Design

8/1/2019 Design Stress - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
Journals & Books Create account Sign in
Design Stress
Design stress shall be modified by factors that consider the end-use
applications,Fa=CeSwhere Fa=allowable design stress, Ce=product of end use factors,
and S=design stress.
From: Encyclopedia of Materials: Science and Technology, 2001
Related terms:
Creep, Fracture Toughness, factor of safety, Tensile Strength, Allowable Stress
View all Topics
Lumber: Engineered-Strand
B.A. Craig, in Encyclopedia of Materials: Science and Technology, 2001
3.1 Structural Properties

The design stresses for this product can be found in the manufacturer’s proprietary code reports and literature.
These design stresses can vary between countries due to the different evaluation procedures employed in each
country, and reference to their specific evaluation reports is necessary. Common dry-service applications are the
9·0 MNmm−2 (1·3E) and 10·3 MNmm−2 (1·5E) grades.
The LSL manufacturing process produces a highly oriented product resulting in different structural performance
with product orientation. For properties such as horizontal shear and compression perpendicular to grain, design
stresses are reported for two product orientations: perpendicular to wide strand face (WSF) and parallel to WSF
(Fig. 3).
Sign in to download full-size image
Figure 3. Design stresses for two product orientations.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/design-stress 1/11
The perpendicular to WSF orientation (also referred to as the “joist” orientation) gives significantly higher shear
and compression perpendicular to grain strength performance relative to the parallel to WSF orientation (also
referred to as the “plank” orientation).
Pressure System Design

In Lees' Loss Prevention in the Process Industries (Fourth Edition), 2012
12.6.1 Conventional and Advanced Codes

The maximum design stresses allowed in a code either are tabulated in the code or are calculated from materials
properties using factors of safety given in the code. The difference between the conventional and the advanced
codes lies mainly in the design stress considered. These differences may be illustrated by considering on the one
hand BS 1500: 1958 and ASME Section VIII, Division 1, and on the other BS 1515: 1965 and ASME Division 2.
At temperatures below the creep range the conventional codes BS 1500: 1958 and ASME Division 1 use as the
design stress the tensile strength divided by a factor of safety, which is 4 in both codes, while the advanced codes
BS 1515: 1965 and ASME Division 2 use the yield stress at design temperature divided by a factor of safety, which
in BS 1515: 1965 is 1.5. This different design criterion favors the use of steel with high yield strength such as low
alloy steels. The use of low alloy steels makes possible the design of thinner walled pressure vessels.
At temperatures within the creep range the design stress used is the creep strength, again in conjunction with a
suitable factor of safety. The difference between the two types of code may be seen in the comparisons of design
strengths given in the earlier BS codes by L. Evans (1974) and in the ASME code by Pilborough (1989). For a
particular material at a particular temperature, the maximum permissible design strength is the lowest strength
obtained by dividing the specified properties by the specified factor of safety. For BS 1500 and BS 1515, Evans
gives the design strengths in terms of the material tensile strengths R20 and Rt, the yield strengths E20 and Et, and
the creep strengths Sr and Sc (as defined in Section 12.4), and an appropriate factor of safety.
The comparison given by Pilborough (1989) for the two divisions of the ASME code and also for ISO R831 is
summarized in Table 12.7. For each code the design strength is the lowest one.
The design strengths laid down in BS 5500: 1991 and the ASME code are given in Tables 12.6 and 12.7.
Table 12.6. Design Strengths in BS Codes by L. Evans (1974)
BS 1500: 1958
BS 1515: 1965
Table 12.7. Design Strengths in ASME Code by Pilborough (1989)
ASME Section VIII Division 1
ASME Section VIII Division 2
ISO R831
Steel and Concrete Storage Tank

Mohamed A. El-Reedy PhD, in Onshore Structural Design Calculations, 2017
4.2.4.1 Allowable Stress

