIGN RESPQNSE SPECTRA


RELATIVE VALUES OF SPECTRUM AMPLlFI~ATION FACTORS
F9R CONTROL POINTS

Perelli nt

AmpiifiQtion Fileto" for Control Points

of

Acx:el....'ion'

Critlal

o.mP"9

0.5
2.0
5.0

7.0
10.0

A(33cpal

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

[)isp&lcement' . a

C(~:5 epcl

B(9 cpsl

Z.6!

5.67'\
4.05
Z.9R

2.27
1.90

:!.17

4.96

3.54

0(0.25 q:l51

:.59

2.13
1.67
1.37
1.25
1.13

Maximum IJound displamcnt is taken proporUon.l to maximllm


:lcL-eler.ation and Il 36 in. ((Ir pound :u:,,-eler:ltion (lI' 1.0 plvity.

)trt\u~

Acclcroation Impllf1l::llion l'aCtllrS fnr

Ih~

ycrlil:ili dcsip

te.~J'OnlC

ICspOn.'Ie ~pcctra al a giveft


amplificall,n (;II:tun arc 2/3 Chose fur hari-

,.-,'\:lra an: cqual tn lbu., rnr horimnlill desll(n

rrcquellCY, whCJca. cI.cement


lnnlal dcsi~ responsc spcc:Ua. 't1Icse ratins bcllll\.'Cl\ lbe amplific:;ztion factors
fur Ihe lWU dcs~n rcspunsc IpCCUllre in apcemenl ""ilJllbosc recommmd.ed
in rcferen 1.
.

'l'hese ",.. lues WCIC: c:ha",od 10 maltc Ihis l:able c:nnsixtenl with the disnl' \l("rtial camponeftl$ in Scction R of Ihis ,;uide.

~u5Si"n

REFERENCES

1.

Ncwm:uk, N. M., John A. Siume. and lCanwar K.


Kapur. "Design Rcsponse Spectra for Nuclear Power
PI:lIIls: ASCE Structural Engineering Meeting. San
Francisco. April 1973.

N. M. Newnlarlc. Consulting Engineering S~rvices. UA


Study of Vertic.al and Horizontal Earthquake

4-54

Spectra," Urbana, lIlinois. USAEC Contract No.


AT(49-S)-2b67, WASH12S5. April 1973.
3.

John A. Slume &. Associates. '4Recommcndations


for Shape of Earthquakc Response Spccua. San
Fr:tncisco. Califomia. USAEC Contract No.
AT(49.S)-3011, WASH1254. February 1973.

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

0.1

0.2

0.5

10

20

50

100

FRF1UENCY,qJI
FIGURE 1. HORIZONTAL DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA - SCALED TO 19 HORIZONTAL
GROUND ACCELERATION

4-55

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

100

-.=
u

50

>"
~

...

.",

>

20

10

FREQUENCY,qII
FIGURE 2. VERTICAL DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA - SCALED TO 1; HORIZONTAL
GROUND ACCELERATION

4-56

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

4.6.2.2 Application to a Multi-Degree-of Freedom System

Reviewing the dynamic equations for an earthquake problem:

X(t)

x(t)

system displacement (relative to ground), as a function oftime

xg(t)

dis placement of ground (introduced through system supports), as a function


oftime

Figure 4-40
The structural forces within the system are based upon the displacements relative to the
ground:
Fstruct

=K

x(t)

The inertial force on the mass is based upon the total acceleration, notjust the acceleration
relative to the earth:
Fmass

=M [x(t) + xg(t)]

Therefore, ifthe spring is very, very stiff; the mass will move along with the earth and there
will be no relative acceleration hetween the earth and the mass, but there will still he the
inertial force.
The equation for earthquake motion hecomes:
M [x(t) + xg(t)] + Kx(t) = 0
Moving the ground acceleration to the right side of the equation:
M x(t) + K x(t) = -M xg(t)
As it turns out, the mode shapes of the piping system (as extracted by the Eigensolver) have
a unique set of characteristics. They are a peculiar set ofvectors which serve to rotate the
coordinate axes for each node.

4-57

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

v
1
/
1 /

----y
Z

[~J ) ~~ ~ = ) ~~ ~
\ (X3) (v3)
Matrix which rotates the point CD
from the X,Y,Z coordinates into
alternate coordinates

Figure 4-41
This rotation will be seen to serve a unique purpose. Proceeding by multiplying both the
acceleration and the displacements by the matrix of mode shapes, this gives the same
accelerations and displacements in a different, rotated coordinate system: x -> v
v(t) = cI> x(t); v(t) = cI> x(t)
Multiplying these expressions by the inverse of cI>, i.e. cI> -1 converts the rotated coordinate
system back to the original coordinate system:
cI> -1 v(t)

= x(t);

cI> -1 v(t)

= x(t)

Insertingthese last two expressions backinto the dynamic equations forearthquake motion:
M cI> -1 v(t) + K cI>-1 v(t) = -M xg(t)
Multiplying both sides ofthis equation by cI> again:
cI> M cI>-1 v(t) + cI> K cI>-1 v(t)

= -cI> M xg(t)

The "sets ofequations" represented by the matrix expression above are displayed graphically
in Figure 4-42.

4-58

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

cp

Fully
Populated

Diagonal

K
Fully
Symmetrically
8inded
Populated

v(t)
Fully
Populated

cp-1

v(t)

Fully
Populated

This multiplication results


in a "Rotated" stiffness matrix
that looks like:

This multiplication results


in a "Rotated" mass matrix
that looks like:

'"
K

Diagonal

Diagonal

Figure 4-42
This is a unique property of the dynamic mode shapes of any arbitrary structural system:
<1> M <1>-1 v(t) + <1> K <1>-1 v(t)

v(t) +

= -<1> M xg(t)

v(t) = -<1> M xgCt)

The "diagonalization" ofthe M and K matrix took what was previously an intricately linked
set of equations and found a generalized coordinate system that completely decoupled each
equation in the system, so that each equation can now be de aIt with as a single degree-offreedom system.
The new set ofequations appears in Figure 4-43:

4-59

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

v(t)

v(t)

= -CPMXg(f)

This represents N independent equations of the form:


ml VI(t) + k l VI(t) = - [<1> M xg(t)h
m2 V2(t) + k 2 V2(t) = - [<1> M xg(t)h
mN VN(t) + k N VN(t) = - [<1> M Xg(t)]N

Figure 4-43
Note that each of the equations above represents a different single degree-of-freedom body.
Remembering how the earthquake shock spectrum was generated, one knows exactly what
the maximum displacement for each of the single degree-of-freedom bodies is going to be
under the seismic load.
Doing the previous multiplications by _ provided a set of equations that were "decoupled",
and so were very easy to solve. These equations were of the form:

M v(t) + K v(t) = -<1> M xg(t)


The response spectrum, by definition, gives us solutions to the equation:

M x(t) + K x(t) = - M xg(t)


The form of these equations is very similar except for the right hand sides. Introducing a
constant "C" into the first equation, it becomes:

M v(t) + K v(t) = C[ M xg(t)]

4-60

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

ln this form, the solution to the following equation can be found from the response spectrum:

1\1

v(t) +

K v(t) = - 1\1 xg(t)

Multiplyingthat solution by "c" converts the dis placement solution to the modal coordinate
system. From the above:

= -<1> MI M

Since the displacement from the response spectrum is in the rotated coordinate system, it
must be "unrotated" back to the global coordinate system, so C must be multiplied by <1>-1:

r = C <1>-1 = -<1> M <1>-1 1M


This value "_", by which the solution from the shock spectrum must be multiplie d, is the ~
participation factor. Note that this is the same mass participation factor as defined in Section
4.32 as -cI>T M<1>, since <1>-1

cI>T M and M

<1> M cI>-1; so:

<1> M <1>-1 1 M = -<1> M <1>T MI <1> M <1>-1


= -<1> M cI>T M 1 <1> M <1>T M
= -<1>T M cI> Mil M

= -<1>T M <1>
The procedure for doing earthquake dynamic analysis can be summarized as described
below:
1) Generate the shock response spectrum either by feeding the earthquake time

history through a shake table, or through analytical means such as those


described in Regulatory Guide 1.60.
2) Set up the set of dynamic equations for the earthquake problem:
M x(t) + K x(t) = -M xg(t)
3) Solve the Eigenproblem to get the natural frequencies and mode shapes.
4) Using the mode shapes, decouple the complex set of equations:
M

x(t) + K

x(t) = -M xg(t)

vet) + K

v(t)

= -cI> M xg(t)

4-61

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

5) Read maximum displacements (zmax) for M v(t) + K v(t) = -M xg(t) from the
response spectrum curve. (Remember that because of the decoupling, this
expression represents a group of single degree offreedom bodies.)
6) Convert this displacement to the modal displacements that we need, in the global

coordinate system, by multiplying it by the mass participation factor, r:


Xmax =

Zmax = (cI> M cI>-1 / M) Zmax

These individual modal responses are then combined to get the total system response.
4.6.2.3 Modal Results Summation Methods
Considering that the response spectrum yields the maximum response at any time during
the course of the load, and considering that each ofthe modes of vibration will probably have
different frequencies, it is probable that the peak responses of all modes will not occur
simultaneously. Therefore the correct means of summing the modal responses must be
considered.
Available modal combination methods are:
1) Double Square Root of the Sum of the Squares (DSRSS): This combination

method is the most technically correct. The total system response is calculated
as:

nn
= [ 1:1:

IJ

iJ R.1 R.J ]112

Where:
R

= total system response

Eij

correlation coefficient between mode i and mode j

= varies from -1.0 (for out-of-phase modal responses) to O.


(for independent modal responses) to 1.0 (for in-phase modal responses)

= response of mode i

Rj

response of mode j

This method results in a correctly phased response for dependent modal


responses and a statistical response (SRSS) for independent modal responses
(since they are unlikely to occur at exactly the same time during the load profile).
The drawback to this method is that the inter-modal correlation coefficients are
usually not known, other than some empirical estimates based on earthquake
data (see the excerpt from the USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.92 in Section 4.6.2.5).
Therefore, more usable methods have been developed, which are described
below.

4-62

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

2) Absolute: This method states that the total system response is equal to the
absolute value of the individual modal responses. (This is effectively the same
as using the DSRSS method with aU correlation coefficients equal to 1.0.)

n
L IR.I

This method gives the most conservative result, since it assumes that the aIl
maximum modal responses occur at exactly the same time during the course of
the applied load. This is usually overly-conservative, since modes with different
natural frequencies will probably experience their maximum DLF during
different parts of the load profile.
3) Square Root of the Sum ofthe Squares (SRSS): This method states that the total
system response is equal to the square root of the sum of the squares of the
individual modal responses. (This is effectively the same as using the DSRSS
method with aIl correlation coefficients equal to 0.0.)

[L R.2]1 / 2

This method is based upon the statistical assumption that all modal responses
are completely independent, with the maxima following a relatively uniform
distribution throughout the duration of the applied load. This is usually nonconservative, especially ifthere are any modes with very close frequencies, since
those modes will probably experience their maximum DLF during the same part
of the load profile.
4) Grouping Method: This method attempts to eliminate the drawbacks of the
Absolute and SRSS methods, by assumingthat modes are completely correlated
with any modes with similar (closely spaced) frequencies, and are completely
uncorrelated with those modes with widely different frequencies.
R. 2

R=

P
L

k
L

q=1

m=j

1R

lq

lq

1]1/2

Where:
p

number of groups of closely-spaced modes (where modes are consid


ered to be closely-spaced iftheir frequencies are within 10% ofthat of
the base mode in the group)

number of first mode in group i

number of last mode in group i

Rlq

response of mode l in group q

Rmq

response ofmode m in group q

4-63

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Effectively, this method requires that the responses of any modes which have
frequencies within 10% of each other first be added together absolutely, with the
results of each ofthese groups then combined with the remaining modal results
using the SRSS method.

4.6.2.4 Combination of Spatial Components


Ifmultiple shocks have been applied to the structure in more than one direction, the results
must be combined spatially as weIl (for example, the X-direction results with the Z-direction
results). Combining these results vectorially points to an SRSS combination method;
however a question arises as to whether the spatial summations should precede or follow the
modal summations.
The two different combination methods (i.e. spatially first or modally first), are associated
with the terms DEPENDENT and INDEPENDENT respectively:
Spatial before Modal-> DEPENDENT
Modal before Spatial-> INDEPENDENT
IEEE 344-1975 (IEEE Recommended Practices for Seismic Qualification of Class lE
Equipment for Nuclear Power Generating Stations) states:
"Earthquakes produce random groundmotions which are characterized by simultaneous but
statistically INDEPENDENT horizontal and vertical components."
Dependent and Independent refer to the time relationship between the X, y and Z
components ofthe earthquake. With a dependent shock case, the X, Y, and Z components
ofthe earthquake have a dependent relationship - a change in the shock along one direction
produces a corresponding change in the other directions. For exam pIe, this would be the case
when the earthquake acts along a specific directionhaving components in more than one axis
- such as when a fault runs at a 300 angle between the X- and Z-axes. In this case, the Zdirection load would be a scaled (sin 300/cos 300), but otherwise identical version of the Xdirection load.
An Independent shock is one where the X, Y and Z time histories produce related frequency
spectra but have completely unrelated time histories. It is the Independent type of
earthquake that is far more common, and thus in most cases the modal components should
be combined first.
Combination of modal response can be illustrated by considering a simple problem - a
cantilever beam built in CAESAR II and for which four modes (natural frequencies and
shapes) were extracted:

4-64

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Mode#2 -

8.5 Hz. Z-direction

J-IIIIIIII!~---x

8.5 Hz. Y-direction

Z
Y

Mode#4 -

Mode#3 -

15.6 Hz. Z-direction

15.6 Hz. Y-direction

Figure 4-44

Goingto the response spectrum plot for the two differentfrequencies, the maximum response
can be obtained in terms of displacement, velocity, or acceleration. This response can then
be converted into structural displacements, and in tum into forces, moments, and stresses.
Modal response is the product of the mode shape, the direction of the excitation, the
magnitude, and the dynamic load factor. (For example, note that the modal displacements
along the X-direction of the cantilever are zero, thus there will be no contribution to the
stresses or dis placements due to the X-component of the earthquake.)
For the cantilever, the stress at the wall represents the important response quantity of
interest. For each of the modes, the maximum displacements are converted into forces,
moments, and stresses. Once these response quantities have been computed for each
individu al mode, and for each direction, they must be combined to get an estimate of the
cumulative value.
There are four modes and three excitation directions, which means there are 3 x 4, or 12,
response quantities to combine. Looking specifically at the stresses at the connection of the
cantilever to the wall, the 12 values are shown below. (Note that most of the response
quantities for the cantilever are zero, while for true three dimensional piping models this will
not he the case.)
Mode
1
2
3
4

Frequency

8.5 Hz
8.5 Hz
15.6 Hz
15.6 Hz

Modal Stresses at the Wall


X-Direction Y-Direction
Z-Direction
0.0
18000.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
18000.0
0.0
4000.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4000.0

4-65

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The response quantities are defmed as spatial and modal. Spatial response quantities are
those associated with each individual excitation direction (the columns of the table shown
above). Modal response quantities are those associated with each individual mode (the rows
of the table shown above). Using a GROUP combination method for the modal results, it is
first necessary to determine if the modes are closely spaced - i.e., iftheir frequencies are
within 10% of each other. Modes 1 and 2 are closely spaced (difference in frequency is 0%),
as are modes 3 and 4 (difference is 0% as weIl), so their responses will be added absolutely
when the modal responses are combined.
The combinations can be made first spatially and then modally, or first modally and then
spatially. The differences are shown schematicaUy in Figure 4-45.
MobAt. SIJ .... ~,:Tlol-lS S(c.o,.:')l) (Gfou? )

lIIi.DI Rodai Strlssls at th. 1111

!!adl Fria.
1 8.5 111
2 8.5 111
3 15.6 111
.. 15.6 111

1gO~O

l'l.MQ.)

~o+OQ(
~ooo S

3~OOQ '2.

<!-.

C '-osn 'r' C;;;'11 (f'}_

4<60002...

,)'/?.

<r--

C!.oS,LY

SPk~ll

1IaII. Fr".
1 5 Hz

2 '.5 Hz
3 15.6 Hz
.. 15.6 Hz

..

Mo 'iJfrL , I~~~__S ~~1JM.


( 4.fl>.f_P f-~l) f" .si')

\
Figure 4-45

Figure 445
A difference in the final results arises whenever different methods are used for the spatial
and modal combinations. In this case, modal results are combined using the GROUP
method, while the spatial results are combined with the SRSS method. Therefore the
stresses ofmodes 1 and 2, and modes 3 and 4 are added absolutely in the first case, because
they are aU non-zero at the time when the modal summations are made.
Nuclear Regulatory Guide 1.92 (published in February, 1976), included on the following 5
pages, de scribes the requirements for combining modal responses and spatial components
when performing seismic response spectra analysis for nuclear power plants.

4-66

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

....Won, .

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

. Flibruliry 1878
;.: .:.....

'.';J

OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT

REGULATORV GUIDE 1.92

COMBINING MODAL RESPONSES ANO"SPA11AL


COMPONENTS IN SEISMIC ~. , - .
RESPONSE ANALYSIS

case

A. INTRODUCTION

CriteJon 2, "Design Bases for Protection Against


Natural Phenomena," of Appendix A, "Ceneral Design
Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," to 10 CR Part SO~
"censing of Pr04uction anel UtiUzatlon FadJities."
requires. in part,; that nuc:1ear power pJlllt ItlUctures,
systems, and ccmponents important to afety be de
signed to withstand the effects of eartbquals without
lass of capabity to perform their satty funetions.
Paragraph (aXI) of Section VI, '''AppUcatioo te Engi
neering Design," of Appendix A, '"Seismlc and Geologie
Siting Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," to 10 CR
Part 100, "Reactor Site Criteria,'~ .req1JiJes, in part, that
structures, systems, and components itportant to safety
remain functiorW in the event of a SaCe Shutdown
Earthquake (SSE). It specifies the use of a suitable
dynamic analysis as one method of ensuring that the
structures, systems, and components cao withstand the
seismic loads. Similarly, paragraph (aX2) of Section VI
of the same appendix requiRs. in part. that the
structures, systems, and componeats aecessuy for con.
tinued operation without undue
to'the bealth and
safety of the public remain Nnctional iii an Operating
Basis Earthqual (OBE). Again. the use of a suitable
dynamic analym is specified as one methocl of ensuring
that the structures, systems, and components cao withstand the seismic 101uis.

