You are on page 1of 8

Proceedings of PVP2002

2002 ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference


August 5-9, 2002, Vancouver, BC, Canada

STIFFNESS COEFFICIENTS FOR NOZZLES IN API 650 TANKS

PVP2002-1279

Manfred Lengsfeld
Fluor Daniel Inc.
manfred.lengsfeld @fluor.com

Kanhaiya L. Bardia
Fluor Daniel Inc.
ken.bardia@fluor.com

Jaan Taagepera
Valero Refining Co.
Jaan.taagepera@valero.com

Kanajett Hathaitham
Fluor Signature Services Inc.
ken.hathaitham @fluor.com

Donald G. LaBounty
Fluor Daniel Inc.
donald.la.bounty@fluor.com

Mark C. Lengsfeld
Crane Valves
lengsfeld @yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

this paper stiffness coefficients are provided for nozzles away


from a structural discontinuity. The distance at which a
discontinuity has no influence on the spring rate of a nozzle is
defined by Welding Research Council (WRC) Bulletin 297
[11]. Height factors are used to calculate stiffness coefficients
for nozzles located close to a gross structural discontinuity.
With the height factors provided, the engineer is able to arrive
at stiffness coefficients for nozzles at any location on the tank
shell, which in turn helps to predict more accurately the piping
loads at the nozzle.

The analysis of tank nozzles for API Standard 650 [1] tanks
is a complex problem. Appendix P of API 650 provides a
method for determining the allowable external loads on tank
shell openings. The method in Appendix P is based on two
papers, one by Billimoria and Hagstrom [2] and the other by
Billimoria and Tam [3]. Although Appendix P is optional,
industry has used it for a number of years for large diameter
tanks. For tanks less than 120 feet (33.6 m) in diameter,
Appendix P is not applicable.
In previously published papers [4-10], the authors used
finite element analysis (FEA) to verify the experimental results
reported by Billimoria and Tam for shell nozzles. The analysis
showed the variance between stiffness coefficients and stresses
obtained by FEA and API 650 methods for tanks.
In this follow-up paper, the authors present stiffness
coefficients for tank nozzles located away from a structural
discontinuity. Factors to establish spring rates for nozzles
varying from 6 to 48 inches and tank diameters from 30 feet to
300 feet and for nozzles at different elevations on the shell are
provided. Mathematical equations are provided together with
graphs for the stiffness coefficient factors.

NOMENCLATURE
B

D
Do
FR
KBc

=
=
=
=

Kc

KBL =

INTRODUCTION
KL

In Appendix P of API 650 a procedure has been established


to determine the allowable loads on tank shell openings. This
procedure is a practical solution to a complex problem,
especially since low-type nozzles, as defined in API 650, are
close to the bottom and thus are affected by the bottom-to-shell
junction (See Fig. 1). As mentioned by Billimoria and
Hagstrom, this procedure is conservative. Users in industry
have questioned the need for such conservatism. Even though
Appendix P is not mandatory, many designers use this method
for lack of any other guidance.
In previously published papers, the authors used FEA to
verify the experimental results reported by Billimoria and
Tam. In papers by Lengsfeld, et. al [4-7] various degrees of
conservatism were reported for different nozzle sizes attached
to tanks. Stress factors and stiffness coefficients for low-type
nozzles were published by the authors [8,9]. Stress factors for
varying nozzles heights were published by the authors [10]. In

