THE FUNCTIONING OF FLANGE JOINTS — FINDINGS

FROM FULL SCALE EXPERIMENTS AND FEM ANALYSES

Lars Jacobsson, Hans Andersson, Daniel Vennetti and

Sven-Erik Sällberg
SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden, Göteborg, Sweden

Abstract
Leakages are reported in flange joints of large pipelines for water supply although
mounted according to recommended practise. FEM analyses and full scale
experiments have been performed in order to better understand the functioning of the
joints. The objectives were to find out about the sensitivity to mounting and service
conditions and, if possible, to suggest improvements in today’s practise.
A FEM script was developed, where arbitrary joint geometries can be simulated with
a time hardening visco-elastic behaviour. In-house relaxation tests on a PE 100
material were used to assess the parameters of the material model. Simulations were
performed for 400 and 630 mm flange joints with various geometries, gaskets and
loading conditions. Principally, bolts were given forces corresponding to
recommended torques and then a pressure of 10 bars was applied, leaving the
system to relax for up to 10,000 hours. The main results are that the pressure in the
joint surfaces is concentrated to the outer parts, that it decreases significantly and
that most of the decrease, relaxation, occurs for short times. It is also possible to
study the influence of gaskets, flexible backing rings and re-tightening.
Experiments were performed with 630 mm joints, which were tightened with different
torque levels and then pressurized until leakage occurred. Since strain gauges were
applied on some bolts the real bolt force resulting from the nominal torque could be
registered with time. Configurations which remained tight up to 13 bars were
tightness tested for up to seven days. Among the important findings were that the
bolt forces are much lower than foreseen from the formula usually used to convert
torque to force. Further, the forces are very unevenly distributed, partly since much of
the relaxation occurs already during the tightening rounds. Soft rubber gaskets and
re-tightening significantly improve the performance of the flange joints.

1. BACKGROUND
Leakages reported to occur in flange joints of large pipe lines for water supply are
serious since the pipe lines are expensive and since repair is cumbersome and often
involves disputes about responsibility.
Therefore SP in co-operation with Swedish Water Association (SVU) and Nordic
Plastic Pipes Association (NPG) has investigated the functioning of flange joints and
possible causes for leakage partly by FEM analyses and partly by full-scale
experiments. The flanges studied were two Hostalen PE 100 flanges, one with

1
standard width according to ISO 9624 (1) and one wider flange used by KWH.
Details can be found in two SP-reports (2), (3).
The intention of the numerical study was to get a principal understanding of the
interaction over time between flanges, gaskets, bolts and backing rings, particularly
with regard to the time-dependence of the flange material. A number of pipe and
gasket geometries were simulated for up to 10,000 service hours. Since the FEM
model has limitations, e g the instant application of bolt forces and pressure,
experiments were found to be highly desirable.
In the experimental part 630 mm pipe joints with various flange geometries, gasket
types and procedures for tightening have been pressurized and the conditions for
leakage have been registered. The intention was to find out about the real behaviour
in relationship to the nominal one foreseen in mounting recommendations.
The need for a consistent investigation is mainly due to the difficulty to find
information in the open literature. Even the large reference work (4) is lacking
thorough information. Suppliers issue technical information and offer design support
and courses but the background for the design is scarce. Further, there are different
design principles, (5)-(8), that may be mixed up.
The numerical analyses of flange joints existing in the literature are mainly treating
metals and problems with gaskets and temperatures in pressure vessels, (9)-(11).
Corresponding investigations seem to be missing for plastic pipes with focus on
creep and relaxation, although some suppliers, e g (12), state that their design is
based on FEM-analyses.
Some of the important features, which have been studied, are the following.

The procedures for tightening vary, as does the types of gaskets. The criss-
cross tightening is sometimes performed in rounds with 20% of the final torque
in each round, and sometimes a re-tightening after one or two days is
recommended.
There is also a type of flexible backing ring in the market, intended to
compensate for some of the relaxation of the flange material.
Normally it is tacitly assumed that a rule-of-thumb formula for the relationship
between torque and bolt force can be relied upon to get the desired nominal
flange pressure. This presumes a fixed coefficient of friction between bolt, nut
and backing ring. If the friction is higher the bolt force will become lower.
The market is moving from PE 80 to PE 100 and higher, and to thinner pipes,
from SDR 11 to SDR 17. The functioning of flange joints, as expansion of the
pipe, extent of relaxation etc is if interest to study systematically for the safe
use of new designs.
The effect of using a flange with standard width according to ISO 9624 versus
using a wider flange.

2. THE FEM SCRIPT AND SIMULATIONS

A FEM script was developed using the commercial code ABAQUS (13). The script
comprises a model utilizing the periodic symmetry of a flange joint, as shown in

2
Figure 1(a). Geometry and material properties can be chosen arbitrarily so that
different standard flanges, dimensions, materials, gaskets etc can be simulated.
A strain-hardening model of a typical PE 100 material was chosen. In order to get
realistic material data in-house relaxation tests were performed for 96 hours on
cylinders of Hostalen made from a similar flange adapter and the results were fitted
to the parameters of the material model. The quick relaxation response of the
material is thought to allow extrapolation to longer times.
The plane gaskets are modelled as hyperelastic with catalogue data for an EPDM
rubber (14). The bolt and backing ring are modelled as steel with Young´s modulus
200,000 MPa and Poisson´s ratio 0.3. The backing ring is modelled as solid, but for
cases simulating a profiled flexible backing ring the modulus of the bolt is instead
lowered.
First, the bolt is given a force, 30.2 kN for 400 mm pipe and 37.0 kN for 630 mm pipe,
and a pressure for PN 10, i e 1 MPa is simulated by applying pressure and stresses
on the inner pipe wall and cut-off pipe end. Then the system is left to relax. The bolt
forces correspond to what is obtained from recommended torques by using the rule
of thumb formula M=0.2 D ∙ F, where M is torque, D bolt diameter and F bolt force.

The following cases were analysed, mainly with ISO flange geometry and SDR 17,
and for 1,000 hours:

A 400 mm and a 630 mm flange with rigid gasket, to have a comparison

between a problematic and a non-problematic case.
A 630 mm flange with a flat rubber gasket.
A 630 mm flange with lowered bolt stiffness, in order to get a principal
understanding of the functioning of a flexible backing ring.
A 630 mm flange with a wider flange (KWH), and higher bolt force.
Two runs were made for a 630 mm flange with SDR 11 and for 10,000 hours, one of
them with simulated re-tightening of the bolt after 48 hours.

Figure 1. a) The FEM model with pipe, flange, gasket, backing ring and bolt. b)
Sample result showing vertical stresses after 10,000 hours of relaxation.

3
3. FEM RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
Results from the FEM simulations are stresses and displacements as a function of
time. As an example, the element grid and the vertical stresses are shown in
Figure 1(b) for an SDR 11 run with a rigid gasket and for the mid-section of the model
in Figure 1(a). As can be seen the stresses are concentrated to the outer part of the
flange corresponding to the backing ring.
The by far most important result is the development of the pressure distribution in the
contact surface between the flanges. A typical example is shown in Figure 2.

0,00E+00
0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1

-5,00E+06

-1,00E+07
Pressure (Pa)

Time = 0
-1,50E+07
Time = 1.1 hr

Time = 10.9 hr
-2,00E+07
Time = 1000 hr

Sealing Pressure
-2,50E+07
Normalised distance from inner surface

Figure 2. Pressure distribution for different times, for a 630 mm ISO flange with a
rigid gasket.
Already from the beginning there is contact only at the outer part of the flange, and
this is accentuated as time proceeds. Most of the relaxation occurs for short times,
much shorter than 1,000 hours. Both the longitudinal forces and the radial expansion
of the pipe tend to “wring” the flange out of the backing ring. Since the plastic is much
less stiff than steel the composite joint is much more sensitive than corresponding
metal ones. For comparison the 2 MPa mean pressure (recommended sealing
pressure for a PN 10 joint) is shown as a violet line.
Other significant results are that