:risk

This guide descrtbes methods acceptable to the NRC


staff for:

1. Combining the values of the responseof indMdtal


modes in a respcmse spectrum modal dynamic analysis te
fmd the representatiYe maximum value of a particular
rC!Sponse of interest for the design of a pen clement of
a nuclear power plant structure, system, or component.

l: Combifting tb,e' maximum' values (in. the


of
time-lstory dynamic anal)'lis) or the-:'n:PRsenta~
maximum values (in the case of spectrum dynamic
analysis) ~f, the response ofa ,pven .. le~nt 'of .a
structure,: system, or omponent, when N.h values are
calculated independent}y' foi e&eh of the tliie Ortbogo.. .
nal spatiarcampcmenU'(two horizOntahlid :Cne,.WrtiaJ.) .'
of an earthqual; ,~ combined v&lue: WIll:. he 1he .
representatiw ~um valUe of the Ombid'iponse : :
of that element of the strueture, syStem, or' component
to iimultaneous action of the three tpatial components.

The AcMsOry CommUtee On' Reacttt 'Safe~ds bas ,been consulted conceming this ginde aiul has'<:aocurred
in the regulatory position.
.:.
.
B. DISCUSSION

1.CombiDiDg Modal R~onses


To .flDd the values of.. the response of different
e1emenu of a JlUC1ear power plant stru'ctu., system, or
cOmpoant to a prescribed .n:sp~ spectrum. it is first
nec:asary to calculate the madt shapes' and frequeacies
of the s~ctwe, system, or compoent~' This ~ clone by
solwing the foUowing equation for' the eisenwctom and

eigenvalues:

[ [K] -

'.

w~ lM1]{ 'n}=O

wh~re {K] is!f1e. stiffness matrix, w n is the natum.


frequency fo' the nth mode; [M] is the ~IS:' ma~. and
{~) is the eigenwctor for the nth mode.:, .

.~ indicate

substmtivedwlps rrom pzmous isIIIOo

_ _ ,..... -'''.'Y ., .... c............ U.L ....._

_in._
.....
_
--_
....
_,
.....ui_ . . ._if._..-.._,..
...
10._
,,---........
..... . . ._.......
--_
,._._.
.. _._nr.
c-_ -

USNRC REGULATORY GUIDES

R ....I .." G ...... .;., iuu_ _Me _


.... --.... ,. , ... ...."' ........ MC . . . . . . . t . . . . . . .
et 1.... '. . . . . . . . . . . . ,.,.. .. the

......_ie_............,..-....- .....______
.....,....-........
.
..
eo...... _ ........_

c .....
... _
_ ........ _.,,_ ...H 100 ........
~

con
.............." a __ M
..... _
wi....

......-.. ...

....

_8ft4--...~

.-.1 ca....-'iII

....eo...__
... -.._ ............IiCII_.,,_Ca_
_ _ _..._ ..,
..................n.a. ...... __
''''..... .,............... "".......ioft., ..
iU _ _

_.-..~_

iftIp. ._

" "_ _ C.-.I......

w......._.

s-Iee--.

~ .. .

-...... ...H

4-67

D.C. _ . _ _

~.

. '

lIIe ....... _ _ _ iII_ ..

1.'-___
2. _ _ T., __ _
J. ...... _

'.T'.._ ........

.. _ ,_ _

LOc ............ HMIIIo

4. _ _ _. '

.................. _ _.....

ca_..... _ _ , _ , ... ....- _

(1)

1. An'II",.. R . . -

Copiee . - - . - ...., MI o M _ . " ...rIt... _

......... _

...... U.L ......

..

_a..-_ea....-w............ D.C.

~A~Oireee.'.Oftlee of

4-67

...

at....... D........... .

...., . . . -........ .

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Course

No~es

1/93

1. CombiJlilll SpiII Campoaen..

Note that it ma)' not be necessary to solve Equation 1


for all modes. In mlllY cases, determlDadoD of only
those modes that are sipiflc:ant should lie auftlclent.

1.1 _Rapo. . 10 Tbree Spatial Compoaenu CaJ&:u,.


lated Sepuately

The ncxt step is to tennine the maxiDmm modal


displacement relative to the supports. this is done as
follows:

Regulatory Guide 1.60, "Design Respouse Spcctra for


Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants," indicates that
design of
Seismic Category 1 structures, systems. or
components should be based on three orthogonal corn
panent motions (twc horizontal and one vertical) of a
prescribed design earthquake. Chu, Amin, and Singh
(Ref. 3) have concluded that the representative maxi
mum value of a particular response of interest for
(e.g., stress, strain. moment, shear, or displacement) ofa
given element of a structure, system, or component
subjected to the simultaneous action of the thiee
.compOetlts .of the earthqualc.e can be sa1is(actorily ;
obtained by talcing the square root of the S\Un of the
squares of carrespding representative maximUm wlues .
of the. spec:trum response, or the maximum response
values 1rom tlme-hlstory. dynamic analysis, to each . of.
the tiuee componeDts calculated independently.

an

(2)
whe re lqn \ max is the maximum displament vector for
the nth: mtde, rD is the modal participation factor for
the nth mode and is expressed by

desisn

San is the value of acceleration in the specifted sesponse


spectrum corresponding. to w n and desillft cbmping, and
superscript T desipates the transpose. Otber maximum
values of the responses per mode such I l 1treII. strain.
oment. or wu CID be computed !rom the approprilte
q max by using the stifIness properties orthe elements
f me structure, system, or componeat. Newmark (Rd.
1) has shown that the representave maximum value of
a . particular response of interest for desip ($Och as
components in given directions of stJesspstrain. moment,
shear, or displacement) of a given element CID be
obtained from the corresponding maximum values of the
response of individual modes as computed abo. by
taking the square root of the sum of the squares (SRSS)
of the maximum values of the respanse of these
individual modes of the structure, system, or corn
ponent. The Newmark study, however. does not address
the problem of closely spaced modes. Other studies (sec
References 2 and 3) have .mown that SRSS. procedure
can sipficantly underestimate the true ~ponse in
certain cases in whic:h some of the modal frequencies of
a structural system are closely spaced (see resulatop:
eosition 1.1 for definition of closely spaced modes). The
nuclear ind"ustry bas used many different methods to
combine the response when closely spaced modes exist.
Sorne of these methods can be found in Reterences 2, 4,
and 5. A recent unpublished study bas shown that the
resulting combined response of nuclear plant f~cilities
using any of the methods delineated in rewlatory
20sition 1.2, which covers a broad range otmthods
currenuy being used by the industry, is in good
agreement with time-history response. Therefore, any of
the methods given in reguJatory position 1.2 is
acceptable for combining the modal responses when
closely spaced modes exist.

ft should be noted that, if the fIequencies of a system


are all widely separated. aU the terms in the second
summation sign in Equations 4 and 5 of regulatory
position 1.2 wiU vanish, and these equations wl
degenerate to the SRSS method (Equation 3).

The SRSS procedure used by Newmark (Ref. 1) and


Chu, Amin, and Singh (Ref. 3) for comQining the values
of the response to three components of an earthquake is
based on the consideration that it is' very unlikely that
peak values of a response of a given element would oc~r
at the same me during an earthquake.
1.1 Respoase to Tluee Spatial Compooentl CalcuJated Simultaaeously
.

The maximum value of a particular response of


interest for desillft of a given element cao be obtaned
througb. a step-bystep method. The timehistory res
ponses from- e&ch of the three components : of . the
earthquake motions cao be obtained and then combined
algebraically at each time step or the response at each
time step cao be calculated directly owing. to the
simultaneous action of three components. The maxi
. mum respanse is determined by scanning the 'combined
time-history solution. When this me~od is used, the
earthquake motions specified in the tluee c!ifferent
directions should be statistically independent. Fora
discussion of statistical independence, seeRefreuce 6 ..

C. REGULATORY POSITION
The following procedures for combining the values. of
the respanse of invidual modes and the respse tothe
three independent spatial components of an earf:hquake
in a seismic dynamic anaIysis of a nuclear power plant
structure, system, or companent are acceptable to the
NRCstaff:

4-68

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

1/93

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Course Notes


\1. CombiDatiOll of Modal RapOIIIeI
1

1.1 With No aosely Spacl Mollet

ln a re!pense spectrum modal dynamic analysis, if the


modes are not c1ely spaced (two consecutive modes
are defined as closely spaced if their frequenc:ies differ
from each other by 10 percent or leu of the lower
frequency), the representative maximum value of a
particular response of interest for design (e.g., com
panent! of stress, strain, moment, shear, or displace
ment) of a given element of a nuclear power plant
structure, system, or component subjected ta a single
independent spatial component (response spectrum) of a
three.component earthqua1 should be obtafned by
taking the square root of the sum of the squares (SRSS)
of correspanding maximum values of the response of the
element attributed to individual significant modes of the
structure, system, or component. Mathematically, this .
can be expressed as foUows:

R=

[t Rkl*J

component shouJd then be obtained by taking the


square root of the sum of the squares of corresponding
representative maximum values of the response of the
element attributed ta each closely spaced group of
modes and the remaining modal responses for the modes
that ue not closely spaced.
MathematicaUy, this an be expressed as foUows:

where ~q and Rmq are modal responses, Ri and Rut


within. the qth group. respectively; i is the number of the
mode where a group starts; j is the number of the mode
where a group ends; R, Rc, and N are as defined
preYiously in regulatory position 1.1 of this guide; and P
is the num~r of groups of closely spaced modes,
excluding individu al separated modes.
1.2.2 Ten Percent Method

(3)

k= 1

(5)

wherc: R is the representative maximum value of a


particular response of a given element ta a given
component of aD earthquake, Rte is the peak mue of the
response of the clement due to the kth mode, and N il
the n .unber of significant modes considered in the modal
respcnse combination.
1

1.:: With OOlely Spad Modes

where R, Rt, and N ~ as defined previously in


regulatory position 1.1 of this guide. The second
summation is to be done on ail i and j modes whose
frequencies are clely spad to each other. Let CAli and
" be the frequencies of the ith and jth mode. In order
10 ve~fy which of the modes are c10sely spaced, the
foUowmg equation will apply:

In a response spectrum modal dynamic analysis,.if

1s.ome ~r all of the modes .~ closely spaced, any of the


-;:..

(6)

toll':,"mg regulatory positions (i.e., 1.2.1", 1.2.2 or


1
May be used as a method acceptaril.'to the NRC
~ swf .:l combine the modal responses.
:1

y-?-

1.2.1 Grouping Method

alsol$i<j$N

(7)

1.2.3 Double Sum Method

Oosely spaced modes should be divided inlO


grou's that include aU IOOdes haviJ;lg. frequencies lying
betw' en the lowest frequcncyin the group and a
1 ~requ :ncy 10. ~r,?en~ . ~gher. L . The re'presentative
maxr num value of a particular respanse of interest for
the Cesign of a given e1ement of a nuciear power plant
suuc ure. system. or component attnbuted to each such
grOU! of modes should fIrSt be obtained by taldng the
sum )f the absolute values of the corresponding peak
value; of the respanse of the e1ement attributed to
indiv dual modes in that group. The representative
:naxi num value of this particular response attributed to
ill tt e signifiant modes of the structure, system, or
os should be rormeci starting rrom the lowest frequency
and vorking towucis sw:casively hilher frequcnc:ies. No one
freq\ ency Is to be ln more than one ~up.

1 Gro\:

4-69

where R, ~, and N are as defined preYiously in


regulatory position 1.1 of this ~ide. Ra is the peak value
of the response of the clement attributed to sth mode.

Eks= [ 1+ {

(Wk - w;)

'(Pk wlc + fJ;

}J-I

(9)

w s)

in which

(10)

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

f3k,

tdwk

1 where

(11)

b. "''hen the timehistory responses from eac:h of the


three components of the earthquake motion are
calculated by the stepbystep method and combined
algebraicaDy al eac:h lime step, the maximum response
cao be obtained from the combined time solution. 2

tJk

are the modal frequenc:y" and the


damping ratio in the kth mode, respectively, and td is
the duration of the earthquake.

2.

wk and

responses are calculated using the timehistory method


instead of the spectrum method.

=f3k+-

Combination of Effects Due to The Spatial Components of an Eartbquake

3. If the applicant has used the methods described in

Depenciing on which basic method is used in the


1 scismic analysis. i.e., respanse spectra or time.rustory
1 method. the following two approaches are considered
'acceptable for the combination of threedimensional
earthquake effects.

this guide, the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report


(PSAR) should indicate in each applicable section which
of the alternative acceptable methods were used for the
structures, systems, or components covered by tbat
section.

2.1 Respon8e Specua Methocl

D. IMPLEMENTATION

The purpose of this section is to provide information


to applicants and linsees regarding the NRC stafrs
plans for utilizing this guiatory guide.

When the response spectra method is aclopted for


sei smic analysis, the representative maximwn wlues of
the structural respcnses to each of the tJuee campoDents
of earthquake motion should be c:ombined by taking the
square root of the sum of the squares of the maximum.
representative values of the codilectiOllal respOD.SeS
caused by eath of the three components of earthquake
motion at a particu1ar point of the structure or of the
mathematical model

Except in those cases in which the applicant proposes


an alternative method for complying with specified
portions of the Commission's regulations, the methods
described herein will he used by the staff in the
evaluation of submittals for construction permit applica
tions docketed after the date of issue of this guide.

2.2 Tune-History Analysis Method

If an applicant wishes to use thls regulatory guide in


developing. submittals for applications docketed on or
before the date of issue of this guide, the pertinent
portions of the application will be evaluated on the basis
of this guide.

When the time.mstory analysis method is employed


1 for seismic analysis. two types of anal}'Sis are generally
1 perfonned depending on the complexity of the problem:
a. When the maximum responses due to cach of the
three components of the earthquake motion are
ca1culated separately, the method for c:ombining the
three-dimensional effects is identic:al to that deicribed in
1 regulatory position 2.1 except that the maximum

1. R. L. Wiegel, editor. Etuthqu.tIke EngiMt:Ttng.


Englewood Cifrs, N.J., PrenticeHaU,lnc:.,1970, chapter
by N. M. Newmark, p. 403.

2. A. K. Singh, S. L. Chu. and S. SinBh, "Influen of


Closely Spaced Modes in Response Spec:trum Method of
Analysis." Proceedings 01 the SpecJJty Conlermce on
Structural Design' 01 Nucletlr Plant Facilities. Vol. 2.
Chicago. December 1973. (Published by American
Sode ty of Civil Engineers, New York, New York.)
3. S. L Chu, M. Amin, and S. Singh, "Spectral
Treatment of Actions ofThree Earthquake Components
on Structures," Nucletrr Engineering tmd Dnign, 1972,
Vol. 21, No. l, pp. 126136.

method is usecl, the earthquake motions specifiee! in


the three difrermt directions should be statistically indepen
dent. For 1 discussion of statistical independence, seo Refer
ence 6.

2When this

4. E. Rosenblueth and 1. Elorduy, "Response of


Unear Systems ta Certain Transient Disturbans,"

Proceedings, Fourth World Conference on Eanhqu.ake


Engineering, Vol. l, Santiago, Che, 1969.
5. N. C. Tsai, A. H. Hadjian et al., "Seismic Analysis
of Structures and Equipment for Nuc1ear Power Plants,"
Bechtel Power Corporation Topical Report 4.A, Revi
sion 3, November 1974.
6. C. Chen, "Definition of Statistically IndepeJ\dent
Tune Histories," JounuJl of the St7Uctunzl Division,
ASCE, February 1975.

4-70

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

4.6.2.5 Missing Mass Correction

Since the response of the rigid (highest order) modes are purely static and mode independent,
this response can be calculated without actually extracting aIl of the rigid modes, through
a method called missing mass correction. This is important, since, although displacements
may be obtained with good accuracy using only a few ofthe lowest frequency modes, the force,
reaction, and stress results may require extraction offar more modes (usually far into the
rigid range) before acceptable accuracy is attained. By performing a missing mass
calculation, a correction representing the quasi-static contribution ofthe higher order modes
not explicitly extracted for the modal/dynamic response can be included, providing greater
accuracy with reduced calculation time.
The residual response ofnon-extracted rigid modes is calculated by summingthe active mass
(over all of the extracted modes) for each degree-of-freedom at each of the mass points,. The
difference between the total mass modeled at each of the points, and the sum of the active
mass at each ofthe points, is called the missingmass, and represents the residual mass active
in the rigid (non-extracted) modes. This missing mass is then multiplied by the ZPA from
the response spectrum and applied to the structure as a static load. The static structural
response is then combined with the dynamically amplified modal responses as ifit were a
modal response as weIl. (Actually this static response is the algebraic sum of the responses
of aIl non-extracted modes - representing in-phase response, as would be expected from
rigid modes.)

CAESAR II's implementation of the missing mass correction procedure assumes that the
missingmass correction represents the contribution ofrigidmodes, and that the ZPAis based
upon the spectral ordinate value at the frequency of the last extracted mode. Therefore, it
is recommended that the user extract modes up to, but not far beyond, the rigid frequency
cutoff of the response spectrum. Choosing a cutofffrequency to the left of the spectrum's
resonant peak will provide a non-conservative result, since resonant responses may be
missed. U sing a cutoff frequency to the right ofthe peak, but still in the resonant range, will
yield conservative results, since the ZPNrigid DLF will be overestimated. Extracting a large
number ofrigid modes for calculation of the dynamic response may be conservative, since aU
available modal combination methods (SRSS, GROUP, ABS, etc.) give conservative results
versus the algebraic combination method which gives a more realistic representation of the
net response of the rigid modes.
CAESAR II provides two options for combining the missing mass correction with the modal
(dynamic) results - SRSS and Absolute. The Absolute combination method of course
provides the more conservative result, and is based upon the assumption that the dynamic
amplification is going to occur simultaneously with the maximum ground acceleration or
force load. Research suggests that the modal and the rigid portions orthe response to typical
dynamic loads are actually statistically independent, so that an SRSS combination method
is a more accurate representation ofreality.
4.6.3 Force Spectrum Analysis (for Impulse Loadings)

A similar method can be followed for non-random loads, such as any load profile for which
the force vs. time profile is known - for example, the ramp up, constantforce, andramp down
of a relief valve firing (or fluid hammer or slug flow), as shown in Figure 4-46.

4-71

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

Plot ot mo,lm,m d,nom', dlsplo"m,nt


for each of the oscillators being
exposed to the forcing function

Single DOF
Oscillators

Relief Valve Discharge


Force Profile

Force

~/
Hydraulic Shakers

Time

Relief v a l v : - - - I - - - - H e l i e f Volve
Opening Time
Totol Duration
Closing Time
Needed to Vent
Overpressure

Figure 4-46
A look at the equation for the earthquake problem explains why the force spectrum solution
is very similar to the earthquake solution:
M x(t) + K x(t) = -M xg(t)
The term on the right hand side is nothing more than a dynamic force acting on the piping
system, i.e. F = Ma.
So the analogous equation to be solved for the force spectrum problem is:
M x(t) + K x(t) = F(t)
Where:
F = the dynamic load (water hammer or relief valve)
4.6.3.1 Generation of the Response Spectrum
Instead of the displacement, velocity, or acceleration spectrum used for the seismic problem,
aDynamie LoadFactor spectrum is usedfor a force spectrum problem. ADLF spectrum gives
the ratio of the maximum dynamic displacement divided by the maximum static displacement.
Whereas the earthquake response spectrum analysis method started with the time history
of an earthquake excitation, the force spectrum analysis method is done in exactly the same
way - except that the analysis starts with the force vs. time profile.
Just as for the earthquake, this time history loading can he applied to a shake table of single
degree-of-freedom bodies, with a response spectrum (in this case, DLF vs. natural frequency)

4-72

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

being generated by dividing the maximum oscillator displacements by the static displacements expected under the same load. Note that for this type ofload, as the ramp-up becomes
steeper, the DLF gets closer to 2.0; while as the load duration increases, the curve shifts to
the left and more lower order modes will become excited.

