Journal of Solid Mechanics

and Materials
Engineering

Vol. 6, No. 4, 2012

Elasto-Plastic FEM Stress Analysis and

Mechanical Characteristics of Pipe Flange
Connections with Non-Asbestos Gaskets
under Internal Pressure*
(Effects of Flange Nominal Diameter)
Yoshio TAKAGI**, Yuya OMIYA***, Takashi KOBAYASHI****
and Toshiyuki SAWA***
**Material Engineering Group, R&D Center, Tokyo Electric Power Company
4-1 Egasaki-cho, Tsurumi-ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan
E-mail: takagi.yoshio@tepco.co.jp
***Graduate school of Engineering, University of Hiroshima
1-4-1 Kagamiyama, Higashihiroshima,
Hiroshima, Japan
****Numazu College of Technology
3600 Ooka, Numazu, Shizuoka, Japan

Abstract
The effects of the nominal diameter of pipe flange connections with non-asbestos
spiral wound gaskets(SWG) under internal pressure on the mechanical
characteristics such as the contact gasket stress distribution which governs the
sealing performance, the load factor and the hub stress of the connections were
evaluated. The stresses in the connections with the nominal diameters from 3 to
24 under internal pressure are analyzed using the elasto-plastic(EP) FEM analysis
taking account the hysteresis and non-linearity of deformation behavior of the
non-asbestos SWG. As a result, it is found that the variations in the contact gasket
stress distributions are substantial due to the flange rotation in the connections with
the larger nominal diameter. Leakage tests were conducted to measure the axial bolt
forces (the load factor) and the hub stress. The results obtained from the EP-FEM
analyses are fairly consistent with the experimental results concerning the variation
in the axial bolt forces (the load factor) and the hub stress. Using the obtained
contact gasket stress distributions and the fundamental relationship between the
amount of leakage and the contact gasket stress, the amount of the leakage of the
connections is estimated. It is observed that the sealing performance of the
connections with larger nominal diameter is worse than that of the connection with
smaller nominal diameter because of the flange rotation. The estimated results are
in a fairly good agreement with the measured results. The difference in the hub
stress between the EP-FEM and ASME code is demonstrated and the differences in
the load factor and the sealing performance of the connections are shown between
the asbestos and non-asbestos gaskets.
Key words: Bolted Joints, Stress Analysis, Load Factor, Non-Asbestos Gasket,
Flange Nominal Diameter, Contact Problem
*Received 19 Oct., 2011 (No. 11-0630)
[DOI: 10.1299/jmmp.6.288]

Copyright 2012 by JSME

288

Journal of Solid Mechanics

and Materials Engineering

Vol. 6, No. 4, 2012

1. Introduction
Pipe flange connections with gaskets have been widely used in chemical plants, nuclear
power plants and so on. Those connections are usually used under internal pressure as well
as other loadings. In order to optimize the design of pipe flange connections with gaskets, it
is necessary to understand the mechanical characteristics of the connections under internal
pressure. The important issues in designing the pipe flange connections under internal
pressure are the precise estimations about the actual reduced contact gasket stress
distributions at the interfaces, the hub stress and a variation in the axial bolt force (the load
factor) from the view point of sealing performance and structural flange design. Some
studies(1)-(8) on pipe flange connections with asbestos gaskets have been carried out for the
connections with the smaller nominal diameter such as the sealing performance, the contact
gasket stress distribution, the hub stress and the load factor. In practice, a lot of pipe flange
connections with larger nominal diameter have been used, too. However, some questions
remain whether it is possible to apply the researched results to the connection with the
smaller nominal diameter for estimating the behavior of the connections with the larger
nominal diameter, such as leakage prediction and a method to determine the bolt preload.
In Japan, the usage of asbestos material such as gaskets has been prohibited since
2008(9). Thus the non-asbestos gaskets must be used in pipe flange connections. However,
only a few research(10)(11) has been carried out on the characteristics of the connections with
non-asbestos gaskets. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the characteristics of the
connections with non-asbestos gaskets. Furthermore, it is desirable to know the difference
in the characteristics, in particular, the sealing performance of the connections with between
asbestos and non-asbestos gaskets to replace asbestos gasket to non-asbestos one.
PVRC(11)(12) (Pressure Vessel Research Council) proposed the new gasket constants (Gb,
a, Gs) and the tightness parameter Tp and it also proposed a method for evaluating the
sealing performance and for determining the bolt preload using the new gasket constants
and the tightness parameter Tp. However, the PVRC test method is based on the hypotheses,
in which the gasket stress SG the tightness parameter TP relationship is the linear and the
values converge to the new gasket constant Gb in Part B. The hypothesis is sometime
incorrect. Therefore, a rational pipe flange design method based on a test method by which
the gasket sealing performance can be evaluated such as JIS B 2490(13) is needed.
Thus, in this paper, the contact gasket stress distributions in the pipe flange connections
with the different nominal diameters from 3 to 24 under internal pressure are analyzed
using elasto-plastic finite element method (EP-FEM) by taking account a non-linearity and
a hysteresis in the stress-strain curves of a non-asbestos spiral wound gasket (SWG)
obtained from JIS B 2490(13) which is the test method for characterizing the mechanical
properties of gaskets. In addition, the differences in the characteristics mentioned above of
the connections with between asbestos and non-asbestos gasket are examined. The effects of
the nominal diameters of the connections on the contact gasket stress distributions, the
variations in the axial bolt force (the load factor) and the hub stress are analyzed using the
EP-FEM (7)(8). The obtained hub stresses are compared with the values obtained from ASME
code(14). An amount of gas leakage using the obtained contact gasket stress distributions and
gasket property according to JIS B 2490(13) are estimated. Furthermore, the leakage tests
and the measurements concerning a variation in an axial bolt force are performed for the
connections with 3 and 20 nominal diameters (ANSI/ASME)(15) using helium gas to
confirm the EP-FEM results and the estimated amount of gas leakage (leak rate).
Discussion is made on the differences in the contact gasket stress, the load factor and the
hub stress between asbestos and non-asbestos gasket.

289

Journal of Solid Mechanics

and Materials Engineering

Vol. 6, No. 4, 2012

2. Nomenclature
2a1: inner diameter of pipe
2a3: inner diameter of gasket
2b1: outer diameter of pipe
2b3: outer diameter of gasket
2h1: pipe flange thickness
2h3: gasket thickness
A: gasket contact area in the analysis
C: bolt pitch circle diameter
D: outer diameter of pipe flange
Fc: force eliminated from the contact surfaces
(=(1-g)W/N)
Ff: bolt preload
Ft: increment in axial bolt force
P: internal pressure
L: amount of gas leakage
LS: fundamental leak rate
N: numbers of bolt
W: axial force due to internal pressure (=a12P)
W: total axial force due to internal pressure (=a32P)
X: outer diameter of hub
Y: hub thickness
: gasket displacement
: the circumferential angle of gasket
g: load factor (=Ft/W)
zm: initial average contact gasket stress
z: contact gasket stress

3. Elasto-plastic Finite Element Analysis (EP-FEM)

Figure 1 shows a pipe flange connection with a gasket, in which two pipe flanges
including the gasket are fastened with N bolts and nuts with a bolt preload Ff, subjected to
internal pressure P. When the internal pressure P is applied to the connection, a tensile load
W (=a12P) acts on the end part of the connection in the axial direction, and an increment in
axial bolt force Ft occurs in the bolts and the contact force Fc (per bolt) is eliminated from
the gasket contact surfaces, that is, the total axial force W/N (=a32P/N) (per bolt) due to
the internal pressure P equals to the sum of Ft and Fc (W/N=Ft+Fc), where the inside
diameter of the gasket is designated as 2a3 and that of the pipe as 2a1. In predicting the
sealing performance of the connection, the actual reduced contact gasket stress of the
connection under internal pressure P must be estimated exactly. The ratio Ft to W/N is
called as the load factor(4) g (=Ft /(W/N). When the value of the load factor g is obtained,
the force Fc is obtained by the equation Fc=(1-g)W/N and the actual reduced average
contact gasket stress is obtained from the equation (Ff -Fc)/A, where A is the contact gasket
area per bolt. The cylindrical coordinate (r, , z) is used in the EP-FEM analysis. The
contact gasket stress distributions, the hub stresses and the load factor g of the pipe flange
connections with the different nominal diameters from 3 to 24 (3, 8, 16, 20 and 24)
are analyzed using the EP-FEM. The flanges used are the class 300 while 3 pipe flanges
are the class 600 in the ANSI/ASME B16.5 (15) (in the experiments, the connections with 3
of the class 600, and the connections with the 20 of the class 300 were used).
Figure 2 shows an example of mesh divisions of the connection with 3 nominal diameter
in the EP-FEM analyses. Taking account the symmetry of the connection, one-eight part of the
connection is analyzed. The code of the EP- FEM employed is ANSYS. In this study, a

290

Journal of Solid Mechanics

and Materials Engineering

Vol. 6, No. 4, 2012

non-linearity and a hysteresis of gasket are taken into consideration in the EP-FEM. Table 1
shows the dimensions of the pipe flange connection with the SWG. Figure 3 shows the
designations of pipe flange connections shown in Table 1. Figure 4 shows a stress-strain
curve of non-asbestos SWG (expanded graphite) which is market sold. The ordinate is the
contact gasket stress z, and the abscissa is displacement of the gasket. This relationship was
obtained according to JIS B 2490(13).

Z
Hub
Bolt

Gasket

Fig.2 A model for the elasto-plastic finite

element analysis of a pipe flange connection
and mesh divisions

Fig.1 A pipe flange connection with a

gasket subjected to internal pressure
(Bolt number, N=8 for 3 pipe flange)
Table.1 Dimensions of the pipe flange
connections (15) with the spiral wound gasket
used in the present EP-FEM (unit: mm)

3inch

8inch

16inch

20inch

24inch

2a1

74

196

378

476

574.9

2b1

89.1

216.3

406.4

508

609.6

210

381

648

775

915

168

330

571.5

686

812.8

127

270

470

584

692.2

117

260

483

587

702

h1

32

41.5

57.2

63.5

71.6

82.6

111.1

146

161.9

168.1

2a3

101.6

233.4

422.4

525.5

314.3

2b3

120.6

263.6

463.6

577.8

342.9

2h3

4.5

4.5

4.5

4.5

4.5

12

20

24

24

Bolt

M20

M24

M33

M33

M39

Fig.3 Designations of
the connection

Fig.4 Stress-displacement curve of

non-asbestos SWG used in this study

291

Journal of Solid Mechanics

and Materials Engineering

Vol. 6, No. 4, 2012

4. Experimental Method
An amount of gas leakage (leak rate LS: Pam3/s/m) in the connections with the 3 and
the 20 nominal diameter under internal pressure P are measured at room temperature for
verifications of the estimated amount of the leakage which is obtained from the contact
gasket stress distribution and the fundamental data of the SWG according to JIS B 2490(13).
Figure 5 shows a schematic of the experimental setup of the pipe flange connection
with the 20 nominal diameter to measure the amount of gas leakage, an increment of axial
bolt force (the load factor g) and the hub stresses. The material of pipe flanges, the bolts
and the nuts are all mild steel. The outer ring of the SWG is the stainless steel SUS304
(Japanese Industrial Standard: JIS). The nominal diameter of bolts used is M33 and the size
of the gasket is 20 in ANSI/ASME Class 300(15). After fastening two pipe flanges including
the SWG by 24 (=N) bolts and nuts with a bolt preload Ff, an internal pressure P was
applied to the connections using helium gas shown as in Fig.5. Then, the magnitude of the
internal pressure was measured with a pressure transducer and a variation in the axial bolt
force was measured by the strain gauges attached to the bolt shank. The bolt preload was
controlled monitoring the attached strain gauge outputs. The strain gauges were calibrated
prior to the experiment. The outputs were recorded by an analyzing recorder through
dynamic amplifiers. The mass leakage was measured from a variation in the pressure during
certain time interval. In order to reduce the inner volume of the pipe flange connection a
hollow cylinder was inserted in the pipe flange connection (20) as shown in Fig.5. The
leakage tests were also carried out for the connection with the 3 nominal diameter as well
as the connection with 20 nominal diameter.

5. Results of Elasto-Plastic Finite Element Method

5.1 Contact Gasket Stress Distribution
EP-FEM analyses were carried out for the pipe flange connections with the different
nominal diameters from 3 to 24. Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio of mild steel pipe
flange were 205GPa and 0.30, respectively. Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio of
stainless steel of 3 pipe flange were 193GPa and 0.30, respectively.
Figure 6 shows the contact gasket stress distributions in the pipe flange connection with
8 nominal diameter in the circumferential-direction (-direction) at the distance
r=116.7mm (the inner radius of the gasket), and 131.85mm (the outer radius of the gasket).
The ordinate is the contact gasket stress z, and the abscissa is the circumferential angle
(=0~90). The initial average contact gasket stress zm is 100MPa. Internal pressure P
applied is 5MPa. Black solid line and dotted line show the initial clomping state. Purple
solid line and dotted line show the pressurized state. Since the uniform axial bolt force is
applied, the variations of the contact gasket stress distributions in the -direction are small.
In the connections with another different nominal diameter (from the 3 to the 24), the
variations of the contact gasket stress distributions in the -direction are also observed to be
small. Thus, hereinafter, the contact gasket stress distributions in the radial direction are
shown at = 0 (at the middle of bolt pitch). In Fig.6, the contact gasket stress distributions
of the connections with asbestos gasket are described(8) as the red sold lime and dotted line.
It is seen that the reduction in the contact gasket stress is larger for the connection with the

292

Journal of Solid Mechanics

and Materials Engineering

Vol. 6, No. 4, 2012

Fig.5 Schematic of experimental

setup for 20 pipe flange connection

Fig.6 The contact stress distributions

in the -direction for 8 pipe flange
connection

asbestos gasket than that with non-asbestos gasket. According to Fig.6, the sealing
performance is better for the connection with non-asbestos gasket than that with asbestos
gasket.
Figure 7 shows the effects of the flange nominal diameter on the contact gasket stress
distributions in the r-direction in case of initial clamping state. The ordinate is the
normalized contact gasket stress z/zm, and the abscissa is the ratio of the distance r to the
inner radius of the gasket a3, where zm is the initial average contact gasket stress. The
nominal diameters of the connections calculated are 3, 8, 16, 20 and 24, where the
initial average contact gasket stress zm is 100MPa for all nominal diameter connections. It
is shown that the variations in the contact gasket stress distributions of the connections with
the larger nominal diameter are larger than those with the smaller nominal diameter. Since
the flange rotation in the connections with the larger nominal diameter tends to be larger
than that with the smaller nominal diameter, the main reason of this fact is due to the flange
rotation.
Figure 8 shows the effects of the flange nominal diameter on the contact gasket stress
distributions in the r-direction in case of internal pressurized state at 5MPa. From the
EP-FEM results, it is observed that the reduction in the contact gasket stress of the
connections with the larger nominal diameter is larger than that with the smaller nominal
diameter when the internal pressure is applied to the connections. It is because that the
flange rotation of the connection occurs easily for the connections with larger nominal
diameter. Another reason is that the value of the load factor of the connections decreases as
the flange nominal diameter increases.
5.2 The load factor
Figure 9 shows the comparisons of an increment in axial bolt force (load factor g). The
ordinate is the axial bolt force Ff +Ft and the abscissa is the total axial force W/N
(=a32P/N). The solid line shows the results obtained from the EP-FEM. The dotted line
shows the experimental results. The bolt preload Ff is 41.4kN for 3 and 189kN for 20.
Red lines show the results for the connection with the smaller nominal diameter (3). Black
line shows the case of the larger nominal diameter (20). The axial bolt force in the
connection with the larger nominal diameter decreases linearly as the total axial force W/N
increases while that in the connection with the smaller nominal diameter it increases
linearly as the total axial force W/N increases. A fairly good agreement is observed between
the results obtained from the EP-FEM and the experimental results. From the present

293

Journal of Solid Mechanics

and Materials Engineering

Vol. 6, No. 4, 2012

Fig.7 The contact stress distribution in

the r-direction (in initial clamping state)

Fig.8 The contact stress distribution in

the r-direction (in pressurized state)

Table.2 The values of the load factor

obtained from FE-FEM (the values in the
brackets are the load factor o the
connections with asbestos SWG(8))

Fig.9 The variation in axial bolt

force of connections (3 and 20)

Nominal
diameter

Load Factor
(Calculation)

3inch

0.162(0.161 )

8inch

-0.003(-0.06 )

16inch

-0.134(-0.197 )

20inch

-0.148(-0.226 )

24inch

-0.161

(8)

(8)

(8)

(8)

analysis, the value of the load factor g in the connections with 3 nominal diameter was
obtained as g=0.162 and, for the connections with 20 nominal diameter, it was as g=
-0.148.
Table 2 shows the values of the load factor g of the connections with the different
nominal diameters from 3 to 24 obtained from the EP-FEM. The load factor g of the
connections with 3 nominal diameter is the biggest. As the nominal diameter of the
connections increases, the value of the load factor g decreases. The force Fc, which
eliminates the contact gasket stress due to the internal pressure, is obtained as Fc =(1-g)
W/N. Thus, the force Fc increases as the value of the load factor g of the connections
decreases. In particular, when the value of the load factor is negative, the value of Fc
increases. Thus, it can be concluded that the sealing performance of the connections with
the larger nominal diameter is to be worse. In determining the bolt preload Ff of the pipe
flange connections with the larger nominal diameter (more than 8 flange), it is necessary to
take into account that the value of the load factor g which becomes negative. In Table 2, the
values of the load factor for the connections with conventional asbestos gasket (SWG) are

294

Journal of Solid Mechanics

and Materials Engineering

Vol. 6, No. 4, 2012

described by the brackets(8). It is found that the values of the load factor for the connections
with non-asbestos gasket are larger than those with asbestos gaskets. The result reveals that
the average reduced gasket stress in the connection with non-asbestos gasket is smaller than
that with asbestos gasket. Therefore, the sealing performance of the connections with
non-asbestos gasket would be expected to be better than that with asbestos gasket.
5.3 The hub stress
Figure 10 shows the effects of the nominal diameter in the pipe flange connections on the
hub stress (stress component in z-direction z(hub)) at the circumferential angle =0, where
the initial average contact gasket stress is zm =100MPa and the internal pressure is
P=5MPa. The ordinate is the stress component in the z-direction z(hub), and the abscissa is
the nominal diameter (inch) of the pipe flange. Purple lines show the EP-FEM results, and
the red lines show the results obtained from ASME code(14). Solid lines show the case of
initial clamping state, and the dotted lines show the case of pressurized state. In the
EP-FEM results, it is shown that the values of the hub stress of the connections with the
smaller nominal diameter under internal pressure are larger than that in the initial clamping
state. However, as the nominal diameter of the connections increases, the values of the hub
stress of the connections in the case where the internal pressure is applied decreases more
than that in the initial clamping state. The effect of the nominal diameter of the connection
on the hub stress is seen to be small from the obtained results. The difference is found to be
substantial between the results obtained from ASME code and the EP-FEM results. The hub
stress obtained from ASME code is about 5.6 times larger than the hub stress obtained from
the EP-FEM in the case where the nominal diameter is 24. The bolt preload Ff must be
determined smaller due to the hub stress based on ASME code(14). This leads leakage
accident to occur easily. From the EP-FEM result, the bolts should be tightened with the
larger bolt preload. The hub stress in the z-direction was measured using the strain gages in
the leakage experiment for verification of the EP-FEM result. The strain gages of which the
length was 2mm were attached to flange hub. The hub stress was measured as 88.5MPa,
while the EP-FEM result was 85.5MPa. A fairly good agreement was observed between the
EP-FEM results and the experimental results. The hub stresses of the connections with
asbestos gaskets are compared with those with non-asbestos gaskets. The difference is
found to be small between asbestos and non-asbestos gaskets.

Fig.10 The effects of the nominal diameter of the pipe flange

connections on the hub stress at =0

295

Journal of Solid Mechanics

and Materials Engineering

Vol. 6, No. 4, 2012

6. Comparison of the leakage between the estimated and the measured results
The amount of helium gas leakage L(Pam3/s/m) is estimated using the contact gasket
stress distribution obtained from the EP-FEM. The procedure is described as follows. (1) The
sealing test according to the test method for sealing behavior of gaskets for pipe flanges (JIS
B 2490) is conducted using the same kind gasket of which the nominal diameter is 3. The
gasket stress z -gasket displacement curve and gasket stress z-fundamental leak rate Ls
(Pam3/s) curve are obtained in the test. Figure 11 shows the schematic of experimental set
up according to JIS B 2490(13). Figure 12 shows the gasket stress z -gasket displacement
curve and gasket stress z- fundamental leak rate Ls curve obtained from JIS B 2490(13). (2)
The contact gasket stress distributions obtained from the EP-FEM calculation are divided
by n in the circumferential direction. In this study, the n is equal to the number of bolt N
because the variation of contact gasket stress distribution in the circumferential direction is
small. (3) The averages of contact gasket stress in each divided area are calculated. (4) The
amount of leakage is obtained using the relationship between the gasket stress z fundamental leak rate Ls curve obtained above procedure and the averages of contact gasket
stress in each divided area. (5) The estimated fundamental leakage from the pipe flange
connection is obtained from the sum of the leakage in each divided area. (6) The shape
factor k(13) (k=1/(do/di)-1)) and the value of (P/P*)m (13) are multiply by the estimated
fundamental leakage Ls for taking into account the nominal diameter and difference in the
internal pressure, where, do is the outer diameter of gasket, di is the inner diameter of

Fig.11 Schematic of experimental setup

for measuring the sealing behavior of
gaskets (JIS B 2490)(13)

(a) case of 3pipe flange

Fig.12 The relationship between

gasket stress and leak rate of
non-asbestos SWG

(b) case of 20 pipe flange

(a) the smaller nominal diameter (3)

(b) the larger nominal diameter (20)

Fig.13 Comparison of leak rate in the pipe flange connection with spiral wound gasket
between estimation and experiment
296

Journal of Solid Mechanics

and Materials Engineering

Vol. 6, No. 4, 2012

gasket and m is a value that describes the relationship between internal pressure and
leakage. The value of m is usually chosen as 1.5(13).
Figure 13 shows the comparisons of the results between the estimated gas leakage and
the experimental results. The ordinate is the amount of gas leakage per unit gasket diameter
(Pam3/s/m), and the initial average contact gasket stress zm. Figure13(a) is the case of the
connection with the smaller nominal diameter pipe flange connection(3), and Fig.13(b) is
the case of the connection with the larger nominal diameter pipe flange connection (20). A
fairly good agreement between the estimated results and the experimental results is
observed. The leak rate per unit gasket diameter in the connection with the smaller nominal
diameter (3) is smaller than that in the connection with the larger nominal diameter (20).
From the results, it can be concluded that the bigger preload is needed for the connections
with larger nominal diameter for getting the same sealing performance of the connection
with smaller nominal diameter. In Fig.13(a), the estimated results for the pipe flange
connection with asbestos gasket are shown as an orange line. It is found that the sealing
performance of pipe flange connection with non-asbestos gasket is better than that with
non-asbestos gasket.

7. Conclusions
This paper has dealt with the effect of the nominal diameter of pipe flange connection
on the sealing performance and the difference in the mechanical characteristics of the
connections with between asbestos and non-asbestos gaskets. The contact gasket stress
distributions, the load factor and hub stress are obtained from EP-FEM taking into account
the non-asbestos gasket property according to JIS B 2490. The leakage tests were also
conducted to demonstrate the validity of the result of EP-FEM. The results obtained are as
follows.
(1) The contact gasket stress distributions in the pipe flange connections with the
different nominal diameter from 3 to 24 were calculated using the EP-FEM taking
account the hysteresis and the non-linearity of the non-asbestos gasket. It is found that the
variations of the contact gasket stress distributions in the pipe flange connections with the
larger nominal diameter are larger than those with the smaller nominal diameter. When an
internal pressure is applied to the pipe flange connections, it is observed that the reductions
of the average contact gasket stress in the pipe flange connections with the larger nominal
diameter are much larger than those with the smaller nominal diameter. It is also found that
the reduction in the average contact gasket stress in the connection with asbestos is larger
than that with non-asbestos gasket.
(2) An increment in axial bolt force (load factor g) of the connections are obtained
from the EP-FEM. It is found that the load factor g of the connections with the larger
nominal diameter is negative. A fairly good agreement is observed between the results of
the EP-FEM and the experimental results in the connections with 3 and 20 nominal
diameters. It is also found that the values of the load factor of the connections with
non-asbestos gaskets are larger than those with asbestos gaskets. Thus, the sealing
performance of the connection with non-asbestos gaskets is assumed to be better than that
with asbestos gaskets.
(3) The effects of the nominal diameter in the pipe flange connections on the hub stress
are calculated when the initial average contact gasket stress z is 100MPa. It is shown that
the values of the hub stress of the connections with the smaller nominal diameter in the case
where the internal pressure is applied to the connections are larger than that in the case of
initial clamping state. However, as the nominal diameter of the pipe flange connections is
increases, the values of the hub stress of connection in the case where the internal pressure
is applied are smaller than that in the case of initial clamping state. The hub stresses
obtained from the EP-FEM is different from those obtained from ASME code. Due to the

297

Journal of Solid Mechanics

and Materials Engineering

Vol. 6, No. 4, 2012

EP-FEM result, the bolt preload is designed to be much larger.

(4) The gas leakage is estimated using the contact gasket stress distributions obtained
from the EP-FEM and the relationship between gasket stress z and fundamental leak rate LS
according to JIS B 2490. A fairly good agreement is observed between estimated gas
leakage and experimental gas leakage. The sealing performance of the connection with
smaller nominal diameter is better than that with larger nominal diameter. It is demonstrated
that the sealing performance of the connection with non-asbestos gaskets are better than that
with asbestos gasket.

References
1.

2.
3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.
11.

12.
13.
14.
15.

Morohoshi, T., Sawa, T., On the Characteristics of Rectangular Bolted Flanged

Connections With Gaskets Subjected to External Tensile Loads and Bending Moments,
Transactions of the ASME, Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol.116, (1994),
pp.207-215.
Bickford, J. H., Gaskets and Gasketed Joints, Marcel Dekker Inc., (1997).
Bouzid, A. H., Derenne, M., Analytical Modeling of the Contact Stress with Nonlinear
Gaskets, Transactions of the ASME, Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol.124,
(2002), pp.49-53.
Sawa, T., Ogata, N., Nishida, T., Stress Analysis and Determination of Bolt Preload in
Pipe Flange Connections with Gaskets under Internal Pressure, Transactions of the
ASME, Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol.124, (2002), pp.385-396.
Takagi, T., Fukuoka, T., Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Pipe Flange
Connections (In Case of Using Compressed Asbestos Sheet Gasket), Transactions of the
Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers, Series A, Vol.68, No.665, (2002), pp.22-27.
Ando, F., Sawa, T., Ikeda, M., A New Design Method for Piping Components Against
Leakage and Damage Subjected to High Level Earthquake Load, Proc. of ASME PVP
Conference 2002, Vol.445, No.1, (2002), pp.113-118.
Nagata, S., Matumoto, M., Sawa, T., Stress Analysis and Sealing Performance Evaluation
of Pipe Flange Connections under Internal Pressure (Effects of Scatter in Bolt Preload),
Transactions of the Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers, Series A, Vol.70, No.699,
(2004), pp.1595-1602.
SAWA, T., Nagata, S., Tsuji, H., New Development in Studies on the Characteristics of
Bolted Pipe Flange Connections in JPVRC, Transaction of ASME, Journal of Pressure
Vessel Technology, Vol.128, (2006), pp.103-108.
Ministry of Health. Labor and Welfare, Government ordinance in which a part of labor
safety hygiene law enforcement order is revised (Government Ordinance Vol.349), (2008).
(In Japanese).
Kobayashi, T., Nishiura, K., Hanashima, K., Study on the Tightening Criteria of bolts for
Low Pressure Rating Flanges, Yamanashi District Conference, 504, (2008), pp.131-132.
Bouzid, A. H., Derenne, M., El-Rich, M., Effect of flange Rotation and Gasket Width on
Leakage Behavior of Bolted Flanged Joints, Welding Research Council Bulletin, 496,
(2004).
Pressure Vessel Research Council, Standard Test Method for GASKET CONSTANTS
FOR BOLTED JOINT DESIGN, Draft 10.01, (2001).
Japanese Industrial Standards. JIS B2490 Test method for sealing behavior of gaskets
for pipe flanges , (2008).
ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code Section VIII Division 1 Rules for Construction of
Pressure Vessels App.2, (2004).
ANSI/ASME B16.5, Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings, (1996).

298