The maximum allowable product design stress, Sd, shall be as shown in Table 4.3. The net plate thicknesses—the
actual thicknesses less any corrosion allowance—shall be used in the calculation.
Table 4.3. Plate materials and allowable stresses
Plate Minimum yield Minimum tensile Product design Hydrostatic test

specification Grade strength (MPa) strength (MPa) stress Sd (MPa) stress St (MPa)
A 283M (A C 205 380 137 154

283)
A 285M (A C 205 380 137 154

285)
A 131M (A A,B,CS 235 400 157 171

131)
A 36M (A 36) 250 400 160 171
A 131M (A EH36 360 490a 196 210

131)
A 573M (A 400 220 400 147 165

573)
A 573M (A 450 240 450 160 180

573)
A 573M (A 485 290 485a 193 208

573)
A 516M (A 380 205 380 137 154

516)
A 516M (A 415 220 415 147 165

516)
A 516M (A 450 240 450 160 180

516)
A 516M (A 485 260 485 173 195

516)
A 662M (A B 275 450 180 193

662)
A 662M (A C 295 485a 194 208

662)
A 537M (A 1 345 485a 194 208

537)
Plate Minimum yield Minimum tensile Product design Hydrostatic test

specification Grade strength (MPa) strength (MPa) stress Sd (MPa) stress St (MPa)
A 537M (A 2 415 550a 220 236

537)
A 633M (A C,D 345 485a 194 208

633)
A 678M (A A 345 485a 220 208

678)
A 678M (A B 415 550a 194 236

678)
A 737M (A B 345 485a 194 208

737)
A 841M (A CLASS 345 485a 194 208

841) 1
A 841M (A CLASS2 415 550a 220 236

841)
According to API 650, the design stress basis Sd shall be either two-thirds the yield strength (2/3 Fy) or two-fifths
(2/5 Ft) the tensile strength, whichever is less.
The maximum allowable hydrostatic test stress St shall be as shown in Table 4.3. The gross plate thicknesses,
including any corrosion allowance, shall be used in the calculation. The hydrostatic test basis shall be either three-
fourths the yield strength (3/4 Fy) or three-sevenths the tensile strength (3/7 Fy), whichever is less.
According to API 650, in cases of shell thickness less than or equal to one-half inch (1/2 in.), an alternative shell
design with a fixed allowable stress of 145 MPa (21,000 psi2) and a joint efficiency factor of 0.85 or 0.70 is
permitted.
Propeller Blade Strength

J.S. Carlton FREng, in Marine Propellers and Propulsion (Fourth Edition), 2019
19.6 Residual Blade Stresses