2.0

Longer Duration
Extends Curve
Le ft

..

DLF

tt

Quicker Ramp-Up
Shifts Curve Up
(Towards 2.0)

1.0

Natural Frequency

Figure 4-47

4.6.3.2 Application to a Multi-Degree-of Freedom System


The mathematics ofthis method proceed similarly to those for the seismic response spectrum
method. Once the eigensolution is complete, the next step is to decouple the set ofequations:
cp M cp-1 v(t) + cp K cp-1 v(t)

= cp nt)

which can be re-expressed as:

M v(t) + K v(t) = cp F(t)


The DLF curve was generated for the equation:
M x(t) + K x(t) = F(t)
So,just as for the earthquake problem it is necessary to find a constant by which to multiply
the solution in order to make the problems compatible. By comparing the two equations, it
is obvious that the required constant is CP.

So the solution to M v(t) + K v(t) = cP F(t) can he found as:


v max = C (F / K)(DLF) = cP (F / K)(DLF)
Where DLF is the dynamic load factor selected from the response spectrum.
As with the seismicproblem, vmaxis in the rotatedcoordinate system, so, inorderto get back

to the global piping coordinate system we must "un-rotate" these displacements, again using
the mode shapes:
xmax = cp-1 V max
4-73

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

These are the maximum displacements in the piping system due to the relief valve or water
hammer load.

4.6.3.3 Summation of Responses


Once the force spectrum modal quantities are computed, they must be combinedjust as for
earthquakes. The SRSS method with a 10% closely spaced mode criteria seems to give the
most reasonable answers for the force spectrum method.
The force spectrum combinations usually are much simpler to apply than the earthquake
combinations because normally there are no separate spatial components to combine - i.e.,
there are not X-, Y-, and Z-shocks acting simultaneously. However, in the event that there
is more than one potential force load (such as when there is a bank ofreliefvalves that can
fire individually or in combination) the spatial combination method may be used to indicate
the independence of the loadings. For example, if two relief valves may or may not fire
simultaneously (i.e., they are independent), the two shocks should be defined as being in
different directions (for example, X- and Y-), and the combination method selected should be
"Modal before Spatial". Ifunder certain circumstances, the two valves will definitelyopen
simultaneously (i.e., the loadings are dependent), the combination method should be
"Spatial before Modal". (Otherwise, the direction defined for a force spectrum loading has
no particular meaning.)
Including the missing mass correction is especially effective when performing force spectrum
calculations. This is because force spectrum loads due to causes such as fluid hammer and
slugflow act axially along the pipe, and therefore excite most highly the extremely rigid axial
extension modes. Therefore the rigid response represented by the missing mass correction
often provides a very high proportion ofthe total force spectrum response. 1t is recommended
that the user extract modes up to, but not far beyond, the peak ofthe force response spectrum
and use the SRSS method for combining the missing mass.

4.6.4 Harmonie Analysis


Harmonic analysis looks at dynamic problems where the forces or displacements (i.e.,
pulsation or vibration) acting on the piping system take sinusoidal forms. In these cases,
when damping is ignored, the dynamic equation of the system becomes:

M x(t) + K x(t) = Fo sin ro t


Where:
M

mass matrix of system, slug

x(t)

acceleration vector with respect to time, ftlsec 2

stiffness matrix of system, lb/ft

x(t)

displacement vector with respect to time, ft

Fa

vector of amplitude ofharmonic force, lb

ro

forcing frequency of harmonic load, rad/sec

time, sec
4-74

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

This equation may be solved directly, giving the system displacements, forces, stresses, and
reactions; thus obviating the need for response spectra. This type of differential equation
has a solution of the form:
x(t)

=A sin

ro t

Where:
A

= vector representing maximum harmonic displacements of system, ft

Since acceleration is the second derivative of displacement with respect to time:


x(t) = -A ro2 sin rot
Inserting these equations for displacement and acceleration back into the basic harmonic
equation of motion yields:
-MA ro2 sin ro t + K A sin ro t

= F 0 sin

ro t

Dividing both sides of this equation by sin ro t:


-M A ro2 + KA = F 0
Reordering this equation:
(K - M ro2 ) A = F 0

This is exactly the same form of equation as is solved for alllinear (static) piping problems.
The appealing thing about this is that the solution time for each excitation frequency takes
only as long as a single static solution, and, when there is no phase relationship to the loading,
the results give the maximum dynamic responses directly. Due to the speed of the analysis,
and because the solutions are so directly applicable, it is advisable to make as much use of
this capability as possible. Two considerations must be kept in mind:
1) An assumption of zero damping in a harmonic problem permits a dynamic load
factor ofinfinity. This may have to he overcome by a slight tuning of the forcing
frequency up or down to get a more realistic DLF.
2) If multiple harmonic loads occur simultaneously, and they are not in phase,
system response is the sum of the responses due to the individualloads:

Where:

Ai

dis placement vector of system under load i

phase angle of load i, degrees

In this case an absolute maximum solution cannot be found. Rather, solutions


for each load, and the sum ofthese, must be found at various times in the load
cycle. These combinations should then be reviewed in order to determine which
one causes the worst load case.
4-75

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

The biggest use by far of the harmonic solver is in analyzing low frequency field vibrations
due either to fluid pulsation or out-of-round rotating equipment displacements. The
approach typicaIly taken towards solving this type of problem is described briefly below:
1) A potential dynamic problem is first identified in the field - either in terms of
large cyclic vibrations or high stresses (fatigue failure) being present in an
existing piping system, raising questions ofwhether this represents a dangerous
situation. As many symptoms of the problem (quantifiable displacements,
overstress points, etc.) are identified as possible, for future use in refining the
dynamic model.
2) Amodel of the piping system is built using CAESAR II. This should be done as
accurately as possible, since system, as weIl as load, characteristics affect the
magnitude of the developed response.
3) The engineer next postulates the cause of the load, and from that, an estimate
of the frequency, magnitude, point, and direction ofthe load. This is somewhat
difficult because the dynamic loads can come from many sources. Dynamic loads
may be due to internal pressure pulses, external vibration, flow shedding at
intersections, two phase flow, etc., butin almost all cases, there is sorne frequency
content of the excitation that corresponds to (and therefore excites) a system
mechanical natural frequency. If the load is caused by equipment, then the
forcingfrequency is probably sorne multiple ofthe operating frequency; ifthe load
is due to acoustic flow problems, then the forcing frequency can be estimated
through the use ofStrouhal's equations (from fluid dynamics). Using the best
assumptions available, the user should estimate the magnitudes and points of
application of the dynamic load. Note that the point of application is not
necessarily a point of high system response.
4) The loading is then modeled using harmonic forces or displacements (normally
depending upon whether the cause is assumed to be pulsation or vibration) and
several harmonic analyses are done, sweeping the frequencies through a range
centered about the target frequency (in order to account for uncertainty). The
results of each of the analyses are examined for signs of large displacements,
indicating harmonic resonance. If the resonance is present, the results of the
analysis are compared to the known symptoms from the field. Ifthey are not the
similar (or ifthere is no resonance), this indicates that the dynamic model is not
a good one, so it must be improved, either in terms of a more accurate system
(static) model, a better estimate of the load, or a finer sweep through the
frequency range. Once the model has been refined, this step is repeated until the
mathematical model behaves just like the actual piping system in the field.
5) At this time, there is a good model ofthe piping system and a good model ofthe
loads (or, more accurately, a good model ofthe relationship of the load characteristics to the system characteristics). The results ofthis run are evaluated in
order to determine whether they indicate a problem. Since harmonic stresses are
cyclic, they should be evaluated against the endurance limit of the piping
material; displacements should be reviewed against interference limits or
esthetic guidelines.

4-76

COADE Pipe Stress Analysis Seminar Notes

6) If the situation is deemed to he a problem, its cause must be identified, where the
cause is normally the excitation of a single mode ofvibration. A modal extraction
of the system is done; one (or more) of these modes should have a natural
frequency close to the forcing frequency ofthe applied load. The guilty mode can
be further identified as that one having a shape very similar to the shape of the
total system vibration, since this mode shape has certainly been dynamically
magnified far heyond the other modes (and thus predominates in the final
vibrated shape).
7) Once the guilty mode has been identifie d, it must be eliminated. This is done
most easily by adding a restraint at a high point (and in the direction thereof) of
the mode shape. Ifthis cannot be done, the mode may also be altered by changing
the mass distribution ofthe system (for example, by adding operators to valves).
Ifno modification of the system is possible, it may he possible to alter the forcing
frequency of the load. If the dynamic load was postulated to be due to internal
acoustics, it is recommended that the pipe not be rerouted at this point, as
rerouting the pipe will change the internaI flow conditions (which may resolve
or amplify the problem, but in either case will void CAESAR II's "good model"
of the system). After modifying the system, the harmonic problem (using the
single forcing frequency determined as a "good model") is then re-run, and the
stresses, displacements, etc. are re-evaluated.
8) If the dynamic problem has been adequately solved, the system is now reanalyzed statically to determine the effects of any modifications on the static
loading cases. (Remember, adding restraint normally increases expansion
stresses, while adding mass increases sustained stresses.)

4-77

This section discusses earthquake spectru- analys1s where each support


point on the piping sys.tell is exposed to the SUIe seiSllic excitat10n.
foll~ng sect10n d1scusses independant support Spectrwl excitation
wtlereby different groups of support points are exposed to different
se1S11ic exc1tat1ons. (For eaa.ple. p1p1ng in a systel supported in the
rack .ight be exc1ted by one shock. while all p1ping in the s..e
syStei. supported frai the ground would be excited by a d1fferent

The

sIIOCk. )
There are tllree ujor sources of earthquake excitation tllat can be

accessed fl"Clll CAESAR II:.

1. Predef1nec1 El Centro. (AYaUable in the CAESAR clata base.)


2. Predef1ned Nuclear Regulatory Guide 1.60. (AYanable in the
CAESAR clata base.)
3. User def1ned spectra.

EL CENTRO (Predef1 ned spectl"lll n..e EI.CEIITIIO)


Spectl'Ull clata is taken fl"Clll Biggs:
Dyn.iCS- and 15 baRd on the May
earttlquake north-soutll cponent.
0.33 g' s. 13.7 ipso and B.3 ipss.
apply for ellstic s,rsteas having 5
Eu.ple D-4 on page
11lustrates

-IntrocluCtion to Structural
18. 1940 El Centro t.l1forn1l
The recorded lIUi_ values were
This spectl'Ull 15 intended to
to 10 percent crtt1cal ~ping.
the use of tIIis predefined spect.....

NAC REGULATORY GUIDE 1.60


The predefined spectl'Ull nlIIIes Ire:
1.60H.5
1.60H2
1.60H5
1.60H7
1.60H10

1.60V.5
1.60V2
1.6OV5
1.60V7
1.60VlO

Horizontal
Horizontal
Horizontal
Horizontal
Horizontal

and
Ind
Ind
Ind
and

vertical
vertical
Vertical
Vertical
Vertical

spectrl
spectra
spectrl
spectra
spectra

for
for
for
for
for

0.5S

~ping

10.OS

~ping

2.OS ~ping
5.OS ~ping
7.OS claing

Associated w1t11 the Reg. Guide 1.60 spectra 15 a vllue for the
1IIIX1mum ground aecelerltion (or ZPA - zero pertod acceleration). The
default value for the ZPA used 1n CAESAR and found in the control
earallf!ter spreadsheet 15 0.5 g's. Frai IEEE Std 344-1975 Sect. 3.1
Earthquake Environaent-:

-An earthquake of _gn1tude 6.0 or higher on the Richter seale


-y persist for 15 to 30 seconds and proctuce a lIUillUl horizontal
ground aeeeleratfon frai 0.1 to 0.6 9 or higher vitll the lII,jor
energy content usually occurring in tIIe first 5 or 10 seconds.
The t.Ypical broaclband randoll mtion proctuces clauging effects
over a frequency range fl"Clll 1 to 33 Hz. Usually the vertical
cponent of the ground mt10n is ass.... to be between 67 and
100 percent of the horizontal below 3.5 Hz nd equal to the
horizontal above 3.5 Hz.
Often used in cOnjunction with Reg. Guide 1.60 1s Reg. Guide 1.92
which provfdes essentfally three _tIIods for cb1ning ml
responses and directs tIIat the SRSS cbinat10n of the tllree
spatial responses be used. Most t.Yp1cally tIIis translates into:
1.

~erfoN

_thod. mul

cbinations first us1ng the -grouping-

2. Perfonl spatial c0lD1nat10ns second using tIIe -SRSS


_thod.

USER DEFINED SPECTRUM (N..e up to 24 char.cter user define! label)


User defined spectra -y be entered vitll period or frequenty as the
range. and d1spl.c....t. veloc1ty or acceler.t1on as the ordinate. TheM
spectra -y be read 1n frai an aseff data file or entered d1rectly 1nto
a spectrua table dur1ng dyn.1c input process1~i.

-377-

~ P,'l.1 ..>.. ~AMC,~12.

1)~~~~O

ItJ

---::II....

.::n-/II(i'1~ ~....,

oc..CAS 1014.) 1+ C-

Co-,?..ATE.

Srl4f1C

t..DAL) VrfE

tr4-

Sr/2.E(f(i'>

Afto/

7#.

$'0'- fA. TI OAJ .

'5 TA- .,-, (!,.

L0 A- () S .'

1- w + P
) LISE 0
f - /.A.J+ P+ T + /)+ F
3 - w+P+ -;+/)"f- F (o?[)
4- t-..J+P-I-I= (St.1s)
5'- l/3-l)4 (XP)

-378-

~"""f

St.-tSrA/;..JE D

!5'p.c..mlA.M

i>y'ItJAVI4IC

EXN4P\.E D-4 EARTHQUAI - UNIFO"" SUPPORT MOTION - EL tENTRQ


Klnger destgn Ind nonltnelr restrltnts extst tn thts rune The
sutte elSes 11II11Zed were:
1
2
3
4
5

V+P
V+P+T1+04f
V+P+T1+04f
V+P4f
D3-D4

for hlnger destgn


for hlnger destgn
(OPE)
(SUS)
(EXP)

Use 1.0 tt~s the El Centro Elrthqulke tn the hortzonul dtrecttons Ind
0.667 tt~s the El tentro elrthqulke tn the Yerttell dtrectton. tOllbtne
the sutte susutned Cise (Cise 4) wtUl the eerthqulke result. The
operlttng Cise (Cise 3) Should be used tG set the nonltnelr restrltnt
sutus for the d1n_te lul,S1s.
The tAESAR dynIa1e input sequence for Ulis probl. 1s slKMl below.
Prtor to ent.er1ng the d1n_te input the user sllould haye fint run 1
sutte 11II11s1s for the lold elses ltsted lbove.

CAESAR Il (VERSION 2.1C) [PI'IE-RELEASEl

PIPING/STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

<---_.

CURRENT JOIINNIEI
- - ) D-4

1 - INPUT
2 - STATICS
- DYNAftICS

<- <cr>

4 -

OUTPUT

S - FILES
6 - JOBNNIE
7 - UTILlTIES
8 -

RETURN Ta DOS

ENTER OPTION

->

1 - UJfPED MSSES

2 - SNU8JIERS
~

CAESAR

- stCICIC DEFINITIDNS
4 - P\LSE T~ &DEIVtTJCIN
S - tUND 8U5T TMLE SENERATIDN

Il

6 - PULSE &f'ECTfUII FORCE SETS


D~IC

ANALYSIS INPUT

7 - HMl'DtIC LDAD8

8 - stCICIC CASES
- 8TATIC/D~IC CDNBINATIDN8
A - caNTRG. PMNEIERS

C
D
E

SAVE D~IC 1""'"


CHECIC D~IC 1""'"
PEJIIFCRI'I DVNMIC ANALYSIS
R.tlU'n ta CAESAR _1n .en",

~r
SHOCIC LDAD CASE EDITlNB

DPTIDNSI
1 - Acld anDIW' shaell lCNd ca. . _
2 - O.I.t. an . . 'sUne ca_
3 - Edit an .. istino ca. .
4 - Finishsd ~

-379-

TG SELECT

...xx

LDAD CASE

CCNTRlaJTIONS - DlrecUCift c.n ... l, Y _ Z _ CA" ...


el ......_ IIlrecUCift c_ln. _ .IU,.ect1C1ft _ t _ . Th.
far_t f_ lIirectiCift c_in_ _ _ t __ i. Cc_,cy,CZ)
far ~l..
CO.707,O,0.7071. Ed1tine kava on t~
,,~ic Il..,.,... K,.oll tM ln"ut.
My U" tarU"e .U;"
A" t_1 ... CI) .Ul ... t.k_ c~t.. Er,._. h __
11--. Il.t_t ... CIft .ny U_
IIUnUne. Only _t._
"ode. f_ I"lIep_lIant s.ap,,_t clt.Uon. U . .., !!!

."0.1\

,,_c.

set.

<->

Dl,._U_,

Btart

Nod.,

.toP

NoeS.,

l"cr_t

1.0
0 . . .7

1.0

1,,_

Dai

<_>To Exit

1 - LU9'ED M8SEB
2 - SNI"'"

CAESAR
D~IC

Il

ANALYSIS INPUT

3
4
5
"
7

- ..x:x DEFINITIONS
- ~ TABLE IENERATlaN
- -.IND . . , . TQU; SEfERATlCIN
- ~ SPECTRUIt FDfICE SETS
- IWRCIC LOAD8

- 6HDCIC CA&EII

8T"TlCID~IC

CllNATlCIN& _ _ __

- BAVE D~IC INPUT


C - Q4ECIC D'tIIWfIC INPUT
D - PERFONt

D~IC

ANALYSIS

E - Returft to CAESAR

STATIC/D~IC

_i" _

LOAD CASE EDITINS

OPTIONS.

- AllII _oth_ .taUc/dyn_ic load


- Dal.t. an .. i.t'ne c . . .
Ed,t an '.t'''e c . . .
- F'n'sh'" h_e

STATIC/D~IC

c._I

CClINATlaN CAlE

1 - p,._ .... lIyn_lC load ca_ ".,..,. ith


Editl"" kava
an the , , _ l e Il..,.,... K,.OU tM input. My U,,_ .tartine
.ith _ a.t_iek Cil .111 ... trtad c~t. Errars
ha_ lleen lIet_t... on env U_ sho.l\ IIU"k1ne.

-D- and .t.tic 1oac1 c . . . nuaer ,th an -S-.

Not.

Ent_ .aeh .t..tlc/dyn_'c load ca. . t.o Il.


