Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 40

ASME_Ch10_p343-382.

qxd 5/19/09 2:57 PM Page 343

CHAPTER

10
SUBSECTION NFSUPPORTS
Uma S. Bandyopadhyay1
10.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY it was first published, Subsection NF [1] was titled Component
Supports, since the term component was relevant to both
On December 31, 1973, the American Society of Mechanical supports for nuclear components (e.g., tanks, pumps, and vessels)
Engineers (ASME) published Subsection NF [1] of the ASME and supports for piping, which is also defined as a component. In
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1 (hereafter a major rewrite first published in the winter 1982 addenda to the
addressed as Subsection NF) as part of the winter 1973 addenda to 1980 edition [7], the generic term component supports was
the 1971 Code edition [2]. This was a historic publication; prior to redefined as supports. This subtle change allowed supports to be
it, supports (also called pipe hangers and restraints) were not separated into two distinct categories: component supports and
addressed as part of ASME Section III. Existing nuclear plants and piping supports, which resulted in a revised philosophy of
plants under construction during that time were using ANSI B31.1 Subsection NF. The changes and impact resulting from this revi-
[3], ANSI B31.7 [4], MSS-SP58 [5], and the AISC Manual of sion are discussed in various sections of this chapter.
Steel Construction [6] to design supports. ASME Section III,
Subsection NF, provided a stabilizing position for future nuclear
plant support design by designating a single source of rules for the 10.2.1 Scope
design, construction, fabrication, and examination of supports. Subsection NF contains rules for the materials, design, fabrica-
This criteria-and-commentary chapter provides information on tion, examination, installation, and preparation of certification
the origins and evolution of design rules and is intended to allow documents (certificate of compliance and NS-1 certificate of con-
designers, engineers, and fabricators to make better use of formance for supports) for Classes 1, 2, 3, and MC construction.
Subsection NF of the ASME Code. Topics of greatest interest are This statement appears at the beginning of Subsection NF and
discussed and addressed from both a technical and historical defines the scope in only one sentence. However, the interpreta-
viewpoint. It is not the intent, however, to address every detail or tion of this scope by industry users and the Working Group has
anticipate every question associated with the use of the subsec- provided many inquiries and discussions over the past 25 years or
tion. However, there will be situations when engineering judg- so. Simply stated, the purpose of a support is to provide a path to
ment and special considerations will be used in conjunction with transmit specified loads from the pressure boundary component to
Subsection NF to qualify supports. the building structure. It should be noted that supports are not
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, pressure-retaining components but rather structural components.
Subsection NF, was developed in an attempt to provide rules for Until the appearance of Subsection NF in the ASME Section III
the estimated 10,000 piping and component supports existing in a Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, all components were, by defini-
typical nuclear power plant. These rules have evolved so dramati- tion, pressure-retaining. Because many of the requirements that
cally that the existing support rules seldom resemble the original eventually were included in Subsection NF were taken from the
rules of 1973. This document follows the evolution of Subsection pressure-retaining portions of Subsections NB, NC, ND, NE, and
NF as the industry attempted to apply the subsections rules. NG, implementation of these rules was sometimes difficult. Many
Commentary is provided to explain how the criteria are used, the users of Subsection NF regarded some of the rules as too stringent
source and technical basis for the equations and the rationale, and because their purpose was for use on pressure boundary applica-
the reasons for change. It is anticipated that readers will develop a tions, a view that became more apparent when the boundaries of
better understanding of Subsection NF to appreciate its complexi- jurisdiction were established for supports. (See Section 10.2.4 of
ties and usefulness. this chapter for a detailed discussion of this subject.)

10.2 NF-1000 INTRODUCTION 10.2.2 Types of Supports


Article NF-1000 provides readers with general information Since there are thousands of supports in a typical nuclear power
regarding component supports such as their scope and classifica- plant, it was considered prudent to identify various types of sup-
tion, and also regarding types of supports and attachments. When ports based on their historical use in both fossil fuel and nuclear
power plants. Initially, component supports were separated into
1
Robert J. Masterson was the author of this Chapter for the first edition three types: plate-and-shell supports, linear supports, and compo-
but revised by Uma S. Bandyopadhyay for the previous edition and nent standard supports. Subsection NF defined plate-and-shell
this edition. supports as supports that are normally subjected to a biaxial stress
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:46 AM Page 344

344 Chapter 10

field and are fabricated from plate-and-shell elements. Examples ceased to be the term used to describe the entire family of sup-
were given as vessel skirts and saddles. It was apparent from this ports and also to describe the type of supports used to support
definition that plate-and-shell supports are closely related to pressure components; it was redefined as the group that supported nuclear
boundary items; these types of supports essentially represent a components, and piping support was defined as the group that
method of making the transition from the pressure boundary of the supported nuclear piping. The types of supports remained the
vessel or piping into the support load path. It was common for plate- same because there could be plate-and-shell, linear, and standard
and-shell supports to be integrally attached (i.e., welded) to the pres- (previously termed component standard) supports in both groups
sure boundary component and designed and analyzed as part of the of component and piping supports. This descriptive revision was
component. An example of this was a vessel skirt, which normally most profoundly beneficial in Article NF-3000 Design.
would be provided with the vessel. It was initially believed that
supplying plate-and-shell supports with the components would be a 10.2.3 Intervening Elements
normal procedure (this was often the case as Subsection NF was As more nuclear power plants were designed to Subsection NF,
implemented). Also, the number of plate-and-shell supports turned it became apparent that each type of support had its place in the
out to be very low relative to the other two types of supports. overall design of piping and components. Many support assem-
Subsection NF defined linear supports as acting under a single blies consisted of standard supports, such as clamps, that attached
component of direct stress that also may be subjected to shear to the pressure boundary, and also of linear supports, such as steel
stress. Examples given included tension and compression struts beams, that attached to the building structure. In some cases, stan-
and beams and columns subjected to bending stresses. Linear sup- dard supports composed the entire assembly; similarly, in other
ports were meant to be structural steel members used to connect cases, linear supports composed the entire assembly. There was,
the supports and complete the load path to the building structure. however, another species of support that was about to make an
Linear supports were also intended to form unique piping and appearance. After four years of Subsection NF implementation, a
component restraints when these components were subjected to Code revision was needed to address the concept of a non-Code
loads other than simple deadweight. These loads were dynamic item in the support load path between the pressure boundary and
(both seismic and hydrodynamic); transient, such as water and the building structure. Such items as diesel engines, electric
steam hammer; and thermal operation. Based on the number of motors, coolers, valve operators, and access structures were bear-
supports in a typical plant, linear supports constituted the majority. ing on supports or were welded to, bolted to, pinned to, or clamped
Finally, Subsection NF created a new category of supports to them. By definition, supports extending from the pressure
called standard supports, which were defined as one or more gen- boundary to the building structure were within the support load
erally mass produced units usually referred to as catalog items. For path. Guests attending the Working Groups meetings submitted
design, fabrication, and examination purposes, standard supports inquiries concerning what should be done with these intervening
were further classified as being of the linear or plate-and-shell elements that were within the load path. After many debates,
type; this classification was required to maintain consistency with Subsubarticle NF-1110(c) was revised and paragraph NF-1111 and
the other two support types. Based on the sheer numbers of stan- subparagraph NF-1131.6 were added in the summer 1978 addenda
dard supports, the linear type again constituted the vast majority. to the 1977 edition [8] to introduce the concept of intervening ele-
The concept of the standard support was unique considering its ments. In addition, Fig. NF-1131-1 was revised to add sketches
sheer numbers. Standard supports were created to take advantage (g), (h), (i), (j), and (k) to illustrate the many ways that an interven-
of the historically good manufacturing record of catalog supports. ing element may be used in the support load path (see Figs. 10.2
At one of the early Subsection NF meetings (circa 1973 or 1974), and 10.3). Essentially, intervening elements were outside the
a Working Group member who was an employee of a support Subsection NF jurisdiction; however, paragraph NF-1111 provided
manufacturer, described standard supports as having a time-tested the clear requirement that the owners Design Specification shall
history of success, a statement that was proven correct because furnish specific information to the designer of the intervening ele-
very few if any failures of catalog supports were documented ments regarding loads, materials, temperature, environmental
under normal operating conditions on older fossil fuel and nuclear effects, design, fabrication, examination, testing, and installation.
power plants. The design factor of safety and the quality assurance Addressing the concept of intervening elements was a challenge
used in the manufacturing process of these catalog supports served that the Working Group was likely to encounter given the nature of
as powerful arguments for establishing this category of supports. the support load path, that is, between two existing boundaries of
Figure 10.1 provides pictorial representations of typical standard jurisdiction. With so many components and other equipment vying
supports. As we will see, the advantage of this type of support is for the space between the piping and the building structure, it was
manifested in the relaxation (i.e., the less stringent) of require- inevitable that the concept of intervening elements would even-
ments for materials, design, fabrication, and examination. tually manifest itself. What was ironic, however, was that the con-
With the publication of the winter 1982 addenda to the 1980 cept of intervening elements was a jurisdictional boundary issue,
edition [7], component supports were redefined to more closely but not the most difficult one to address and solve. Working Group
represent their use in service. The term component support initially members found that addressing the basic concept of the boundary
was used on the cover of Subsection NF and was descriptive of on each side of the support load path, the piping, or component and
the entire family of supports. The winter 1982 addenda separated the building structure, became a monumental task.
supports into two groups: component supports and piping
supports, a Code revision that was the outcome of years of debate 10.2.4 Boundaries of Jurisdiction
within the Code Committee on how to make Subsection NF more From the initial issue of Subsection NF in the winter 1973
useful for the engineering community. It was apparent from addenda to the 1971 edition of ASME Section III [1], it eventual-
the many guests attending the Working Groups meetings that a ly became clear that the most challenging task facing the Working
more descriptive categorization of supports was required to make Group would be to explain and defend the requirements for
implementation more efficient. The term component support boundaries of jurisdiction. At first glance, it seemed to be a
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:46 AM Page 345

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 345

FIG. 10.1 TYPICAL STANDARD SUPPORTS (Source: Fig. NF-1211.4-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)

straightforward task to establish the boundaries of jurisdiction for No doubt existed about when the pressure boundary ended and
supports at the pressure boundary and building structure ends of when the support began. Even for supports welded to the pressure
the support. In fact, the Working Group was convinced that boundary, it was clear that the weld was in accordance to the
Fig. NF-1131-1 provided a simplified illustration to define the pressure-retaining portion of the Code (NB, NC, ND, or NE) and
boundaries and to specify under which subsection the connection the support jurisdiction began with the item that was welded to
responsibilities rested. the component. However, the building structure end of the support
For the pressure boundary side of the support load path, it was another matter. Because many supports could contain struc-
appeared that the figure did indeed provide such an illustration. tural steel elements in their design, and because the building
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:46 AM Page 346

346 Chapter 10

FIG. 10.2 ILLUSTRATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES [Source: Fig. NF-1131.1.(a)(f), Subsection NF of the ASME
B&PV Code]
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:46 AM Page 347

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 347

FIG. 10.3 ILLUSTRATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES [Source: Fig. NF-1131.1.(h)(k), Subsection NF of the ASME
B&PV Code]
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:46 AM Page 348

348 Chapter 10

structure boundary was generally composed of structural steel, the or Code Case. The 1986 edition of Subsection NF published a
actual boundary of jurisdiction could become difficult to identify revision to subsubarticle NF-1130 [11], which defined the bound-
accurately. One school of thought, implemented initially to create aries of jurisdiction applicable to Subsection NF. The old Fig.
Fig. NF-1131-1, defined the building structure as the surface of NF-1131-1 (Figs. 10.2 and 10.3), a generic presentation of the
concrete or steel as shown on civil/structural drawings. Any addi- boundaries between both the component and the building struc-
tional steel framed between existing steel or concrete (also called ture, was replaced with Fig. NF-1132-1 (Figs. 10.4, 10.5, and
supplementary steel) and needed to support piping or components 10.6). This figure was applicable only to the boundary between
would be under Subsection NF jurisdiction. The debate on bound- the piping support and the building structure. The jurisdictional
aries of jurisdiction began soon after the publication of boundary between supports and the component was deferred to
Subsection NF in December 1973 [1]. Many potential users had paragraphs NB-1132 [12], NC-1132 [13], ND-1132 [14], or NE-
difficulty identifying the boundary at the building structure, and 1132 [15] as applicable. A review of this figure shows that Fig.
guests at the Working Group meetings began to have jurisdictional 1132-1(d), (g), and (i) now specifies that the baseplate and anchor
boundary questions. One typical case, which would eventually bolts are part of the building structure. This is a complete reversal
change philosophy in a future Code revision, concerned base- from the original Code edition for identifying jurisdictional
plates and concrete anchor bolts. Initially, with the first edition of boundaries between baseplates and anchor bolts and the building
Subsection NF, it was clear that baseplates and anchor bolts were structure. This new revision, however, more realistically separates
within the jurisdiction of Subsection NF. Figure 10.2 [Fig. NF- normal building structure items from support items; historically,
1131-1(e) and (f)] clearly states that an integral or nonintegral baseplates and anchor bolts were normally regarded as building
support connected to the building structure has a connection in structure components. Since the initial jurisdictional boundary
accordance with Subsection NF, which means that a baseplate questions were eventually resolved, Subsection NF has evolved
secured to the concrete by anchor bolts (e.g., Hilti Quik bolts and without any additional substantial jurisdictional boundary issues.
Phillips Red Heads) would conform exactly to the Fig. 10.2(f)
sketch. The nonintegral support (the baseplate) was connected to
the building structure (the concrete) by means of the anchor bolts; 10.3 NF-2000 MATERIALS
the connection was in accordance with Subsection NF.
However, as clear as the boundary to the building structure may 10.3.1 Permitted Material
appeared to have been, a large number of users questioned its With the initial publication of Subsection NF in 1973, ASME
location. On March 30, 1978, Interpretation III-1-78-47 [9] was Section III BoilerPressure Vessel Code Division 1 [1] was pro-
published in an attempt to answer one of the jurisdictional bound- viding rules for nonpressure-retaining components. Prior to this,
ary dilemmas. The following is a verbatim presentation of the ASME Section III was a pressure-retaining code, concerned pri-
question and reply: marily with pressure-retaining components such as pumps,
valves, piping, vessels, and tanks. Subsection NF, however,
Question: How are the jurisdictional boundaries between brought a new concept on a large scale to ASME Section III
structural members fabricated and installed with the build- because supports were nonpressure-retaining structural elements,
ing structure and supports for Section III components to be of which there were thousands in a typical nuclear plant. To
determined? accommodate support design and material requirements, materials
specifically designated for supports were needed. Mandatory
Reply: It is the responsibility of the Owner to define the Appendices Tables I-11.1 (Table 10.1), I-12.1 (Table 10.2), I-13.1
jurisdictional boundaries of component supports in the (Table 10.3), and I-13.3 (Table 10.4) were included to provide
Design Specification (NCA-3254) [10]. Items furnished as design stress intensities, allowable stresses, and yield strength
part of the building structure are normally constructed to the values for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC plate-and-shell type and linear
appropriate portion of the building code used for the design type supports. With the publication of the 1992 edition, the Code
and construction of the building structure. The Owner is requires that material for supports shall conform to the require-
responsible for designating whether or not metallic supports ments of the specifications for materials listed in the tables of
for Section III components, which are attached to the items Section II, Part D [35]. Initially, these tables accounted for a very
defined as part of the building structure, are required to be limited number of permitted material specifications (less than 20
constructed with the provisions of Section III, Subsection NF. support materials and 20 bolting material specifications). It soon
The Owner is also responsible for the compatibility of the became evident that additional material specifications were need-
boundaries and corresponding loads between the building ed to address the numerous materials used by different support
structure and the component supports constructed in accor- manufacturers.
dance with Section III. A Materials Task Group was formed consisting of all occupa-
tions from the Working Group including the Nuclear Regulatory
This interpretation clearly put the responsibility of determining Commission (NRC). The purpose of the Task Group was to devel-
the boundary of jurisdiction with the owner and the Design op a Code Case to permit additional materials and to provide the
Specification where, in actuality, the responsibility belonged. design stress intensities, allowable stresses, and yield strength val-
Subsection NCA clearly stipulates that one responsibility of the ues for these materials. After several Task Group meetings, Code
owners Design Specification was the identification of the bound- Case 1644 [16] was issued to permit the use of numerous addition-
aries of jurisdiction. Therefore, the interpretation answered the al structural material specifications. The intent of this Code Case
inquiry by using existing Code words. was to expedite the publication of structural materials needed for
The jurisdictional boundary questions continued for many the design and construction of Subsection NF supports. It was
Working Group meetings. A Task Group was established to planned that a Code Revision would eventually be published to
resolve the questions and produce the appropriate Code revision complete the action.
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:46 AM Page 349

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 349

FIG. 10.4 TYPICAL EXAMPLES OF JURIDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PIPING SUPPORTS AND THE BUILDING
STRUCTURE [Source: Fig. NF-1132.1.(a) and (d), Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]

In November 1976, as part of the 1974 edition, Code Case N-249-14 [21]. As mentioned previously, the Working Groups
1644 Revision 6 [17] was issued as Code Case N-71 [18] under intention was to eventually incorporate Code Cases N-71 and
the revised Code Case numbering system. Subsequently, Code N-249 into the body of Subsection NF, an action currently that is
Case N-71 has been revised numerous times to add and delete being prepared as Mandatory Appendix NF-1 [22].
material specifications as needed. At one point between March
1978 and March 1982, Code Case N-71 was revised to remove 10.3.2 Exempt Material
the material specifications that did not permit welding. These Since some Subsection NF supports were designed with non-
materials were placed in the new Code Case N-249 [19]. metallic and/or bearing materials, the concept of exempt materi-
The most current revision to each Code Case is N-71-18 [20] and als needed to be addressed by the Working Group. Subparagraph
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:46 AM Page 350

350 Chapter 10

FIG. 10.5 TYPICAL EXAMPLES OF JURIDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PIPING SUPPORTS AND THE BUILDING
STRUCTURE [Source: Fig. NF-1132.1.(e) and (g), Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]

NF-2121(b), Permitted Material Specifications, provides guid- made the assumption that since a material is exempt from
ance for those materials for which the requirements of Article Subsection NF-2000, the material must also be exempt from the
NF-2000, Materials, do not apply. Items such as gaskets, remaining articles of Subsection NF. This belief was incorrect
seals, springs, compression spring end plates, bearings, retaining because it was clear from subparagraph NF-2121(b) that the
rings, washers, wear shoes, and hydraulic fluids, are exempt exemption applied only to materials, not to design, fabrication,
from the requirements of Article NF-2000. Initially, some users and examination. However, a recent Subsection NF action has
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:46 AM Page 351

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 351

FIG. 10.6 TYPICAL EXAMPLES OF JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PIPING SUPPORTS AND THE BUILDING
STRUCTURE [Source: Fig. NF-1132.1 (h) and (i), Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]

reversed this stand, and the requirements of all Subsection NF irradiation conditions; (3) the materials do not require the material
articles no longer apply to exempt materials, except for a minor manufacturers Certificate of Compliance (COC); and (4) the sup-
list of caveats. port manufacturer shall provide the owner with a list of exempt
Additionally, NF-2121 (b) states that (1) exempt material materials. These additional provisions, with the exception of the
requirements, if any, shall be stated in the Design Specification; COC, are intended to provide the owner with the assurance that
(2) the material shall not be affected by fluid, temperature, or exempt materials meet the most basic ASME Section III
352
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd
5/15/09

TABLE 10.1 ASME SECTION III MANDATORY APPENDIX I, DESIGN STRESS INTENSITY VALUES, Sm,
FOR FERRITIC STEELS FOR CLASS 1 PLATE-AND-SHELL-TYPE COMPONENT SUPPORTS
(Source: Table I-11.1, Section III, Appendix 1 of the ASME B&PV Code)
8:46 AM
Page 352
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd

TABLE 10.2 ASME SECTION III MANDATORY APPENDIX I, ALLOWABLE STRESS VALUES, S, FOR FERRITIC
5/15/09

STEELS FOR CLASS 2, 3, AND MC PLATE-AND-SHELL-TYPE COMPONENT SUPPORTS


(Source: Table I-12.1, Section III, Appendix 1 of the ASME B&PV Code)
8:46 AM
Page 353

353
354
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd
5/15/09

TABLE 10.3 ASME SECTION III MANDATORY APPENDIX I, YIELD STRESS VALUES, SY,
FOR FERRITIC STEELS FOR CLASS 1, 2, 3, AND MC LINEAR-TYPE COMPONENT SUPPORTS
(Source: Table I-13.1, Section III, Appendix 1 of the ASME B&PV Code)
8:46 AM
Page 354
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd

TABLE 10.4 ASME SECTION III MANDATORY APPENDIX I, YIELD STRENGTH VALUES SY,
FOR BOLTING MATERIALS FOR CLASS 1, 2, 3, AND MC COMPONENT SUPPORTS
(Source: Table I-13.3, Section III, Appendix 1 of the ASME B&PV Code)
5/15/09
8:46 AM
Page 355

355
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:46 AM Page 356

356 Chapter 10

requirements. It is important that users be aware that materials material including nuts, and structural material meeting specific
exempt from Article NF-2000 requirements must still meet some dimensional limits. Similar to the NPT stamp required for welded
basic concerns. Currenly, guidance for exempt materials is shown products, material organizations needed to successfully complete
in Subparagraph NF 1110 (e). an ASME Quality Systems survey to obtain a Quality Systems
Certificate for support material.
10.3.3 Certification of Material
Many nuclear plant components require the highest level of
material certificationthe Certified Material Test Report (CMTR). 10.4 NF-3000 DESIGN
The NF Working Group determined that because of the large num-
ber of supports in a nuclear power plant, requiring a CMTR for all When Subsection NF was first published in the winter 1973
supports was impractical and unnecessary because of the structural addenda of the 1971 edition of ASME Section III [1], the Code
rather than pressure-retaining nature of supports. Subsubarticle was considered complete because it now addressed all major
NF-2130 requires CMTRs for Class 1 plate-and-shell and linear nuclear plant components. Supports were different from many
supports, as well as for material of other types and classes of sup- other components because they were nonpressure-retaining
ports where impact testing is required. Certificates of Compliance structural components rather than pressure-retaining components.
with the material specification, grade, class, and heat-treatment In fact, much of the structural steel required for support design
condition may be provided for all other supports, which means that and construction closely resembles the building structural steel.
the majority of supports could be supplied with a COC rather than This critical difference, nonpressure-retaining components,
a CMTR because of the relatively few Class 1 plate-and-shell or required the Working Group to establish new rules for structural
linear supports. Support manufacturers would benefit greatly elements of supports. Design rules for supports were initially
because maintaining full traceability throughout the manufacturing established for two types of supports: plate-and-shell and linear.
process for supports with COCs is not required. Also, many simple Although both procedures were structural, the plate-and-shell
supports such as rods, clamps, and clevises could be manufactured techniques were more consistent with those from other Code sub-
and shipped with a single COC. However, material for small items sections. Because Subsections NB, NC, ND, and NE contained
would need to be controlled during the manufacturing process so rules for pressure-retaining components such as pumps, valves,
that it is identifiable as acceptable material until the material is piping vessels, and tanks, ASME concluded that component sup-
actually consumed in the final product. To meet this requirement, ports with a design exhibiting a biaxial stress field should follow
many support manufacturers would transfer a color-coding system similar design rules. This conclusion was a reasonable one and
to material after cutting so that the material identification remained allowed rules for plate-and-shell supports to be established that
on both items of the cut material. were familiar to owners and Architectural Engineers (AEs).
Similarly, the rules for linear supports were patterned after an
10.3.4 Impact Testing and Fracture Toughness accepted and recognized structural Code found in the seventh edi-
Because most support material is structural, the Working Group tion of the Manual of Steel Construction [25], published by the
did not consider it necessary to require support materials to be American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC). The AISC Steel
impact tested when Subsection NF was first published. As previ- Manual was well recognized by support designers because it was
ously mentioned, if impact testing were required, material for any extensively used to design steel supports and other structures in
class or type of support would need to be supplied with CMTRs. fossil fuel and preSubsection NF nuclear power plants.
Doing so would require support manufacturing facilities to initiate Allowable stresses were based on the material minimum specified
a comprehensive material separation and control system for the yield strength rather than on allowable stresses and stress intensi-
full line of products. The Working Group concluded that impact ties. The AISC specification was incorporated in its entirety with
testing would be required only when specifically stated in the some enhancement of design criteria such as temperature and
owners Design Specification. Based on service conditions, most buckling requirements.
support Design Specifications would specify impact testing for all This section discusses the design rules for supportsboth
support materials being used in cold environments, such as below plate-and-shell and linear. All aspects of design are considered
40F. When impact testing was required, however, several including stress theory, loadings, welding, bolting, load testing,
exemptions were in effect especially for small products. Impact and functional requirements.
testing would not be required for such items as material thickness
5 10.4.1 Design Loadings and Service Conditions
8 in. and less; bolting nominal size 1 in. and less; austenitic stain-
less steel; nonferrous materials; bars of 1 sq. in. in area; supports Because design loadings and service conditions are established
with a maximum stress not exceeding 6000 psi; and other material as a requirement of the Design Specification (NA/NCA-3252) [26],
dimensional limits. Paragraph NF-2311 was revised in the winter Subsection NF is also governed by these requirements. Design
1982 addenda to the 1980 edition [7] to require impact testing for loadings are defined as design temperature and design mechanical
all classes of Component supports. Piping and Standard supports loads. Because supports are subjected to nonpressure-retaining
would still need the Design Specification to state whether impact loads, temperature-generated loads are transmitted to supports by
testing was required. the movement of piping and equipment. Structural loads are trans-
mitted to supports through the deadweight of piping and its con-
10.3.5 Quality System Program tents and also of piping components such as valves, flanges,
Material organizations were required to have quality system pro- flowmeters, and in-line pumps. Design mechanical loads also
grams that met the requirements of ASME Section III, Subarticle include dynamic loads caused by earthquakes, flow-induced loads
NCA-3800 [23]. However, except for paragraph NCA-3862 [24], such as water and steam hammer, and hydrodynamic loads.
the other requirements of subarticle NCA-3800 did not need to be The assortments of design loadings are combined based on
met for small products that were defined as pipe, tubing, bolting identified service conditions with specified service limits. When
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 357

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 357

Subsection NF was first published [1] in 1973, these service con- are required to be analyzed by elastic analysis based on the maxi-
ditions were identified as normal, upset, emergency, faulted, and mum shear stress theory for Class 1 construction and the maxi-
testing. The winter 1976 addenda to the 1974 edition of ASME mum stress theory for Class 2, 3, and MC construction. Linear
Section III [27] changed the term service condition to service supports are required to be analyzed by elastic analysis based on
limit. Normal condition was changed to Level A service the maximum stress theory for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC construc-
limit; the term pertains to specified loadings to which supports tion. The design-by-analysis procedure for standard supports
may be subjected for its specified service function. Upset condi- either will be the maximum shear stress theory or the maximum
tion was changed to Level B service limit; the term pertains to stress theory depending on whether the standard support is con-
specified loadings on supports that must be withstood without structed of plate-and-shell or linear elements.
damage requiring repair. Emergency condition was changed to The maximum shear stress theory calculates principal stresses
Level C service limit; the term pertains to specified loadings and transforms these into stress differences or stress intensities.
that permit large deformations in areas of structural discontinu- At any point on the support, the stress components for each type
ities and that may require removal of the support from service for of loading may be calculated: namely, x , y , and z , or l, r , and
inspection or repair. Faulted condition was changed to Level D t . These loadings may result in general primary membrane
service limit; the term pertains to specified loadings that permit stress, Pm; primary bending stress, Pb; expansion stress, Pe; or
gross general deformations and may require the removal of the secondary stress, Q. (Definitions for these stresses are given in
support from service. paragraph NF-3121 [29].) For each category of stress the algebraic
sum of the j stresses for each loading is obtained and the l, r, and t
10.4.2 Code Class and Design Procedures stress components are translated into principal stresses, 1, 2, 3,.
Supports are grouped by class as all ASME Section III compo- Finally, the stress differences, S12, S23, and S31 are calculated,
nents. Support Classes 1, 2, 3, and MC (metal containment) fol- where S12  1  2, S23  2  3, and S31  3  1. The cal-
low the definitions of paragraph NA/NCA-2131 [28]. Because culated stress intensity for each location on the support is the
there are more supports in a nuclear power plant than there are largest absolute value of S12, S23, and S31.
any other components (the total number is in the thousands), only The maximum stress theory calculates membrane, bending, and
a few were anticipated as being Class 1 supports; indeed, only shear stresses as direct, not principal, stresses. Membrane stress,
100200 supports are usually classified as Class 1 supports, and 1, is the average stress across a solid section. It includes the
the remaining 5,00010,000 fall into Classes 2 and 3. This is sig- effects of discontinuities but not local stress concentrations.
nificant because material, design, and examination rules are less Bending stress, 2, is the linearly varying portion of the stress
stringent for Class 2 and 3 supports. As discussed later in this across the solid section. It excludes the effects of discontinuities
chapter, there is also a significant advantage for Class 2 and 3 and concentrations. With the initial publication of Subsection NF
standard supports, especially material certification, design certifi- in 1973 [1], a third direct stress was required to be evaluated. The
cation, load capacity data sheets, and visual examination of maximum tensile stress, 3, at the contact surface of a weld pro-
welds. The Working Groups intent was to provide less stringent ducing a tensile load in a direction through the thickness of a
rules for standard supports to take advantage of the industrys plate or rolled shape, had a reduced allowable stress. This reduc-
exceptional manufacturing history. Many support manufacturers tion in stress was intended to reduce the maximum load on the
had developed an extensive line of pipe support products, many connection to prevent plates with the potential of laminations
with designs that were based on physical and empirical testing. from experiencing the full allowable stressa behavior that
A safety factor of 5 was a common design factor for these applied to all classes and types of supports. The fact that this
catalog products, and failure of supports in field use was a rare requirement was a design and manufacturing anomaly was even-
occurrence. tually discovered because the intent to limit the load to address
Associated with support class is the type of support and the the lamination concern in effect exacerbated the condition. As
design procedure to be used for Code qualification. Based on noted in Fig. NF-3321.1(c)-1 (Fig. 10.7), for any given joint,
existing support designs and how they are used, the Working because the allowable stress was essentially limited to 50% of the
Group created three types of supports: plate-and-shell, linear, and normal allowable stress, the maximum applied load permitted was
standard. Plate-and-shell supports exhibit a biaxial stress field (in effectively reduced. To circumvent this low allowable stress,
a flat plate this would be membrane and bending stresses in both many designers simply made the weld contact surface larger to
of the plates in-plane axes, that is, Sx and Sy). Also, plate-and- permit larger loads but still remain within the reduced allowable
shell supports are more associated with pressure-retaining compo- stress. It was quickly experienced that increasing the weld size
nents and usually are vessel skirts and saddles. Very few supports increased the heat input to the joint, and for those plates that
in a nuclear plant will be of the plate-and-shell category. Linear exhibited laminations, these conditions caused some joint designs
supports are defined as supports that essentially act under a single to be compromised. The Working Group was made aware of this
component of direct stress such as a structural beam or column. condition and quickly revised Subsection NF between the 1977
Component standard supports (later redefined as standard sup- [30] and 1980 [31] editions to remove this requirement. It was felt
ports) are defined as support assemblies composed of several that additional rules for fabrication and examination of these
catelog items and are generally mass produced. types of welded joints were needed as a better approach to the
Three design procedures also were specified: design-by-analysis, problem.
experimental stress analysis, and load rating. The design-by- Experimental stress analysis is the second design procedure
analysis procedure was established to allow a calculation stress permitted by Subsection NF. Designers are directed to ASME
analysis method for Code qualification similar to Subsections NB, Section III, Division 1, Appendix II [32], which contains manda-
NC, and ND. However, because supports can be both plate-and- tory rules for employing experimental stress analysis. It was the
shell or linear in design, a different design-by-analysis proce- intent of the Working Group to permit a design procedure that pro-
dure was provided for each support type. Plate-and-shell supports vided Code qualification by means of physical testing to determine
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 358

358 Chapter 10

testing and test reports to be used in conjunction with additional


testing and the load rating equations in Subsubarticle NF-3280
[33] to establish Code qualification, especially for standard sup-
ports. This topic is discussed in more detail in Section 10.4.10 of
this chapter.

10.4.3 Stress Intensities and Allowable Stresses


Allowable stresses for all types and classes of supports are cat-
egorized in Table NF-2121 (a)-1 (Table 10.5). For Class 1 plate-
and-shell supports, design stress intensity values, Sm, are used to
limit the calculated stresses. Allowable stresses values, S, are used
for Class 2, 3, and MC plate-and-shell supports, and yield
strength values, Sy, are used for all classes of linear supports and
for all classes and types of bolting. Component standard supports
are qualified using design stress intensity values, and allowable
stress values or yield strength values are based on whether the
standard support elements are composed of plate-and-shell or lin-
ear items.
The specific values for Sm, S, and Sy for supports were provided
in ASME Section III, Division 1, Appendix I Tables I-1.1, I-1.2,
I-2.1, I-2.2, I-7.1, I-7.2, I-8.1, I-8.2, I-10.1, I-10.2, I-11.1 (given
here as Table 10.1), I-12.1 (given here as Table 10.2), I-13.1
(given here as Table 10.3), and I-13.3 (given here as Table 10.4)
until the publication of the 1992 edition of ASME Section II [34].
At that time, all material property tables were transferred from
Section III, Appendix I, to Section II, Part D [35] for both ferrous
and nonferrous materials. For supports, these are Tables 1A, 1B,
2A, 2B, 3, 4, U, and Y-1. These tables contain essentially the
same data used in Tables 10.110.4. Similarly, Section II, Part A
contains the material specifications for all materials permitted for
use in Section III construction. The basis for establishing the
design stress intensity and allowable stress values are currently
found in Section II Part D, Appendices 1 [36] and 2 [37]. These
Appendices are very useful for determining stress values because
they are essentially a function of yield strength, Sy, and ultimate
strength, Su, values at temperature and at room temperature. In
many cases, the ultimate strength value at temperature of a partic-
ular material specification is not published in Section II, Part D.
Appendix 1 and/or Appendix 2 can be used conservatively to
determine the Su value if either the S or Sm values are published.
Because Appendix 1 stipulates that the design stress intensity
value, Sm, can be established as 13 Su at temperature (this choice is
the most conservative of the ones given), the value of Sm can be
established as Su  3Sm. Similarly, Appendix 2 can be used to
establish Su  4S, and the smallest value of Su should then be
FIG. 10.7 ILLUSTRATION OF MAXIMUM DESIGN STRESS used. This method was used by the Nuclear Regulatory
IN THROUGH-THICKNESS DIRECTION OF PLATES AND Commission (NRC) in Regulatory Guide 1.124 [38] in Section
ELEMENTS OF ROLLED SHAPES [Source: Fig. NF-3321.1 C2c, Regulatory Position Method 3.
(c)-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code] It was recognized early after the initial publication of
Subsection NF in 1973 that the material specifications permitted
in Appendix I, Section III (later Section II, Part D), were not of
stress levels within supports. The procedure uses strain gages to sufficient quantity to address the materials used by many support
determine stresses within actual supports under load. Appendix II manufacturers. The Working Group acted quickly to establish a
contains complete guidelines for performing the tests, obtaining Task Group to identify and bring these additional materials into
results, and interpreting the results. ASME Section III for use in Subsection NF. It was expected that
A third design procedure, known as load rating, was created to additional structural materials would become necessary because
provide support manufacturers with a method of establishing most of the existing material specifications were required from
maximum load ratings for standard supports using techniques and the pressure-retaining nature of ASME Section III. This important
test reports newly and/or previously developed by the manufac- Task Group comprised all Working Group professional disci-
turer. Many manufacturers had established testing procedures and plines: utilities, manufacturers, AEs, consultants, and regulatory
methods that allowed load ratings to be published with confi- members. The Task Group worked closely with the ASME
dence. It was the Working Groups intent to permit existing Section III Subgroup on Materials; consequently, in 1975 Code
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd

TABLE 10.5 MATERIALS TABLES REQUIRED FOR SUPPORTS


[Source: Table I-NF-2121(a)-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]
5/15/09
8:47 AM
Page 359

359
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 360

360 Chapter 10

Case 1644 [16] was published. This Code Case contained a con- expected. However, the Task Group, during one of the meetings
siderable number of material specifications used by support and for the NF-3000 rewrite in the winter 1982 addenda [7], rede-
snubber (both hydraulic and mechanical) manufacturers. In 1976, fined expansion stresses in supports caused by free-end displace-
Code Case 1644 was renamed Code Case N-71 [18]; it contained ment of piping as primary stresses. It was concluded that the
material specifications for both welded and nonwelded construc- growth in the piping caused by thermal expansion was a true sec-
tion. The alternative rules for bolted joints eventually were ondary stress in the piping; however, the support would see this as
removed from the Code Case and published as part of the NF- a primary load and thus a primary stress.
3000 rewrite in the winter 1982 addenda to the 1980 edition to Design-by-analysis of plate-and-shell supports for Class 2 and
ASME Section III [7]. In 1980 the nonwelded materials were 3 construction is less complicated than Class 1 supports. Because
removed from CCN-71 and placed in a new CCN-249 [19]. Since the maximum stress theory is used rather than the maximum shear
their original publication, both Code Cases have been revised stress theory, true allowable stresses are employed to qualify sup-
many times and currently appear as CCN-71-17 [20] and CCN- ports rather than design stress intensities. Calculated membrane
249-13 [21]. All revisions to these Code Cases are addressed and and bending stresses are compared directly to the allowable stress,
approved for use with caveats in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.85 S, and to factors of S to account for the differences in membrane
Code Case Acceptability ASME Section III Materials. Material and bending action and the different operating conditions (service
specifications have been added and removed over the years; how- limits). It should be noted that the total number of plate-and-shell
ever, currently there is an effort to reduce the number of material supports for all Classes is relatively small when compared to the
specifications to only those that are in use at any given moment. linear and standard supports. Based on the many pre-Subsection
Future plans are to move both Code Cases into Subsection NF as NF nuclear power plants designed to ASME B-31.1 [3] and US
Appendices. AS B31.7 [4] Codes for Power Piping, the dramatic difference in
quantities of linear and standard supports with plate-and-shell
10.4.4 Plate-and-Shell Supports type supports was anticipated by the Working Group. It was this
While the Working Group was preparing Subsection NF for its distinction in the quantity of linear and standard supports that
initial publication, it wrestled with the concept of writing rules for prompted the Working Group to concentrate its efforts to establish
structural and nonpressure-retaining components in what was new rules for supports that exhibited mainly structural behavior.
essentially a pressure boundary Code. The Working Group finally
agreed to create three types of supports: plate-and-shell, linear, 10.4.5 Linear Supports
and component standard supports. As defined previously, plate- During the early days of the Subsection NF Working Groups
and-shell supports exhibit a biaxial stress field (in a flat plate, mandate to write rules for supports applicable to ASME Section III,
membrane and bending stresses would develop in both in-plane Division 1 philosophy, it was evident that the task of addressing lin-
directions together with shear stress). When using the design-by- ear and standard supports would be a challenge. The literally thou-
analysis procedure, calculations used to qualify Class 1 plate-and- sands of supports that were composed of various structural steel
shell supports would essentially be the same as structural calculations elements (viz., wide flanges, channels, structural angles, square
for Class 1 pressure boundary components. Terms relating to tubing, structural pipe, and manufacturers standard catalog prod-
design-by-analysis were presented in paragraph NF-3121 [29], ucts) presented some difficulties for the Working Group. It even-
which contained definitions for the following stresses: normal, tually became apparent that in lieu of creating exclusively new
shear, membrane, bending, primary, secondary, free-end displace- design rules for linear and standard supports, the Working Group
ment, expansion, and total. When Subsection NF was initially should take a more pragmatic approach by investigating rules for
published in 1973 [1], Table NF-3217-1 (Table 10.6) contained a these supports already existing in other design Codes. For linear
matrix that provided classification of stresses for some typical supports, this document was the seventh edition of AISC Manual
cases. Also associated with Class 1 plate-and-shell design-by- for Steel Construction [41]. Originally used to design building
analysis are the design and operating conditions that allow vary- structures, such as commercial steel buildings, the AISC Code
ing allowable limits of stress intensity based on the type of stress was also already in use at nuclear power plants to design the
(primary and secondary) and the conditions (design and operat- building structures that housed the nuclear piping and other com-
ing) for the plate-and-shell support. This concept is presented in ponents. In fact, almost all linear and/or standard supports are
Fig. NF-3221-1 (Fig. 10.8), also known as the Hopper Chart, and attached to the building structure at one end of their load path.
is essentially identical to Figs. NB-3221-1 [39] and NB-3222-1 Therefore, it was a reasonable approach to extend the AISC rules
[40] except for the stresses in Class 1 pressure boundary compo- to include the design of linear supports because many of the sup-
nents that are not required to be evaluated in Subsection NF. port elements were the same as those of the AISC Code [41].
These stresses are Q stresses as well as secondary membrane and Because the distinct differences between building structures and
bending stresses (except expansion stress, Pe), an example of nuclear power plants, especially in areas of varying temperatures,
which is thermal stress within the support. Unlike piping and environmental conditions, and multiple operating conditions,
other pressure-retaining components, supports were not required some additional considerations needed to be added to the design
to be evaluated for thermal stresses within the support, that is, rules of AISC to adjust the rules for supports for use in nuclear
thermal stress caused by a large differential in temperature in the plants.
through-thickness direction of a plate or shell. The only exception At this juncture, the Working Group considered it necessary to
to this was expansion stress caused by the restraint of free-end include the structural rules in ASME Section III as opposed to
displacement (of piping) and the effect of differential support or making reference to the AISC Manual of Steel Construction.
restraint motions. Initially, expansion stress, Pe, was considered a When Subsection NF was first published in the winter 1973
secondary stress because it was self-limiting, or local yielding and addenda to the 1971 edition of ASME Section III, Division 1 [1],
minor distortions would satisfy the conditions that caused the the design rules for linear supports were published in Mandatory
stress to occur; failure from one application of stress would not be Appendix XIII [42]. However, when the 1974 edition was
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 361

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 361

TABLE 10.6 CLASSIFICATION OF STRESSES FOR SOME TYPICAL CASES


(Source: Table I-NF-3217-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)

published, the rules for linear support design were moved to power plants and commercial buildings. A list of these additional
Mandatory Appendix XVII [43], where they remained until the caveats follows.
winter 1982 addenda [7] when the major revision to Article
NF-3000the NF-3000 rewritewas published. Appendix XVII accounts for the specified minimum yield
As stated earlier, linear supports exhibit essentially a single strengths at temperature.
component of direct stress (uniaxial stress) and they also may be To avoid column buckling in compression applications the
subjected to shear stress. This is best demonstrated by a simply allowable stress is limited to two-thirds of the critical buck
supported or cantilever wide flange beam with a vertical load. The ling stress.
resulting stresses are bending about the strong axis of the beam An upper limit of 0.5Su is applicable to tension stress except
and shear stress in the beam. Because linear supports were for pin-connected members.
designed by elastic analysis based on the maximum stress theory Shear stress on the effective area in resisting tearing failure is
as stipulated in paragraph NF-3143 [44], principal stresses are not limited to 0.3Su.
required to be calculated. Each individual direct stress resulting Increases in allowable stresses are permitted for different
from all loadings is compared to an allowable stress for the corre- operating conditions (service limits).
sponding type of stress. Appendix XVII [45] is organized so that The maximum bearing load on the projected area of bolts in
these individual stresses can be easily evaluated; that is, tension, bearing connections is limited to 1.5Su.
compression, bending (weak and strong axis), and both shear and Commencing with the NF-3000 rewrite, allowable stresses for
bearing stresses are clearly identified together with their allowable bolting are based on percentages of Su.
stresses for all load aplications.
Similar to the AISC Code, Appendix XVII [45] uses the speci- Between 1973 and 1982 many interested Subsection NF users
fied minimum yield strength as the basis for the allowable stresses. attended Working Group meetings and advocated a more useful
However, the working group included some additional require- design Code. A Task Group was formed with the mandate
ments in Appendix XVII to account for the differences in nuclear to rewrite Article NF-3000, an effort that culminated with the
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 362

362 Chapter 10

FIG. 10.8 STRESS CATEGORIES & LIMIT OF STRESS INTENSITIES FOR PLATE-AND-SHELL ANALYSIS FOR CLASS 1
SUPPORTS (Source: Fig. NF-3321-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 363

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 363

publishing of a complete revision to Article NF-3000 in the win- catastrophic to its piping system, but the failure of a support on
ter 1982 addenda to the 1980 edition of ASME Section III, a major nuclear component could have serious consequences.
Division 1 [7]. The three major Subsection NF changes that Therefore, more stringent rules were contemplated for compo-
appeared in this revision were (1) the introduction of the concept nent supports. This concept was strongly supported by the
of piping supports and component supports, (2) the introduction Working Group and had considerable input from regulatory
of stress limit factors to establish the increased allowable stresses personnel.
for various service loadings, and (3) the incorporation of The second major revision to the winter 1982 addenda to
Mandatory Appendix XVII into Subarticle NF-3300. Subsection NF [7] was the introduction of stress limit factors to
Initially, Subsection NF viewed component supports as the provide increased design stress intensities and allowable stresses
entire family of supports within its scope of responsibility. With for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC plate-and-shell, linear, and standard
the winter 1982 addenda, Subsection NF divided all supports into supports for both component and piping supports. For Class 1
two categories: piping supports and component supports. Piping plate-and-shell supports, Tables NF-3522.2-1 (Table 10.7) and
supports were considered those supports used to support nuclear NF-3622.2-1 (Table 10.8) replaced the old Hopper chart (Figure
piping and that were frequently of the linear or standard types; 10.8). Similarly, Tables NF-3552.2-1 (Table 10.9) and NF-3652.2-1
additionally, they included supports on piping used to support (Table 10.10) provide stress limit factors for Class 2, 3, and MC
other piping components, such as in-line valves and pumps. plate-and-shell supports; Tables NF-3523.2-1 (Table 10.11) and
Component supports were considered those supports that were NF-3623.2-1 (Table 10.12) provide stress limit factors for Class 1,
used to support nuclear components such as vessels, tanks, and 2, 3, and MC linear supports. The purpose of these tables was to
other pressure components and were commonly of the plate-and- present the increase factors for various service levels (A, B, C, D,
shell type. It was expected that this categorization of supports and testing) in a concise, simplified form and to provide consis-
would put the major emphasis for more stringent design and con- tency for different types and categories of supports. Additionally,
struction rules with the newly defined component supports. these tables also introduced the concept of piping and component
Historically, piping supports that constituted the vast majority of supports. One major consideration that was included was the
supports in a nuclear power plant were simple in design and con- redefinition of restraint of free-end displacement and anchor
struction. A failure of a piping support would normally not be motions of piping as a primary rather than a secondary stress.

TABLE 10.7 ELASTIC ANALYSIS STRESS CATEGORIES AND STRESS LIMIT FACTORS FOR
CLASS 1 PLATE-AND-SHELL SUPPORTS DESIGNED BY ANALYSISCOMPONENT SUPPORTS
(Source: Table NF-3522.2-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 364

364 Chapter 10

TABLE 10.8 ELASTIC ANALYSIS STRESS CATEGORIES AND STRESS LIMIT FACTORS FOR
CLASS 1 PLATE-AND-SHELL SUPPORTS DESIGNED BY ANALYSIS PIPING SUPPORTS
(Source: Table NF-36522.2-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)

The third important revision was the incorporation of Appendix supports and their families grew over the years as they were
XVII, Design of Linear Type Supports by Linear Elastic and applied to fossil fuel and nuclear power plants. The concept was
Plastic Analysis, into Subarticle NF-3300 [46], an act done to to identify and categorize designs that could be mass-produced
make Subsection NF a more complete Code. It was concluded and stored on the manufacturers shelf. Key to their success was
that a major source of mandatory design rules should not be in an the design margin of 5 on failure that all manufacturers advertised
Appendix, but rather merged into its appropriate location in the in their catalogues. These products proved popular because many
subsection. Because of the task of moving the linear design rules different categories of standard supports existed to address the
into Subsection NF and of the task of rewriting Article NF-3000 types of applications that engineers were designing.
were both large, a cross-referencetype table was provided to When it was first discussed in the Working Group meetings, the
identify the previous location of each NF-3000 item. This table concept of standard supports appealed to many members.
was extremely helpful, for it enabled users to understand the Underlying this concept was the idea that providing design and
many changes in this revision and also provided a roadmap for the construction rules would be simple and not require stringent con-
new NF-3000. siderations. The reason for allowing a group of supports with less
rigorous rules was to take advantage of the fact that standard sup-
10.4.6 Standard Supports ports were catalog items and normally mass-produced. Discussed
One of the unique ideas introduced to ASME Section III with at length during the early meetings of the Working Group, but not
the initial publication of Subsection NF was the concept of com- included in the text of Subsection NF, was that standard supports
ponent standard supports (presently called standard supports). had a time-tested history of success. Very few, if any, failures of
Early in the preparation of Subsection NF, the Working Group these supports were ever documented because of incorrect or poor
realized that nuclear plants contained thousands of supports of designs. Usually, when a failure was discovered, the cause was
various designs and application. The support industry had evolved determined to be an overload or product misapplication. This
with manufacturers developing catalogues of what were known as time-tested history of success was instrumental in convincing
catalog or standard supports. These supports were grouped the Working Group that this type of support should be included in
into various families such as rod hangers, spring hangers, rigid Subsection NF. Standard supports, then, were permitted to pos-
supports, seismic supports, clamps, and clevises. These standard sess less stringent material, design, fabrication, and examination
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 365

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 365

TABLE 10.9 ELASTIC ANALYSIS STRESS CATEGORIES AND STRESS LIMIT FACTORS FOR CLASS
2, 3, AND MC PLATE-AND-SHELL SUPPORTS DESIGNED BY ANALYSISCOMPONENT SUPPORTS
(Source: Table NF-3552.2-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)

TABLE 10.10 ELASTIC ANALYSIS STRESS CATEGORIES AND STRESS LIMIT FACTORS FOR CLASS
2, 3, AND MC PLATE-AND-SHELL SUPPORTS DESIGNED BY ANALYSISPIPING SUPPORTS
(Source: Table NF-3652.2-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 366

366 Chapter 10

TABLE 10.11 ELASTIC ANALYSIS STRESS CATEGORIES AND STRESS LIMIT FACTORS FOR CLASS
1, 2, 3, AND MC LINEAR-TYPE SUPPORTS DESIGNED BY ANALYSISCOMPONENT SUPPORTS
(Source: Table NF-3523.2-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)

rules than plate-and-shell and linear supports as a result of their many of the supports used on components such as vessels and
successful use over the years as a unique group of supports. Since other pressure-retaining items were plate-and-shell supports. It
1973, standard supports have proven to be, and continue to be, a seemed appropriate, then, to create these categories of supports to
popular type of support and have maintained an excellent histori- better define how supports were used in actual practice. This sep-
cal record of safe products. aration was also acceptable to the regulatory authorities because
plate-and-shell supports normally used to support components
10.4.7 Component and Piping Supports were of great interest to the NRC and the more stringent require-
Component and piping supports were addressed briefly in ments for plate-and-shell supports seemed appropriately placed.
Section 10.4.5, Linear Supports, to explain their role in the With the publication of the NF-3000 rewrite in the winter 1982
NF-3000 rewrite of the winter 1982 addenda to the 1980 edition addenda to the 1980 edition [7], the inclusion of component and
of ASME Section III [7]. Initially, all supports were defined as piping supports brought Subsection NF up to date with the use of
component supports (see the title on the cover of Subsection NF supports in the nuclear power plant industry.
from 1973 through the 1992 edition). As defined in Subsubarticle
NF-1110(c) [47], these structural elements are used to support 10.4.8 Snubbers
nuclear components. Because components encompass vessels, Because ASME Section III requires that dynamic loads caused
tanks, pumps, and piping, the terminology of component supports by such events as earthquakes be considered, the support manu-
seemed appropriate, for all of these components would require facturers saw the opportunity to suggest the use of hydraulic
some type of support. However, after the industry had used snubbers (shock suppressors) for piping to address this require-
Subsection NF for several years, the Working Group considered ment. Prior to this application, snubbers were commonly used in
establishing separate categories for supports for those used on fossil fuel plants to restrain piping and equipment during water
piping and those used on components. This consideration was the and steam hammer events. The application of snubbers to restrain
result of many queries from members and inquiries concerning earthquake loadings seemed to be a natural outgrowth of the
the actual use of supports in the everyday application of design of snubbers, which allows relatively unrestrained growth
Subsection NF. It was concluded that the vast majority of supports of piping during thermal excursions; however, snubbers lock up
used on piping were either linear or standard supports. Similarly, during rapid dynamic events such as earthquakes.
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 367

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 367

TABLE 10.12 ELASTIC ANALYSIS STRESS CATEGORIES AND STRESS LIMIT FACTORS FOR CLASS
1, 2, 3, LINEAR-TYPE SUPPORTS DESIGNED BY ANALYSISPIPING SUPPORTS
(Source: Table I-NF-3623.2-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)

Few support products have generated as much controversy and because there were fewer snubbers to test and replace. Eventually
have produced both popular yet questionable responses from the mechanical snubbers began to exhibit their own problems. Unlike
industry as snubbers. Initially, snubbers were of the hydraulic hydraulic snubbers, which failed in the passive mode, that is, loss of
design and were used liberally throughout the nuclear industry. hydraulic fluid meant the snubber would fail to restrain the pipe dur-
After several years of use, mostly in the passive sense (i.e., being ing low probability dynamic events, mechanical snubbers began to
stroked in unrestrained thermal applications and not in activated fail in the active mode. This failure involved the snubbers locking up
dynamic events), hydraulic snubbers began to exhibit leakage of in a thermal excursion, thereby placing potentially large thermal
the hydraulic fluid. This was unacceptable and resulted in action loads on piping and equipment. Recently, some utilities began mak-
by the regulatory authorities (NRC). Technical specifications were ing a return to newly designed hydraulic snubbers because of the
written that required continuous inspection and testing of snub- unacceptability of failing mechanical snubbers in the active mode.
bers to identify those snubbers in use that had fallen outside of It seems that snubber design has made a complete turnabout with
predetermined parameters. (Inspection and testing of snubbers the return to hydraulic snubbers; however, most utilities would
was conducted under the auspices of ASME Section XI.) Based agree that the fewer the snubbers the better.
on statistical sampling and testing, snubbers that did not meet the
technical specifications needed to be replaced. As the number of 10.4.9 Welding and Bolting
replaced snubbers increased, manufacturers saw an opportunity to Two specialized areas of support design-by-analysis that
offer a different snubber design that was not beset by leakage and demands some attention are welding and bolting design. Both of
other technical specification problems. these are connection design and historically can be the weak link
At that time, approximately in the mid-1970s, the mechanical of a support design. Permissible types of welded joints for Class 1
snubber was introduced to the industry. The paramount reason for plate-and-shell supports were initially presented in Fig. NF-3291
the popularity of mechanical snubbers was because they did not (a)-1 (Fig. 10.9) and later in Fig. NF-3226.1-1 (Fig. 10.10). These
leak fluid. As utilities slowly began to replace hydraulic snubbers, designs consisted of full penetration and fillet welds in butt, lap,
many of them implemented snubber reduction programs that angle, corner, and T-joints. Class 1, 2, 3, and MC linear supports per-
became practical with new and more aggressive piping analysis mitted full-penetration, partial-penetration, and fillet welds in vari-
techniques and rules. The reduction programs were popular ous configurations as specified in Table NF-3292.1-1 (Table 10.13),
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 368

368 Chapter 10

FIG. 10.9 PERMISSIBLE WELDED JOINTS FOR COMPONENT SUPPORTS [Source: Fig. NF-3291(a)-1, Subsection NF of the
ASME B&PV Code]

later in Table NF-3324.5(a)-1 (Table 10.14) and in Appendix XVII- in the thickness of the parts being joined. Also of consideration
2450 [48], later in subparagraph NF-3324.5 [49]. The stress was welding to a plate in a T-joint configuration, also known as
limits in Table 10.13 were essentially identical to the welding the through-thickness direction; this was discussed in detail in
stress limits in the AISC Manual of Steel Construction [25]. Section 10.4.2 regarding stress theories and types of stresses.
Welding of linear supports, which constituted the vast majority The requirement to reduce the allowable stress in this joint con-
of supports, also had restrictions, such as a minimum and maximum figuration was eventually removed and addressed as a fabrica-
size of fillet welds. This was necessary because of differences tion consideration in later editions of Subsection NF.
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 369

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 369

FIG. 10.10 PERMISSIBLE WELDED JOINTS FOR CLASS 1 PLATE-AND-SHELL-TYPE SUPPORTS [Source: Fig. NF-3326
1-1. (h) and (i), Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]

Historically, piping support welds are primarily fillet and flare nature of supports designed to restrain load in any or all of the
bevel welds, and component support welds are more often partial- three orthogonal directions. Fillet weld joint analysis is common-
and full-penetration welds. Fillet welds are frequently analyzed ly performed by using the methods of Omer W. Blod-gett [50],
by treating the weld profile as a line rather than an area of weld who provides bending and twisting properties of many weld
deposition. By using this technique, the analyst establishes an profiles treated as a line. These properties allow an analyst to
allowable weld stress as a force per in. as opposed to a force per determine weld stresses for connection profiles of many common
sq. inch. The shape of the weld profile, that is, the contour of the structural shapes such as angles, channels, wide flange beams,
weld around the connection between two or more items, is dictated square tubing, and structural pipe. Based on the type of loading
by the manner in which the items are connected. This orientation on the welded connection, the analyst determines the resultant
of the connection will determine the type of weld joint; examples weld stress as the square root sum of the squares (SRSS) of the
of such types include the butt joint, T-joint, and angle joint. The normal stress (sum of bending and tension) and the shear stresses
most common weld joint in supports is the T-joint because of the (sum of direct shear and torsional shear). This resultant stress is
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 370

370 Chapter 10

TABLE 10.13 ALLOWED STRESS LIMITS FOR LINEAR COMPONENT SUPPORT WELDSALL CLASSES
(Source: Table NF-3292.1-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)

TABLE 10.14 ALLOWABLE STRESS LIMITS FOR CLASS 1 SLINEAR-TYPE SUPPORT WELDS
[Source: Table NF-3324.5(a)-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 371

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 371

compared to an allowable stress calculated as a percentage of the Tension and shear allowable stresses are specified as a function
ultimate strength of the material based on the throat thickness of of ultimate strength, Su, rather than the previously used yield
the weld size. strength, Sy, basis. Because the allowable stresses are given in
Bolting design for all types and classes of supports was gov- equation form rather than table form, the material specifica-
erned by the rules for linear supports in Appendix XVII-2460 tions are no longer limited. In fact, separate tension and shear
[51], later in subparagraph NF-3324.6 [52]), and Table XVII- equations are given for ferritic and austenitic steels to account
2461.1-1 (given here as Table 10.15). Initially, the allowable for the differences in the ratio of yield strength to ultimate
bolt tension and shear stresses in Table XVII-2461.1-1 was strength, Sy/Su. When the yield strength is less than half of the
similar to comparable allowable stresses in the AISC Manual ultimate strength, which is the case for austenitic materials,
of Steel Construction [25]. This table, however, provided using the tension equation for the ferritic steel would result in
allowable stresses for a limited number of bolting material an allowable stress above the yield strength. It is for this rea-
specifications. With the publication of the winter 1982 adden- son-keeping the allowable stress below the yield strength - that
da to the 1980 edition of ASME Section III [7], the bolting a larger denominator is used in the equations for austenitic
requirements were totally revised and were no longer based on steel. The new rules also provide for combined tension and
the AISC Manual of Steel Construction. Subparagraph NF- shear stresses (normally used with concrete anchor bolts),
3324.6 [52] presented new rules for the design of bolted joints bearing- and friction-type joints, slip resistance joints, and
that were based on work performed by John W. Fisher [53]. minimum and maximum edge distances.

TABLE 10.15 ALLOWABLE BOLT TENSION AND SHEAR STRESSES


(Source: Table XVII-2461.1-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 372

372 Chapter 10

10.4.10 Load Rating Load ratings determined with this approach would be more realis-
Subsubparagraph NF-3132.1(a)(3) [54], later Subarticles NF- tic because the strength of the actual material used in the test is
3280 [55] and 3380 [56]), identifies load rating as the third design used as the basis for establishing the load ratings.
procedure permitted for use for support qualification. Since many
support manufacturers had established a complete line of catalog 10.4.11 High-Cycle Fatigue and Limit Analysis
supports, the load rating procedure was advantageous, especially
Subsection NF required evaluation of high-cycle fatigue for
because many products had catalog load ratings previously estab-
Class 1 linear supports and their connections (Appendix XVII-
lished by some form of load testing. The load rating procedure is
3000 [58], later Subsubarticle NF-3330 [59]), which were subject-
a series of simple equations based on operating conditions (later
ed to more than 20,000 cycles of fatigue loading. This requirement
called service level limits). The equations establish the product
was unique for supports and was not considered necessary for the
load rating as a function of a test load multiplied by the ratio of
many support designs. Most supports were not expected to under-
allowable stress, S, to ultimate strength, Su, for plate-and-shell
go more than 20,000 cycles of fatigue loading; therefore, this
supports; the ratio of allowable stress, Fall, to ultimate strength, Su,
requirement was not considered to be a normal criterion for sup-
for linear supports; and the ratio of either S or Fall to Su for com-
ports. In fact, user questions and requests for interpretations serve
ponent standard supports, depending on whether it is produced
as a measure of how often a particular topic is addressed by the
from plate-and-shell or from linear items. The term test load is
engineering community. Because the topic of high-cycle fatigue
defined as the support test load equal to or less than the load
did not manifest itself as a common topic at Working Group
under which the component support fails to perform its specified
meetings, it can be assumed that not many users of Subsection NF
support function. Also, the tests are required to be performed on a
availed themselves of this requirement. In fact, the author found it
statistically significant number of full-size samples, or a 10%
necessary to use this Subsection NF requirement for the first time
reduction in load rating results is taken if only one sample was
only recently.
tested. It soon became apparent that a 10% reduction in the load
Similarly, limit analysis design (Appendix XVII-4000 [60],
rating results was a small price to pay because (1) it was very dif-
later Subsubarticle NF 3340 [61]) was intended to be an alterna-
ficult to define a statistically significant number of samples to
tive to elastic analysis for Class 1 linear supports. In this case
satisfy the design organization, the owner, and the regulatory
simple or continuous beams and rigid frames may be propor-
authorities; and (2) testing one rather than several samples was
tioned on the basis of plastic design namely, on the basis of
more economically attractive to the manufacturer.
the lower bound collapse load. This strength shall not be less than
When it was first published in 1973 [1], load rating was a new
that required to support a factored load equal to 1.7 times those
concept, and the definition of the term test load caused some
of the normal (Level A) and upset (Level B) conditions and
confusion in the industry. It was unclear whether the phrase fails
1.3 times that of the emergency (Level C) condition. Again,
to perform its specified support function was referring to the
because this topic was rarely discussed at Working Group meet-
support exceeding the yield strength or the ultimate strength of
ings, it can be concluded that this option to elastic design was
the material. The working group had many discussions regarding
very seldom used.
the meaning of this phrase and concluded that its meaning is
dependent upon the product being tested and what the tester
determines to be the mode of failure of the support. If the tester 10.4.12 Functional Requirements
believes a support no longer performs its support function, when Even though Article NF-3000 was a design Code, functional
the load applied to the support reaches the support material yield requirements of supports were also addressed. These considera-
strength, then this load is the test load. Similarly, it may be at tions were important, even though they did not specify require-
complete failure, ultimate strength, at which the tester feels the ments. Paragraph NF-3122 [62] (later NF-3123 [63]) specified
support no longer performs its support function. Historically, that the Design Specification shall indicate when a support is to
many manufacturers used yield strength as their threshold to be designed to perform a specific function. Some examples of
determine the test load for catalog products. In many instances, support functional requirements that Article NF-3000 addressed
catalog load ratings could have been increased based upon the follow:
results of the load rating tests; however, manufacturers believed
that the success history of their products was attributed to the cat- VibrationPiping shall be arranged and supported so that
alog loads that had persisted for many years. Therefore, many vibration shall be minimized.
manufacturers catalog load ratings remained unchanged. Movement of supported componentConsideration shall be
The winter 1983 addenda to the 1983 edition of ASME Section given to the relative motion of the supported piping or other
III [57] included a major revision to the load rating procedure. supported component and the component support.
The revision to Subarticles NF-3280 [55] and NF-3380 [56] Rolling and Sliding supportsShall permit free movement of
addressed the earlier concern regarding whether yield or ultimate the component or the component shall be designed to include
strength should be used to determine if the support test sample the imposed load and frictional resistance.
failed to perform its support function. The new requirements Sway Brace and Vibration DampenersThe effect of sway
directed the tester to determine a yield test load and an ultimate braces shall be included in the stress analysis of the component.
test load that were then multiplied by the ratio of the appropriate SnubbersThe end connection of the snubber shall be
allowable stress to either the actual yield strength or the actual designed to accommodate the vertical and horizontal move
ultimate strength as applicable. The load rating would then be the ment of the component.
lower of the two values. The use of the actual yield strength, Syact, Support spacingSupports for piping shall be spaced to pre-
and the actual ultimate strength, Sauct, is needed, since these val- vent excessive shear stresses resulting from sag and bending
ues vary with different Certified Material Test Reports (CMTRs). in the piping.
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 373

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 373

10.5 NF-4000 FABRICATION employ welding as a fabrication process are required to obtain
AND INSTALLATION and maintain an ASME NPT (nuclear parts) stamp. This stamp is
obtained initially through an ASME survey and maintained
10.5.1 General Requirements through subsequent surveys on a 3 yr. audit basis.
Fabrication and installation are important steps in the overall Class 1 plate-and-shell and linear supports are required to show
support construction process. Prior to the existence of Subsection identification marks of the welders who construct welded joints.
NF, supports were fabricated and installed based on manufac- This is a form of material identification as defined in
turers practices and recommendations and also on standards Subsubarticle NF-2150 [69]. For all other classes and types of
such as MSS SP-58 [5], MSS SP-69 [64], and MSS SP-89 [65]. supports, the manufacturer must certify that only qualified
Article NF-4000 [66] for the first time presented a structured welders are used in making all welds. Subarticle NF-4400 [70]
approach to control the fabrication and installation of supports. presents the rules governing the making and repairing of welds.
These rules attempted to provide requirements for the entire fab- Prewelding considerations, such as identification, storage and
rication cycle, including forming, fitting, aligning, welding, heat handling of welding materials, and the cleanliness of weld
treatment, and bolted connections. The Working Group believed surfaces, are of great importance and must be addressed by manu-
that requiring reasonable and beneficial fabrication and installa- facturers and installers of supports. Rules are provided for the
tion practices would enhance the quality and inherent safety of making of the welded joint including backing strips, peening,
supports. weld surface quality, butt weld reinforcement, and the shape and
size of fillet welds. Defects discovered in welds by means of weld
10.5.2 Form, Fitting, and Aligning examination (Article NF-5000 [71]) are subject to weld repairs.
These requirements addressed such support fabrication topics Surface defects may be removed by grinding or machining rather
as cutting, forming, bending, tolerances, aligning methods, and than repair by welding when specific conditions pertaining to
tack welds. Since the majority of supports consisted of either lin- design thickness, blending, and magnetic particle or liquid pene-
ear or standard supports, Article NF-4000 [66] had its largest trant examination are considered. Repair by welding is permitted
impact on support manufacturers. The requirements for forming, when defects result in reduction of design thickness. Weld repairs
cutting, and bending affected the manufacturers complete line of must use materials, welders, and welding procedures in accor-
support products. Standard products such as clamps, beam attach- dance with the provisions of this article. After the weld repair is
ments, variable- and constant-support spring hangers, formed and performed consideration must be given to blending, examination,
forged clevises, baseplates, and saddle supports were fabricated and heat treatment (when required) of repaired areas.
using a variety of standard forming operations such as cold- and Heat treatment of welded joints is a process that may be speci-
hot-forming, shearing, and thermal cutting. Consideration needed fied under the welding procedure qualification requirements of
to be given to preheating before thermal cutting and the effect of ASME Section IX [68]. Preheat may be necessary depending on
reducing impact properties of materials below minimum values as such factors as chemical analysis, elevated temperature, physical
a result of the fabrication process. Material identification during properties material thickness, and the degree of restraint of the
these operations is required to be maintained throughout the man- joined parts. The preheat method must not harm or alter the base
ufacturing process. Original identification markings are required material or preapplied weld metal. Limitations of interpass
to be transferred to subsequent parts when they were cut or other- temperatures must be considered for quenched and tempered
wise separated during the process. materials to avoid detrimental effects on the materials mechani-
Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-D [102] incorporates all toler- cal properties. Post-weld heat treatment (PWHT) is a more com-
ances, was published in 2007 edition of ASME Section III mon practice and is required for all welds, including repair welds,
[103]. These tolerance guidelines, though non-mandatory, were except for those exempted in subparagraph NF-4622.7 [72] and
followed by most support manufacturers and installers. Many of Table NF-4622.7(b)-1 (Table 10.16). This table is organized by
these tolerances were prevalent in other support standards or material P-number (ASME Section IX, QW-420 [73]) and type of
manufacturing practices. Fitting and aligning methods include weld. A considerable number of materials and weld types are
such operations as bars, jacks, clamps, and tack welds. Tack exempted based on material thickness, percent of carbon, and
welds are used to secure alignment and shall be removed com- preheat requirements. Factors and requirements for PWHT are
pletely or incorporated into the final weld after the proper weld time-temperature recordings (required for the Authorized
preparation. Inspector), nominal thickness definition, holding time at tempera-
ture, dissimilar P-number materials, heating and cooling rates,
10.5.3 Welding and Heat Treatment and heating methods.
Welding of support products is the most prevalent of all fabri-
cation processes. Even though Subsection NF is a structural rather 10.5.4 Bolting
than pressure-retaining Code, many of the welding rules and Subarticle NF-4700 [74] provides the fabrication and installa-
requirements have their origins in the other subsections that per- tion requirements for bolted construction including both items in
tain to pressure-retaining design and construction. Welding proce- the connection, the bolt, and the connected parts. Bolting is a
dure qualification requirements of ASME Section IX [68] apply significant item in the support load path because many standard
to supports fabricated to Subsection NF. Emphasis is placed on supports use bolting to connect support products both to the com-
welding qualification and maintenance and certification of ponent (clamping device) and the building structure (beam attach-
records. These qualification and certification records are crucial ment). Thread engagement is the primary mechanism through
for a manufacturer to maintain his ASME stamping certification. which the bolted connection performs its function. Threads for
Because welding is considered Code work (the material proper- bolts and studs are required to be engaged for the full length of
ties are altered during this process), support manufacturers who the thread in the load-carrying nut. Thread lubricants must not
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 374

374 Chapter 10

TABLE 10.16 EXEMPTIONS OF MANDATORY PWHT


[Source: Table NF-4622.7(b)-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]

react unfavorably with support materials except in friction-type washer required), (3) load-indicating washers, and (4) direct
joints where contact surfaces must be free of lubricants. extension indicators. For other than high-strength bolts, locking
Bolt tensioning, or preload, is a form of locking device that is devices, which are required to prevent loosening during service,
common for high-strength bolts (yield strength  80 ksi) and is may be any of the following: elastic stop nuts, lock nuts, and free-
designated in the Design Specification. Preload may be obtained spinning and prevailing torque. Upset threads may be used as a
by (1) turn-of-the-nut method, (2) calibrated wrenches (hardened locking device when the threads are upset by cold-working or
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 375

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 375

tack welding. When locking devices cannot be installed because liquid-penetrant or magnetic-particle examination. A closer scruti-
of the assembly geometry, preloading of fasteners with yield ny of these requirements shows that fillet welds typically used in
strengths  80 ksi can be used if specific preload values are main- structural applications use predominantly visual examination,
tained, dynamic testing is performed, and acceptable preload whereas the full-penetration butt welds normally seen in pressure
methods are used. Bolted connections are also used in pure shear boundary applications primarily require more rigorous examina-
and shear combined with tension. Bolts loaded in pure shear shall tion methods. The Working Group intended this approach to
not have the threads located in the load-bearing part of the shank maintain the ASME philosophy regarding pressure boundarytype
unless permitted by the Design Specification, which is more of a welds while realizing that most support welds, being structural in
functional requirement. In addition to the bolt part of the connec- nature, would fall into the fillet weld category.
tion, requirements also apply to the mating portion of the connected
part. Bolt holes shall have specific requirements regarding the 10.6.2 Acceptance Standards
diameter of bolt holes relative to the diameter of the bolt. Acceptance standards are given for all five examination methods:
Oversized and slotted holes shall have specific dimensions and ultrasound, radiography, liquid penetrant, magnetic particle, and
may have restrictions regarding the direction of loading. visual. Indications identified by the particular method of examina-
tion are characterized as imperfections and are unacceptable when
they exceed specific dimensional limits. Visual examination does
10.6 NF-5000 EXAMINATION not identify indications as a result of a supporting test, as is the
case for the other examination methods. Therefore, there are
Nondestructive examination of support welds was a relatively many dimensional acceptance standards that address such para-
new requirement for support manufacturers and had its origins in meters as weld size, weld fusion, overlap, craters, surface porosity,
the other ASME Section III subsections that dealt with pressure- undercut depth, weld location and length, arc strikes, blemishes,
retaining design. The Working Group recognized that structural and slag.
elements did not require the more stringent examination tech-
niques except for specific conditions. Since there were thousands 10.6.3 Special Considerations
of supports in a nuclear plant, examination requirements needed Article NF-5000 [71] contains examination requirements for
to be practical by taking advantage of the different types of sup- items with special considerations. These requirements do not fall
ports and their construction methods. Examination of supports under the examination methods categorized by support class as
would have a dramatic impact on support manufacturers by its indicated in Section 10.6.1; instead, they have special require-
effect on the fabrication process of the many different standard ments as follows.
support products. The Working Group provided rules for nonde-
structive examination, conducted in accordance with ASME For weldments that impose loads in the through-thickness
Section V [75]), that would address manufacturers considerations direction of primary members 1 in. and greater in thickness,
and ensure a safe product. the base material beneath the weld shall be ultrasonically
examined when required by subsubarticle NF-4440 for all
10.6.1 Examination Methods classes of supports.
The vast majority of supports fall into the linear and/or stan- When this article requires radiographic examination, inertia
dard support type of Class 2 and 3 construction. Initially, and continuous drive friction welds shall also be examined by
Subarticle NF-5200 [76] was organized based on the type of sup- the ultrasonic method to verify bonding over the entire area.
port: plate-and-shell, linear, or standard support. However, Springs for Class 1 variable, constant, and sway standard sup-
Subarticle NF-5200 was revised in the winter 1978 addenda to the ports shall be examined after coiling by the liquid-penetrant
1977 edition of ASME Section III [77] to present examination or magnetic-particle method.
requirements based on class of construction. Paragraph NF-5221 Weld repairs and special welded joints may require examina-
[78] identifies the method of examination based upon the type of tion by the ultrasonic, liquid-penetrant, or magnetic-particle
weld and weld throat dimension for Class 2 and MC primary methods.
member welded joints. Primary members of supports are those
members designed to carry load under any postulated condition,
whereas secondary members are those members typically used as
bracing and not designed to sustain any significant stress (>50% 10.7 NF-8000 NAMEPLATES, STAMPING,
of the allowable stress). Primary members that have groove depth AND REPORTS
dimensions less than 1 in., T-joint welds that have throat dimen-
sions less than 21 in., and all secondary member welded joints need When Subsection NF was first published in the winter 1973
only to be examined by the visual method. All Class 3 welded addenda to the 1971 edition of ASME Section III [1], require-
joints for both primary and secondary members require visual ments for Code symbol stamping were not included. However, the
examination except for primary member welded joints with a winter 1974 addenda to the 1974 edition of ASME Section III
groove depth greater 1 in., in which case liquid-penetrant or [79] included stamping requirements for Subsection NF. This
magnetic-particle examination is required. meant that for any component support contract written between
Liquid-penetrant or magnetic-particle examination is also required July 1, 1974 (when the 1974 edition became mandatory) and July 1,
for Class 1 primary member welds other than full-penetration 1975 (when the winter 1974 addenda [79] became mandatory),
butt welds, which must be radiographed. Class 2 primary member Code symbol stamping was not required. This stamping require-
butt welds, Class 2 primary member partial-penetration or ment would have a major impact on support manufacturers
fillet welds with groove depth dimensions greater than 1 in., and because, for the first time, an Authorized Inspector would be
T-joint welds with throat dimensions 12 in. or greater also require required to inspect welds at a manufacturers plant on a daily
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 376

376 Chapter 10

basis. After this time, support manufacturing for all types and involved with this effort, which culminated in the initial publica-
classes of supports would never be the same. During the period tion of the first Appendix in the 1995 edition, A96 addenda [88].
from July 1, 1974 to July 1, 1975, a concerted effort to sign as In actuality, two Appendices were identified. However, Mandatory
many component support contracts as possible was the goal of Appendix NF-I [89] was published as being in the course of
many support manufacturers. Utilities also had a vested interest in preparation, and it is being reserved for the transfer of additional
committing to the earlier Code Edition to reduce their exposure to permitted material table data on allowable stress values, design
the requirements of nameplates, stamping, and data reports. stress intensity values, specified minimum yield strength values,
and ultimate strength values. Code Cases N-71 [20] and N-249
10.7.1 General Requirements [21] currently permit these additional materials. When the
Article NF-8000 [80] is concise, simply stating that the require- Working Group completes the appropriate effort, these materials
ments for certificates of authorization, nameplate, stamping, and will be transferred to Appendix NF-I and Code Cases N-71 and
data reports are specified in NCA-8000 [81]. It also states that N-249 will be annulled.
stamping is not required for supports fabricated from materials Appendix NF-II [90] presented the design requirements for
(i.e., not welded). This is an important consideration because per- single angle members, which were not included in Subsection
forming Code work or welding would require that a support NF-3300 [91]. Single-angle members require more comprehen-
manufacturer apply for an ASME NPT stamp, which necessitates sive design requirements because their unique structural shape
an initial ASME Survey and subsequent renewal surveys every makes them asymmetrical at either of their axes. Structural angles
three years. In November 1976, the first support manufacturer have both geometric and principal axes. Seely and Smith [92]
successfully scheduled and passed the ASME survey and received define the geometric axes as the perpendicular axes lying in a
the first NPT stamp for supports. Since 1975 several attempts transverse section of the beam and passing through the centroid of
have been made to eliminate the requirement for stamping of sup- the section and define the principal axes as the centroidal prin-
ports, with the Working Group discussing in depth Code cipal axes of inertia of a transverse section of the beam. For a lat-
Revisions and Code Cases that would eliminate this requirement. erally unrestrained structural angle, determining the bending
Code Cases CCN-500 [82] and CCN-570 [83] have currently stress with a load not passing through the angles shear center and
accomplished this task: CCN-500 allows support manufacturers using the section modulus of the angles geometric axes will con-
to design and construct standard supports to a support manufac- siderably understate the true bending stress. This Mandatory
turers standard MSS-SP-58 [5], which does not require name- Appendix accounts for the differences between the geometric and
plates, stamping, or data reports; and similarly, CCN-570 allows principal axes of a single angle.
linear and standard supports to be designed to ANSI/AISC N-690 Additional Appendices were published in the 1998 edition of
[84], a specification that does not require nameplates, stamping, Subsection NF [93]. Mandatory Appendix NF-III [94] contains
or data reports. rules in addition to those of Article NF-3000 [95] for the design
The Working Group has discussed this topic at length over the and construction of linear supports using energy-absorbing mater-
past 25 years or so, and its consensus was that stamping of stan- ial designed to yield by dissipating energy associated with
dard and linear supports (normally piping supports) should not be dynamic piping movements. Two Non-Mandatory Appendices
a requirement. As a result of these discussions, the Working were included in the 1998 edition of ASME Section III [93]. Non-
Group has succeeded in gaining approval of a very recent (July 1, Mandatory Appendix NF-A [96] considers structural bolt preload-
1999) Code Revision to Article NF-8000 [85] that eliminates the ing of steel to steel joints for bolting materials other than A-490
requirements for Code symbol stamping of all supports. In con- and A-325, which are included in the AISC Steel Manual [6].
junction with this revision, Subsubarticle NCA-3680 [86] intro- Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-B [97] provides background for
duced a new entity, the NS Certificate Holder. This Certificate the allowable stresses and design stress intensities used for the
Holder essentially has responsibilities similar to that of the NPT design of supports in Article NF-3000 [95]. Non-Mandatory
Certificate Holder (which formerly pertained to welded supports) Appendix NF-C [101] provides design basis for Linear-Type
except that Code symbol stamping is not required (the rules apply Supports. Another Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-D [102] which
to all supports). Other differences are that (1) the duties of the provides tolerances was included in the 2007 edition of ASME
Authorized Inspection Agency (AIA) have been greatly reduced, Section III [103].
(2) a new data report formNS-1 Certificate of Conformance
NCA-8100 [87]is required for welded items, and (3) a
Certificate of Compliance is required for nonwelded support. 10.9 CODE CASES AND
INTERPRETATIONS
10.8 NF APPENDICES 10.9.1 Code Cases
After the initial publication of any Code, and if users of that
From 1982 to 1984, the Working Group on Supports (known Code begin to deal with its effects, questions concerning Code
then as component supports) began discussions to determine the rules and requirements are inevitable. One mechanism to deal
feasibility of publishing Appendices to Subsection NF that would with these questions and concerns is for the appropriate Code
provide aid and guidance for frequent users of that subsection. Group (e.g., the Subgroup or Working Group) to develop a Code
Several areas of consideration, including materials, stress analysis Case that addresses additional or alternative rules. Since 1973,
methods, Design Specification contents, design reports, and spe- several Code Cases have been published addressing Subsection
cial design considerations, were identified as topics worthy of NF. Essentially, Code Cases provide some aspect of relief to
inclusion into these proposed Appendices. Initiating these topics existing Code rules either by enhancing existing rules or by pro-
and developing them into Code language for the Appendices was viding alternative rules for the particular Code topic. It should be
a formidable task. Several Working Group members were noted that Code Cases pertaining to design and fabrication are
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 377

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 377

addressed with respect to their acceptability in NRC Regulatory 10.11 ASME B31.1 AND B31.3 SUPPORTS
Guide 1.84 [98] and, similarly, Code Cases pertaining to materials
are addressed in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.85 [99]. Also, the As an enhancement to this chapter, it is appropriate to mention
owner must approve the use of any Code Case and must docu- a few words about Code rules for supports of other jurisdictions,
ment its use in all applicable design reports and calculations. such as power piping (non-nuclear power plants) and petrochemi-
Table 10.17 lists selected important Code Cases addressing cal piping. ASME B31.1 [3] is the Code for power piping for non-
Subsection NF that have been approved for use by ASME since nuclear power plants. Before the initial publication of Subsection
Subsection NFs inception. These Code Cases are not listed in the NF [1], ASME B31.1 was the Code of record for pipe supports of
References because the information is given in Table 10.17, and both fossil fuel and nuclear power plants. The B31.1 power piping
no revision level for each is given. Code was essentially a design Code for piping with some basic
rules for supports. In comparison, Subsection NF [93] contains
10.9.2 Interpretations 185 pages of design, fabrication, and examination rules for sup-
A second technique for determining Code intent or clarification ports, whereas ASME B31.1 [3] contains less than five pages. It is
is the inquiry-and-interpretation process. Code users from any clear that Subsection NF established a new standard for the design
organization may ask a question (i.e., prepare an inquiry) and fabrication and examination of supports.
request an interpretation from ASME of any Code Section. This ASME B31.1 [3] primarily addresses standard (normally cata-
process requires the author of a question to state the question and log) supports. Paragraph 121.1 [3] specifies that MSS SP-58 [5]
propose a response. After reviewing the inquiry, ASME will then shall be used for the design of standard supporting elements.
issue an official interpretation as a response. An important aspect Paragraph 121.2 [3] provides allowable stress values for materials
of the inquiry-and-interpretation process is that the interpretation other than those in MSS SP-58 [5]. The remainder of the design
will attempt to use existing Code words in response to the inquiry. section, paragraph 121 [3], is concerned with providing additional
Table 10.18 lists some selected important interpretations issued for rules addressing hanger adjustments, hanger spacing, anchors and
Subsection NF. As with the Code Cases in Table 10.17, these inter- guides, rigid hangers, springs (variable and constant support),
pretations are not listed in the References because the information shock suppressors (snubbers), and structural attachements. These
is given in Table 10.18, and no revision level for each is given. additional rules are used in conjunction with MSS SP-58 to
ensure a comprehensive support design.
ASME B31.3 [100] provides similar rules and requirements for
10.10 SUMMARY OF CHANGES supports as ASME B31.1 [3], including reference to MSS SP-58.
One major difference between ASME B31.3 and ANSI/ASME
Table 10.19 lists all the changes in 2007 edition of ASME B31.1 concerns how to establish the allowable stresses for materi-
BPVC, Section III, Subsection NF, Supports. [103] als other than bolting materials. B31.1 paragraph 102.3.1(c) identifies

TABLE 10.17 SELECTED SUBSECTION NF CODE CASES


(Source: ASME Section III, Division 1, Code Case Supplements)

CCN No. Title


N-71 Additional Materials for Subsection NF Class 1, 2, 3, and MC Component Supports Fabricated by Welding,
Section III, Division 1
N-249 Additional Materials for Subsection NF Class 1, 2, 3, and MC Component Supports Not Fabricated by Welding,
Section III, Division 1
N-74 Interim Requirements for Certification of Component Supports, Section III, Subsection NF
N-175 Welded Joints in Component Standard Supports, Section III, Division 1
N-180 Examination of Weld Repairs of Springs for Class 1 Component Standard Supports, Section III, Division 1
N-111 Minimum Edge Distance Bolting for Section III, Division 1, Class 1, 2, 3, and MC Construction of Component
Supports
N-116 Weld Design for Use for Section III, Division 1, Class 1, 2, 3, and MC Construction of Component Supports
N-86 Furnace Brazing Section III, Subsection NF, Component Supports
N-220 Code Effective Date for Component Supports, Section III, Division 1
N-225 Certification and Identification of Material for Component Supports, Section III, Division 1
N-337 Use of ASTM B 525-70 Grade II, Type II, Sintered Austenitic Stainless Steel for Class 2, 3, and MC Component
Standard Supports, Section III, Division 1
N-357 Certification of Material for Component Supports, Section III, Division 1
N-403 Reassembly of Subsection NF Component and Piping Supports, Section III, Division 1
N-413 Minimum Size of Fillet Welds for Subsection NF Linear-Type Supports, Section III, Division 1
N-414 Tack Welds for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC Component and Piping Supports, Section III, Division 1
N-420 Linear Energy Absorbing Supports for Subsection NF, Classes 1, 2, and 3 Construction, Section III, Division 1
N-476 Classes 1, 2, and 3 Linear Component SupportsDesign Criteria for Single Angle Members, Section III, Division 1,
Subsection NF
N-500 Alternative Rules for Standard Supports for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC, Section III, Division 1
N-570 Alternative Rules for Linear Piping and Linear Standard Supports for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC, Section III, Division 1
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 378

378 Chapter 10

TABLE 10.18 SELECTED SUBSECTION NF INTERPRETATIONS (Source: ASME Section III, Division 1,
Interpretations: Vols. 135)

Interpretation No. Subject


III-1-77-110 (Vol. 1) Section III, Division 1, NF-2400CMTRs
III-1-77-120 (Vol. 1) Section III, Division 1, Stamping and Inspection of Component Supports
III-1-77-144 (Vol. 2) Section III, Division 1, NF-3133.3, Piping Support Adjustments
III-1-77-164 (Vol. 2) Section III, Division 1, Component SupportsCertificate of Authorization
III-1-77-169 (Vol. 2) Section III, Division 1, NF-5410Class 1 Springs
III-1-77-217 (Vol. 2) Section III, Division 1, NF-2000Bolting Material
III-1-77-233 (Vol. 2) Section III, Division 1, Stamping and Inspection of Component Supports
III-1-77-259 (Vol. 2) Section III, Division 1, Subsection NF, Component SupportsCode Jurisdiction
III-1-77-262 (Vol. 2) Section III, Division 1, Table NF-3132.1(b)-1 and NF-3292Welding
III-1-77-269 (Vol. 2) Section III, Division 1, NF-1214, Component Standard Supports
III-1-78-19 (Vol. 3) Section III, Division 1, NF-1214 and NCA-3820, Material Supplier
III-1-78-47 (Vol. 3) Section III, Division 1, NF-1120 Jurisdictional Boundaries
III-1-78-49 (Vol. 3) Section III, Division 1, NF-1130 Jurisdictional Boundaries
III-1-78-93 (Vol. 3) Section III, Division 1, NF-4452, Elimination of Surface Defects
III-1-78-121 (Vol. 3) Section III, Division 1, NF-4721(e), High Strength Bolts
III-1-78-124 (Vol. 3) Section III, Division 1, Class 1 Component SupportsStress Reports
III-1-78-134 (Vol. 3) Section III, Division 1, NF-2130, Certification of Material; NCA-3867.5, Transmittal
of Documents of a Material Supplier
III-1-78-165 (Vol. 3) Section III, Division 1, NF-5200, NF-5352, and NF-5342Weld Examination
III-1-78-180 (Vol. 3) Section III, Division 1, NF-3212, Appendix F-1323.1(a)
III-1-78-207 (Vol. 3) Section III, Division 1, Design of Component Support Assemblies
III-1-81-110 (Vol. 12) Section III, Division 1, NF-1214 Component Standard Supports, and NCA-3820 Quality System
Certificate
III-1-83-05 (Vol. 12) Section III, Division 1, NF-2130, Certification of Material
III-1-83-10 (Vol. 12) Section III, Division 1, NF-1110 Elements for Construction; NF-1133.1 Intervening Elements
Connected to Pressure-Retaining Components; Code Case N-160 Finned Tubing for Construction
III-1-83-12 (Vol. 12) Section III, Division 1, NF-4720, Bolting
III-1-83-49 (Vol. 13) Section III, Division 1, NF-4725, Locking Devices (1980 edition with winter 1980 addenda)
III-1-83-54 (Vol. 13) Section III, Division 1, NF-2121 Permitted Material Specifications
III-1-83-128 (Vol. 14) Section III, Division 1, NF-3280 Design by Load Rating
III-1-83-142 (Vol. 14) Section III, Division 1, NF-1130 Boundaries of Jurisdiction
III-1-83-168 (Vol. 14) Section III, Division 1, Table NF-3324.5(a)-1 Allowable Stress Limits for Linear-Type Supports,
Class 1, 2, 3, and MC (editions and addenda prior to the winter 1982 addenda)
III-1-83-176 (Vol. 14) Section III, Division 1, NF-3292 Design of Welded Joints; NF-3392 Permissible Types of Welded
Joints in Linear-Type Joints (1974 edition with winter 1976 addenda)
III-1-83-196 (Vol. 15) Section III, Division 1, NF-2130 Certification of Material (1980 edition with summer 1982
addenda)
III-1-83-213 (Vol. 15) Section III, Division 1, NF-1121 Rules for Supports; NF-3213.10 Free-End Displacement;
NF-3231.1 Elastic Analysis (1974 edition with winter 1974 addenda); Thermal Stress
(1980 edition with winter 1982 addenda)
III-1-83-266 (Vol. 16) Section III, Division 1, NF-4724 Bolt Tension (all editions)
III-1-86-26 (Vol. 18) Section III, Division 1, NF-1130 Boundaries of Jurisdiction (all editions)
III-1-86-60 (Vol. 19) Section III, Division 1, NF-3324.6(a)(3)(b) Friction Type Joints; NF-3324.6(a)(4) Slip
ResistanceFriction-Type Joints (1983 edition with winter 1985 addenda)
III-1-86-69 (Vol. 20) Section III, Division 1, NF-3200 Design of Class 1 Component Supports, Appendix XVII
(1974 edition)
III-1-90-11 (Vol.27) Section III, Division 1, Table NF-3523(b)-1 Elastic Analysis Stress Categories and Stress Limit
Factors (1989 edition)
III-1-90-21 (Vol. 27) Section III, Division 1, NF-3290 & NF-3390 Design of Welded Joints
III-1-91-05 (Vol. 29) Section III, Division 1, NF-1214 Standard Supports (1986 edition with any 1987 addenda)
III-1-92-05 (Vol. 30) Section III, Division 1, NF-3282 and NF-3382 Load Ratings in Relation to Service Loadings
III-1-92-77 (Vol. 35) Section III, Division 1, NF-2121 and NF-5400 Material Specification, Examination, and
Acceptance CriteriaCoiled Wire Rope (1974 edition and later editions and addenda through
the 1992 edition with the 1992 addenda)
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 379

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 379

TABLE 10.19 SUMMARY OF CHANGES (Reference: ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE SECTION III,
SUBSECTION NF, SUPPORTS, THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS, 2007 ed. [103])