Re-tightening after 48 hours gives a higher flange pressure after 1,000 hours.
In any case a large starting torque level is better.
Soft rubber gaskets gives a more even pressure distribution, with a smaller
maximum pressure.
SDR 11 does not give better (higher) pressure level than SDR 17.
If flexible backing rings are used, they should be very flexible, to be able to
compensate for the relaxation.
Bolt forces decrease to around 40% of starting values after 1,000 hours, as
compared to 35% reported in the literature (7).

4
Although important principal understanding is achieved the FEM analyses have
limitations. The material model and the detailed geometry are not fully realistic.
Further the relaxation during pressurizing and tightening of bolts is not reflected, and
this may influence the results, since a time span of an hour is significant. Therefore
experiments are highly desirable.

4. THE EXPERIMENTAL SET-UP AND TESTING PROGRAM

The experiments examined different ways of mounting and different gaskets. They
are described in detail in (3). The objective was to identify critical parameters in order
to suggest robust procedures. Comparisons with the FEM analyses were, of course,
also of interest.
As well ISO flanges as a type of wider flanges (KWH) were welded on to short
sections of 630 mm SDR 17 pipes. Joints were made by bolts and solid backing rings
and the pipe ends were closed by end sections to produce cylindrical pressure
vessels, according to Figure 3(a). It was to a pressurizing device, which could
produce a pressure increase of 0.1 MPa/min and keep the pressure constant within
+0.05 MPa.
A main point of interest is of course to know the bolt forces. Therefore four of the
twenty bolts were instrumented with strain gauges. This enables these bolt forces to
be registered as a function of time during tightening and tests, and also to be
compared with the applied torques. Hence, the validity of the relationship M=0.2 D ∙ F
could be checked as well in this case.
Three gasket types were used which represent different strategies for keeping tight, a
stiff (Klingersil (15) fibre gasket, a flat (Kroll & Ziller G-ST (16) rubber gasket with
steel core, and a (Kroll & Ziller G-ST-P/S (16) rubber gasket with steel core and
integrated O-ring.

Figure 3. a) The experimental set-up. b) Instrumented bolts (no:s 1, 6, 11, and 16 out
of 20 around the backing ring).

5
The eight tests are shown in Table 1 in chronological order. The same flange was
used for all gaskets, for resource reasons. This may influence the later tests in a
sequence since then the flange material is not virgin any more. As can be seen the
tests with the narrow (ISO) flange were performed with the gaskets in a reversed
order, in order to have some opportunity to assess the influence of this.
In principle, the tests were performed in the following way.
The bolts were tightened to a number of pre-determined levels, in increasing order.
The tightening was made in four rounds or more for each level and with the
recommended criss-cross order of bolts. In each round the instrumented bolts come
first, in the order 1-11-6-16. General recommendations for tightening are given in e g
(17) but there is a considerable scatter on the literature For each level of tightening
the pressure was increased until leakage occurred. If the flange joint was tight up to
or higher than 13 bars (1.3 MPa) the pressure was maintained at this level for a
number of days.

Table 1. Tests performed, in chronological order.

Flange type Gasket type

Test 1 Wide (KWH) None
Test 2 -“- Klingersil
Test 3 -“- G – ST
Test 4 -“- G-ST-P/S
Test 5 Narrow (ISO) G-ST-P/S
Test 6 -“- G – ST
Test 7 -“- Klingersil, first mounting
Test 8 -“- Klingersil, second mounting

5. RESULTS FROM LABORATORY EXPERIMENTS

One of the most significant results, and which is reproduced in all experiments is the
interaction between bolt forces during the successive rounds of tightening. A typical
example is shown in Figure 4.
The four rounds of tightening to a torque of 165 Nm are clearly depicted, as is the
order (1, 11, 6, 16). It is also possible to see the relaxation caused by the tightening
of the 16 non-instrumented bolts, due to the elastic and time-dependent properties of
the flange material. After the completion of the tightening it is seen that the bolt
forces are un-evenly distributed, probably not a great problem since the backing ring
helps to create a mean value of pressure around the flange perimeter. In the
literature (18) it is mentioned that there may be an uncertainty relative to formulas of
around 30%. What is more serious, however, is that the bolt forces are much smaller
than predicted by the formula commonly used (violet line and legend of Figure 4).