U"e.

caM,,,"

on a seperat.

Fact_
84

Dl

1".

DaI

1.0
1.0

<_>TOExit.~

-380-

:s CAEIM
D~IC

IHDCIC DEFINITla.

4 - I"\LSE TAIlLE 8ENEMTICIN


5 - IUND BUST TAIlLE GEJERATICIN
- I"\UIE IlPECTRUPI f"DRCE ET.

11

ANALY81S INPUT

7 - HMIOIIIC LC1AD8
- &HOCIt CAIIEII

- STATIC/D~IC ~INATIDN8
A -CONTJaL

D~IC INPUT
C - OECIC D~IC JNPUT
D -' ~ D~IC ANALY81.
E - ftMurt! t.o CAE8M _ln .....

- lAYE

Il..,.

le..,.....

CCNT'ftCL PARNEta LJST - ttodUy t.he "al_ or P"'~_ Oft e.cI'I U . . ""lCh

p,.ec-.a.

t.h. descrlpt.lan. bSUn.


Oft t.he f t _ l e
ec,.oU the iftllUt.. Er-r-ar. ha_ b . - lIet_t.1Id Oft ."y U . . bUnlri"9

( - - st.Uc Loacl c._ far NaI'IUn .,. A_t,..iftt. .t..tus


( - St.Sffnee. Factar for- F,.ScUan CO.o-Not. uslld)
( - - ..... No. of Ei . . .".luee c.lcul.tlld co-Not. uelld)
( - - F,..quency cutoff cta)

0.1
20
0.0:5
0.5

( - Cl_ly lIpac'" ftIIII. Cr-St._S.


( - E.,.t"~Ir. Dur-atian CFor- D&ft8S _t.hacU Csec.)
< - 8t.,.uct._.l Du!pSftQ CX of crSUc.U
( - Z_o .... '011 Accwl . .aUan CFor 1te9. Bu' ... 1.60)

N
N

< - <Not.

04.... :s
0.0

Co.)

ua!Id)

( - - (Not. ue!Id)

l'IODAI.. ( - - Sp.Ual ........1 t:a.bSn.tian fS,.st


( - - Sp.Ual t:a.blnaUan ...thOil CSRSS/ABS)
GROUP < - - ......1 eo.blnaUan ...thOil C~/lO"/DSRSS/ABS/SR&ln
y
( - - Inclua P~_t.t1c to.panent. CY/N)

SRS8

1 - L.UI'FED MIISES
2 - lNU8IIER8

:s -

8CICIC

DlEF'INIT~GN5

4 - l"tL8I TAIlLE IlENERATICIN

CAE6M
D~IC

IJ

ANALY6I& JNPUT

5 - MIND . . , . TA8LE 8DERATJCIN


- PUUIE 8PEC'nU't FORCE SET8
7 - HMfDiIIC ~
-- 8HDCIC
CA8E8
6TATIC/D~IC
~JNATJCIN&

- &MIE ~IC IJIPUT


C - CHEQC D~IC JJIPUT
D - PEJlFCIRI't DVNMIC ANALYSIS
E - Rllturn to CAESM _in - . u

-381~

EXAMPLE 0-5 EARTHQUAKE - UNIFORM SUPPORT MOTION - RE6 6UIOE 1.60


This job 1s ltllNr, wittlout lIanger design. Use Reg Guide 1.60 spectra
v1t11 2' clulp1n,. TIIe est1 . .ted ZPA " ...1 _ ground accelerat10nl for the
site 1s 0.35 g s. TIIe stat1c cases analyzed for the job vere:

1 - II+P+T+D-+f
2-II+P+F
3-- 01-02
CoID1ne 1.0 t1.s the Reg Gutde values and 0.5 ti_s the Reg Guide
values witll the sustlined stlt1c case nUlliber 2. Use an SRSS
calbination of the Stlttc and ~1c cases.
The abbreviated dyn. .1c input for t111s Job 1s SIlCM! below:
First the user IlUSt def1ne the probl. and run the stltic analys1s
vitll the 10id cases as descr1bed Above, tIIen fl"Oll the CAESAR ..in

.....

:
3 - DYNAMICS
8 - SHOCK LOADS
1 - AcIcI a

new sIIock load case

Shock na Factor, Direction. Stan Node, Stop Node, Increment


1.6OH2 1 X
1.60H2 1 Z
1.6OY2 ~

<esc>

\.v
1 - Add a nev shock load case

Shock nUle, Factor, Direction. Stan Node, Stop Node, Increment


1.60H2
1*0.5 X
1.60H2
1*0.5 Z
1.6OY2 ~*O.5 Y

<esc>

~.

9 - STATIC/DYNAMIC COMBINATIONS
1 - Add anotller stat1c/dyn. .ic 10id case
LOid case, Factor

COMBINATlON(SRSS 1

52 1

02 1

<esc>

1 - Add anotller static/dyn. .ic lad case


Lad case. Factor

COMBINATlOli (SRSS 1
02 1
02 1
<esc>
A - CONTROL PARMETERS
SPECTRUM

0.35
SPATIAL

<---<---<----

Dyn..1c Analysis Type


Zero Per10d Acceleration (g'sl
Spatial or Modal Combination First

B - SAVE DYNNUt INPUT


C - CHECK DYMAMIC INPUT
D - PERFORM DYNAMIe A1ALYSIS

-382-

........ ,

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'......,117.

REGULATORY-GUIDE
..

OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT

REGULATORY GUIDE 1.92

COMBINING MOOAL RESPONSES ANOSPATIAL


COMPONENTS IN SEISMIC .
RESPONSE ANAL YSIS
2. Combining the maximum Valua (in. the case of
time-history dynamic analyais) or the-:tepresentatM
maximum values (in the case of spectrum dynauiic
analysil) of the mponse of . 8iVen.element ofa
structure,system, or component, when suh values lIe
calculated independen~y for each of the tIiiee ortho..,.,
na1 spatialcomponents(two horizontal arid:e \'ertial) .
of an earthquake.The combinee! mue:
the
representative maximum value of the cmbinechesponse: ..
of that element of the structure, system, orcomponent
to snultaneous action of the three spatial components.

A. INTRODUCTION

Criterion 2, "Design Bases for Protection Against


NaturaI Phenomena," of Appendix A, "General Design
Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," to 10 CFR Part 50,
"Licensing of Pr04uction and Utilization Fadlities,"
requires, in part, tltat nuclear power plant structures,
systems, and components important to safety be designed to withstand the effects of earthquakes without
loss of capability to perform their safety functions_
Paragraph (aXl) of Section VI, ""Application to mgineering Design," of Appendix A, "Seilmic and Geologic
Siting Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," to 10 CFR
Part 100, "Reaetor Site Criteria," requires, in part, that
structures, systems, and components important to safety
remain functionil in the event of a SaCe Shutdown
Earthquake (SSE). It specifies the use of a suitable
dynamic analysis as one method of ensuring that the
structures, systems, and components cm withstand the
seismic loads. Similarly, paragraph (aX2) of Section VI
of the same appendix requires, in part, that the
structures, systems, and components necessary for continued operation without undue risk to the health and
safety of the public remain funetional in an Operating
Basis F.arthquake (OBE). Again, the use of a suitable
dynamic analysis il specified as one method of ensuring
that the structures, systems, and components cm withstand the seismic loads.

wqrbe

The Acms;ry Committee on lictor Safep,ards bas ,been consulted conceming this guide ald haSCcurred
in the regulatory position..
..
B. DISCUSSION

1.CombiDing Modal Rt!SJJOIIIM!S


To . fmd the values of the response of different
elements of a Jluclear power plant structUJe, system, or
component to a prescribedsponse spectrum, it il filSt
necessary to calculate the mode shapes and fquencies
of the structure, system, or component. 'This il done by
solving the following equation for the eiFDvectolS and
eiFDvalues:

[[X] -w~ lMl] ttf>n}=O

This guide describes methods acceptable to the NRC

stafffor:
1. Combining the values of the response of individual
modes in a response spectrum modal dynamic analysis to
fmd the representative maximum value of a particular
response of interest for the design of a given element of
_ a nuclear power plant structure, system, or component.

"_lai

ac_......

..in,

......

{tI>n} is the eigenwetor for the nth mode ..


-Unes indicate substantive cbaDges from prmous SIae.

.r.

i'.""

where IK] is t:ile stiffness matrix, w n il the naturaI


fiequency for the nth mode, [M] is the ~ass matrix, and

_"0'

ui_

st."

.0 _

eo...._ .

c:o-n_. w_IntIt_. D.C. _ . AtMfttioft: Dock_. _

Commen _

USNRC REGULATORY GUIDES

Dry Guida .;. issu....0 dacribe .nd m .........iIabIe .0 .... public


m ..hocl.
0 .... HIIC ...fI o, impl.....n.in' specifie ...... o, .he
Commission 's qgua-tiona. to clelineate techniques used by the a.aft in ev"u~
apecafic probl. . . or .ahdatad accident. or to pravicle guid.,.ce 10 appli
cants. Ae,ulatory Guides
ftOt subatitU1H for Nl'ulM:"'. and complillnce
witt. Ihem i. not rwquared. Methoda and solutions differenl from 1hou aet out in
....._
wiU ... _
......
_vide.
.he .intI........
to
the ""anc. or continuance of penniI or licen.. by.he Commi..ion.
Comment. and . . . . . .'ions for impravementa in ...... guides .re encourag_
e' ail '.m... and guides wiH be reviMd. a. appropriet to accommodMe COIR
Il mena end to retlec1: Mw mfor. .ion or exp.rience. This guide .a. l'eviMd _

resuIt of . .batanli.,. comment. received 'rom the public ..ut additional

(1)

... _

Sec....ry of _

u.s. _ _

Senrico Section.
The guida ... iuuedin_tollowin. _ _ d . . . . . . .:

1. _ . 1Ioec:t_
2. ......rcIl_T... IIeect....
M--.. F.ciIit_
4. Emrir _ _ Sitin,
5. _ _ _ Plant Pntt_

3.,..... ..._

1.-.
7 . T _....-

,._"*-

.. Occupao.... ~

10. .........

m.y _ _ _ _ by - ' -.-..,......... _tolhe U.5. N _ .........INY CO........... W........... D.C.

CopiaI of......- ......

.....AttentiDn:DirecIor.Otficeof~.O." ......."'.

-383-

2. Com_DI S..tiaI Components

Note that it MaY not be nec:essary to solve Equation 1


for all modes. In many cases, determination of only
thase modes that are significant should be sufficient.

2.1 Respoaae to Tbree S..tial Componeats Cal&


latecl Separately

The next step is to determine the maximum modal


displacement relative to the supports. This is done as
follows:

(2)
where \qn \ max is the maximum displacement vector for
the nUl m~de, rn is the modal participation factor for
the nth mode and is expressed by

San is the value of acceleration in the specified response


spectrum corresponding to w n and design damping, and
superscript T designates the transpose. Other maximum
values of the responses per mode such as stress, strain,
oment, or shear can be computed from the appropriate
q max by using the stiffness properties of the elements
structure, system, or component. Newmark (Ref.
f
1) has shown that the representative maximum value of
a 'particular response of interest for design (such as
components in given directions of stress, strain, moment,
shear, or displacement) of a given element can be
obtained from the corresponding maximum values of the
response of individual modes as computed above by
taking the square root of the sum of the squares (SRSS)
of the maximum values of the response of these
individual modes of the structure, system, or component. The Newmark study, however, does not address
the problem of closely spaced modes. Other studies (see
References 2 and 3) have shown that SRSS procedure
can significantly underestimate the true response in
certain cases in which some of the modal frequencies of
a structural system are closely spaced (see regulatorv
eosition 1.1 for definition of closely spad modes). The
nuclear industry has used many different methods to
combine the response when closely spaced modes exist.
Some of these methods can be found in References 2, 4,
and S. A recent unpublished study has shown that the
resulting combined response of nuclear plant facilities
using any of the methods delineated in regulatory
position 1.2, which covers a broad range of methods
currenuy Seing used by the industry, is in good
agreement with time-history response. Therefore, any of
the methods given in regulatory position 1.2 is
acceptable for combining the modal responses when
closely spaced modes exist.

~e

It should be noted that, if the frequencies of a system


are all widely separated, all the terms in the second
summation sign in Equations 4 and 5 of regulatory
position 1.2 win vanish, and these equations will
degenerate to the SRSS method (Equation 3).

Regulatory Guide 1.60, "Design Response Spectrafor


Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants," incticates t,hat
design of all Seismic Category 1 structures, systems, or
compOllents should be based on three orthogonal component motions (two horizontal and one vertical) of a
prescribed design earthquake. Chu, Amin, and Singh
(Ref. 3) have concluded that the representative maximum value of a particular response of interest for design
(e.g., stress, strain, moment, shear, or displacement) of a
given element of a structure, system, or component
subjected to thesimultaneous action of the three
components of the earthquake can be satisfactorily
obtained by taking the square root of the sum of the
squares of corresponding representative maximum values
of the spectrum response, or the maximum response
values from time-history dynamic analysis, to each of
the tluee components calculated independently.
The SRSS procedure used by Newmark (Ref. 1) and
Chu, Amin, and Singh (Ref. 3) for combining the values
(jf the response to three components of an earthquake is
based on the consideration that it is very unlikely that
peak values of a response of a given element would occur
at the same time during an earthquake.
2.2 Response to Tbree Spatial Components Calculated Simultaneously
The maximum value of a particular response of
interest for design of a given element can be obtaned
through a step-by-step method. The time-history responses from each of the three components of the
earthquake motions cao be obtained and then combined
algebraically at each time step or the respoose at each
time step cao be calculated directly owing to the
simultaneous action of three components. The maximum response is determined by scanning the combined
time-history solution. When this method is used, the
earthquake motions specified in the three different
directions should be statistically independent. For a
discussion of statistical independence, see Reference 6 ..

c.

REGULATORY POSITION

The following procedures for combining the values of


the response of individual modes and the respoose to the
three independent spatial components of an earthquake
in a seismic dynamic analysis of a nuclear power plant
structure, system, or component are acceptable to the
NRC staff:

1.92-2

-384-

r
1. CombiDation of Modal Respon.s
1.1 With No a_y Spacecl Modes
In a response spectrum modal dynamic analysis, the
modes are not closely spaced (two consecutive modes
are defined as closely spaced if their frequencies differ
from eachother by 10 percent or less of the lower
frequency), the representative maximum value of a
particular response of interest for design (e.g., components of stress, strain, moment, shear, or displace
ment) of a given element of a nuclear power plant
structure, system, or component subjected to a single
independent spatial component (response spectrum) of a
three-component earthqual should be obtained by
taking the square root of the sum of the squares (SRSS)
of corresponding maximum values of the response of the
element attributed to individual significant modes of the
structure, system, or component. MathematicaIly, this
can be expressed as foDows:

R=[t Rkl*J

component should then be obtained by taking the


square root of the sum of the squares of corresponding
representative rximum values of the response of the
element attributed to each closely spaced group of
modes and the remaining modal responses for the modes
that are not closely spaced.
MathematicaDy, tbis can he expressed as follows:

Rm

~e~ ~q and Rrnq are modal responses, ~ and


Wlthin the qth group. respectively; i is the number of the
mode where a group starts; j is the number of the mode

where a group ends; R, ~, and N are as defined


previously in regulatory position 1.1 ofthis guide; and P
is the numbP.r of groups of closely spaced modes,
excluding individual separated modes. l'latF.

Roi 'l. .. ~~t. ~ '-~~

1.2.2 Ten Percent Method /


-

(3)

k= 1

(5)

where R is the representative maximum value of a


particular response of a given element to a given
component of an earthquake, RJc is the peak value of the
response of the element due to the kth mode, and N is
the numher of significant modes considered in the modal
response combination.
1.2 With Close1y Spaced Modes

where R, Rt, and i-{ are as defined previously in


regulatory position 1.1 of this guide. The second
surnmation is to he done on aIl i and j modes whose
frequencies are closely spaced to each other. Let Wj and
Wj be the frequencies of the ith and jth mode. In order
to verify which of the modes are closely spaced, the
following equation will apply:

-In a response spectrum modal dynamic analysis,


sorne or aD of the modes are closely spaced, any of the
following regulatory positions (i.e., 1.2.1, 1.2.2. or
!J,J) May he used as a method accepiablto the NRC
Staff to combine the modal responses.

w-w

(6)

< 0.1

_J_ _l
W1
-

(7)

aIso 1 $" i <j $" N

1.2.1 Grouping Method

1.2.3 Double Sum Method

Oosely spaced modes should he divided into


_groups that include aD modes having frequencies lying
between the lowest frequency in the group and a
1freq~ncy 10 _percen~ higher. 1 The representative
maxunum value of a particular response of interest for
the design of a given element of a nuclear power plant
structure, system, or component attnbuted to each such
group of modes should fust he obtaned by taking the
sum of the absolute values of the corresponding peak
values of the response of the element attributed to
indi~dual modes in that group. The representative
maxunum value of tbis particular response attnbuted to
aD the significant modes of the structure, system, or

where R, ~, and N are as defined previously in


regulatory position 1.1 of this guide. Rs is the peak value
of the response of the element attributed to sth mode.

~ould be fonned st~g f~om the lowest frequency


and working towards successJVely higher frequencies. No one
frequency is to be in more than one group.

(10)

Eks= [ 1+ {

@f wk + (3;

lJ-

(9)

ws)

in which

1Groups
\

(Wk - w;)

1.92-3

-385-

:.

(R;t~

responses are calculated using the time-history method


instead of the spectrum method.

(11)
where WJc and (jk are the modal frequency and the
damping ratio in the kth mode, respectively, and td is
the duration of the earthquake.
2.

Combioation of Effects Due to Tluee Spatial Co..


pooents of an Earthquake

Depending on which basic method is used in the


seismic analysis, i.e., response spectra or time-history
method, the folloWDg two approaches are considered
acceptable for the combination of three-dimensional
earthquake effects.

b. When the time-history responses from each of the


three components of the earthquake motion are
calculated by the step-by-step method and combined
algebraically at each time step, the maximum response
can be obtained from the combined time solution. 2

3. If the applicant bas used the methods described in


this guide, the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report
(PSAR) should indicate in each applicable section which
of the alternative acceptable methods were used for the
structures, systems, or components covered by that
section.

2.1 Response Spec:tra Method

D. IMPLEMENTATION

When "the response spectra method is adopted for


seismic analysis, the representative maximum values of
the structural responses to each of the three components
of earthquake motion should be combined by taking the
square root of the sum of the squares of the maximum
representative values of the codirectional responses
caused by each of the three components of earthquake
motion at a particular point of the structure or of the
mathematical model.

The pUlpose of this section is to provide infonuation


to applicants and licensees regarding the NRC staffs
plans for utilizing this regulatory guide.
Except in those cases in which the applicant proposes
an altemative method for complying with specified
portions of the Commission's regulations, the methods
described herein will be used by the staff in the
evaluation of submittals for construction permit applications docketed after the date of issue of this guide.

2.2 une-Bistory Analysis Methocl


When the time-history analysis method is employed
for seismic analysis, two types of analysis are generally
performed depending on the complexity of the problem:
a. When the maximum responses due to each of the
three components of the earthquake motion are
calculated separately, the method for combining the
three-dimensional effects is identical to that described in
regulatory position 2.1 except that the maximum

If an applicant wishes to use this regulatory guide in


developing submittals for applications docketed on or
before the date of issue of this guide, the pertinent
portions of the application will he evaluated on the basis
of this guide.
2When this method is used, the earthquake motions specified in
the three different dilections should be statistically independent. For a discussion of statistical independence. see Reference 6.

1.92-4

-386-

REFERENCES
1. R. L. Wiegel, editor, Earthquake Engineering,
Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970, chapter
by N. M. Newrnark, p. 403.

2. A. K. Singh, S. L. Chu, and S. Singh, "Influence of


Closely Spaced Modes in Response Spectrum Method of
Analysis," Proceedings of the Specialty Conference on
Structural Design of Nuclear Plant Facilities, Vol. 2,
Chicago, December 1973. (Published by American
Society of Civil Engineers, New York, New York.)
3. S. L. Chu, M. Amin, and S. Singh, "Spectral
Treatment of Actions of Three Earthquake Components
on Structures," Nuclear Engineering and Design, 1972,
Vol. 21, No. l,pp. 126-136.

4. E. Rosenblueth and J. Elorduy, "Response of


Unear Systems to Certain Transient Disturbances,"
Proceedings, Fourth World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, Vol. 1, Santiago, Chile, 1969.
5. N. C. Tsai, A. H. Hadjian et al., "Seismic Analysis
of Structures and Equipment for Nuclear Power Plants,"
Bech tel Power Corporation Topical Report 4-A, Revision 3, November 1974.
6. C. Chen, "Definition of Statistically Indepefldent
Time Histories," Jounud of the Structural Division,
ASCE, February 1975.

1.92-5

-387-

RevIsion 1
Oecember 1913
U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

REGULATORV GUIDE
DIRECTORATE OF REGULATORY STANDARDS

REGUlATORY GUIDE 1.60

DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA FOR SEISMIC DESIGN


OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS
A. INTRODUCTION
Criterion 2, "Design Bases for Protection Againsl
Natural Phenomena," of Append1x A, "General Design
Critcria for NucJear Power Plants," to 10 CFR Part 50,
"Licensing of Production and Utilization Faeilities,"
requires, in part, that nuclear power plant structures,
systcms, and components important to safety be
designed 10 withstand Ihe effects of earthquakes.
Proposed Appendix A, "Seismic and Geologie Siting
Criteria," to la CFR Part 100, "Reactor Site Criteria,"
wlmld require, in part, that the Safe Shutdown
Earl hquake (SSE) be defined by response spectra
COI rcsponding to the expccted maximum ground
.lclcler.lIiuns. This guide describes a procedurc
acceplablc tu the AEC Regulatory staff for defining
lespOllse spectra for the seismic design of nudear power
planls. The Adviory Committee on Reactor Safcguards
has becn consulted conceming tbis guide and has
concurred in Ihe regulatory position.
B. DISCUSSION

ln order to approxlmate the intensity and thcreby


estimate the maximum ground acceleration l of the
expecled strongest ground motion (SSE) for a given site,
proposed Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 100 specifies a
number of required investigations. ft does not, however,
~ve a method for defining the response spectral
l'llTlCSpllnding to the expected maximum ground
;lcceler<Jlion.
The recorded gwund accelercillons and response
SpcCtl;1 of paSl e'lTlhquakes provldc a basis for Ihe
rallol1.11 'design 01 structures 10 resist earlhquakes. The
Dcs Igl 1 I{esponsc Spectr<J. 1 speciflcd for design pur poses,
.:an he dcvelopcd sta Ils! Ically l'rom re~ponse spel:tr<J of
past stTllng-motioll c<Jrthquakes (see reference )). An
'SL'C defmnionS;l1 Ihe end of lhe ~uldc.
USAEC REGUlATORY GUIDES

.,.dft

..,tU be ecpt8b" if th.y pro. . . . . .11 for , . . ",.,.,.. ntQIIHtI"


IN . .uanc 0' mnhn'*'GI of perm.t or "'*'- by tM Con'WNIlIOft

-388-

'ubllllhecl ..,.... wiU bI

corn""""

""'1ed

Su~ndlrdl. CO..w'IW!"tlJ .nef .uggnllQrtt for


encour...,a .ftCI shovid bit Mn' fO the Sec:retlry

Aflenuon: Dtrw:tor 0' R..,.ory


~".,~nwml

'"

t'" .,..... ..

01 tho Com.........". uS. Atomoc E-ev C _ _ . W... ,ngton. O.e.


A"...,_: Cil .... 'ubloc " ' -... S .. II.
The tui1iltl ..... uacI

ln

the fofl"""l"I len

br~

d,YIII(.In1.

to

D....od'QUY. as aporopt .... , 10 accOf"N'tlOde ...

ta r.'''' , . . Infor"WltQn 01 per-.cw.

In this prOCedure, the configurations of the


horizontal comJXment Design Response Spectra for each
of the two mutually perpendicular horizontal axes are
shown in Figure 1 of this guide. These shapes agree with
Ihose developed by Newmark, Blume, and Kapuf in
1 eference 1. In Figure 1 the base wagram consists of
Ihree parts: the bottom line on the left part represents
. the maximum ground displacement, the bottom linr on
the nghl part represents the maximum acceler:llion. and
the middle part depends on the maximum velocity. The
horizontal component Design Response Spectra in
Figure 1 of this guide corresporid 10 a maximum
hurizontal ground acceJerrztion of 1.0 g. The maximum
ground displacement is taker. proportional to the
maximum ground acceleration, and is set at 36 inches
for a ground acceleration of 1.0 g. The numerical values
of design clisplacements, velocities, and accelerations for
the horizontal component Design Response Spectra are
obtained by multiplying the corresponding values of the
maximum ground clisplacemenl :md i!!:ce!era!lOT! by the
factors glven in Table 1 of this guide. The dlsplat'ement
region Imes of the Design Response Spectr~ are parallel
III the maximum ground displacemenl boe Jnd are
shown on the left of Figure 1. The velu..:lty reglon lmes
slope downward from a frequency of 0.25 cr~ (conlrol
point DI to a frequency of 2.5 ct::; ;.:ntrol pmnl C) and
are shown at the top. The remainlng two sets uf lines
belween the frequencies of 2.5 cps and 33 cp!> (control
point A), wlth a break at a frequency of 9 cps (cont roi
Coc"" Of pubh.hed VU .... nwy . . obta.ned Dv reQo,lQ.t ;,-.;;i ..JIi,,.'V Ih~ d.vtt.o",
_ .."" ft> tho U.s. Ato""" E _ Com......"'n. _""on. O.e 70!!0<15.

G........ t.uec:I 10 dIncr'tae and ...... 8Ve.iebl. to .hI publiC


nwthodl ecc:ap. . . . 10 'hP AEC R.gul.tcwy et, of Irl"lCMetnenlll'lg IC)IClftC.-n1 of
'M Co""","IOft', ,..,iM.ona. 10 dtlineM' t.d\nlqUR UMd bv .,... "8ff .ft
"'uettnt . .ohe problllml or pol"...... tICC'lfttl. or to pro." ",.-..c. 10
IIIIIP'lCenft. R.....'Otv GuidM .r. not lUtai.. ,,,... far "".'0'" .nd C'OfIIPI..nc:e
...." them not r-aUl,ad. Mltnoct. end lOfutto", d.ff. .nt 'rom lhole . , OUt N"I
AtlguaalC)ry

ft

extensive study has been described by Newmarit and


91ume in references l, 2, and 3. After reviewing the!e
rcferenced documents, the AEC Regulatory staff has
determined as acceptable the following procedure for
deflning the Design Response Spectra representing the
effects of the vibratory motion of the SSE, 1/2 the SSE,
and the Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) on sites
underlain by either rock or soi! deposits and covering ail
frcquencies of interest. However, for unusually soft sites,
modification ta trus procedure will be required.

R.ectOl'l
Il. . .,.,, _
T ..t IIIMCtOfI
Fuels _
M........ Fecolll_
EnYWOlVneft'.l et'ld SitU''U
_
.... _l'lent

1. PO.....

1.
J.
...
!i.

'ro,*,,_

6. 'roGo.",'
7. Trerac:oo;tlUon

8. Oc:cupeuo,.' H'th
i. Antitrust A.v.....
10. Ge ....

a'

~5.

poan! B), ,onstilut.: the ~ler3tion regi()n of the


homon!JI Desi8l1 Respnnse SpedrJ. For frcquenl:ics
hl!!her Ih.1Il .U .:ps, the maJumum gmund ac:c:elerallull
hnc a'prl'scnls 1111' Design R"'PUIISC Speclra.
'1 Il.: vella.: .. 1 ,'omplllJent DeSIgn Responsc Spe':lra
.:orr'lospondmg tLl the maximum horizontlll gr()Und
(/('('('lcrutlCln
1.0 gare !Jl()wn in Figure 2 ()f this guide.
The nurnerieaJ values of design displ4lCements, velocities,
and J,celcrations in these spcetra are obtained by
lllultiplYlOg Ihe correspondmg values of the maximum
hoJn':ontal gruund motion (acceleration
1.0 g and
dlspliiccment = 36 in.) by the factors given in Table Il of
Ihis gUide. The displacement region lines of the Design
Response Spectra are parallel to the maximum ground
displacement line and are shown on the left of Figure 2.
The ~Ioeity region nes siope downward from a
f:equency of 0.25 cps (control point D) to a frequency
of J.S cps (,onlrol point C) and are shawn at the 10p.
The remaining two sels of lines betw.n the frequencies
of J.S .:ps and 33 cps (control point A), wilh a break at
t~ frcquency of 9 cps (control point B), constitute the
a.:ceieratilln region of lhe vertical Design Response
Spc':lra. Il should be noted that the vertical Design
I{espon~ Spectra values are 2/3 those of the horizontal
OeSll(rl J{esponse Speetra for frequencies less than 0.25;
!or frequencies tugher than 3.5, they are th same, while
[Ix- rail" vanes between 2/3 and 1 for frequencies
tx-Iween 0.2S and 3.5. For frequencies higher than 33
cps. the Design Response Spectra foUow the maximum
gJOund al:celeration bne.

earthquJite or (2) have physical characterishcs that


could significanlly affect lhe SpeClll1 pattern of input
mOllulI, sUl:h as helng IInderl3111 hy puur snil dcpc~ltS.
the procedure descriJw.d ahnve will IInt apply. III tli~
cases. the DeSIgn RespUl15e Spectra shmald he developed
indiVldually aCl:nrding tn the site characterislics.

ur

The horizontal and vertical companent Design


Response Spectra in Figures 1 and 2, respectively, of tbis
guide correspond to a maximum horizontal ground
acceleralion of 1.0 g. For sites with different
acceleration values specified for the design earthquake,
[he Design Response Spectra should he linearly scaled
from Figures 1 and 2 in proportion to the specified
maximum horizontal ground acleration. For sites that
(1) are relatively close to the epicenter of an expected

C. REGUlATORY POSITION
1. The horizontal component ground DeSIgn Response
Spectra, wilhout sa-structure interaction effects, of the
SSE, 1/2 the SSE, or the OSE on sites underlain by rock
or by sail should he linearly scaled from Figure 12 in
proportion ta the maximum horizontal ground
acceleration specifaed for the earthquake chosen. (Figure
1 corresponds to a maximum honzontal ground
ac~eleration of 1.0 g and accompanyingdisplacement of
36 in.) The applicable multiplication factors and control
points are given in Table I. For damping ratios not
induded in Figure 1 or' Table l, a linar interpolation
should be used.
2. The vertical component ground Design Response
Spectra, without sa-structure interaction effects, of the
SSE, 1/2 the SSE, or the OSE on sites underlain by rock
or by sail should be linearly scaled from Figure 2 2 in
proportion to the maximum horizontal ground
acceleration specifaed for the earthquaite chosen. (Figure
2 is based on a maximum horizonllli ground flCCeluanon
of 1.0 g and accompanying displacement of 36 in.) The
applicable multiplication factors and control points are
given in Table Il. For damping ratios not inciuded in
Figure 2 or Table Il, a linear interpolation should be
used.
'This does not apply to sites whic:h (1) ale relatiYely cloR
to the epinter of an expec:ted eanhquate or (2) whic:h haft
physical characteristics dlat couJd sipUf"acantly affect the
spectral combinauon
input motion. 1be DcsiIn RespoDle
Spectra for such Ita sbould be cleYdoped on 1 caby-cue

0'

basis.

1.60-2

-389-

DEFINlnONS
rdahun5hip uhtained by analyzing. ev:lIualina. and
statistically ,,..,mhininl a numher nf indMclual response

RapGll8r Spectnam mcaRS a plul .. 1 1he: Rlaximum

raponse (ac:c:cleration. velocity. ur displacen1Cnt) uf a


family of idealized sintie-depee-of-frceduRl damped
osciUators IS a func:tion of naturaJ frequencies (or

spectra derived (mm the records of Spifant


eart hquakes.

plst

periods) of the oscillaton to a specifled vibratory

Mlximum (pak) GrGUDd Ac:aIeIatioa specifled for a

motion input at their supports. When obtaincd from 1


recorded eartWake record, the response spetrum
tends to be irrepIlar. with 1 number of peaks and

...uers.

liven site means that value of the acceleration which


corresponds to .ro period in the design response s~etra
for tbat lite. At zero period the design response _peetra
acceleration is identica1 for aD dampUlg nlues and is
equal to the maximum (pnk) Found ac:ceJeration

Daip . ., . . . SpectnalD is a relatMly smooth

specified for tbat lite.

TABLE 1

HORIZONTAL DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA


RELATIVE VALUES OF SPECTRUM AMPLIFICATION FACTORS
FOR CONTROL POINTS

PwcInt

Amplification Fectan for Control Poinu

of

CrhicIII
Dlmping

0.5
2.0
5.0
7.0
10.0

Aca_etion'
AI33_

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

set

Dilpa..nwnt'

c:pI'

4.96
3.54
2.61
2.27
1.90

CI2.5_

5.95
4.25
3.13
2.72
2.28

DC0.25_

3.20
2.50
2.os
1.88
1.70

'lIaximuaa pUlld dbpIameDt is tlken pmportiollal to maxiIIlam


poUlld ICCIIleIation, and js 36 iL for pound acIIIration of 1.0

srmty.

1 AJaatioD and cliaplacement amplif"xation factors are tateD froaI


recollUftllldations p.en in ref.-cnce 1.

1.60-3

-390-

TABLE Il

VERTICAL DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA


RELATIVE VALUES OF SPECTRUM AMPLIFICATION FACTORS
FOR CONTROL POINTS

Percent
of
Critical
Dlmping

0.5
2.0
5.0
7.0
10.0

Amplification

FilClon

Acceleration'
A(33cpsl

S(Scps)

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

3.54
2.61
2.27
1.90

for Control Points


DtsptKement'

C(~:S

cps)

5.67.\
4.05
2.98
2.59

4.96

~.17

010.25 cpsl

2.13
1.67
1.37
1.25
1.13

'Maximum (!I"ound displament is talten proportional to maximum


Itrnund acc:eleration and 5 )6 in. for pound ac~. clcrati(ln (lf 1.0 tuavity.
S Acceleration amplif"lCation facll."s for the vertical design rClIronle
lJIL"Ctra an: cqual tn l''ose fClr horizontal desilln rcsponsc spectra at a given
frequency. whereas diqtbcemenl amplifcatilln fadors arc 2/3 tbose for horizuntal clcsilm responsc: 5pectra. Thesc ratins lW\.ocn the amplification factors
fur Ihe Iwo desi&n respunse spcctra are in apeemenl with tbose recommendecl
in rcferenc:e 1.

'These valua were changed to malte Ihis table oonsi5lenl Wilh the dis
cUSlliun uf vertical componenl'; in Seclion B of this Kuidc.

REFERENCES
1.

...

Ncwmark. N. M. John A. Diurne. and Kanwar K.


Kapur, "Design Response Spectra for Nuclear Power
l'I:mls," ASCE Structural Engineering Meeting, San
Francisco. April 1973.

Spectra," Urbana, Illinois. USAEC Contraet No.


AT(49-5)-2667, WASH-12S5, April 1973.

3.

N. M. Newmark Consulting Engineering Services, UA


Study of Vertical and Horizontal Earthquake

1.60-4

-391-

John A. Diurne & Associates, Recommendations


for Shape of Earthquake Response Spectra," San
Fnncis, Califomia, USAEC Contr.ct No.
AT(49-5}3011. WASH-1254, February 1973.

FRflUENCY,c:pa
FIGURE 1. HORIZONTAL DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA - SCALED TO 19 HORIZONTAL
GROUND ACCELERATION

-392-

fiOO

.i

~.

III

>

20

0.2

0.&

10

20

10

100

FAEOUENCY,cpI
FIGURE 2. VERTICAL DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA - SCALED TO 19 HORIZONTAL
GROUND ACCELERATION

-393-

EXAMPLE 0-6 EARTHQUAKE - UNIFORM SUPPORT MOTION - USER oEFINEo SPECTRA


There are non11near restraints 1n the job and the stat1c load cases run
were:
1 - T+P+w+O+f
2 - P+W+F

3 - 01-02
Use operat1ng case 1 to f1x the nonlinear restraints for the dynamic
job and use 3.75 as the friction stiffness mult1plier. The follow1ng
shack spectra has been defined:
User def1ned shack na.e TABLE1
Per1 od (sec)
0.001698
0.0286

Accelerlt1Qn (g's)
0.3756
0.984

2.0078
2.0078
1.140
3.078
3.078
1.813
2.256

0.058

0.071
0.091
0.1140
0.1410
0.172
0.20
0.25
0.323

2.256

1.03623

User def1ned snack name TABLE2. Table 2 1s defined by 3 straight 11nes


on the frequency displacement spectrum:

uaax 10.375 1n.


u.ax 3.832/f 1n.
IIIIU 7. n /f/f in.
User def1ned shock na.e TABLE3
Frequency
0.01
0.5
1.9
3.75
6.39
10.4
15.56
20.01
20.3

(Hz)

Accelerltion (1pss)
58

lOS
210
315
509
789
655
312
119

Table 1 is to be used for mast of the lines at this particular s1te.


and so enter 1t into an ascii data f11e te be read in so that it only
has te be typed once. Note that TABLE1's values are def1ned 1n tenlS
of g's. CAESAR expects accelerat10n in units of length per second
squared. For English units th1s _Ins that the values extracted
fl"Olll the entered table (1f 1t is entered as shawn above) sllould be
scaled by 386. Note how this 1s done in the shock load case editing
below. (The same -*386. - could have been used when the data wu entered
in the ascii file.)
The shack load cases should be set up as follows:
SHOCK LOAl> CASE Il:

1.0
* TABLEl
0.6667 * TABLE1
1.0
* TABLE1
Use the spatial

SHOCK LOAl> CASE 12:

1.0
* TABLE1 1n the X direction
0.6667 * TABLE1 1n the Y direction

1n the X direction
1n the Y direction
in the Z direction
combination method f1rst.