The steady and fluctuating design stresses produced by the propeller when rotating in the wake field developed by
the ship represent only one aspect of the total blade stress distribution. Residual stresses, which are introduced
during manufacture or during repair, represent the complementary considerations.
Full-scale experience relating to residual stresses is limited to a comparatively few studies. The study by Webb et al.
(1975) is typical of these studies in which measurements have been made for propellers subjected to local heating.
These measurements related to high-tensile brass and manganese-aluminum bronze propellers, which had been
subjected to heating after manufacture. In these cases, residual stresses of the order of 155 and 185 MPa were
measured by the trepanning technique of residual stress measurement. Little published information exists,
however, for the level or nature of residual stress in new or unrepaired castings. This is principally due to the
semidestructive nature of the measurement procedure involved in determining a residual stress field for these
types of casting.
Investigations undertaken by Carlton (1984) into the causes of propeller failures, due other than by poor repair or
l lh i f h b h h h id l
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/design-stress
f d i bl d dj h f il d bl d 4/11
local heating of the boss, have shown that residual surface stresses measured in blades adjacent to the failed blade
can attain significant magnitudes. The technique used for those measurements was that of bonding purpose-
designed strain gauge rosettes to the surface of the blade and then incrementally milling a carefully aligned hole
through the center of the three-rosette configuration. At each increment of depth within the hole, a measurement
of the relaxed strain recorded by each gauge of the rosette was made. This method, used in association with a
correctly designed milling guide, is relatively easy to apply and has been shown to give reliable results in the
laboratory on specially designed calibration test specimens. An example of the results gained using this procedure
is given by Fig. 19.12 for a five-blade, nickel-aluminum bronze, forward-raked propeller having an approximate
finished weight of approximately 14 tons. From the figure, it is seen that the measured residual stresses in this
case are of a significant magnitude and tensile in nature over much of the blade. Indeed, the magnitudes in this
case reach tensile values of between two and three times the normally accepted design stress levels. Furthermore,
it can also be seen that the principal stresses at a given measurement point are of similar magnitudes. This implies
the introduction of a strong biaxial characteristic into the stress field on the blade surface, which under pure
design considerations, in the absence of residual stress, would be expected to be of a predominantly radial nature.
Analysis of the through-thickness characteristics of the relieved strain for the same propeller blade also suggests
that the residual stresses possess a strong through-thickness variation, having high stresses on the blade surface,
which then decay fairly rapidly within the first 1–2 mm below the surface.
Fig. 19.12. Measured residual stresses on a propeller blade.
To extrapolate the results of a particular residual stress measurement to other propellers would clearly be unwise.
Nevertheless, since these stresses play an important part in the fatigue assessment of a propeller, the designer
should be aware that they can obtain high magnitudes. However, full-scale experience in terms of the number of
propeller failures would suggest that either residual stresses are not normally this high or there are significant
safety margins in design procedures. The magnitudes of residual stress, although unclear in their precise origins,
are strongly influenced by the thermal history of the casting, material of manufacture, and the type or nature of the
fi i hi i F h i i l k
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/design-stress
f h l i i i b 5/11
finishing operation. Furthermore, it is also known from measurements that large variations can exist between
measurements made at equivalent positions on consecutive blades of the same propeller.
Cross-Sectional and Dynamic Analyses of Flexible Pipes

Qiang Bai, Yong Bai, in Subsea Pipeline Design, Analysis, and Installation, 2014
Safety against Collapse

API Spec 17J is based on working stress design. Present standards have been based on a permissible utilization
of 67% of the pipe capacity for external pressure. In practice, this means that the stresses in the carcass must be
less than 67% of the stresses required to collapse the carcass.
API Spec 17J uses the formulae shown in Table 25.1 to limit stress in the internal carcass from local buckling.
Table 25.1. Permissible Utilization of Stress for Local Buckling
Water Depth (D) Permissible Utilization
D ≤ 300 m 0.67
300 m < D < 900 m (D – 300)/600 ∗ 0.18 + 0.67
D > 900 m 0.85
For water depths less than 300 m, the permissible utilization is as before. Due to the negligible uncertainty
related to hydrostatic pressure in deep water, the permissible utilization is gradually increased with water depth.
The maximum value of 0.85 is reached at 900 m water depth.
Wood: Structural Panels

M.R. O’Halloran, in Encyclopedia of Materials: Science and Technology, 2001
(b) Design stresses

Design stresses include values for each of four species groups and one of three grade stress levels. Grade stress
levels are based on the fact that bending, tension, and compression design stresses depend on the grade of the
veneers. Since veneer grades A and natural C are the strongest, panels composed entirely of these grades are
allowed higher design stresses than those of veneer grades B, C-plugged, or D. Although grades B and C-plugged
are superior in appearance to C, they rate a lower stress level because the ‘‘plugs’’ and ‘‘patches’’ which improve
their appearance reduce their strength somewhat. Panel type (interior or exterior) can be important for bending,
tension, and compression stresses, since panel type determines the grade of the inner plies.
Stiffness and bearing strengths do not depend on either glue or veneer grade but on species group alone. Shear
stresses, however, do not depend on grade, but vary with the type of glue. In addition to grade stress level, service
moisture conditions are also typically presented—for dry conditions, typically moisture contents less than 16%;
and for wet conditions at higher moisture contents.

