st llc 0702 pres
DESCRIPTION
ST LLC 07 02TRANSCRIPT
6/3/2013
1
Presentation Title:
ASME ST LLC 07-02
Recommended Changes to Appendix D
Presentation Summary -
Appendix D of the B31 codes offers stress intensification factors (SIFs) for
common fittings in piping systems.
It has been known since 1987 that a number of these SIFs are incorrect
and give incomplete guidance.
The omission of k-factors for branch connections in Appendix D is also a
known source of potential error in piping system analysis.
ASME ST LLC 07-02 provides more applicable data to address these
issues.
Presentation Contents:
1-Introduction of B31.3 Appendix D
2-Identification of parts of Appendix D where SIFs and k-factors might be affected
3-Schneider and initiation of WRC 329 in mid 1980’s
4-WRC 329 corrections for Appendix D SIFs and k-factors for branch connections
5-References and work after WRC 329
6-Introduction of ST-LLC 07-02
7-Examples in ST-LLC 07-02
8-Additional Examples
6/3/2013
2
B31.3 Appendix D
6/3/2013
3
6/3/2013
4
Piping Code Limitations:
• D/T > 100 (not a limit for FEA)
• 0.5 < d/D < 1.0 may be non-conservative. (not a problem for FEA)
7
Some additional notes in the 2010 version of B31.3 that contrast
a little with what’s in ASME ST-LLC 07-02.
6/3/2013
5
There were concerns in the 1980’s from R.W. Schneider
that Code SIFs for branch connections were not
conservative when 0.5 > d/D < 1.0.
WRC 329 was intended to address this problem, but E.C.
Rodabaugh found a number of issues with the present
Codes. Most of those issues have been addressed with
the technology of the time for ASME III NC/ND, but
have not been addressed in the B31 Codes.
WRC 329
6/3/2013
6
6/3/2013
7
p.22
6/3/2013
8
“Silly” Overestimate of the Stress:
ST-LLC 07-02 8.9767/1.0439 = 8.599 Times TOO Big
ASME Section III 8.9767 / 2.1 = 4.27 Times TOO Big
FEA SIF 8.9767 / 1.0 = 8.9767 Times TOO Big
6/3/2013
9
6/3/2013
10
6/3/2013
11
22
WRC 436
iir(test) = 1.050
6/3/2013
12
Basically – don’t use the effective section modulus with the
new rules. It is easier for the rules to provide a more
appropriate i-factor..
AND – Fix Weldon Fittings (Olets)
6/3/2013
13
Excerpt from Table 1, p.4.
WRC 329 – pp.31,32.
Reformatted WRC 329 Table 13 for Mob Evaluation (10 thru 17 – Olets)
6/3/2013
14
Mob comparison of test, B31.3 and ST-
LLC 07-02 for UFTs, EXTs, and Olets.WRC 329 – Fig. 16
…
6/3/2013
15
After WRC 329 (after 1987)
Since WRC 329 in 1987 there have been a number of
papers published that can affect Appendix D guidance:
2003
1999
2001
2007
1998
6/3/2013
16
2005
2006
1993
2002
1998
2004
1998
2001
1998
1997
2008
6/3/2013
17
2002
1989
1994
2006
1994
Khan’s tests were run in Oklahoma
on the WFI/PRG Markl Test
machine that is presently in PRG’s
offices in Houston Texas.
These tests were run to supplement
Markl’s test so that some voids in
the test parameter ranges were
addressed.
6/3/2013
18
Markl Fatigue Test Machine Setup for k-factor Test
Blair tests run
below 40Hz.
6/3/2013
19
Item Markl
Test
Hinnant
Test
ST-LLC
07-02
UFT
in-plane
3.74 2.57 2.89
Pad
in-plane
2.91 1.85 2.08
Blair SIF Test Summary (Avg Values)
Item Test ST-LLC
07-02
WRC 497 Wais
UFT
in-plane
4.422 5.89 6.86 4.196
Pad
in-plane
2.062 2.183 4.034
Blair k-factor Test Summary (Avg Values)
First recorded fatigue tests for piping recorded
by Markl. Dynamic shaker tests conducted by
Blaire between 1935 to 1945.
PRG k-factor, i-factor and I-factor tests
conducted in 2013 – Houston Tx.
Piping Fatigue Tests from 1935 to 2013
6/3/2013
20
What do the newer tests and
documents indicate?
6/3/2013
21
42
What are the errors – why didn’t I see them in all my years working in pipe stress?
6/3/2013
22
pp. 36 & 37.
44
6/3/2013
23
PRG regression matches Wais/Rodabaughsurface from EPRI 110997 while PRG FEA data matches Widera from WRC 497.
6/3/2013
24
Some Possible New SIF
Equation Forms
?
?
6/3/2013
25
49
Nothing should be weaker than a fabricated tee (with equal dimensions),
or more flexible than a fabricated tee (with equal dimensions),
No other contoured fitting can be stronger than a welding tee.
i(ir) ≥ i(or) and i(ob) ≥ i(ib)
Relationship between UFT and
WLT in ASME III NC/ND:
The t/T Problem
6/3/2013
26
6/3/2013
27
53
t/T=0.3
t/T=1
t/T=2
Welding Tees
6/3/2013
28
56
6/3/2013
29
57
WPW-Welded
WPS-Seamless
58
6/3/2013
30
59
How can welding tees be updated?
1-Look at existing Code.
2-Recognize that welding tees always have a lower SIF than UFTs
3-Look at UFT variation.
4-Ignore 0.5 < d/D < 1.0 problem
5-Run FEA models with smooth contours and local thicknesses
6-Recognize that i-factors and k-factors increase and decrease together but not
proportinnally. Follow guidance for “reasonableness”. Tees aren’t as thick as they
used to be 1.5-to-3.0 times more than nominal wall. Generally now it’s 1.1 to 1.5
times with no crotch thickening.
6/3/2013
31
Olets
For fittings with larger d/D ratios the bevel below the parting line in the circumferential plane may reduce the fitting
thickness available for pressure containment in the circumferential plane and in some cases may reduce it such that it
is equal to or smaller than the wall thickness of the attached matching pipe. This is not likely the intent of the
manufacturer however. These dimensions are not controlled, and a number of the fittings are produced by copying
those of another manufacturer, which may result in angles from one fitting being applied incorrectly to another.
The amount of reduction is a function of the dimensions selected by the manufacturer. These dimensions are not
controlled by any standard. Welded outlet fittings are manufactured to typically MSS-SP-97 and in some part to
B16.9.
As the d/D ratio gets smaller the thickness reduction also gets smaller and the bevel shown below the parting line in
the figure above vanishes. In the smaller d/D case, below the parting line, the welded on fitting profile is similar, if
not identical to that of a typical thickened straight nozzle body. The dimension (di) is equal to the inside diameter of
the matching pipe, and the outside diameter, (while not controlled by any standard), is often approximately the
dimension X in Table 14 of B16.5, or given by the relation included in Note 12 of the 07-02 project.
For welded outlet fittings, it is expected that the i-factors and k-factors converge to those for Sketch 2.3 with a
thickened, straight barrel length as described in Appendix B Fig. 5 as d/D < 0.5.
6/3/2013
32
63
64
6/3/2013
33
Modeling Branch
Connections
6/3/2013
34
67
6/3/2013
35
69
70
6/3/2013
36
Testing
72
6/3/2013
37
73
74
6/3/2013
38
6/3/2013
39
77
Analysis
6/3/2013
40
79
The NB3686 model with a rigid element from the center to
the surface of the pipe is used for all d/D ratios?
How it’s Tested How it’s Used
6/3/2013
41
Reporting
Comparison to current Codes and MethodsComparison to Test Data82
6/3/2013
42
83
84
As part of the project all i-factors and k-factors through 2007 were collected.
6/3/2013
43
85
86
6/3/2013
44
87
WRC 166 – McClure
(Similar to Blair Tests?)
88
6/3/2013
45
89
72 of these comparisons are provided. For each branch connection sketch
there are plots for: iib, iob, itb, iir, ior, itr, kib, kob, ktb, kir, kor, ktr
6/3/2013
46
6/3/2013
47
6/3/2013
48
95
Major Features of Aligned Equations
1) Flexibility Factors Added for all Branch Connection Components
a) k-factor for 90 deg. elbow adjusted per N-219 and Fig. 19 in ORNL/Sub-2913/7.b) Run and Branch Flexibilities Provided and Examples Presentedc) Branch Connection Flexibilities Modified for Attached Flanges
2) SIF Updates
a) Out-of-plane d/D Inflection Includedb) t/T Inflection Includedc) Reduction of SIFs for Run where Appropriated) Weld-on Fitting SIF Correctione) In-plane, Out-plane and Torsional SIFs Providedf) Locally Thickened Branch Rules Clarifiedg) EPRI Rodabaugh/Wais Results for Concentric and Eccentric Reducers Addedh) Branch Connection Figure Clarification
3)Corrections, Note Changes, etc. Recommended in WRC 329 Implemented
ST-LLC 07-02 is three documents:
�Replacement for Appendix D
�Example Problems illustrating application with discussion
�Detailed calculation example
6/3/2013
49
Replacement for Appendix D:
Note that for contoured fittings (B16.9 tees, extruded tees, etc.) the k- and i-
factors are proportional to d/D raised to a constant.
6/3/2013
50
Note that for fabricated fittings, e.g. pads, UFTs, olets, i- and k-factors are a cubic
function of d/D. These d/D functions produce a “hump” when 0.5 > d/D < 1.
6/3/2013
51
WRC 329 Para 4.2.4, “A puzzling aspect fo the Table 6 [extruded tee] results is that
the [i-factors] are higher than would be predicted by Code equations for UFTs.”
(See next slide for geometry discussion.)
6/3/2013
52
103
Difference between the middle Sketch 2.3 and the first Sketch 2.5
6/3/2013
53
From Note 15.
6/3/2013
54
6/3/2013
55
6/3/2013
56
111
6/3/2013
57
114
Reference for Note 10 Guidance for Laterals
6/3/2013
58
6/3/2013
59
6/3/2013
60
6/3/2013
61
6/3/2013
62
6/3/2013
63
Without considering the branch connection flexibility of
the 12x30” fabricated tee at point 15 the out-of-plane (Z)
bending moment at point 15 is 372,000 in.lb. Including
the branch connection flexibility reduces the bending
moment to 41,832 in.lb., a reduction of 8.8.
6/3/2013
64
128
Example No. 5 Heater Piping
6/3/2013
65
Fails without k-factors,
passes easily with k-factors.
Studying the system, there
are 6 welding tees in line
with very little straight pipe.
The welding tees control the
planar stiffness of the model.
(With k-factors stress is
reduced by 70%.)
Moment increase by
more than two times
at vessel nozzle when
flexibilities are
included.
The unbalanced load in a typical
variable support spring design,
causes more cold load movement.