6
Figure 4. Example of the development of bolt forces during tightening to 165 Nm.

After the first hour of tightening the forces are relatively stable; this is before
pressurizing.
After tightening and pressurizing the results for the tests can be summarised
according to Table 2.
There are two clear tendencies. One is that the narrow flange is tight up to higher
pressures for lower torques. This is probably due to the fact that the flange pressure
becomes higher for a given force, and concentrated to a small ring shaped contour at
the flange surface corresponding to the contour of the backing ring. The other one is
that tightness is more easily obtained with rubber gaskets, and particularly the ones
with an integrated O-ring. Partly this should be thanks to unevenness being
smoothed out by the gasket.

Table 2. Results of the tightness tests summarised. The numbers are the pressures,
in bars, when leakage started for the respective torque levels.

Torque level (Nm) 50 70 110 165 220 280

Wide (KWH)
Klingersil, case 2 2.0 3.0 3.6 3.7
flange
Flat rubber case 3
2.4 3.7 7.2 >16
G-ST
O-ring, rubber, case 4
14.4 14.4
G-ST-P/S
Narrow (ISO)
Klingersil, case 8 9.5 11.7 >16
flange
Flat, rubber, case 6 13.3/
>16
G-ST 10.5
O-ring, rubber, case 5
>16
G-ST-P/S

7
In all cases it is noted that the bolt forces are much smaller than nominally predicted
from the torques. This also means that all joints should be tight with bolt forces
intended in the recommended mounting procedures.
The cases 3, 8 and 6, marked in Table 2 by bold characters as momentarily tight up
to 16 bars, were exerted to a constant pressure of 13 bars for 7, 3 and 5 days
respectively for which periods they all remained tight. For the SDR 17 geometry the
pressure levels 13 and 16 bars make the pipe expand considerably. This contributes
to a tendency of the flange to “wring” out of backing ring, concentrating the flange
pressure to the outer edges of the flange. There is a large difference in creep
bahaviour of the material between 10 and 13 bars.
The forces in the instrumented bolts remained stable during this period, see Figure 5,
indicating that most of the relaxation takes place during tightening and the first hours
of testing. Therefore tightening in rounds or re-tightening after one or two days is
advantageous. In this connection it is observed as a practical matter that the
tightening of large joints in the field is cumbersome and takes time.

Figure 5. Bolt forces for case 3. Note that the whole tightening, and short time
tightness testing lies before “time 0”.

6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUDING REMARKS

The complementary results from the numerical analyses and the experiments give a
considerable amount of information, both confirming the state of the art practise and
yielding some new knowledge.
The calculations give a good principal picture of the function of a flange joint, with the
concentration of the flange pressure to a triangular distribution in the outer region of
the flange surface corresponding to the width of the backing ring. Further the quick
relaxation of the plastic material is mirrored, as is the “wringing” effect from the pipe
expansion. The fact that the backing ring and bolt is much stiffer than the plastic in