Allowable stresses for plywood typically fall in the same range as for common softwood lumber, and when
combined with the appropriate section property, result in an effective section capacity. Some comments on the
major mechanical properties with special consideration for the nature of plywood are given below.
Bending modulus of elasticity values include an allowance for an average shear deflection of about 10%. Values for
plywood bending stress assume flat panel bending as opposed to bending on edge, which may be considered in a
different manner. For tension or compression parallel or perpendicular to the face grain, section properties are
usually adjusted so that allowable stress for the species group may be applied to the given cross-sectional area.
Adjustments must be made in tension or compression when the stress is applied at an angle to the face grain.
Shear through-thickness stresses are based on common structural applications such as plywood mechanically
fastened to framing. Additional options include plywood panels used as the webs of I-beams. Another unique
shear property is that termed rolling shear. Since all of the plies in plywood are at right angles to their neighbors,
certain types of loads subject them to stresses which tend to make them roll, as a rolling shear stress is induced.
For instance, a three-layer panel with framing glued on both faces could cause a cross-ply to roll across the lathe
checks. This property must be taken into account with such applications as stressed-skin panels.
Nominal stress approach for welded joints

D. Radaj, ... W. Fricke, in Fatigue Assessment of Welded Joints by Local Approaches (Second Edition), 2006
2.2.4 Influence of mean and residual stresses

The permissible design stress ranges (or amplitudes) are presented as independent of the mean stress (expressed
by the stress ratio R) in the diagrams of Figs 2.4–2.7. The argument behind this simplification is the assumption
that high tensile residual stresses which keep the propagating crack permanently open are acting in welded
components in contrast to small test specimens. This is typically the case, for example, for longitudinally welded
girders, where the residual stresses in the weld reach the yield limit and the fatigue failures start from
imperfections in this area. Stress relieved or postweld-treated welded joints with compressive residual stresses in
the critical area allow higher permissible stresses which depend on the stress ratio, R. The principle of this concept
together with proposed parameter values is graphically shown by the Haigh diagram in Fig. 2.8. Definite functional
relationships are recommended by Eurocode 3,23 IIW design recommendations,9 FKM guideline1 and by
Haibach.2
Fig. 2.8. Endurable nominal stress amplitude of welded joints made of structural steels dependent on mean stress (Haigh diagram); after
Haibach.2
The procedure according to the IIW fatigue design recommendations3 is described in more detail. The influence of
the mean nominal stress σnm on the endurable nominal stress range (or amplitude) is assumed to be independent
of σnm in general, but a fatigue enhancement factor can be introduced in certain cases. Stress-relieved welded
components allow a fatigue enhancement factor rising linearly up to 1.6 between R = 0.5 and R = − 1. Small-scale
specimens made of thin-sheet material can claim a factor up to 1.3 between R = − 0.25 and R = − 1. The FKM
guideline1 proposes a procedure closely related to the Haigh diagram in Fig. 2.8 introducing three different values
of the mean stress sensitivity M, defined as the ratio of endurable stress amplitudes at R = − 1 and R = 0 minus
one.
The specification of a relatively low R-independent permissible design stress amplitude for as-welded joints was
recently shown to be too conservative (Krebs et al40). The underlying hypothesis of a constant upper stress at the
yield limit is proven to be unrealistic by a re-evaluation of the relevant fatigue test results in the open literature. It
is claimed that the R- dependency of the endurance limit and the slope of the S–N curve do not differ
fundamentally between as-welded and postweld heat-treated specimens. The technical endurance limit at 2 × 106
cycles is larger by a factor of 1.25 for R = − 1 in comparison to R = 0.
Suspended Systems
George Antaki, Ramiz Gilada, in Nuclear Power Plant Safety and Mechanical Integrity, 2015
Where is the starting point for pipe stress analysis?

The starting point in design stress analysis is to decide how the thousands of feet of piping and tubing runs in a
nuclear power will be subdivided into manageable subsystems that can be modeled and analyzed, and filed in a
retrievable form. This is one of the first steps: subdividing and grouping piping systems for design analysis. One
good method for tracking piping analysis packages is to generate one set of plant P&IDs color-marked with the
boundaries of the individual stress calculation package numbers.
Clear end points for modeling piping systems are the anchors—points that restrain the six degrees of freedom of
motion of the pipe. Other ending points are floor-anchored equipment such as pumps, compressors, tanks, or
vessels. Where the end point of a model is a piece of equipment, it is important to address several key aspects of
the model:
• Will the pipe model end at the equipment nozzle or will it proceed all the way down to the equipment axis or
even its anchorage to the building structure?
• How to account for the global flexibility of the equipment (for example, its bending or rocking flexibility) and
the local flexibility of the equipment nozzle and shell?
• How to account for the movements at the equipment nozzle caused, for example, by thermal expansion,
seismic motions, or other dynamic motions?
• How to account for the amplification and the frequency shift of the seismic floor excitation as it is transferred
from the equipment base, through the equipment itself, to the pipe nozzle?
• Who has the responsibility for qualifying the equipment-to-pipe connection?
Propeller Blade Strength

J.S. Carlton FREng, in Marine Propellers and Propulsion (Third Edition), 2012
19.6 Residual Blade Stresses

The steady and fluctuating design stresses produced by the propeller when rotating in the wake field developed by
the ship represent only one aspect of the total blade stress distribution. Residual stresses, which are introduced
during manufacture or during repair, represent the complementary considerations.
Full-scale experience relating to residual stresses is limited to a comparatively few studies. Webb et al.19 is typical
of these studies in which measurements have been made for propellers subjected to local heating. These
measurements related to high-tensile brass and manganese–aluminum bronze propellers which had been
subjected to heating subsequent to manufacture. In these cases, residual stresses of the order of 155 and 185 MPa
were measured by the trepanning technique of residual stress measurement. Little published information exists,
however, for the level or nature of residual stress in new or unrepaired castings. Clearly this is principally due to
the semi-destructive nature of the measurement procedure involved in determining a residual stress field for these
types of casting.
From investigations undertaken by Lloyd’s Register14 into the causes of propeller failures, due other than by poor
repair or local heating of the boss, have shown that residual surface stresses measured in blades adjacent to the
failed blade can attain significant magnitudes. The technique used for those measurements was that of bonding
purpose-designed strain gauge rosettes to the surface of the blade and then incrementally milling a carefully
aligned hole through the center of the three rosette configuration. At each increment of depth within the hole, a
measurement of the relaxed strain recorded by each gauge of the rosette was made. This method, used in
association with a correctly designed milling guide, is relatively easy to apply and also has been shown to give
reliable results in the laboratory on specially designed calibration test specimens. An example of the results gained
using this procedure is given by Figure 19.12 for a five-blade, nickel–aluminum bronze, forward-raked propeller
having an approximate finished weight of approximately fourteen tonnes. From the figure it is seen that the
measured residual stresses in this case are of a significant magnitude and tensile in nature over much of the blade.
Indeed, the magnitudes in this case reach tensile values of between two and three times the normally accepted
design stress levels. Furthermore, it can also be seen that the principal stresses at a given measurement point are
of similar magnitudes. This implies the introduction of a strong bi-axial characteristic into the stress field on the
blade surface, which under pure design considerations, in the absence of residual stress, would be expected to be
of a predominantly radial nature. Analysis of the through-thickness characteristics of the relieved strain for the
same propeller blade also suggests that the residual stresses posses a strong through-thickness variation, having
high stresses on the blade surface which then decay fairly rapidly within the first 1–2 mm below the surface.
FIGURE 19.12. Measured residual stresses on a propeller blade.
To extrapolate the results of a particular residual stress measurement to other propellers would clearly be unwise.
Nevertheless, since these stresses play an important part in the fatigue assessment of a propeller, the designer
should be aware that they can obtain high magnitudes. However, full-scale experience in terms of the number of
propeller failures would suggest that either residual stresses are not normally this high or there are significant
safety margins in design procedures. The magnitudes of residual stress, although unclear in their precise origins,
are strongly influenced by the thermal history of the casting, material of manufacture and the type or nature of the
finishing operation. Furthermore, it is also known from measurements that large variations can exist between
measurements made at equivalent positions on consecutive blades of the same propeller.
Design Codes for Risers and Subsea Systems

Yong Bai, Qiang Bai, in Subsea Pipelines and Risers, 2005
5 Safety Against Collapse

API Spec 17J is based on working stress design. Present standards have been based on a permissible utilization of
67% of the pipe capacity for external pressure. In practice this means that the stresses in the carcass must be less
than 67% of the stresses required to collapse the carcass.
API Spec 17J uses the following formulae, see Table 23.2.
Table 23.2. API Spec. 17J.