KBR =
KR

LB

Mc
ME
a
d
h
mc

=
=
=
=
=
=
=

2(12*Dt) in, height from tank bottom per WRC,


Bulletin 297 where tank bottom has no influence
on stiffness on nozzles (see Figure 1), in
nominal diameter of tank, ft
outside diameter of reinforcing pad, in
radial load, lbs
stiffness coefficient due to circumferential
moment at distance B, in-lbs/radian
stiffness coefficient for circumferential moment,
in-lbs/radian
stiffness coefficient due to longitudinal moment
at distance B, in-lbs/radian
stiffness coefficient for longitudinal moment, inlbs/radian
stiffness coefficient due to radial force at
distance B, lbs/in
stiffness coefficient for shell thrust (radial) load,
lbs/in
vertical distance from nozzle centerline to tank
bottom (see Figure 1), in
vertical distance of nozzle centerline where tank
bottom has no influence on nozzle stiffness
B + Do
circumferential moment, in-lbs
longitudinal moment, in-lbs
outside radius of opening connection, in
outside diameter of nozzle (2a), in
height factorL/LB
stiffness ratio for circumferential moment

1
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2002 by ASME

..... ~
l

:-----~LONGrlIlJDINAL
1
MOMENTM~,
.

+M~
Figure 1: Dimensions for nozzles per API 650
mL =
mR t =
t. =
tp =

three-dimensional models of the tanks and the nozzles. Larger


tanks (D>30 feet) were modeled with 4 node shell elements.
Smaller tanks were modeled using 8 node solid elements.
Each variation of tank and nozzle diameter had different
numbers of elements. The analyses were performed on a
Silicon Graphics Workstation and PC's.
Figure 3a represents stiffness coefficients due to a radial
force for tanks from 30 feet to 300 feet in diameter with a wall
thickness of 3/4". Figure 3b gives the stiffness ratio due to a
radial force to be used for nozzles located closer to a structural
discontinuity. Figures 4a and 4b are for circumferential
moments where as Figures 5a and 5b for longitudinal
moments. Actual stiffness ratios mi conform to a relative
narrow scatter band. For simplicity these bands were combined
into single lines in Figures 3b, 4b and 5b. Stiffness coefficients
for above figures 3a, 4a and 5a are for nozzles 6" to 48" in
diameter located away from a gross structural discontinuity.
Nozzles were chosen to have reinforcing pads with equivalent

stiffness ratio for longitudinal moment


stiffness ratio for radial force
shell thickness of tank, in
thickness of nozzle wall, in
thickness of reinforcing pad, in

DESCRIPTION

Figure 2 shows a detail of the nozzle area. Each tank was


assumed to be at ambient temperature of 70 Fahrenheit. The
bottom of the shell course for each model had the nodes fixed
in all displacements while rotations were not fixed. This
assumes that the annular ring provides little resistance to shell
rotation due to imposed piping loads. Only an 180 section of
each tank was modeled, utilizing symmetry to reduce model
size. Stiffness coefficients were calculated from the deflection
of the nozzle after the loads were applied.
For the FEA, COSMOS software developed by Structural
Research and Analysis Corporation was used to construct

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2002 by ASME

Figure 2: Detail of a typical nozzle and shell area


The loadings were applied independently. In excess of 100
combinations of loading, tank, thickness, and nozzle sizes
were evaluated.

dimensions of Table 3-6, column 5 of API 650. The tanks


modeled were 30 feet to 300 feet in diameter and 64 feet high.
Several shell-thickness were investigated for each tank. The
mathematical method of least-square fits for polynomial curves
was used to smooth these curves and derive mathematical
equations. Table 1 lists the equations for tank diameters and
thickness presently available. These equations were then used
to produce the graphs of Figures 3a through 5b. Using the
mathematical equations will simplify the creation of computer
programs for the calculation of nozzle stiffness coefficient at
the nozzle-to-shell junction.

RESULTS
Stiffness coefficients vary with the location of the nozzle in
height on the tank wall. Stiffness coefficients increase as the
nozzle moves closer to a gross structural discontinuity. Factors
have been established to calculate spring rates for nozzles at
any location on the tank wall using as a basis the rates for
nozzles away from a discontinuity. Stiffness coefficients are
inverse proportional to the height, the lower the location on the
tank, the higher is the spring rate. Depending on the location of
the nozzle, the value for the stiffness coefficients from Figures
3a, 4a or 5a will be divided by the height factor from Figures
3b, 4b or 5b respectively.

