Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
PVP2014
July 20-24, 2014, Anaheim, California, USA
PVP2014-28958
Writing and Reviewing FEA Reports Supporting ASME Section VIII, Division 1 and 2 Designs Practical Considerations and Recommended Good Practice
Trevor Seipp
Becht Engineering Canada Ltd.
110-259 Midpark Way, S.E.
Calgary, AB CANADA
Tel: 403-668-7274
Fax: 403-256-3520
Email: tseipp@becht.com
Mark Stonehouse
Becht Engineering Canada Ltd.
110-259 Midpark Way, S.E.
Calgary, AB CANADA
Tel: 403-668-8675
Fax: 403-256-3520
Email: mstonehouse@becht.com
ABSTRACT
Finite element analysis (FEA) is used, with increasing
frequency, to supplement or justify the design of an ASME
Section VIII, Division 1 or 2 pressure vessel. When this
occurs, good engineering practice indicates that a
competent engineer should review the finite element
analysis report. In some jurisdictions, it is required that a
Professional Engineer review and certify the report.
This paper discusses some of the practical aspects of
both writing and reviewing a good quality FEA report both in the context of the technical perspective and in the
context of Code compliance. This paper will serve as a
practical assistant to an engineer reviewing an FEA
report, as well as a guide to an engineer preparing an FEA
report. Aspects such as properly following Code
requirements, following appropriate Design By Analysis
methodologies, and applying good design practices will
be discussed.
FEA REPORT
The goal of the report writer should be to clearly
describe the work performed with sufficient detail that
another analyst could, with applicable referenced
drawings and documentation, independently duplicate the
analysis.
A quality FEA report consists of the following detailed
sections:
INTRODUCTION
FEA can be used to support pressure equipment
design where the configuration is not covered by the
applicable rules in the ASME code. Whether the pressure
vessel design is considered an ASME Section VIII
Division 1 [1] or a Division 2 [2] vessel, all finite element
analysis for pressure vessels should follow the
methodology in ASME Section VIII, Division 2, Part 5 (it is
recommended to use the latest Edition, as improvements
are continually being made) unless that type of analysis
is not covered in Part 5. If specific rules exist in ASME
Executive Summary
This should be standard practice and should briefly
describe how the FEA was used to support the design,
the FEA model, the results and conclusions. This section
should be no more than one page, and should be written
primarily for the non-technical reader.
1
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/27/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
Introduction
A good introduction should lay out the scope of the
FEA, justification for using FEA, the software used, the
type of analysis (linear elastic, elastic-plastic, etc.), and
the material properties. For example, if the report is in
support of a Division 1 vessel, then reference should be
made to article U-2(g), with an explanation of how the as
safe as provision is accomplished.
A complete description of the material properties
should be provided. Simply referring to the material
specification is not sufficient. The authors recommend
that a mixture of tabular data as well as graphical data be
used to efficiently provide this data especially if material
properties as a function of temperature are used.
References
All drawings, calculations, and other supplemental
information referenced in the report should be detailed in
the References section. Since significant changes can
occur in drawings after the FEA report is prepared, it is
highly recommended that both the Revision Numbers and
the dates of all reference material be included in the list.
The Edition of the Code of Construction should also be
listed, as should the edition of ASME Section VIII, Division
2. Since the Edition of the Code of Construction is
dictated by the fabrication contract, it may be not current
by several years. Despite that, the authors highly
recommend that the current Edition of Division 2 be used
at all times.
Model Description
Dimensional descriptions should be provided from the
referenced drawings.
The authors experience as
reviewers has shown that it is useful to provide some
basic dimensional details if for no other reason than to
provide the reviewer something to verify from the
drawings. Some critical dimensions should also be
explicitly described in the report. If there are any
geometric simplifications used, those also need to be
discussed and justified. The type (2D, 3D, axisymmetric,
etc.) and the order of the elements should also be
reported. If different types of elements are used, then a
description of how the different elements are connected
together should be provided.
There should be a significant description of the mesh,
particularly the mesh size. Mesh features such as the
number of elements on fillet radii should also be reported.
The accuracy of the model, by way of the discretization,
should be indicated. A convergence study is expected
although it is not explicitly required for every FEA.
Boundary conditions, loads and other similar
interactions must also be detailed. It is most helpful when
the loads, supports, and restraints are described and
shown graphically. The method of restraining the model
against rigid-body motion should be described and
Presentation of Results
Depending on the type of analysis being performed
the results that need to be presented may vary. As part
of generally accepted good practice, the results should
show enough details to demonstrate an appropriate
analysis of the failure modes being checked.
The results in most analyses will include
displacements, deformed shape with un-deformed shape
superimposed, stress plot with an appropriate color
contour to establish some sense of the magnitude of the
stress profile of the model with respect to an allowable
stress. When plotting multiple stress contour plots for
comparison, it is most useful when the contour
scheme/intervals are identical.
Analysis of Results and Conclusion
This section of the report should follow the approach
in ASME Section VIII, Division 2, Part 5.
Each Failure Mode must be demonstrated in the
results, however, the presentation of the results should be
as simple and clear as possible. Hundreds of pages of
stress plots need not be presented. On the contrary,
industry best practice is to be as concise as possible with
2
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/27/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
FAILURE MODES
From a technical perspective, the analyst must
evaluate the design for all failure mechanisms in 5.2, 5.3,
5.4, and 5.5 of Part 5. The analyst is required to create a
modeling approach that will be appropriate for each failure
mechanism, and ensure that an appropriate margin
against failure is maintained. The appropriate margins for
each failure mode depend on the Code of Construction
for the component being evaluated. Part 5 of ASME
Section VIII, Division 2 approaches the design-byanalysis requirements from this protection against failure
modes perspective. The 2013 Edition provides rules for
protection against four critical failure modes. For each
failure mode, the analyst is required to present a modeling
approach and discuss how it is appropriate.
3
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/27/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
4
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/27/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
5
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/27/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms