Piping Stress Analysis Using CAESAR II PDF

Pipe Stress Analysis Using
CAESAR II
Piping System Analysis
Why do we do it? When & Why Stress Analysis

Analysis.doc
doc
What do we do?
How do we model the piping system?
How do we document the work?
13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis
1
Pitfalls of
Piping Flexibility Analysis
Just about any set of numbers can run

through a piping program (GIGO)
Elements used in piping programs have
their limitations
A good analysis addresses these
limitations
3D Beam Element
A purely mathematical model

All behavior is described by end
displacements using F=Kx
Basic parameters define stiffness and load
(K and F, respectively)
Diameter, wall thickness,
Diameter thickness and length
Elastic modulus, Poisson’s ratio
Expansion coefficient, density
2
3D Beam Element
Behavior is
dominated by
bending
Efficient for most
analyses
Sufficient for
system analysis
3D Beam Element
What’s missing?
g
No local effects (shell distortion)
No second order effects
No large rotation
No clash
No accounting for large shear load
Where wall deflection occurs before
bending
As in a short fat cantilever (vs. a long
skinny cantilever)
Centerline support
No shell/wall
3
3D Beam Example
Si l cantilever
Simple il bending:
b di
L P
δ
L3
δ = P⋅
3⋅ E ⋅ I
(x = F )
K
How Do We Represent
Stress?
4
Evaluating Stress at a Point
Local coordinate system

Longitudinal
Hoop
Radial
End loads and pressure
through a free body
diagram
Stress Element
Longitudinal stress
F/A, PD/4t, M/Z (max. on outside surface)
Hoop stress
PD/2t
Radial stress
0 (on outside surface)
Shear stress
T/2Z, (V=0 on outside surface)
5
From 3D to 2D
With no radial stress the cube can be

reduced to a plane.
Equilibrium
Stress times unit area = force

Any new face must maintain equilibrium
New face will have a normal and shear
stress component
6
Mohr’s Circle
Calculation of these new face stresses are

symbolized through Mohr’s circle
Named Stresses (Definitions)
Principal stress – normal stress on the

face where no shear stress exists
Maximum shear stress – face upon which
shear stress is maximum
7
Mohr’s Circle
Representation
Principal Stresses:
S1, S2, S3
Maximum Shear Stress:

τmax
so....
Any complex stress on an element can be

represented by the principal stresses (S1,
S2, S3) and/or the maximum shearing
stress (τmax)
8
How Do We Measure
Failure?
Modes of Pipe Failure
Burst – due to pressure

Collapse – due to overload
Corrosion – a material consideration
Fatigue – cyclic loading
9
Other Failure Concerns
Too much deflection (clash)

Overloaded pump or flange
(bearing/coupling failure or leak)
How Do We Measure Failure?
Maximum p
principal
p stress – S1 ((Rankine).
)
Principal stress alone causes failure of the element.
Wall thickness calculations due to pressure alone.
Maximum shearing stress – τmax (Tresca).
Shear, not direct stress causes failure.
Common stress calculation in piping.
M i
Maximum distortion
di t ti energy – wd (von
( Mises).
Mi )
Total distortion of the element causes failure.
Octahedral shearing stress (τGmax) is another measure
of the energy used to distort the element. This is
known as equivalent stress.
10
How Do We Measure Failure?
These are just three

Others include maximum strain and
maximum total energy
Which Measure Do We Use?
Energy
e gy oof d
distortion
sto t o iss tthe
e most
ost accu
accurate
ate
prediction of failure but maximum shearing
stress is close and conservative.
Piping codes often utilize their own mix (through
the term “stress intensity”).
CAESAR II can print either Tresca or von Mises
stress in the “132 column” stress report.
Our (code) focus is maximum shearing stress.
11
From Lab to Field
How Do We Compare
F il
Failures?
?
Material Characteristics
Lab produces stress-strain

stress strain characteristics
for our alloy
12
Material Characteristics
Direct (axial) load on a test specimen to

yield and ultimate failure
Gives E, Sy, Sult
These terms vary with temperature
Lab Failure
If failure occurs at
yield, the appropriate
stress is calculated
using the yield load
Sy = Py/a
And this is our limit
τmax ≤ Sy/2
13
Field Failure
If stress of interest (S1, τmax , τoct) on the

field element is greater than the lab
element, failure is predicted
Piping Code Simplification
Us g tthe
Using e maximum
a u sshear
ea cacalculation…
cu at o
τmax is the radius of Mohr’s circle.
τmax = (S1-S3)/2.
So, (S1-S3)/2≤ Sy/2.
Or (S1-S3) ≤ Sy
Piping codes define (S1-S3) as stress intensity.
Stress intensity must be below the material
yield.
14
More Simple?
Hoopp stress (S
( H) is positive
p and below yyield due
to wall thickness requirements (design by rule).
Radial stress is zero, assume this is S3.
Longitudinal stress (SL), assumed positive, must
be checked only if it exceeds hoop stress, then
S1=f(SL,τ) and (S1-S3)= f(SL,τ).
S with
So, ith h
hoop stress
t accounted
t d with
ith wallll
thickness, you need only evaluate longitudinal
and shear stresses and compare the results with
the material yield, Sy.
If SL is negative, then SL becomes S3 and

SH is S1. This produces a greater stress
intensity of (SH – SL). This is a concern
for “restrained pipe” most commonly
found in buried piping systems.
Oh
Otherwise, as long
l as longitudinal
l d l stress is
below yield, the pipe material will not fail.
15
Or So You Might Think…
Other Failures Do Occur
Through the wall cracks on components

Through-the-wall
subject to thermal strain
Not immediate
Low cycle and high cycle fatigue
Rupture at elevated temperatures (creep)
Again, over time
16
Effects of thermal strain were investigated
and addressed by A.R.C. Markl et. al. in
the late 40’s and into the 50’s.
Yield Is Not the Only Concern
Yield is a “primary”
primary concern for force-
force
based loads which lead to collapse.
But other, non-collapse loads exist.
17
Non-collapse Loads?
Deadweight loads must satisfy equilibrium

(F in F=Kx is independent) or collapse.
Displacement-based loads such as thermal
strain can satisfy static equilibrium
through deformation and even local
structural yielding.
Here, x in F=Kx is independent but
material yield will limit K and therefore F.
Are There Strain Limits?
Going cold to hot may produce yield in

the hot state but there will also be a
residual stress in the system when it
returns to its cold condition
18
But what if this residual cold stress

exceeds its cold yield limit?
Yield will occur at both ends of every

thermal cycle
This is low cycle fatigue
Failure will occur in only a few cycles
(Try this with a paper clip.)
19
Shakedown and Its Limits
Initial yield is acceptable.

This is known as shakedown.
But to avoid low cycle fatigue failure, the
overall change in stress – installed to
operating – must be less than the sum of
the hot yield stress and the cold yield
stress…two times yield!
Shakedown and Its Limits
Yielding is acceptable; The pipe “shakes

shakes
down” any additional strain.
Expansion stress range ≤ (Syc+Syh).
The code equations limit this stress to
(1.25Sc+1.25Sh).
The stress at any one state (hot or cold)
cannot measure this fatigue stress range.
(One limit for S is based on Sy: S=2/3 Sy, so Sy=1.5S)
20
But We’re Not Done…
Yet other systems have been in service,

cycling for many years, only to fail later in
life.
This is evidence of high cycle fatigue.
Material Fatigue
Polished bar test specimens will fail

through fatigue under a cyclic stress
The higher the stress amplitude, the
fewer cycles to failure
Fig. 5-110.1, Design Fatigue

Curves from ASME VIII-2 App. 5 –
Mandatory Design Based on
Fatigue Analysis
21
Piping Material Fatigue
This is reflected in the allowable stress by the

cyclic reduction factor – f.
Expansion stress Se ≤ f(1.25S

f(1 25Sc+1.25S
+1 25Sh).
)
To address ratcheting, the force-based stress
(SL) will reduce this acceptable stress amplitude.
Therefore, Se ≤ f(1.25Sc+1.25Sh-SL).
Some Components Fail

“Sooner” Than Others
Failures occurred at pipe connections,

bends and intersections.
Markl’s work examined the cause of these
fatigue failures
22
Bend Failure
Pipe bends ovalize

as they bend
This makes them
more flexible
And makes them
fail “sooner” than a
butt weld
Component Fatigue
Markl tested various piping components

and plotted their stress and cycle count at
failure.
23
Stress Intensification
Rather than reduce the allowed stress for

the component in question, this SIF (or i)
increases the calculated stress.
Stress = Mi/Z.
S bw
i=
S el
In-Plane/Out-Plane
Process piping distinguished between in

in-
plane bending and out-plane bending
In-plane bending keeps the component in
its original plane
Out-plane bending pulls the component
out of its plane
24
In-Plane/Out-Plane
Markl’s Work in Today’s Code
Markl extended his findings to several

pipe components and joints.
This work appears in Appendix D.
Pay attention to the notes.
25
B31.1 Appendix D
B31.3 Appendix D
26
B31.3 SIF Example
B31.3 Sample
p SIF Calculations
Welding elbow or pipe bend Reinforced fabricated tee with pad or saddle
Input Input
Pipe OD : 10.75 10.75 10.75 10.75 Pipe OD : 10.75 10.75 10.75 10.75
Pipe wall : 0.365 0.365 0.365 0.365 Pipe wall : 0.365 0.365 0.365 0.365
Bend radius : 15 10 30 50 Pad thickness : 0 0.25 0.365 0.5
Intermediate Calculations Intermediate Calculations

Tbar = 0.365 0.365 0.365 0.365 Tbar = 0.365 0.365 0.365 0.365
R1 = 15 10 30 50 Tr = 0 0.25 0.365 0.5
r2 = 5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193 r2 = 5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
h= 0.203 0.135 0.406 0.677 h= 0.070 0.147 0.194 0.259
Stress Intensification Factors Stress Intensification Factors

out-of-plane = 2.171 2.845 1.368 1.000 out-of-plane = 5.284 3.234 2.688 2.215
in-plane = 2.605 3.414 1.641 1.167 in-plane = 4.213 2.676 2.266 1.911
B31.1 SIF Example
B31.1 Sample
p SIF Calculations
Welding elbow or pipe bend Reinforced fabricated tee with pad or saddle
Input Input
Pipe OD : 10.75 10.75 10.75 10.75 Pipe OD : 10.75 10.75 10.75 10.75
Pipe wall : 0.365 0.365 0.365 0.365 Pipe wall : 0.365 0.365 0.365 0.365
Bend radius : 15 10 30 50 Branch OD : 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Branch wall : 0.237 0.237 0.237 0.237
Branch OD at tee : 5
Pad thickness : 0 0.25 0.365 0.5
Intermediate Calculations Intermediate Calculations

tn = 0.365 0.365 0.365 0.365 tn or tnh = 0.365 0.365 0.365 0.365
R= 15 10 30 50 r or Rm = 5 193
5.193 5 193
5.193 5 193
5.193 5 193
5.193
r= 5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193 tnb = 0.237 0.237 0.237 0.237
rm = 2.132 2.132 2.132 2.132
rp = 2.250 2.500 2.250 2.250
h= 0.203 0.135 0.406 0.677 h= 0.070 0.147 0.194 0.259
Stress Intensification Factor Stress Intensification Factor

2.605 3.414 1.641 1.167 Header : 5.284 3.234 2.688 2.215
Branch : 3.471 3.124 3.471 3.471
27
To Summarize:
Unchanging loads (loads that do not vary with

system distortion – weight, pressure, spring
preloads, wind, relief thrust, etc.) must remain
below the material yield limit.
Strain-based loads (thermal growth of pipe,
pp
movement of supports) ) must remain below the
material fatigue limit
Several piping codes such as the transportation
codes also limit operating stress
Piping Code
Implementation
What Are the Code Stress

E
Equations
ti and
d Th
Their
i Li
Limits?
it ?
28
A Review of the Basic
Concerns
Force-based
Force based loads are limited by yield
But also! Permanent or temporary?
These are “primary” loads and they produce
sustained and occasional stresses
Strain-based loads are limited by fatigue
These are “secondary” loads and they
produce expansion stresses
Piping code equations:
Power Piping
B31.1, ASME III, B31.5, FBDR (, EN-13480?)
Most stringent limitations
Sample Equations
Sustained: Slp + (0.75i)Ma/Z < Sh
E
Expansion:
i iMc/Z
iM /Z < f(1.25Sc
f(1 25S + 1
1.25Sh
25Sh – Sustained)
S t i d)
Sustained + Occasional:
Slp + (0.75i)Ma/Z + (0.75i)Mb/Z < kSh
29
Process Piping
B31.3, ISO 15649
Wider applications
Sample Equations
Let Sb = {sqrt[(iiMi)2+(ioMo)2]}/Z
p + Fax/A + Sb < Sh
Sustained: Slp
Expansion:
sqrt(Sb2 + 4St2) < f(1.25Sc + 1.25Sh – Sustained)
Sustained + Occasional:
Slp + (Fax/A + Sb)sus +(Fax/A+Sb)occ < kSh
Transportation Piping
B31.4, B31.8, TD/12, Z662, DNV
Based of proof testing and yield limits
Addresses compression
Sample Equations
Let Sb = {sqrt[(iiMi)2+(ioMo)2]}/Z
Sustained: Slp + Sb < 0.75Sy
Expansion: sqrt(Sb2 + 4St2) < 0.72Sy
Operating: Sustained + Expansion < Sy
30
FRP (GRP) Pipe

BS 7159, UKOOA (ISO14692)
Different materials different concerns
Equations evaluate the interaction of hoop
and axial stress
B d on d
Based design
i straini rather
h than
h stress
(but σ=εE)
CAESAR II – The Program
An Overview of
th D
the Design
i P
Procedure
d
31
Pipe Stress Analysis
and
Design by Analysis
32
Design by Analysis
The design cycle

Collect data (with assumptions)
Generate the model and load sets
Run the analysis
Check the assumptions
Diagnose any problems
Re-run with fixes
Document the analysis
The Design Cycle

Model
A system model, not a local model
Analyze
It’s just F = KX
Evaluate
Check the design limits
33
Is It a Good Model?
Focus on stiffness
stiffness, boundary conditions and
loads.
Consider the stiffness method assumptions

(remember, it’s only an approximation).
Run a simple “sensitivity study” when you’re

unsure.
A Sensitivity Study
Treat CAESAR II as a black box.

Examine the effects of a single input
modification.
Determine the sensitivity of the results to
that particular piece of data.
Examples: nozzle flexibility, friction,
support location, restraint stiffness.
34
Verifying Results
Equilibrium exists in static analyses.

Resultant loads equal applied loads.
Restraint loads for weight analysis sum to
total deadweight.
You can verify coordinates of key
positions.
ii
Check the plotted deflections.
Design Limits
Pipe failure (stress)
Pipe Deflection
Equipment loads
35
Use a Sensitivity Study:
To improve the
values
To improve
p your
y
confidence
Which Is Better –
a complex model
or a simple model?
36
Summary
Basic stresses reviewed

Failure theories reviewed
SIFs introduced
Load case (stress) type introduced
Expansion case explained
Code equations summarized
Pipe Stress Analysis Using

CAESAR II
37

Piping Stress Analysis Using CAESAR II PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Piping Stress Analysis Using CAESAR II PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Pipe Stress Analysis Using

Piping System Analysis

Why do we do it? When & Why Stress Analysis

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Just about any set of numbers can run

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

A purely mathematical model

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Local coordinate system

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

With no radial stress the cube can be

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Stress times unit area = force

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Calculation of these new face stresses are

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Named Stresses (Definitions)

Principal stress – normal stress on the

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Maximum Shear Stress:

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Any complex stress on an element can be

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Modes of Pipe Failure

Burst – due to pressure

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Too much deflection (clash)

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

How Do We Measure Failure?

These are just three

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Which Measure Do We Use?

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Lab produces stress-strain

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Direct (axial) load on a test specimen to

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

If stress of interest (S1, τmax , τoct) on the

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Piping Code Simplification

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

If SL is negative, then SL becomes S3 and

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Other Failures Do Occur

Through the wall cracks on components

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Yield Is Not the Only Concern

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Deadweight loads must satisfy equilibrium

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Are There Strain Limits?

Going cold to hot may produce yield in

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

But what if this residual cold stress

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Are There Strain Limits?

Yield will occur at both ends of every

13-Feb-08 Introduction to CAESAR II and Pipe Stress Analysis

Initial yield is acceptable.