LOADING
The same loadings were applied to all finite element models,
namely
P = 1,000 lbs
Radial,
ML = 10,000 in-lbs
Longitudinal Moment,
Mc = 10,000 in-lbs
Circumferential Moment,

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2002 by ASME

Time and size constrains prevent the authors from


investigation of several more shell thickness.

ANALYSIS PROCEDURE
The procedure for the evaluation of stiffness coefficients is
as follows:
1. Calculate the distance B
2. Establish the height LB
3. Establish the height factor h
4. For a given nozzle on a tank with established wall
thickness read the stiffness coefficient from Figures
3a, 4a or 5a for the corresponding loading
5. From Figures 3b, 4b or 5b establish the stiffness ratio
factors mi
6. Divide the value of the spring rate from (4) by the
stiffness ratio factor from (5) to arrive at the stiffness
coefficient for the nozzle under consideration

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the
managements of Fluor Daniel, Valero Refining Co and CCI to
prepare and publish this paper. Special thanks to Gilbert
Chen, Avtar S. Mann and Dennis Mitchell for their review of
the manuscript and their encouragement.

REFERENCES
[1] American Petroleum Institute, API Standard 650 tenth
Edition, November 1998 "Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage"
[2] Billimoria, H.D., and Hagstrom, K.K, "Stiffness
Coefficients and Allowable Loads for Nozzles in Flat Bottom
Storage Tanks" Paper 77-PVP-19. ASME 1977
[3] Billimoria, H.D., Tam, K.K., 1980, "Experimental
Investigation of Stiffness Coefficients and Allowable Loads
for a Nozzle in a Flat Bottom Tank" ASME Publication 80C2/PVP-5
[4] Lengsfeld, M., Bardia, K.L, Taagepera, J., 1995 "Nozzle
Stresses Resulting from Piping Loads at Low-Type Nozzles in
API 650 Storage Tanks" ASME PVP-Vol. 315
[5] Lengsfeld, M., Bardia, K.L, Taagepera, J., 1996 "FEA vs.
API 650 for Low Tank Nozzles" ASME PVP-Vol. 336
[6] Lengsfeld, M., Bardia, K.L, Taagepera, J., 1997 "FEA vs.
API 650 for Low Tank Nozzles (2)" ASME PVP-Vol. 359
[7] Lengsfeld, M., Bardia, K.L, Taagepera, J., 1998 "Spring
Rates for Low Tank Nozzles" ASME PVP-Vol. 368
[8] Lengsfeld, M., Bardia, K.L, Taagepera, J., Hathaitham,
K., 1999 "Stress Factors for Low-Type Nozzles in API 650
Tanks" ASME PVP-Vol. 388
[9] Lengsfeld, M., Bardia, K.L, Taagepera, J., Hathaitham,
K., 1999 "Spring Rates for Low Tank Nozzles in API 650
Tanks" ASME PVP-Vol. 388
[10] Lengsfeld, M., Bardia, K.L., Taagepera, J., Hathaitham,
K., LaBounty, D.G., Lengsfeld, M.C., 2001 " Analysis of
Loads for Nozzles in API 650 Tanks" ASME PVP-Vol. 430
Ill]Bulletin 297, September1987, "Local Stresses in
Cylindrical Shells due to External Loadings on Nozzles"
Welding Research Council (WRC), New York

DISCUSSION
The graphs presented in this paper were constructed to be on
the conservative side.
The presented results may be interpolated to establish
stiffness coefficients for other nozzles, tank diameters and
shell thickness.
The purpose of this paper is to give the designer a simple
means to arrive at a spring rate at a nozzle to tank shell
connection.
For more complex or critical applications, it is
recommended to perform an FEA analysis including the
complete piping system.

CONCLUSION
The method presented in this paper provides the design
engineer a means to calculate stiffness coefficients at the shell
to nozzle junction. With these rates applied piping loads can
be established.
Once accurate piping loads have been established, stresses at
the nozzle-shell junction can be calculated using the methods
published previously [10].
The use of the finite element analysis models in determining
the stiffness coefficients for tank nozzles is recommended
when piping loads indicated by the method provided in this
paper are excessive and would result in expensive piping
systems.
Additional data for other tank sizes are being developed

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2002 by ASME

STIFFNESS COEFFICIENT DUE TO RADIAL FORCE


400

350

300
.....

[.

30'Dia.xl/2"

250
o

30'Dia.x3/4"

200

KBR = 3.4604X + 70,876


150

1 gO'Dia.xa/4"
KBR =

100

2.3202x + 47.251

300'Dia.x3/4"
5O

KBR= 0.4032X + 4.4569

0
30

20

10

40

50

Note 3/4" thicknesses are solid line

Nozzle Size (in)

Figure 3a

STIFFNESS RATIO DUE TO RADIAL FORCE

0.9

0,8
0.7
0.6

0.5I

0.4-

0.30.2
0.1
mR = -0.2504h 2 + 1.2516h - 0.0086

,,,

,
0.1

....

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

,,,,,

0.8

0.9

h=L/L B

Figure 3b

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2002 by ASME

STIFFNESS C O E F F I C I E N T DUE T O C I R C U M F E R E N T I A L M O M E N T
200 -

180

T
.

3O'Oia.x3/4"

K ~ = 0.0622x 2 + 0.451 l x + 9.1617

160 180'Dia.x,3/4"

140

KBC = 0.0243x = + 0.0707x + 2.2218


o

8~

12o

7,

1oo.

ff,-

~.~

3O'Dia,xl/2"
P
KBc = 0.0421 x2 - 0 . 2 7 2 3 x + 9.9571

80120'Dia.x3/4"

60
40 .

KBC = 0.0364x ~ + 0.106x + 3 3 3 2 7

=.

.
t

300'Dia.x3/4"

Kec= 0.0075x 2 + 0.2921x + 4.1626


i
........

. . . . . . .
10

20

30

x
Nozzle Size (in)

40

50

Note 3/4" thicknesses are solid line

Figure 4a

S T I F F N E S S RATIO DUE TO C I R C U M F E R E N T I A L M O M E N T

0.9

0.8

07

0.6

05

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

mc = -0.2947h2 + 1.0205h + 0.2751


0
0.1

0.2

03

0.4

0.5

06

0.7

0.8

0.9

h=L/LB

Figure 4b

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2002 by ASME

SPRING RATE DUE TO LONGITUDINAL MOMENT

:eli

400

"~ 3001
2'1

"
.

I
.

/ . . . .

50 1

.....

,,~ = o.,3,~e-

I"

o.,,,x+,.o,,~

"

I-/

30'Dia.xl/2"

,20'Dia.x3/4"

K,L = o.2~oo,' - o.o883,+ 2o.,~

.......

~
.

"

....

300'Dia.x3/4"

o|

~,L= o o249x~ + o 2o8,x + , , , ~ 9

t0

20

30

40

Nozzle Size (In)

50

Note 3/4" thicknesses are solid line

Figure 5a

STIFFNESS RATIO DUE TO LONGITUDINAL MOMENT

0.9
0.8
0.7
.j 0.6
0.5

................................................................

0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
m L = -0.2512h 2 + 0.641h + 0.6034
0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

h=L/LB

Figure 5b

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2002 by ASME

= 32.86 in
2) Establish the centerline distance of the
nozzle of no discontinuity influence
LB = B+0.5*D0
= 32.86 + 0.5 * 49.5
= 57.61 in
3) Establish the height factor
h = L/LB
28/57.61
0.486
4) From Figure 3a, 4a, 5a read the stiffness
coefficients
KBR = 280,000 lbs/in
(Fig. 3a)
KBC = 80,000 in-lbs/rad
(Fig. 4a)
KBL = 200,000 in-lbs/rad (Fig. 5a)
5) From Figure 4, 5, 6 read the coefficient
factor
mr
= 0.6 for Kr
( Fig. 3b)
mc
= 0.68 for Kc
(Fig. 4b)
mE
= 0.88 for KL
(Fig. 5b)
6)
Divide
the
stiffness
coefficients
established in step 4 by the factors from step
5 to arrive at the stiffness coefficients for the
nozzle under investigation.