1.0
* TABLE1 in the Z direction
Use the .aGal cbination _thod fint.
SHOCK LOAl> CASE 13:

1.0 *
1.0 *
0.667 *
Use the

TABLE3 1n the X direction


TABLE3 in the Z direction
TABLE2 in the Y direction
.aGal cbinltion _thod first.

Once the shock cases Ire run cbine each dyn_ic load cise with the
sustained stltic case 12. Use the ABS _thod of cbinltion.

-394-

To use shoct TABLE2 1ft! need to generlte the points on 1ts cuneo The
intersection of the constant veloc111. constant d1spllc~t l1ne cln
be found:
10.375 3.832 / f;

3.832/10.375 0.36935 cps

The intersection of the constant veloc1ty. constant Iccelerat10n 11ne can


be found:
3.832 / f 7.77 / f/f; f 7.77 / 3.832 2.0277 cps;
and th1s corresponds to a displlcl!lleflt of 3.832 / 2.0277 1.8898 in.
Select a point arb1trlr11y further out on the constant accelerat10n 11ne:
ut33HZ 7.77 1 33 / 33 0.007135 in.
50 the d1splacement spectrl for TABLE2 will appear:
Frequency (Hz)
0.001
0.36935
2.0277
33.0

Displacelent (in.)
10.375
10.375
1.8898

0.007135

ascif file that contains the data points for TABLE1 can be entered
using a full screen word processor or EDLIN.COM. Any line in the file
that starts w1tll an asterfslt (*) will be treated 1fke a COIIIIIent tfne.

The

TIIe abbreviated dynamfc input for thfs job appears below:


Ffrst the user _ust deffne the problem and run the static analys1s
w1th the load cases as descrfbed abave. Then frOll the CAESAR 1III1n

menu:

3 - DYNAMICS
2 - SHOCK DEFINITIONS
1 - SpectnIID N_ and Type
NIIIIe. Rlnge Type, Ord1nate Type, Rlnge Interpol, Ord1nlte Interpol
'TABLEl PERIOD ACCEL LOG LOG
TABLE2 FREQ
DISPL LOG LOG
TABLE3 F
ACCEL LOG LOG
<esc>
Note the 1 s1gn preceedfng TABLEl. TII1s tells CAESAR to reld the
TABLE1 input from an Isci1 data file.
3 - Spectrua Table
bufld spectru. table 2.
(in. )
ORDINATE

(Hz)

RANGE

0.001
10.375
0.36935 10.375
2.0277
1.8898
33.0
0.007135
<esc>
bufld spectru. table 3.
(Hz)

(1n./sec/sec)
ORDINATE

RANGE

0.01
0.5
1.9
3.75
6.39
10.4
15.56
20.01

58

108
210
315
509

789
655
312
119

30.3
<est>

-395-

8 - SHOCIC CASES

1 - Md new cISe
Shock case 1 shock contributions:
5hOCk Maille, Factor, Direction, 5tart Mode, 5top Node, lncrl!llent

TABLE1
TABLE 1
TABLEl

1.0*386 X
0.667*386 Y
1.0*386 Z

5PATlAL(SRSS), MOOAL(GROUP)
<esc>

1 - Add new case


Shock case

shock contributions:

Shock Nalle, Factor, Direction, Stan Node, Stop Node, Increllent

TABLEl 1.0*386 X
TABLE 1 0.667*386 Y
TABLE 1 1.0*386 Z
MOOAL(GROUP I,SPATlAL(SRSS)

<HC>
1 - Add new case
Shock case 3 shock contributions:
5hoct Neme, Factor, Direction, Stan Node, Stop Node, lncrl!llent

TABLE3
TABLE3
TABLE2

1.0 X
1.0 Z
0.667 Y

SPATI AL (SRSS l, MODAL (GROUP)


<esc>

9 - STATIC/DYNAMIC COMBINATIONS
1 - Add new case
Load Case, Factor

52

1.0

Dl 1.0
COMBINATION(ABS)

<esc>
1 - Add new case
Load Case, Factor

52
D2

1.0
1.0

COMBINATION(ABS)
<esc>
1 - Add 1 new cise
Lad Cise. Flctor

52
03

1.0
1.0

COMB(AIS)

<esc>

-396-

A - CONTROL PARAMETERS
SPECTRUM
l
3.75
<esc>

<---<---<----

Oyna.ic Analys1s Type


Stat1c Load case for nonl1near restre1nts
Stiffness factor for friction

B - SAVE DYNAMIC INPUT


C - CHECK DYNAMIC INPUT
o - PERFORM DYNAMIC ANALYSIS

-397-

INDEPENDANT SUPPORT MOTION SPECTRUM ANALYSIS


Earthquake ground motions are caused by the passing of acoustic shock
waves thru the earth's soil. These waves are usually hundreds of feet
long. If supports having foundations in the sail are grouped
together within a several hundred foot radius of each other they will
typically see exactly the same excitation from the earthquake. If all
of the supports for a particular piping system are attached directly
to ground type supports, each support will be excited by an
essentially identical time waveform. This type of excitation is known
as uniform support excitation. Often pipe is supported from rack,
building or vessel structures as well as from ground type supports.
These intermediate structures serve to
in sorne cases fil ter and in sorne case accentuate the effect of the
earthquake. In this situation, the supports attached to the
intermediate structure are not exposed to the same excitation as those
that are attached directly to ground foundations. Ta accurately model
these systems different shocks must be applied to different parts of
the piping system. This type of excitation is known as Independant
support motion excitation. (ISM's). While the different support
groups are exposed to different shocks, there is also a relative
movement between support groups that doesn't exist for uniform support
exciation. The movement of one support group relative to another
is termed pseudostatic displacement.
For uniform support excitation there are spatial and modal response
components available for combination. A separate response
property is computed for each mode for each direction of excitation.
Only after all individual- responses are.computed are they summed
together in accordance with the user's directions.
For independant support excitation there are spatial and modal
response components available for each different support group. In
addition there is the pseudostatic component of the earthquake that
can be added into the dynamic response as well. Components that
act along the same spatial direction are termed /ldirectional/l
components. Fortunately the NRC has made recommendations for
combining each of these different response properties:
1 - Directional Inertial components should be combined using the
AaS method.
2 - Modal and spatial responses should be combined using the SRSS
method without consideration for closely spaced modes.
3 - Directional pseudostatic components should be combined using
the AaS method.
4 - Spatial pseudostatic components should be combined using the
SRSS method.
5 - The total response should be found by combining the pseudostatic
an inertial components using the SRSS method.

-398-

For running ISM load cases in CAESAR this translates into:

* The modal combination method should be SRSS.


* The spatial combination method should be SRSS.
* The directional combination method should be ABS.
* The pseudostatic combination method should be SRSS.

* It makes no difference whether modal or spatial components are


combined first.

The maj or di fference' runni ng ISM type earthquake loads comes


in building the shock load cases. Whereas in the uniform excitation
case the shock acts implicitly over all of the supports in the system,
in the ISM case different shocks act on different groups of supports.
The shock 10ad case input form appears:
Shock Name,

Factor,

Direction,

Start Node,

Stop Node,

Increment

"Name", "Factor" and "Direction" are al1 that is input for


uniform support excitations. For ISM type shocks the group of nodes
the shock acts over must also be specified. Users shou1d define
restraint support node points with this in mind.
For the simple mode1 below, define the ISM cases such that one times
the El Centro earthquake acts over the ground supports and one-ha1f
times the El Centro earthquake acts over the building supports. This
input shock load case would appear:
Shock Name,

Factor,

Direction,

Start Node,

Stop Node,

Increment

-------------------------------------------------------------------ELCENTRO
ELCENTRO
ELCENTRO

1 X 5 30
1 y 5 30
1 Z 5 30

ELCENTRO .5 X 40 60
ELCENTRO .5 y 40 60
ELCENTRO .5 Z 40 60

so
'1'

.s~

. rD".
6"

"ID

Ir

.3S
20

ID

-399-

2$

30

CiIOOIJQ

The control parameter spreadsheet items to use the NRC recommendations


appear below:
SRSS
SRSS
y
SRSS
ABS

<---<---<---<---<----

Spatial Combination method


Modal combination Method
Include Pseudostatic Components
Pseudostatic combination method
Directional Combination Method

For additional discussion, the user is refered to the dynamics


example problem C.

-400-

CAESAR II

VERSION 2.1C

DYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF INDEPENDANT


SUPPORT EARTHQUAKE EXCITATION

PROBLEM: The cryogenie plplng system shown on the follow;ng


page ;s to be designed in aceordance with 831.3
using the ground, building, and uniform speetra
shown. Two analysis are to be run:
1) Assume the pipe (structural steel) supports

are rigid.

2) Inelude the flexibility of the structural


steel supports by including the steel frames
in the analysis.

Finally, compare the results from the two analysis.


Design parameters are:
Ambient Temperature:
Operating Temperature:
Pipe:
Insulation:
Fluid:
Columns:
Beams:

100 deg F
-59 deg F
8 in Sch lOS
4 in 22.3 lb/cu ft
0.232 SG
W14x82
WIOx12

CONTENTS: Geometry and Shock Spectrum Definitions


Structural Steel Input
Dynamic Input Echo
Results Comparison &Discussion

-401-

1.C
4.C
5.C
8.C

CRYOGENIC PIPING DYNAMICS EXAMPLE


The ;sometr;c of the complete model ;s shawn in the figure below. This
drawing shows the piping, pipe supports, and the structural steel frames.

P,PE,:6"

1~,,".H.4'T"IOU~" 1.~.3 lII.f_ ..(,.;r..


1I....f!MGooI'"i T~~~: \00
OpeIL..'T",u.r,

i~IUo1UQ ...~

"1=

- ....,,'F-

,.,:
le

loSa

~.

104'$

,~.

10441

c:::.... " ..... ~ "", ~


~_:. , "OIl''.2.

'.'S'3

l.e
-402-

(TY~.4)

The excitation spectra to be applied to this model are:


GROUND RESPONSE SPECTRA BUILDING RESPONSE SPECTRA ENVELOPE RESPONSE SPECTRA

----------------------- ------------------------- -------------------------

Name="GROUND-RESPONSE"
T, sec

0.05
0.2
0.5
1.0
2.0
3.5
5.0
10 0

V, i n/sec

0.787
7.874
21.653
39.37
18.89
43.7
11.8

5.9

Name="BUILDING-RESPONSE"
T, sec
0.05
0.2
0.5
1.0
2.0
3.5
5.0
10.0

V, i ni sec
0.787
1.3
3.4
27.3
30.4
21.12
21.3

5.359

Name="ENVELOPE"
T, sec
0.05
0.2
0.5
1.0
2.0
3.5
5.0
10.0

V, i ni sec
0.787
7.874
21.653
39.37
30.4
43.7
21.3
5.9

The necessity for the various spectra can be best understood by


investigating the difference between independant support excitation
and uniform support excitation. These excitation methods are shown in
the figures below:

ENVELOPE SPEcrRUM

Acts on aIl support points in the model

UNIFORM SUPPORT EXCITATION


2.C

-403-

SPECTRDr-I
A~ts on aIl points supported
d~rectly from the building.

GROUND SPECTRUN

Acts on ail points supported


directly from the ground.

INDEPENDANT SUPPORT EXCITATION

For the analysis with steel supports, the structural steel must be
included as part of the piping model. This can be accomplished by
using the "INCLUDE STRUCTURAL INPUT FILES" option fram the "KAUX"
feature of the CAESAR II spreadsheets.

3.C
-404-

The structural steel model for this problem can be generated by


invoking the C2S program. The input listing from the C2S session
is shown below:

SECIO=l, W14X82 ;COLUMN CROSS SECTION


SECIO=2, W10X12 ;BEAM CROSS SECTION
MATID=l, YM=29E6 POIS=0.3 G=11E6 DENS=0.283
DEFAULT SECID=l
ANGLE=90
EOIM 1038 1039 DY=15-0 ;DEFINE ALL COLUMNS
EOIM 1043 1044 DY=15-0
EDIM 1048 1049 DY=15-0
EDIM 1053 1054 DY=15-0
DEFAULT SECIO=2
ANGLE=O
EDIM 1039 1040 DZ=-2-0 ;DEFINE ALL BEAMS
EDIM 1044 1045 DZ=-2-0
EDIM 1049 1050 DZ=-2-0
EDIM 1054 1055 DZ=-2-0
FIX 1038 ALL
FIX 1043 ALL
FIX 1048 ALL
FIX 1053 ALL

4.C
-405-

The dynamics input for this problem is summarized in the figure below.
Details of the dynamics input are contained on the following pages.

Define 3 shock response spectra:


1) "GROUND-RESPONSE" for supports
5, 1038, 1043, 1048, 1053

1 UII'O MSSES

2 - SIUIEIS

2) "BUILDING-RESPONSE" for supports

~ - IIIIX IEFIIITIIIIS
4 - PlUE TUlL IEIEIIn.

5-

65, 70, 80, 115

lia ut TIU ....n.

, - RIEF LDIII ImIIIIl


7 - N.S[ &PEt1IIII FGI sm
1 - IlllllaIC LWS

3) "ENVEL OPE

Il

for a11 supports

, - IIIIX WB ___
A- STATlt/DYIIIIIIIC CIIIIIITIIIIS
- CIIITIIII. PMMETEIS

C EF-

SAVE .YIIIIIIIC 1!nT


DEa ''''''''IC 1ft
POfIIIIII ITIMIC AIIUSIS
a.t.nt t. anAl ail _

2 shock load cases:


1) Independant Support Excitation case
(Esc)

2) Uniform (Enve10pe) Support Excitation case

~e1l

CAESAR what type of dynamic analysis to rune

5.C
-406-

CAESAR II DYNAPlICS INPUT DATA CHECKIN6


JOBNAPIE = CRYISPI_7
UNITS: Length (in.)
Force !lb.)
ftas5
IIbl)
SU ff <lb. lin. )
CONTROL PAR APIETERS
sPECTRUPI {----- Dynalic Analysis Type

(HARftONIC/SPECTRU"I"ODES/RANGE~

33

Stauc: load Case for Nonlinear Restraint StatU5


{----- stiffness Factor for Friction (O.O-Hot u5ed)
{----- "ax. No. of Eigenvalues c:alc:ulatl!d (a-Not u5ed)
{----Frequenc:ycutoff !HZ)

0.1
20
0.03
0.5

{----{----{---{-----

N
N

(---- <Not used)


{----- (Not used)

0.0

PlOOAl {----.. (----5RSS (---y


{----SRSS {---SRSS (---..,......
.., ...
...... fII. ...

Control Parameters Input Data Echo


Tell CAESAR to do a Spectrum Analysi s.
Only the four entries shown are required
for thi s jOb
All other val ues are
the original defaultso

{-----

Closely Spac:ed Plode Criteria


Earthquake Duration (For DSRSS .ethod) !sec.)
Struc:tural Dalping (% of c:ritical)
Zero Period Acceleration (For Reg. Guide 1.601 (g'5)

Spatial or l'iodaI COlbination first ...._ _ _ _ _ _ __


Co!:binatior: !leine' (SRSS/AeSl
Parameters modi fied to correspond wi th
!'IodaI COlcination P\ethoc [6ROU?!10i.!DSR55?ABSiSRS5~ the NRC 1 S recolllllended practice for
Inc:lude Pseudostatic Co.ponents (Y/NI
~
combi ni ng ISM shock components
Pseudostatic COlbination Plethod iSRSS/ABSl
Directional Colbination Plethod ISRSS/ABSI
S~atial

{----- <Not used)


{----- Sturl Sequenc:e check on cOlputed eigenvalues (Y/NI
N {----- {Not used}
b
.: ---- Estilatl!d no. of signi f i cant fi qures in ei genval ues
lE-12 (----- Jacobi Slteep Tolerance
lE10 {----- Deco.position Singularity Toleran:e
y

o
2

o
o
N
N
100

;: ----- 5ubspace se iO-Not Used 1


{----- No. to Converge before Shift Allolled (O-Not Used)
(----- No. of Iterations per shift (O-Pgl co.puted)
(----- % of Iterations per shift before orthogonalization
{---- Force orthogonalization after convergence (Y/NI
{---- Use out-of-core eigensolver (Y/N)
{----- Frequency Array Spaces

60C
-407-

DYNA~IC

LOAD CASE SHOCK CONTRIBUTIONS

Nau, Factor, Ilireeti on, Start, End. Ine

LOAD CASE 1 1
6ROUND-RES?ONSE 1.0
SROUNIl-RESPONSE 1.0
6RDUND-RESPONSE 1.0

.. liAlue

1005 1055
1005 1055
1005 1055

BUILDINS-RESPONSE 1.0 1 65 115


BUILDINS-RESPDNSE 1.0 y 65 115
BUILDINS-RESPONSE 1.0 Z 65 115

..,---------'ISM Load Case and support


group definitions

DYNA"IC LOAD CASE 1 2


"ODALISROUP) ,SPATIAL (SRSS) ..- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

.Combi nati o'n Methods Redefi ned


for uniform support 10ad case

ENVELOPE 1 1
ENYELOPE 1 y
ENVELOPE 1 Z

S?ECTRU" DEFINITIONS
Hile, Range, Ordinate, Range InterpDlation, Ordinate InterpDlatiDn
6ROUND-RESPONSE PERIOD YELOCITY LOE LOS ..
, - - - - - - -...."GROUND-RESPONSE" Spectrum Definition
0.05 0.787
0.2 7.974
0.5 :1.653

i.O 39.37
:. i)

18.29

3.5 43.7
5.0 11.8

l
i

entered "PERIOD vs VELOCITY"


J'--------------.. userSpectrum
table data

10.0 5.9
BUILDIN5-RESPONSE PERlOD YELOCITY LOE LOS
0.05 0.787
0.2 1.3
O.S 3.4
1.0 27.3
2.0 30.4
.,."; ..1
~

1Full Definition for the shocK


"BUILDING-RESPONSE"

21.12

5.0 21.3
1(;.0 5.359
ENVELOPE PERIOD YELOCITY LOE LOS
0.05 0.787
0.2 7.874
0.5 21.653
1.0 39.37

2.0 30.4
3.5 43.7

..
---------------1-Full Definition for the shocK
"ENVELOPE"

5.0 21.3
10.0 5.9

7.C
-408-

In order to keep the documentation for this example brief, the only
results presented are those for the "uniform support excitation" case.
Using this load case, the model with and without structural steel
supports will be compared. The results from these two models are
shown in the tables below:
DISPLACEMENTS
X