8
the flange means that nearly all deformation during creep takes place in the plastic.
Re-tightening, and flexible backing rings, should be advantageous.
If the tightening is performed to bolt forces assumed in recommendations for different
flanges and gasket designs, the joints should remain tight, in spite of a relaxation to
around 40% of the original bolt forces. Such general recommendations are given in
e g (19). The risks are that procedures are mixed up, that tightening in the field is not
performed according to recommendations, or that the relationship between torque
and bolt forces is not the one assumed, due to high friction between bolts, nuts and
backing rings.
The experiments support this but also give some new pieces of information. Through
the quick time-response of the plastic, and since the relationship between torque and
bolt force is not uniform, much lower and more un-evenly distributed bolt forces than
expected are obtained. Soft rubber gaskets seem to have a very favourable influence
on the tightness of a flange joint, especially at lower bolt force levels. Once the first
few hours of tightening and pressurizing are over, the bolt forces seem to be more or
less stable.
Since the combination of a soft and time-dependent plastic and stiff bolts and
backing rings constitute an inherently sensitive design it is important to follow
recommended practise and to be sure about the torque-force relationship for the
bolts used.
When new designs are coming up, involving more high quality plastic materials,
thinner pipes or higher pressures one must be very careful to evaluate the creep
properties of such designs.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Co-funding from Swedish Water Association (SVU) and Nordic Plastic Pipes
Association (NPG) and constructive feed-back during the work are acknowledged.
Thanks also to KWH, Finland for contributing with pipe components and inputs to the
work.

REFERENCES
1. ISO 9624:1997, Thermoplastic pipes for fluids under pressure — Mating
dimensions of flange adapters and loose backing flange, 1997.
2. L. Jacobsson, H. Andersson, D. Vennetti, Tightness of flange joints for large
polyethylene pipes - Part 1: Numerical simulations, SP Report 2011:49, ISBN
978-91-86622-79-4, SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden, 2011.
3. L. Jacobsson, H. Andersson, S.-E. Sällberg, Tightness of flange joints for large
polyethylene pipes - Part 2: Full scale experimental investigations, SP Report
2011:50, ISBN 978-91-86622-80-0, SP Technical Research Institute of
Sweden, 2011.

9
4. Nayar, Mohinder L, Piping Handbook, 7th edition, McGraw-Hill, 2000.
5. PE Pipe – Design and Installation, AWWA Manual M55, American Water Works
Association, 2006.
6. D. A. Willoughby, R. D. Woodson, R. Sutherland, Plastic Piping Handbook
McGraw-Hill, ISBN 0-07-135956-7, 2001.
7. Bolt Torque for Polyethylene Flanged Joints, Plastics Pipe Institute, Technical
note 38, 2010.
8. Backing rings and gaskets, Akatherm recommendation, www.akatherm.com
9. M. Abid, Determination of safe operating conditions for gasketed flange joints
under combined internal pressure and temperature: A finite element approach.
Int. J. Pressure Vessels and Piping, 83 (6), 2006, pp 433-441.
10. H. Estrada, D. Parsons, Strength and leakage finite element analysis of a
GFRP flange joint, Int. J. Pressure Vessels and Piping, 76 (8), 1999, pp 543-
550.
11. M. Murali Krishna, Finite element analysis and optimization of bolted flange
joints with gasket, MS thesis, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, 2005.
12. Catalogue. Improved Piping Products inc. IPP. 1900 Powell street, Emeryville.
A 94608.
13. D. Vennetti, A Parametric ABAQUS model for the Joining of Polyethylene
Pipes, SP Arbetsrapport 2008:18. SP, Technical Research Institute of Sweden,
2008.
14. S. Nilsson, G. Bergström, Packningsförband för polyetenrörssystem –
Utvärdering av tätningsmöjligheter, SP Report P400919, 2004. [In Swedish]
15. www.klinger.se.
16. Sealed tight! Kroll & Ziller product catalogue, www.kroll-ziller.com.
17. “Bolt Torque for Polyethylene Flanged Joints”, Plastics Pipe Institute, Technical
note 38, 2010.
18. M. Carlunger et al, Ordning ur kaos, Bultens tekniska handbook. BULTEN AB
1999. [In Swedish]
19. Guidelines for safe seal usage -Flanges and Gaskets - Part 1 - guidelines for
maintenance operators / engineers / fitters.” ESA / FSA Publication No. 009/98,
1998

10