Table 1
Size

Formulae

30' Tank, 1" Wall

KBC = 0.0529x 2 + 4.0405X - 26.146

30' Tank, 1" Wall


30' Tank, 1" Wall

KBL = 0.2662X 2 + 4.3491X - 35.678


KBR = 0.0079X + 0.1919

30' Tank, 1/2" Wall

KBC = 0.0421X 2 - 0.2723X + 9.9571

30' Tank, 1/2" Wall


30' Tank, 1/2" Wall

KBL = 0.15X 2 " 1.0719X + 6.4632


KBR = 4.1196X + 50.97

30' Tank, 3/4" Wall

Kac = 0.0421X 2 - 0.2723x + 9.9571

30' Tank, 3/4" Wall


30' Tank, 3/4" Wall

KBL = 0 . 1 5 X 2 " 1.0719x + 6.4632


KBR = 4.1196X + 50.97

120' Tank 1" Wall

KBC = - 0 . 0 5 8 9 X 2 +

120' Tank. 1" Wall


120' Tank 1" Wall

KBL = 0.1462X 2 - 3.7726X + 54.295


KBR = 0.5828x + 88.103

4.9447x + 2.4016

120' Tank. 1/2" Wall KBc = -010199x 2 + 1.6614x - 4.0694


120' Tank. 1/2" Wall KBL = 0.0215X 2 + 0.2208X + 5.3213
1 2 0 ' T a n k 1/2" Wall KBR = 0.3677X + 38.396
120' Tank 3/4" Wall KBC = 0.0364X 2 + 0.106X " 3.3327
120' Tank. 3/4" Wall KBL = 0.1373X 2 - 0.798X - 9.0685
120' Tank, 3/4" Wall KBR = 3.4804X + 70.876
300' Tank, 1" Wall

KBC = 0-0089X 2 + 0.771X + 13.236

300' Tank, 1" Wall


300' Tank, 1" Wall

KBL = 0.0393X 2 + 0.5196X + 13.023


KBR = 0.1211X + 34.977

KR

Kc

280,000 / 0.6
466,000 lbs/in
= KBc/mc
80,000 / 0.68
117,600 in-lbs/rad

KL

300' Tank, 3/4" Wall KBC = 0.0421X 2 - 0.2723X + 9.9571


300' Tank, 3/4" Wall KBt_ = 0 . 1 5 X 2 - 1.0719x + 6.4632
300' Tank, 3/4" Wall KBR = 4.1196X + 50.97

KBL/me

200,000 / 0.88
227,000 in-lbs/rad

SAMPLE PROBLEM
Calculate
Material:
D =
t =
d =
t, =
L =

KBR/mR

the spring rate for the following tank:


A36
30 feet (360 in)
%in
30 in
3/4 in
28 in (regular p e r A P I 6 5 0 )

Thus for this sample problem the above calculated stiffness


coefficients should be used when establishing the loads for the
piping system attached to the nozzle, namely:
KR= 466,000 lbs/in for a radial load
Kc = 117,600 in-lbs/rad for a circumferential moment
KL = 227,000 in-lbs/rad for a longitudinal moment

The nozzle has a reinforcing plate in accordance with API


650.
Do = 49.5 in
t =
in

SOLUTION
1) Calculate the distance where the bottom
discontinuity has no influence on the spring
rate
B
= 2(12*Dt) 5
= 2* (12"30"0.75) 0.5

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2002 by ASME