RX

RY

RZ

35 with
. without

0.4253
0.0049

0.0336
0.0076

1.5831
1.0334

0.4298
0.2902

0.5932
0.3832

0.0622
0.0033

45 with
without

0.4240
0.0036

0.0379
0.0

3.7952
1.9555

0.2311
0.1635

0.5550
0.2576

0.0412
0.0007

50 with
without

0.4219
0.0020

0.0447
0.0

3.7435
1.4764

0.1911
0.0817

0.5695
0.4083

0.1220
0.0002

60 with
without

0.3799
0.0366

1.4247
0.5838

0.5930
0.0635

0.3613
0.0292

0.3534
0.0425

0.2322
0.0236

75 with
without

0.8484
0.6447

1.3529
0.5631

1.3033
1.1291

0.5127
0.4482

0.4247
0.3346

0.4924
0.2114

90 with
without

0.5927
0.4689

0.4228
0.3414

0.2087
0.1815

0.3816
0.3425

0.5229
0.4236

0.4461
0.2465

8.C
-409-

RESTRAINT LOAQS
FX

FY

FZ

MX

MY

MZ

241
207

319
353

523
353

4761
3114

981
647

1133
1001

40 with
without

146
18

1118
597

45 with
without

229
4

50 with
without

CYJ
1536
434

3848
8100

1116~~ 1

2531
2286

1568
1339

4025
2701

with
without

55 with
without

2029
976

65 with
without

956
580

1101
560

70 with
without

538
500

895
743

80 with
without
115 with .
without

1939
1408

1154
596

236
110
743
504

253
200

429
359
STRESSES

AXIAL

-410-

BENDING

TORSION

MAX OCT

CODE

20F with
without

80
88

20614
13344

1742
1151

9834
6363

20639
13350

35F with
without

22
17

13454
8558

571
280

6366
4041

13468
8559

40 with
without

164
122

7179
4779

571
280

3431
2265

7211
4782

45 with
without

297
193

11001
7963

571
280

5246
3762

11081
7966

55 with
without

429
232

16435
11664

571
280

7832
5504

16582
11667

55 with
without

140
86

15886
17125

1009
148

7600
8114

16024
17210

60F with
without

340
357

20784
12164

696
414

9920
5911

21114
12520

75F with
without

69
59

11489
6208

375
281

5448
2963

11539
6267

9.C

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The comparison table on the previous page illustrates the differences
that can exist when the structural steel models are not included in
the analysis. ln some cases 9 the results with the structural steel
included are many times higher than the results computed without the
structural steel. The steel models add flexibility ta the piping system.
More flexibility means lower natural frequencies and more modes to be
excited by the shock. A comparison of the natural frequencies of the
two models is given below:

NATURAL FREQUENCIES
No.
1)

2)
3)

4)
5)
6)
7)

8)
9)
10)
11)
12 )
13 )

14)
15 )
16 )
17)

18 )
19 )
20)
21 )
22)
23)
24 )
25 )
26 )
27 )
28)

With Structure

--------------

Without Structure

----------------1.706
2.533
3.371
3.936
4.384
5.294
5.929
8.957
11.849
16.367
16.564
20.588
22.954
23.474
25.582
29.685
35.083

1.307
2.244
2.520
3.149
3.443
4.206
4.404
5.250
5.675
5.761
5.988
6.594
7.992
11.855
14.086
14.086
14.086
16.504
15.554
20.333
20.589

I~::I
23.052
23.475
25.582
38.085

10.C
-411-

ln the above table, there are on1y 5 extra mode shapes for the system
which includes the structure. The 6 extra shapes shown in the two
boxes belong strictly to the structural steel frame. (Exciting these
modes will obviously cause stresses in the piping, a possibility which
could go unnoticed in the simpler "piping on1y" model.)
The restrain moment at node 55 in the Z direction is much 1arger without
the steel mode l than it is with the steel mode1. Even though the
piping is tied to the steel, the steel frame will not support much
moment in the Z direction. The steel frame bends slightly about the
Z axis, and the moment is carried throught from the pipe. ln the
"piping only" model, the rigid anchor at node 55 will not rotate about
the Z axis (or any other axis) and so ends up carrying al1 of the
moment load.

11.C
-412-

RELIEF VALVE LOAD ANALYSIS:


Relief device loadings are due to the sudden exhausting of a liquid
or gas. By far the most difficult design problems involve the
relieving of gas. There are several reasons for this:
1 - The potential energy stored in high pressure gas can
cause considerable damage when converted into kinetic
energy.
2 - There are many installations of gas relief valves. i.e.
in every steam plant.
3 - Relief valves tend to "pop" open. and "close" quickly.
resulting in sudden loads on the piping system. Liquid
safety valves tend to open partially. or very slowly.
deadening the effect of the fluid momentum change.
For these reasons the GAS relief problem will recieve the majority
of the attention here. CAESAR has a liquid relief synthesis model that
functions in an identical manner to that for gas.
There are two types of destructive dynamic forces associated with
gas relief devices:
1 - Thrust at the valvejatmosphere interface
2 - Accoustic shock due to the sudden change in fluid
momentum and the associated traveling pressure waves.
A rarefaction wave is initiated at the valve orifice
on opening. and a compression wave is initiated at the
valve orifice on c10sing. These waves are usually ignored.
but may cause damage. The magnitudes of the rarefaction
compression waves are estimated in the relief
load synthesizer in CAESAR, and are dealt with just 1ike
any other (waterhammer) type of traveling pressure wave.
The figure below illustrates these two types of loading:

-413-

. P.a..~Swl~
THAT

. l - _ . _
.

WAVt:.S ...

..

~'\tn. a~

Qo,",,~
.. Pl?IJ.JC,

&>p~~~_.

:."-,

..

~~

:..

TITE

$'l"~~

~
~
.~ --,.~
~i....
..~ - ...
..

-.-

(~~Qr..) )

PI2.L'~~rU.)
o~

LoQ

WA."Ff"72,.O~ T

Vt+c.."EOf>~t.AJ,.

CI..o5.d) (oi!.F~ HA~I"''i

....- .. b.t.J

o~.)

1---1 ~-~~lo...Jt( C~ HI"""

P~~SS"'\l.t:)
01>.) VALVE'

The first step in any relief load analysis is to compute the


magnitudes of the relieving forces. For open-type and similar
vent systems the CAESAR Relief Load Synthesizer can be used.

-414-

1".0,) """

~~'

~,~~.

CAESAR assumes that a successful vent stack/relief system design


maintains the following gas properties:

Supersonic conditions as the


gas flow expands after leaving
the Relief Valve Orifice

~sonic

gas flow conditions

Steck

Gas expanding from subsonic to


sonic conditions at the vent
stack exit
Clel'l'\.s~c:urlng V~nt Steck

PIpe

'"

~SUbsoniC

gas flow conditions

' " Obli que shock sy stem mode 11 ed


as norma 1. shock
Soni C (ChOked\ gas fl ow

conditions at relief valve orifice

The assumptions made in the relief load synthesizer are as follows:


1) The gas can be dealt with using the ideal gas equation of state.
The compressibility factor (Z) is a measure of the gases deviation
from ideal. In the case of steam. over a wide range of pressures
and temperatures the ideal gas assumption is a very good one.
Sorne typical cornpressibility factors for steam are shown below:
At

10 psi and 400 deg. F.


10
1600
10
3200
100
400
100
1600
100
3200
800
800
800
1600
800
3200
800
1500
1600
1500
1500
3200
2000
800
2000
1600
3200
2000
4000
800
1600
4000
4000
3200

Z = 0.9965

0.9999
1.0053
0.9469
0.9990
1.0022
0.9336
0.9925
1.0029
0.8695
0.9859
1.0040
0.8188
0.9813
1.0049
0.5608
0.9647
1.0093

-415-

2) Gas properties follow an isotherm from the relief valve


orifice to the vent stack shock wave. (Temperature of the
gas doesn't change in this short distance.)
3) Gas expansion from the shock wave thru the vent stack is
adiabatic. (No heat into or out-of the vent stack.)
4) Sonic conditions exist at both the relief valve orifice and
at the vent stack exhaust into the atmosphere. (Both can provide
the li.iting criteria for flow.)

5) The oblique shock system in the vent stack which may exist
over a large distance of the vent stack piping~ can be modelled
as a normal shock wave of essentially zero length.
The input for the relief load synthesizer is shown below:

<---<---<---<---<---<---<---<---<----

Line Temperature Cdeg. F)


Line Pressure (psia)
ID of Relief Valve Orifice (in.)
ID of Relief Valve Piping (in.)
Length of Vent Stack
(in.)
Ratio of Gas Specifie Heats (k)
Gas Constant (R) (ft.lb./lbm./deg. R)
Ooes the Vent Pipe have an Umprella fitting (Y/N)
Should CAESAR size the Vent Stack (Y/N)

-416-

LINE TEMPERATURE (CEG. F)


Enter the stagnation condition temperature of the gas to be relived.
(Usually just the gas temperature upstream of the relief valve.)
LINE PRESSURE (PSIA)
Enter the stagnation pressure of the gas to be relieved. (Usually
just the gas pressure upstream of the relief valve.) Note that
stagnation properties can vary considerably from line properties
if the gas flow velocity in the line is high.
ID OF RELIEF VALVE ORIFICE (IN.)
Enter the flow passage inside diameter for the smallest diameter in
the relief valve throat. (This information is usually provided by
the relief valve manufacturer.)
ID OF RELIEF VALVE PIPING (IN.)
Enter the inside diameter of the piping attached directly to the
exhaust of the relief valve.
ID OF VENT STACK PIPING (IN.)
If CAESAR is to size the vent stack then leave this ID blank. If
the vent stack piping is the same size as the relief valve piping, i.e.
it is one-in-the-same, then this field May be left blank. Otherwise
enter the inside diameter of the vent stack piping.
LENGTH OF THE VENT STACK (IN.)
Enter the length of the vent stack. This is a required entry.
double the lengths of fittings and elbows.
RATIO OF GAS SPECIFIC HEATS (k)
Some typical values for this constant are:
Superheated Steam.
Saturated Steam
Nitrogen
Carbon Oioxide
Acetylene
Ammonia
n-Butane
Ethane
Ethylene
Methane
Propane
t..l4-r\..o\i2..AL. ~~

Il

1.300
1.100
1.399
1.288
1.232
1.304
1.093
1.187
1.240
1.226
1.127
l.27

GAS CONSTANT (R) (FT.LBF./LBM./OEG. R)


Some typical values for this constant are:
Nitrogen
Carbon Dioxide
Acetylene .
Ammonia
n-Butane
Ethane
Ethylene
Methane
Propane
"'l4.,.. "'" a. A-~

55.16
35.11
59.35
90.73
26.59
51.39
55.09
96.33
35.05

a It-S ., '1. 1

-417-

Add

OOES THE VENT PIPE HAVE AN UMBRELLA FITTING (YIN)


.
Enter a Y or a N. See the figures below to determine if the
connection of the vent staCK to the vent piping is via an umbrella
fitting.

V~nt St~ck

Cl~l'Ip S~CU"'1n9 V~nt St~ck

V~lv~

Pipe

An umbrella fitting exists whenever the vent stack


pipe is not hard piped to the relief valve pipe.

UMBRELLA FITTING EXAMPLE

V~nt

Steck

ReUef Va.lv~ Pipe

NOT An UMbrella. Fitting

SHOULO CAESAR SIZE THE VENT STACK (YIN)


Enter a Y if CAESAR should size the vent stack. The sizing algorithm
searches through a table of available inside pipe diameters starting at
the smallest diameter until a vent stacK id is found that satisfies the
thermodynamic criteria shown in the figure above. The computed ID
is automatically inserted into the input.

-418-

Example input and output fram the relief load synthesizer is shown and
discussed below:
1000
2800
2.141
6.065
50*12
1.3
85.8
Y
Y

<---<---<---<---<---<---<---<---<---<----

Line Temperature (deg. F)


Line Pressure (psia)
ID of Relief Valve Orifice (in.)
ID of Relief Valve Piping (in.)
ID of Vent Stack Piping (in.)
Length of Vent Stack (in.)
Ratio of Gas Specifie Heats (k)
Gas Constant (R) (ft.lbf./lbm./deg. R)
does the Vent Pipie have an Umbrella fitting (Y/N)
Should CAESAR size the Vent Stack (Y/N)

Computed Mass Flowrate (Vent gas) (lbm./hour)


Thrust at Valve Pipe/Vent Pipe Interface (lbf.)
Thrust at Vent Pipe Exit (lbf.)
Transient Pressure Rise on Valve Opening
(psi.)
Transient Pressure Rise on Valve closing
(psi.)
Thermodynamic Entropy Limit (Should be > 1 )
Subsonic Vent Exit Limit (Should be > 1 )
(psia)
Valve Orifice Gas Conditions (P,vel,T) 152S.0
46.1
Vent Pipe Exit Gas Conditions (P,Vel,T)
64.3
Subsonic Velocity Gas Conditions (P,Vel,T)

388229.300
17658.S50
1051S.7S0
347.091
247.542
2.904
1.041
( fps )
( deg.F )
2135.4
S09.6
1848.S
S09.6
140S.S889.4

COMPUTED MASS FLOWRATE (VENT GAS)


This is CAESAR's computed gas mass flowrate based on choked conditions
at the relief orifice. If greater mass flowrates are expected then
the error in either the approach used by CAESAR or in the expected
mass flowrate should be investigated.
THRUST AT VALVE PIPE/VENT PIPE INTERFACE
If there is an umbrella fitting between the vent stack and the
relief valve piping then this is the thrust load that acts back on
the relief valve piping. (See the figure below). If the vent stack
is ha rd piped to the relief valve piping then this intermediate
thrust will be balanced by tensile loads in the pipe and can be
ignored.

dJ-Vftt
1

1:1

s-

UMBRELLA F"ITTING

UMBRELLA rlTTING

~oth thrust loads act simultaneously during

a valve firing.

Only the valve pipe/vent stack interface thrust


acts in this configuration.

-419-

THRUST AT THE VENT PIPE EXIT


When there is an elbow in the vent staCK plplng, this is the thrust load
that acts on the elbow just before the pipe opening into atmosphere.
(See the figures below for clarification.)

UMBRELLA rITTING

NOT

NOT

An Ul'lbrello. tittlng

An Ul'IbreUo. tlttlng

TRANSIENT PRESSURE RISE ON VALVE OPENING


This is the estimated magnitude of the negative pressure wave that
will be superimposed on the line pressure when the relief valve first
opens. This negative pressure wave will move bacK thru the relief
system piping similar to the pressure wave in the downstream piping
of a waterhammer type system. The magnitude of this wave is estimated
as (Po-Pa)*Ap, where Po is the stagnation pressure at the source, Pa
is atmospheric pressure, and Ap is the area of the header piping.

-420-

TRANSIENT PRESSURE RISE ON VAlVE CLOSING


This is the estimated magnitude of the positive pressure wave that
will be superimposed on the line pressure when the relief valve
slams shut. This positive pressure wave will mave bacK thru the relief
system piping similar to the pressure wave in the supply side piping
of a waterhammer type system. The magnitude of this wave is
estimated fram: r*c*dv where r is the gas density, c is the
speed of sound in the gas and dv is the change in the velocity of the
gas.
THERMODYNAMIC ENTROPY LIMIT
SUBSONIC VENT EXIT LIMIT
This. values should always be greater than 1. If either of these computed
limits fall below 1.0 th en thermodynamic assumptions made regarding the
gas properties are incorrect and the computed thrust values should be
disregarded.
VAlVE ORIFICE GAS CONDITIONS
VENT PIPE EXIT GAS CONDITIONS
SUBSONIC VELOCITY GAS CONDITIONS
These are the thermodynamic properties of the gas at three critical points
in the relief system. These three points are shown in the figure.
The entire formulation for the thrust gas properties is based on an
ideal gas equation of state. If the pressures and temperatures displayed
above for the gas being vented are outside of the range where the ideal
gas laws apply then some alternate source should be sought for the
computation of the system's thrust 10ads.

-421-

The gas load on the piping system has two components:


1) The pressure times area. or P*A component. and
2) The mornentum change component. When the gas goes around a
90 deg. corner, the momentum of the gas is changed frorn the
horizontal direction into the vertical direction. Sorne force
must be exerted on the gas to accomplish this change in the direction
of the momentum. The magnitude of these forces is found in any
first year dynamics book as:
Force

= (dm/dt)

where: (dm/dt) - is the mass flowrate = (rAV).


V - is the gas velocity,
r - is the gas density, and
A - is the inside area of the pipe.

*18-6. Steady-Fluid Streams


Knowledge of the forces developed by steady moving fiuid streams is
of importance in the design and analysis of turbines, pumps, blades. and
fans. The principle of impulse and momentum may he used to determine
these forces. Consider, for example, the diversion of a steady stream of
fiuid (liquid or gas) by a fixed pipe, Fig. 18-16a. The fiuid enters the

fnoooA '
~6.Ir.lE.E.il..l"'~ M~'-~4toJ\GS;
s-r1l),'T'\c.~
~.c.

(a)

+
Timer

,,

,, ,>

"

pipe with a velocity VA and exits with a velocity vB The momentum- and
Impulse-vector diagrams for the fiuid stream are shown in Fig. 18-16b.
The force !F. shown acting on the impulse-vector diagram. represents
th~ res~ltant ~orce of ail the external forces acting on the fiuid stream.
It .lS. thls loadmg which gives the fiuid stream an impulse whereby the
o~gtn.al m~mentum of the fiuid is changed in both its magnitude and
dIrectIon. Smce the fiow is steady this force will be constant during the
time interval dt. As shown in the figure. the fluid stream is in m;tion.
and as a result a small amount of fluid. having a mass dm. enters the
pipe with a velocity l'A at time l, Considering this element of mass and
-422-

A.lJt>

D'<' ",Ar",," -cS

~L'Q~t~

the mass of fiuid in the pipe as a closed system. at time t + dt. a corresponding element of mass dm must leave the pipe with a velocity YB' The
average veloczv of the fiuid stream. having mass m. within the pipe section
is constant during the time interval dt. In Fig. 18-16b, its velocity is shown
to be v. Applying the principle of impulse and momentum to the fiuid
stream. we have
dm VA

+ mv + :::Fdt = dmv B + mv

Solving for the resultant force yields


(18-15)
The term dm/dt is called the massfiow and indicates the constant amount
of fiuid which fiows either into or out of the pipe per unit of time.
(vB - v.-l) represents the vector difJerence between the input and output
velocitv of the fiuid stream. Provided motion of the fiuid can be represented'in the xy plane. it is usually convenient to express Eq. 18-15 in
the form of two scalar equations:
~~
~FI!

dm
= d(VBz
-

VAz)

(18-16)

dm
d(vBI/ - VAl!)

The force summation in Eq. 18-15 or Eqs. 18-16 may easily be accounted for by accompanying the problem solution with a free-body
diagram. Only the entrance and exit velocities of the fiuid are required.
These velocities represent the relative velocities of the fiuid with respect
to the system. For sorne problems. a kinematic diagram for the velocities
will help in determining their values (refer to Example 18-9).