Page Location Change


4 Fig. NF-1132-1 Illustration (g) corrected by errata
7 Fig. NF-1214-1 Illustration for Welded Attachment corrected by errata
10 Table NF-2121(a)-1 (1) Under Yield Strength Values column, [Note (1)]
moved next to Table 4 by errata
(2) Under Yield Strength Values column, Table Y-1
added by errata
12 NF-2222.1 First parenthetical number corrected to 19 000 by errata
13 NF-2224 Paragraph head corrected by errata
14 NF-2311(b)(l) Metric value added by errata
15 Table NF-2311(b)-1 Under the third column, third parenthetical number corrected by errata
16 Fig. NF-2311(b)-l On the vertical axis, fourth parenthetical number from the top corrected
by errata
22 NF-2351(b)(3) Parenthetical number corrected by errata
24 NF-2431.1(b) Revised
42 NF-3256.2(b) Last table designation corrected by errata
4749 NF-3322.1(d)(1)(a)(2) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
NF-3322.1(d)(l)(a)(3) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
NF-3322.1(d)(2) Parenthetical sentences corrected by errata
NF-3322.1(d)(3) Parenthetical sentences corrected by errata
NF-3322.1(d)(5)(b) Last value in first paragraph corrected by errata
NF-3322.1(d)(6) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
51, 52 NF-3322.2(d)(1)(b)(l) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
NF-3322.2(d)(1)(b)(2) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
NF-3322.2(d)(1)(b)(3) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
NF-3322.2(d)(2)(b)(1) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
NF-3322.2(d)(2)(b)(2) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
NF-3322.2(d)(2)(b)(3) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
5254 NF-3322.2(e)(2) NF-3322.2(d)(5) or (d)(6) corrected to read
NF-3322.2(e)(5) or (e)(6) by errata
NF-3322.2(e)(3)(b) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
NF-3322.2(e)(3)(c) Corrected by errata
NF-3322.2(e)(5) Denominator of second equation corrected by errata
55 NF-3322.4(a)(3)(a) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
NF-3322.4(a)(3)(b) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
56 NF-3322.6(a) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
58 NF-3322.6(e)(2) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
NF-3322.6(e)(4)(d) Metric unit corrected by errata
62 NF-3324.2(b)(5) Metric unit in definition of M corrected by errata
NF-3324.3(b)(1) Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata
79 NF-3412.2 Last two sentences added by errata
92 Table NF-4232-1 Values in last two rows corrected by errata
101 Table NF-4622.1-1 Values in first box under fourth column corrected by errata
104 Table NF-4622.7(b)-1 Entries for 10C Gr. 1 corrected by errata
111 NF-5521(a) NCA paragraph designation in footnote 3 corrected by errata
123 NF-A-1311 Units added to definitions of RB and RT by errata
126 NF-B-1200 First sentence corrected by errata
134 NF-D-1320(c)(2) Units and last sentence added by errata
140 Table NF-D-1330-1 (1) Plus/minus sign added to first value in sixth row under
second column by errata
(2) Two minus signs added to values in last row under
second column by errata
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 380

380 Chapter 10

ASME Section II, Part D [36], as the source for the basis of estab- 16. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code
lishing allowable stresses. One calculation specified in ASME Case 1644, Additional Materials for Component Supports; The
Section II, Part D, Appendix 1, for establishing allowable stresses American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1975.
is one-fourth of the specified minimum tensile strength at temper- 17. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code
ature [36]. This is one of several calculations, the lowest of which Case 1644 (Revision 6); The American Society of Mechanical
establishes the allowable stress. Comparatively, ASME B31.3 Engineers, March 3, 1976.
paragraph 302.3.2(d)(1) specifies that one of the calculations for 18. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code
establishing allowable stresses is one-third of the specified mini- Case N-71, Additional Materials for Component Supports and
mum tensile strength at temperature [100]. If it is compared to Alternative Design Requirements for Bolted Joints; The American
ASME B31.1, this difference results in higher allowable stresses Society of Mechanical Engineers, Rev. March 3, 1976.
for ASME B31.3 for the same material. One possible reason for 19. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code
these higher allowable stresses is that ASME B31.1 power plants Case N-249, Additional Materials for Subsection NF Class 1, 2, 3,
are designed for a longer life; thus a lower, more conservative and MC Component Supports Fabricated Without Welding; The
allowable stress is warranted because the material will be subjected American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Rev. 1980.
to stress for a longer time.
20. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code
Case N-71-17 (Revision 17); The American Society of Mechanical
Engineers, Sept. 24, 1999.

10.12 REFERENCES 21. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code
Case N-249-13 (Revision 13); The American Society of Mechanical
1. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Engineers, May 11, 1997.
Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical 22. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Engineers, winter 1973 addenda, 1971 ed.
Mandatory Appendix NF-I (in course of preparation); The American
2. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Nuclear Power Society of Mechanical Engineers, A95 addenda, 1995 ed.
Plant Components; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers,
23. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA,
winter 1973 addenda, 1971 ed.
Subarticle NCA-3800, Metallic Material Organizations Quality System
3. ASME B31.1, Power Piping; The American Society of Mechanical Program; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
Engineers, 1995 ed.
24. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA,
4. USA Standard B31.7, Nuclear Power Piping, 1969 ed. Paragraph NCA-3862, Certification of Material; The American
Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
5. MSS SP-58, Pipe Hangers and SupportsMaterials, Design, and
Manufacturer; Manufacturers Standardization Society of the Valve 25. AISC Manual of Steel Construction; The American Institute of Steel
and Fittings Industry, Inc., 1993 ed. Construction, 7th ed., first revised printing 1970.
6. AISC Manual of Steel Construction; The American Institute of Steel 26. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA,
Construction, 9th ed., 1990. Paragraph NCA-3252, Contents of Design Specification; The
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
7. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical 27. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Nuclear Power
Engineers, winter 1982 addenda, 1980 ed. Plant Components; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers,
winter 1976 addenda, 1974 ed.
8. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical 28. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA,
Engineers, summer 1978 addenda, 1977 ed. Paragraph NCA-2131, Code Classes and Rules of Division 1; The
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
9. ASME Boiler & amp; Pressure Vessel Code Interpretation III-1-78-
47, Paragraph NF-1120, Section III, Division 1; The American soci- 29. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
ety of Mechanical Engineers, March 30, 1978. Paragraph NF-3121, Terms Relating to Design by Analysis; The
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
10. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA,
Paragraph NCA-3254, Design Specification; The American Society of 30. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Mechanical Engineers, 1977 ed. Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical
Engineers, 1977 ed.
11. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Subsubarticle NF-1130, Boundaries of Jurisdiction; The American 31. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1986 ed. Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical
Engineers, 1980 ed.
12. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NB,
Paragraph NB-1132, Boundary Between Components and Attachments; 32. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1986 ed. Appendix II, Experimental Stress Analysis; The American Society of
Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
13. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NC,
Paragraph NC-1132, Boundary Between Components and Attachments; 33. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1986 ed. Subsubarticle NF-3280, Design by Load Rating; The American
Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
14. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection ND,
Paragraph ND-1132, Boundary Between Components and Attachments; 34. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Nuclear Power
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1986 ed. Plant Components; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers,
1992 ed.
15. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NE,
Paragraph NE-1132, Boundary Between Components and Attachments; 35. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section II, Part D, Materials,
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1986 ed. Properties; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1995 ed.
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 381

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 381

36. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section II, Appendix 1, Part 54. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
D, Materials, Properties; The American Society of Mechanical Subsubparagraph NF-3132.1(a)(3), Types of ProceduresLoad
Engineers, 1998 ed. Rating; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed.
37. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section II, Appendix 2, Part 55. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
D, Materials, Properties; The American Society of Mechanical Subsubarticle NF-3280, Plate and Shell SupportsDesign by Load
Engineers, 1998 ed. Rating; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
38. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.124, Service Limits and Loading 56. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Combinations for Class 1 Linear Type Component Supports, rev. 1, Subsubarticle NF-3380, Linear SupportsDesign by Load Rating;
Jan. 1978. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
39. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NB, 57. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Fig. NB-3221-1, Stress Categories and Limits of Stress Intensity for Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical
Design Conditions; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Engineers, winter 1983 addenda, 1983 ed.
1998 ed.
58. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory
40. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NB, Appendix XVII-3000, Design of Linear Type Supports by Lin ear
Fig. NB-3222-1, Stress Categories and Limits of Stress Intensity for Elastic and Plastic AnalysisHigh Cycle Fatigue Analysis for Class 1;
Level A and Level B Service Conditions; The American Society of The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed.
Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
59. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
41. AISC Manual of Steel Construction, Specification for the Design, Subsubarticle NF-3330, High Cycle Fatigue Analysis for Class 1; The
Fabrication, and Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings, 7th ed., American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
Feb. 12, 1969.
60. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory
42. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory Appendix XVII-4000, Design of Linear Type Supports by Linear
Appendix XIII, Design of Linear Type Supports by Linear Elastic and Elastic and Plastic AnalysisLimit Analysis Design for Class 1; The
Plastic Analysis; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed.
winter 1973 addenda, 1971 ed.
61. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
43. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory Subsubarticle NF-3340, Limit Analysis Design for Class 1; The
Appendix XVII, Design of Linear Type Supports by Linear Elastic American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
and Plastic Analysis; The American Society of Mechanical
62. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Engineers, 1974 ed.
Paragraph NF-3122, Functional Requirements; The American Society
44. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, of Mechanical Engineers, winter 1976 addenda, 1974 ed.
Paragraph NF-3143, Linear Type SupportsAnalysis Procedure; The
63. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
Paragraph NF-3123, Functional Requirements; The American Society
45. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
Appendix XVII, Design of Linear Type Supports by Linear Elastic
64. MSS SP-69, Pipe Hangers and SupportsSelection and Application;
and Plastic Analysis; The American Society of Mechanical
Manufacturers Standardization Society of the Valve and Fittings
Engineers, 1998 ed.
Industry, Inc., 1991 ed.
46. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
65. MSS SP-89, Pipe Hangers and SupportsFabrication and
Subarticle NF-3300, Design Rules for Linear Type Supports; The
Installation Practices; Manufacturers Standardization Society of the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, winter 1982 addenda,
Valve and Fittings Industry, Inc., 1991 ed.
1980 ed.
66. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
47. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Article NF-4000, Fabrication and Installation; The American Society
Subsubarticle NF-1110(c), Aspects of Construction Covered by These
of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed.
Rules; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
67. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Non-Mandatory
48. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory
Appendix K, Tolerances; The American Society of Mechanical
Appendix XVII, Paragraph XVII-2450, Design of Linear Type
Engineers, 1998 ed.
Supports by Linear Elastic and Plastic Analysis; The American
Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed. 68. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section IX, Welding and
Brazing Qualifications; The American Society of Mechanical
49. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Engineers, 1998 ed.
Subparagraph NF-3324.5, Design of Welded Joints; The American
Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 69. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Subsubarticle NF-2150, Material Identification; The American
50. Blodgett, O. W., Design of Welded Structures, James F. Lincoln Arc
Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
Welding Foundation, June 1966.
70. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
51. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory
Subarticle NF-4400, Rules Governing Making, Examining, and
Appendix XVII, Paragraph XVII-2460, Design of Linear Type
Repairing Welds; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers,
Supports by Linear Elastic and Plastic Analysis; The American
1998 ed.
Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed.
71. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
52. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Article NF-5000, Examination; The American Society of Mechanical
Subparagraph NF-3324.6, Design Requirements for Bolted Joints;
Engineers, 1998 ed.
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
72. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
53. Kulak, G. L., Fisher, J. W., and Struik, J. H. A., Guide to Design
Subparagraph NF-4622.7, Exemptions to Mandatory Requirements;
Criteria for Bolted and Riveted Joints; New York: John Wiley & Sons,
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
1st ed., 1974.
ASME_Ch10_p343-382.qxd 5/15/09 8:47 AM Page 382

382 Chapter 10

73. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section IX, Paragraph QW- 87. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA,
420, Material Groupings; The American Society of Mechanical Article NCA-8100, Authorization to Perform Code Activities; The
Engineers, 1998 ed. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, A99 addenda, 1998 ed.
74. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, 88. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Subarticle NF-4700, Requirements for Bolted Construction; The Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, A96
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. addenda, 1995 ed.
75. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section V, Nondestructive 89. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Examination; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Mandatory Appendix NF-I (in course of preparation); The American
1998 ed. Society of Mechanical Engineers, A96 addenda, 1995 ed.
76. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, 90. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Subarticle NF-5200, Required Examination of Welds; The American Mandatory Appendix NF-II, Design of Single Angle Members; The
Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, A95 addenda, 1995 ed.
77. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, 91. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Subarticle NF-5200, Required Examination of Welds; The American Subarticle NF-3300, Design Rules for Linear Type Supports; The
Society of Mechanical Engineers, winter 1978 addenda, 1977 ed. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, A95 addenda, 1995 ed.
78. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, 92. Seely, F. B., and Smith, J. O., Advanced Mechanics of Materials;
Paragraph NF-5221, Examination of Class 2 and MC Support Welds, New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2nd ed., 1952.
Primary Member Welded Joints; The American Society of
93. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
79. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
94. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical
Mandatory Appendix NF-III, Energy-Absorbing Support Material;
Engineers, winter 1974 addenda, 1974 ed.
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
80. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
95. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Article NF-8000, Certificates of Authorization, Nameplates,
Article NF-3000, Design; The American Society of Mechanical
Stamping, and Data Reports; The American Society of Mechanical
Engineers, 1998 ed.
Engineers, 1998 ed.
96. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
81. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA,
Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-A, Structural Bolt Preloading; The
Article NCA-8000, Certificates, Nameplates, Code Symbol Stamping,
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
and Data Reports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers,
1998 ed. 97. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-B, Design Allowable Stresses for
82. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code
Plate-, Shell-, and Linear-Type Supports; The American Society of
Case N-500, Alternative Rules for Standard Supports for Class 1,2, 3,
Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
and MC; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Dec. 9,
1993. 98. U.S. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.84, Code Case Acceptability, ASME
Section III Design and Fabrication, Rev. 31, May 1999.
83. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code
Case N-570, Alternative Rules for Linear Piping and Linear Standard 99. U.S. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.85, Code Case Acceptability, ASME
Supports for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC; The American Society of Section III Materials, Rev. 31, May 1999.
Mechanical Engineers, Aug. 9, 1996.
100. ASME B31.3, Chemical Plant and Petroleum Refinery Piping; The
84. ANSI/AISC N-690, Nuclear FacilitiesSteel Safety-Related American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
Structures for Design, Fabrication, and Erection; The American
101. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
National Standards Institute, July 19, 1984.
Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-C, Design Basis for Linear-Type
85. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2004 ed.
Article NF-8000, Certificates of Authorization and Certificates of
102. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Conformance; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, A99
Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-D, Tolerances; The American Society
addenda, 1998 ed.
of Mechanical Engineers, 2007 ed.
86. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA,
103. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Article NCA-3680, Responsibilities of an NS Certificate Holder; The
Supports, The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2007 ed.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, A99 addenda, 1998 ed.