D ≤ 300m 0.67
300m < D < 900m (D-300)/600*0.18+0.67
D > 900m 0.85
For water depth less than 300 m the permissible utilization is as before. Due to the negligible uncertainty related
to hydrostatic pressure in deepwater, the permissible utilization is gradually increased with water depth. The
maximum value of 0.85 is reached at 900 m water depth.
About ScienceDirect Remote access Shopping cart Advertise Contact and support
Terms and conditions Privacy policy
We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content and ads. By continuing
you agree to the use of cookies.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. or its licensors or contributors. ScienceDirect ® is a registered
trademark of Elsevier B.V.

Design

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

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

Design

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

8/1/2019 Design Stress - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

Journals & Books Create account Sign in

View all Topics

3.1 Structural Properties

Sign in to download full-size image

Figure 3. Design stresses for two product orientations.

Pressure System Design

12.6.1 Conventional and Advanced Codes

Table 12.6. Design Strengths in BS Codes by L. Evans (1974)

Table 12.7. Design Strengths in ASME Code by Pilborough (1989)

ASME Section VIII Division 1

ASME Section VIII Division 2

Steel and Concrete Storage Tank

4.2.4.1 Allowable Stress

Table 4.3. Plate materials and allowable stresses

Plate Minimum yield Minimum tensile Product design Hydrostatic test

A 283M (A C 205 380 137 154

A 285M (A C 205 380 137 154

A 131M (A A,B,CS 235 400 157 171

A 36M (A 36) 250 400 160 171

A 131M (A EH36 360 490a 196 210

A 573M (A 400 220 400 147 165

A 573M (A 450 240 450 160 180

A 573M (A 485 290 485a 193 208

A 516M (A 380 205 380 137 154

A 516M (A 415 220 415 147 165

A 516M (A 450 240 450 160 180

A 516M (A 485 260 485 173 195

A 662M (A B 275 450 180 193

A 662M (A C 295 485a 194 208

A 537M (A 1 345 485a 194 208

Plate Minimum yield Minimum tensile Product design Hydrostatic test

A 537M (A 2 415 550a 220 236

A 633M (A C,D 345 485a 194 208

A 678M (A A 345 485a 220 208

A 678M (A B 415 550a 194 236

A 737M (A B 345 485a 194 208

A 841M (A CLASS 345 485a 194 208

A 841M (A CLASS2 415 550a 220 236

Propeller Blade Strength

19.6 Residual Blade Stresses

Sign in to download full-size image

Fig. 19.12. Measured residual stresses on a propeller blade.

Cross-Sectional and Dynamic Analyses of Flexible Pipes

Safety against Collapse

Table 25.1. Permissible Utilization of Stress for Local Buckling

Water Depth (D) Permissible Utilization

300 m &lt; D &lt; 900 m (D – 300)/600 ∗ 0.18 + 0.67

D &gt; 900 m 0.85

Wood: Structural Panels

(b) Design stresses

and for wet conditions at higher moisture contents.

Nominal stress approach for welded joints

2.2.4 Inﬂuence of mean and residual stresses

Sign in to download full-size image

Where is the starting point for pipe stress analysis?

Propeller Blade Strength

19.6 Residual Blade Stresses

Sign in to download full-size image

FIGURE 19.12. Measured residual stresses on a propeller blade.

Design Codes for Risers and Subsea Systems

5 Safety Against Collapse

Table 23.2. API Spec. 17J.

Water Depth (D) Permissible Utilization

300 m < D < 900 m (D – 300)/600 ∗ 0.18 + 0.67

D > 900 m 0.85

300m < D < 900m (D-300)/600*0.18+0.67

D > 900m 0.85