No~e ~hat ~he

relief load

syn~hesizer

also computes the gas mass

flowra~e. This flowra~e should no~ be greater ~han ~he manufac~urers


ra~ed flow, and if much less, ~hen ~he process engineer ~ha~ esigned
~he relief sys~em should be no~ified, as ~he ven~ s~ack choked flow

may be ~he llmi~ing factor on mass flowra~e, i.e. ~he


relief system might not be able to sufficiently vent the excess
steam !!!

condi~ion

-423-

From the relief 10ad synthesizer the fo110wing values are obtained:
1) The magnitude of the dynamic 10ad that acts on the relief
tai1pipe and valve due to the pressure, and change in momentum of
the re1ieving gas.

2) The magnitudes of the opening and closing pressure waves that


propagate back into the f1uid from the relief valve.
Once the magnitude of the relief 10ad is known, sorne estimate
of its time waveform must be made. This can be computed from
the maximum pounds of gas to be vented at any one firing.
The duration of the relief valve blast can be found fram:
Duration

Mass / Flowrate

EXAMPLE:
Assume that on over-pressurizing a system, 3000 lbm of
steam must be vented.
From the relief load synthesizer, we can see that
388229.3 1bm of steam per hour will get thru the
orifice/tailpipe configuration. Once the valve opens
i t wi 11 take:
(3000)lbm / (388229.3)lbm/hour

0.00773 hours
seconds

= 27.3

to vent 3000 lbm of steam.

The longer the duration the more conservative the dynamic calculation.
Longer durations result in quicker rise times in the frequency response
spectrum diagram. This is illustrated below:

~~------~----------~--D~F~~.o

~"~~----

~o~.'~ ....~vf:-

--~~~'-5~._

.--_ . .

_~_-:_-

.l~I...,t; .
TI ioOo\ ~ I-k. S' n;, 12.-'"

___. . _-- .- -

L~4. ~w.n..""='TlO~ J...~;~ ~ TH:E __ fu~~~I:::~."l

___ C\JQ.v~ . _2tS._.Y~_aC4.1.c.t-"~{ _._

-424-

To-- "2._0. __

---_-_} -q ~$;"'~T_ n~~O.L~"::'~_-=-:::


--

lSA-'"(

-- -

--- -- --

-- --- -

-~

< So

~)
- - -

-~

-----

-=- -=-

_.-

~ -=-- ---_.,._-

_ ._ $th:>Ik.T___ D~f1...ATIOJ.LLo~:- T"t_6"_. .E:~~Q.JC'{_~~'.PC~rE


___ ___ G.1l2rt(ti: -i2Js~- _$'4:c:;>~,,:i __

Th__Z ...O_~

____. ____. --_.. -

--- ---

An accurate estimate of the rise and fall time of the valve is also

of use. The shorter the estimated rise and fall times the more
conservative the dynamic solution.

Just like for the earthquake analysis, the time waveform is converted
into a response spectrum by exposing a table of single degree of freedom
bodies to the time waveform and saving the maximum displacement of
each.

---

-- -

--~-

'. '.""'"F. i

~ : _. __
. ~~_ --:~_._ _ _

-; ~ -- _. --- ------- --- - -- - _.__. _~ ___. _ c.~ n..Y.!iL~

n.f::::--'2fl.$:>bi~-fJ5... _.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .~_.!!!M~a......J'-I~~~~L.

,
-.-- ---------'F="'T---=c=

-~....;...---

-t--+rt---'+---~~---.,.....---.---.-

.--------

----- .--:--t--rt-._",-7--~---r-------------_.
-+-i~~~~~-------...:......~----_ --~:-:-'-'-----------'
-'----'-----'--~....;.-----_ ..

------------,.-\----'------------------ ~--'---'--~-'-~

----,'---,- n""'1 e
d

-425-

_---

The input procedure for the time waveform and the resulting response
spectrum from CAESAR are shown below:
1 - INPUT
2 - STATICS
3 - DYNAMICS <------- Go to DYNAMICS
4 - OUTPUT
1 - LUMPED MASSES
2 - SNUBBERS
3 - SHOCK DEFINITIONS
4 - PULSE TABLE GENERATION <------ Pulse table generation
5 - WIND GUST TABLE GENERATION
6 - RELIEF LOAD SYNTHESIS

FORCE SPECTRUM GENERATION


Enter the force spectrum name -----> <spectrum name>
Enter the maximum table frequency (Hz.) --->

<40>

Enter the des1rea number of points in the table ----> 20


TI ME
mill i sec
0.0
5.0
15.0
20.0

FORCE
lb.
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0

The following Force Response Spectrum Table 1s generatea:

FREQ (HZ)

~lTIPlIER

.1112511
.1141111
.8282511
.1641111
.1562511
.3239999
.6112498
1.8241'18
1.6412491
2.4999998
3.6612491
5.1839991
7.1412491
9.6141111
12.6562511
16.3841111
21.8812688
26.2441111
32.58127'1
41.1111211

.1134219
.1183528
.1118866
.1161185
.8147271
.1315411
.1565656
.1964677
.1544218
.2351151
.3431735
.4832111
.6589428
.8712571
1.1159718
1.3799111
1.6356938
1.8364651
1.9341221
1.9354891

\.

--"
lPo,_rs

\~

10

-:

2D

TI""",e"""~~lseCcwos

LOIJ

F-cu::~\oot E"IJC ,lOS' ~H.4. J.J.or

.'l.G/TCi~.

/4./

-426-

8E "S'i.A. i!>S,."-ITI /fIru.'(

Next ~he poin~ of


must be entered.

applica~ion

of

~he

load, its direction and magnitude

For a single relief valve, or for multiple relief valves firing


simultaneously this results in a single force set.
For an interplay between more than one relief valve there may be
multiple force sets. The examples below should help illustrate:
EXAMPlE:

1 A Single relief valve fires. There is a force on the


tailpipe elbow (P*A + mY*Y), calculated from the relief
load synthesizer equal ~o 4532 lb. Because of the
umbrella configuration there is also a load on the
relief piping equal to the value from the relief load
synthesizer of 6789 lb. The following force spectrum loads
would be en~ered:

'-'.NI f,/2.El.L.A
FtT/IAlt:,

j ,-.

-r\._

'l..

ro

J/~?J.."' __ ./!.l;E.S~;~/2.T

Mu.t7 4 E" /)t;ft~"'EJ.)


_Tp-u.._..l!E. .. J2nY/'TIAll; _ .7~. LoLt4s._.

_ .

...

. ......
..._-_ ..__ ...._ -_ __ __
...

...

..

.......

_ _ _ _--_ _ _ _.....

..

...

..

......

...

-..

",

.,.

_. _.

4532 lb. in the X direction, force set #1.


-4532 lb. in the y direction, force set #1.
There will be a single dynamic load case that
contains force set #1.

-427-

. . . _.-

--

...

EXAMPLE:

2 A bank of relief valves are assumed to open and close


simultaneously. They are at nodes 210, 310 and 410. The
thrust force from the relief load synthesizer is equal
to 1331 lb. The following force spectrum loads would
be entered:

AioTri

rH*T"

TH67J.E

X ~'pf)"'I;';wTS
'IN A

T i-fE

1(;

A-n.E- No
if.ft;;-SE

L(}IH)~I

~~WI/U:.7)_ 11"/lJ~ t:oA1FJg"un()~


. J( .P112.~"~.:"'1 0"'; fc"~! ~

7;..~E1J t(P

As

THE

.ID

7f,f~

/"fS

V.'2'f"

6".5#1 ~
FI Ll..$.T

J or 71n\J.S/fMJ IN 'THe !>tyG


BE'TWG:1J.. THF;O/~, F/CE. A-IJ j) TH-E
Ftl1,sr . .2..&>..kJ. rffEn.E /$ A
hlZC..E'. /~-+/..b.J.CE_ r#~.,. )tJT..s
/~n/'Z.F~U,
(c~6.dt..J

SHrJlZr

MOr.lr:$_

7.t14T.

10$

J7z-0M

1~~'~7J

7~

,$ tCA"ISC

PII'IIJ.A77DI-J.

-1311 lb. in the Y direction at 210, force set #1.


-1311 lb. in the y direction at 310, force set #1.
-1311 lb. in the y direction at 410, force set #1.
There will be a single dynamic load case that
contains force set #1.

-428-

OtZ.Ir:le~

EXAMPLE:

3 There are two relief valves in a bank. They may open


individually or simultaneously. The individual firings
may coincide, i.e. the first valve may open, fire and
begin to close when the second begins to open. The first
may open, close, then open again before the
system has come to rest, or while the second is open.
The steady state thrust load for each of the relief
valves is 1679 lb. The relief valves are at nodes
150 and 160.

~i:)y

STA-TE. 1"J+t2MST

r/2.ol"-1

TH6-. -n/t;r ~OI'I:.o

... -:-,/JVTHS/~:'

/fp 7~

i ' ( ? \~ . -Rii..1 Er:

LoA-O

1..8. ..

Ti ....... E

". ~~"-F\-;2..I~ .~s.mT2,"(

ThiS type of relief installation is particularly


difficult to design for. There are two complexities
that act together in the same problem:
1 - The independant interaction of more than one
thrust load, and
2 - The repeated application of the same thrust load.
unfortunately, this is often the situation that exists
at multiple valve relief stations.
The force sets are defined as shown below:
*Set #1 is the independant firing of the valve at 150.
-1679 lb. in the Y direction at 150, force set #1.
*Set #2 is the independant firing of the valve at 160.
-1679 lb. in the y direction at 160, force set #2.
*Set #3 is the simultaneous firing of both valves.
-1679 lb. in the Y direction at 150, force set #3.
-1679 lb. in the Y direction at 160, force set #3.
-429-

Note that the LOAO CASE COMBINATIONS are used to affect the
variation in the loading history, (NOT the force sets!!!).
The load cases would be defined as follows:
*LOAD CASE 1 -- SIMULTANEOUS FIRING
Contains 1 times force set #3.
*LOAD CASE
*
*
Contains
Contains
Contains

2 -- VALVE 1 FIRING 3 TIMES, VALVE 2 FIRING


3 TIMES, ALL COMPONENTS ADDED USING THE
SRSS METHOD, WITH 10% MODAL GROUPING.
1 times force set #1.
1 times force set #1.
1 times force set #1.

Contains 1 times force set #2.


Contains 1 times force set #2.
Contains 1 times force set #2.
DIRECTIONAL(SRSS),SPATIAL(SRSS),MODAL(lO%)
The exact CAESAR input describing this combination loading
case is shown below:

FORCE SPECTIUI EDITINS - irectlon lIily !le 1, 'f or l, cosues, or a


Olrec:tlon veetor. Eac:n force set aeflnes a \I1IIQU!
OynalllC load c:onflguratlon. !-orees glYen nere lIUSt
!le USI!CI in COrIJunCtlon ..ltn a force SlEctl"lll. taIt

on tlle rlUllerlC keypad serell tne Input. Hny


llne startl" .itn an asterlSk (*J ..U! !le taken as
a ~. Errors nave lJeen Cletectea on arry Une
SIlOII'I bunnng.
(lb.)

Force, Direction, NoCle, Force set


1

1 *FORCE SET Il IS ltE

I~T

FIilMi CF IH:: VR..~ AT 15()

. -1679 Y 150 1

*FOII:E SET 12 15 ltE lNDEJ:lEJGNT FIilNS t1= ltE WLIJE AT IbO


-1679 Y 160 2

*FORCE SET .3 IS TtE SlfllTArEilB fIRINS tJ= IIOTH VR..1Jai


-1679 Y 150 3 )o-------------~------.,
-1679 Y 160 3

Ins Del

(esc) 10 ExIt

-430-

StK t:XMTRlflUTlONS - blrE!Ctlon can De x, y or L or can De


glYel'l as a dIrectIon cosll'e or dIrectIon vector. fne
fonaat tor dIrectIon COSllE or vectors lS (CX, cy,CZJ

for examp!e: iO. 707,0, O.707J. Ealtlng keys on the


nuErlC keypad serou the Input. Hny bne startlng wlth
an asterlsK (If) will Ile taken as a ccaent. &rors have
been CletectE!U on any llne stIown bhnkIng. unly enter
noaes for Independant Support ExcItatlons tlSlll' SJ "
1

Force set

(or)

ShOCk Nille,

,l**

DIrectIon, S'art NOCle, Stop Nocle, IncrelEl'lt

Factor,

1 LDAD CASE l REPRfSENTS THE SHu..TIlEWS ::;IMU t-IRlMi


RELIEF WLIJES AT 150 IWJ IbO.
TEST 1 Y

(f

IAiTH

34---------------of.----..I

1
1
1
1
1
bIS Del

L(A) CASE

(escHo ExIt

2 SHOCK t:XMTRlflUTlONS - DIrectIon can l, y or . or can


glVl!rl as a dIrectIon cosne 01" dIrectIon vector. fhe
forllilt for directIon COSllleS or vectors lS (cx,cy,CZ}
for eXilple: (0.707,0,0.707). Ealtlftg keyS on the
nuErlC keypad seroU the Input. Hny IUle stal"tIng .utn
an asterlSk (If) .il! Ile tilken as a COllent. trrors have
_ lIeen Getectet:lmLaftY,j. snown Dlln~er_

nocies for Independant Support Excitations USM' 5)


Force set 11

(or)
Shock Hile, Factor,
1

DIrectIon,

Start NOCle, Stop Nocle,

!lICIl!IIent

* LDAD CASE 2 f/EPRfSENTS TIt: HEPETITlYE t=IHlMi T~ Vli.vt HT

1 If :rT~~/JnEs, AND TIE WLVE HT IbO lliRtE UtES.


TEST 1 Y1 :3

FII'1.Ih.l~S.

@ \... 0

TEST 1 Y 1

TESTIY2}
TEST 1 Y 2

fll4l1.iI:;5 ~ tlQO

TEST 1 Y2
DIRECTIIM. (SRSS) , lOlQ.. (10)

Ins Del

<escHo ExIt

-431-

i 11

5E:C""I4SE

T !oK

i~

'PI as:.TIOfjl'r\..

j)"',..,,.._If!

IF THE
7uEW

($.()V~

lt".DlIJ~

$'P.a.TI.. '

7H-E

Me A,,",- "'Y'5"
)

])';ltC.T"IOIW/U.

7~

(,;,..,TfZ.lfS

C 01404 &/4J AT"lOIJ METI+e>D

IHfi- MrrH-oo

tAcVI:!'7f..JoJS

Cp

't>I~C."lo..l'

t:>!=- ,4i)i)/710AJ L),c 71+E

~-PDND.Jrs.

N7'fl./ES WfdU.

c.oli>'fI3I/fJATIOAJ

OF- rirE

l>DrnOAJ

AL~ 1),FFftTl.P.JT

~G"7'Ht>J)

.J

IVOVL/)

h .JY'AoJ"'''''/1!

Lo,lr()""" 'i tJJ,.., PDA..I ~7t,,)TS

JJOiE:

IH"IVi

ZEFt:>Il..E

-PlfZEi;:nOAIAl.

ANy

Mp~

Co,..,a/AJAT/OA.J$ ~ MA/)E

/);}..

SPtI4-rlR-c.

CD,..,BIIJ,4TJ()AJ~.

A schematic of how this combination works should help:

-432-

._-_.

-- "--

--

..

__.

--

--- ... -

_J)YNAMJt. L.I:ut/) _CIJ!'E ._t.{:>AtTA:.I/VS._

Jg

-IJDJ(JIJl-f1t-J,

~O~~9.Jrs:

. /~ 1/4J"",_~.J?1;: _~~_ . .-:LCI) __ _

--2.~ rl/2.I.IJ.~._-L); Y/!J.:""-v~_2~.


..;r~_~ll:t(!J'.~_~k~ __ '->Q_

_'_-hRJA/I, ~Pl!.. Jl9Lj/I._.~.u,tl


. ~~.~ . .8. ';'IM~ _~e.. i4~._.JJk,D_
-.~ ~.- r1./1..Ju(_-1k- .. YAL14--@jbl) -.

. .'.-.o~ 2-

il'

&~I

)----t J-

ifii,pir ~r-

-- -

li~-~-- -

-"'1"114

S ...,r, LU:

Dt.s

---- - - . -----:~~:~~~:~;:l-~::S-t._

(---1~-:. --.--~._-.

~i)r

e~&(,

~~

UE~-

A1cPt J.i4-!T
~~

n il . H

1" ~ ~/2C1Ai>1/tJ4 &:o"'1~/~A-TTI)N


~F- /U()I)A,

l2.i~/'TS

-433-

-lok~

~ES .--

High frequency modes can often cause confusing results.


example illustrates:

The following

L~.fl~! 'L~"'.~''-'~'''~ ..
A.Lo1>a. ...,~ VAr-c.\!e ~

..... - .......

_~~v(,

... D~ . I~Lo~ .F1l..,,~j;JUJ~Y


,1U.cM_. .P./ILJ_

. /AJ'tIL>J. VE-

-r.H-E.

~---- ...... ~ --- --,...,~

!~~tt

IH'

~~/f"'F

M.o.~E:S

OF T~

J>JPI!-J{

Ft-~~ 8L~kfl:a!tj)t72.

f'lylf:: .

"

A-~BLY

IS

So

.i2.1t7/.t>

Co~~

70 THE ,2c.fr OF TItE ?/~/AJ{ Ir t.,)I/...~ kT


.L, "'E A/2I~ II) k"Y, /., No /lu)t)1IL j)~?t.AC~~74.rd
eAIAS/~&;
lull.(..

Iv

nt-

'ZC

Sr~I'r/AJ_
lJo

A-I'P~

w/'Tlof'OU"

.J..014.)S:

:T.-E.

MOJ>A--t,.
7HE"

mz.:
-434-

])/!",P~"Cl~E-..J7! 71h:72.C

L.0tI'I-0

~/~i1ZI'I.4711J1J

.......

,---.A-u..~.

-.MO ...... U-,)~

A.k>N. ~(a2.c..
. Ml:' l'H ~,,-,b).

~iU.IS-

-l.._~t-S- ..

pa.
J,.

IZoc..u T/OAJ; {(,AJ.H./;-rl.

-- -

--

"

- - --

Jkf::j..S .f';Z:OBU"" . ~ X/SIS:)

I~J2uA!. __..ST4JJ..e__.Aj~P('J(J.~T/QJ./ LJE .. T#E.t?rAuU~-t/e_ .4.(;);1.)/NC; .


.2 - 12/..(~ ~YWA-1lA ~e. A?j!LIC .I+flC>N (FoIU~ ~~~mUM)
$- j)~:S/~N .U,O;y~ walZST CM~.

Let's take sorne exarnple situations and work thru thern verbally:

Ar.;~IAM~

'rIUO$PH7UtZ.

CcIJ I)lnoNlS !-h-7ZEJ

10

U ~ ~ /1-fE. ~12.
Z~l"ln= L OAO 5r'/tI/I1EtlYi.

-435_

---1 ,,:~ -~~~~~. ~~~~y~~ ~- r~ ~


rHE UAJ8~

rca.r.,..1'f'JtI'r

~/rrs

---

8rr