Spring Semester Final Report: Flange Design 2-9/16”

Submitted to
Professor: John Voccio

April 19th, 2019

by
Nicholas Tetreault
Kurt Wiessmeyer

WENTWORTH INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

 2

Executive Summary
In the following report, a detailed analysis was performed on a flange assembly under
various pressure loadings. Given a flange size of 2-9/16”, we were tasked with analyzing the
flange-gasket-cap assembly under a bolt preload, operating pressure, and proof pressure. First,
we conducted some background research into the API standards involved in this assembly. This
included the dimensions of each part, the torque and preload of the bolts, the shape of the gasket,
and other metrics based off of industry standards. Using this information, we performed a series
of hand calculations to acquire a preliminary set of data to compare to later. These calculations
included bolt forces, preload forces, and reaction forces for the assembly. After these
calculations were performed, our next steps utilized SolidWorks’s FEA simulation. We first
created the solid models of each part, based on the specified dimensions from our research. Then,
we used the Simulation feature to determine various metrics under the three loading conditions.
We found that our hand calculations nearly matched the preload simulation results, therefore
showing the validity of FEA. In turn, we used this proof of validity to determine the stresses and
displacements of the assembly under pressures of 5000 and 7500 psi. SolidWorks yielded
valuable stress plots, as well as factor of safety plots, which show the regions of most concern
throughout the different components. These plots, as well as all of the data gathered along the
way, are shown in the following sections.
 3

Table of Contents
Executive Summary 2

Introduction 4

Design Requirements 5

Analysis 9
Description of Case Studies and Boundary Conditions 9
FE Analysis 10

Drawings 17

Conclusions/Recommendations 21

References 23
 4

Introduction
Our project started with an assignment of a flange size: 2-9/16”. We were tasked with
using this assignment to gather background information from a reputable source on the standards
used for flanges and gaskets. We utilized the standards given by the American Petroleum
Institute, or API. Based on their approved standards, we found the specified dimensions and
metrics needed for a 2-9/16” flange and its respective gasket and bolts. Using these dimensions,
we wanted to understand the forces that the assembly would undergo due to bolt preloading.
These calculations are shown in the analysis section. The goal of this project is to simulate a
capped pipe under pressure at the flange, and in order to do that we made use of SolidWorks’s
FEA function. Below you will find the various steps we took in order to simulate the pipe under
different pressure loads.
 5

Design Requirements
For the necessary design requirements, online resources were used for intensive research
performed by the group in order to determine the precise dimensions for the assembly. All
necessary resources used to complete the report can be found in the “References” section of the
report, and below are examples used from said online resources.

Figure 1: Diagram in mm showing specifications of Flange.

 6

Figure 2: Diagrams and table showing API specifications for gasket.

 7

Table 1: Specified bolt dimensions for each nominal size and bore of flange.

Table 2:Recommended torques for flange bolting.

 8

As shown in the figure 3, the flange and cap sandwich the gasket while the entire
assembly is held together by eight bolts, washers, and nuts. The assembly consists of one flange
and cap made of AISI 3140 steel, while the gasket is made of AISI 304 steel. The loading
conditions for each bolt was torqued at 474 foot-pounds, while the operational pressure was 5000
pounds, and the proof pressure was 7500 pounds.

Figure 3: Exploded view of assembly.

Table 3: Bill of Materials for flange assembly.

Item (#) Part Description QTY.

1 Cap 1

2 Gasket 1

3 Hex Bolt 8

4 Hex Nut 1.0000-8-D-N 8

5 Washer Narrow FW 1.062 8

6 Flange 1
 9

Analysis

Description of Case Studies and Boundary Conditions

Figure 4: Free body diagram showing the forces acting on the flange assembly.
 10

FE Analysis

Force of bolts:
T
F b = kd
474 f t* lb
Fb = (0.2)(1.2 in)(1f t/12in)
F b = 25393.76 lb

Preload
P reload = F b * # bolts
P reload = 25393.76 (lb) * 8 bolts
P reload = 203150.11 lb

Operational Pressure Reaction Force

F = Operational P ressure * Area
F = 5000 psi * (π/4) * (2.5625 in)2
F = 25786 lb

Proof Pressure Reaction Force

P roof P ressure = 1.5 * Operational P ressure
P roof P ressure = 1.5 * 5000 psi = 7500 psi
F = P roof P ressure * Area
F = 7500 psi * (π/4) * (2.5625 in)2
F = 38679 lb

Table 4: Hand Calculation Results.

Bolt Force (lb) 25393.76

Preload (lb) 203150.11

Operational Pressure Reaction Force (lb) 25786

Proof Pressure Reaction Force (lb) 38679

 11

Table 5: Initial Condition - Preload

Part Max von Mises Min Factor of Safety Max Displacement
(Name) Stress (#) (in*10​-2​)
(psi*10​5​)

Flange 1.501 0.440 0.447

Cap 1.591 0.420 1.588

Gasket 4.249 0.070 20.980

Table 6: Initial Condition - 5000 psi Operating Pressure

Part Max von Mises Min Factor of Safety Max Displacement
(Name) Stress (#) (in*10​-2​)
(psi*10​5​)

Flange 6.325 0.110 0.609

Cap 9.970 0.067 1.758

Gasket 20.110 0.015 18.800

Table 7: Initial Condition - 7500 psi Proof Pressure

Part Max von Mises Min Factor of Safety Max Displacement
(Name) Stress (#) (in*10​-2​)
(psi*10​5​)

Flange 5.762 0.120 0.690

Cap 9.078 0.074 1.698

Gasket 19.170 0.016 16.190

Table 8: Resultant connector/contact forces for bolts and gasket, compared to hand calculations.
Component FEA Resultant Hand Calculations Percent Error
(lb​f​) (lb​f​) (%)

Bolts 1-8 25393 25393.76 0.00299

Gasket 203140 203150.11 0.00498

 12

Figure 5: Bolt connector forces after running the pre-load simulation.

Figure 6: Von Mises Stress plot, 5000 psi.

 13

Figure 7: Displacement Plot, 5000 psi.

Figure 8: Factor of Safety Plot, 5000 psi.

 14

Figure 9: Contact forces on gasket, 5000 psi.

Figure 10: Von Mises Stress plot, 7500 psi.

 15

Figure 11: Displacement plot, 7500 psi.

Figure 12: Factor of Safety plot, 7500 psi.

 16

Figure 13: Contact forces on gasket, 7500 psi.​

 17

Drawings

Figure 14: Exploded view of assembly with bill of materials.

 18

Figure 15: Detailed drawing of Flange.

 19

Figure 16: Detailed drawing of Gasket.

 20

Figure 17: Detailed drawing of Cap.

 21

Figure 18: Detailed drawing of assembly.

Conclusions/Recommendations
Our analysis above has yielded some useful information. We were successful in our effort
to simulate a capped pipe under three different pressure levels--preload, operating pressure, and
proof pressure. Making use of SolidWorks’s simulation capabilities, we were able to create
models of the assigned flange and cap, along with the respective bolts and gasket--all based on
API standards. We used these solid models to run FEA tests, and we found results that matched
our hand calculations, proving their validity. For the simulations, we utilized the h-adaptive mesh
method with 2 iterations, in order to create more refined and accurate results. These results
showed us some important plots, which are shown above. We found values for the maximum
stresses and displacements of each component using the probe tool, as well as the minimum
factor of safety for each part. The plots are able to highlight the regions of importance, such as
the massive displacement endured by the gasket. This is to be expected however--the gasket is
 22

made of a material that is more ductile than the cap and flange, and is intended to plastically
deform within the groove. This ensures a strong seal, even under high pressures within the pipe.
As seen in table 8, there was little to no percent error between the hand calculations and
the FEA results. This shows how accurate the codes and standards are provided by the American
Petroleum Industry. Therefore, for the most successive assembly/disassembly operations it is
important to research the necessary codes and standards so that all the correctly sized parts are
used for the assembly. This will also avoid as little possibility for failures, such as leakage, as
possible.
 23

References
“API 6A Flange.” ​2-9/16 5M FLANGE​, ​https://www.woodcousa.com/flange/series/29165.htm​.

API Specification 6A.​ American Petroleum Institute, Oct. 2010,

www.api.org/~/media/files/certification/monogram-apiqr/program-updates/6a-20th-editio
n-purch-guidelines-r1-20120429.pdf.

“API Specification 6A.” ​Fseal​, fseal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/api_spec_6a_rtj.pdf.

“Hydraulic & Offshore Supplies.” ​Hydraulic and Offshore Supplies | Offshore Supplies |
Hydraulic Hose​, ​www.hos.co.uk/index.php​.