FEM analysis

for the stress analysis engineer (with application to NozzlePro)

INTRODUCTION
Many physical phenomena in engineering and science can be described in terms of partial differential equations (PDE). In general, solving these equations by classical analytical methods for arbitrary shapes is almost impossible. The finite element method (FEM) is a numerical approach by which these PDE can be solved approximately. The FEM is only one of the many methods available to solve numerically PDE equations (Finite difference method, Finite volume method, etc) but nowadays its the most widespread.

HISTORY of FEM
Engineering applications of finite element analysis is approximately 40 years old. Evolution of FEM is tied with the development in computer technology. With the enhancement in computer speed and storage capacity, FEM has become a very valuable engineering tool. Without computers, FEM would be almost useless. Anyway one of the fundamental notions of FEM, the discretization, is much older. More than two thousands years ago, Archimedes calculated the value of by approximating the circumference with inscribed and circumscribed polygons.

FEM METHODOLOGY
A FEM analysis requires three steps. 1. Pre-process 2. Analysis 3. Post-processing Step1: Pre-process The pre-process is constituted by structure modelling and mesh creation Using a CAD program the structure is geometrically modelled. Constraints, loads and mechanical properties of the structure are defined. A proper element type is selected to constitute the mesh of the structure. Be careful. Dont confuse the geometrical model (before meshing) with the structural model (after meshing). The geometrical elements are only a convenient way to replicate the dimensions of the structure while the structural elements are the physical pieces which the model is divided into. After meshing, the geometrical model is forgotten and only the structural model is considered. In this figure you can compare the geometrical model (on the left) with the structural model (on the right).

To tell the truth, in the past the structural model was created at once by manual insertion of nodes and elements. This procedure, known as a bottom-up approach, requires a substantial investment in time and skill but permits a sharp control on the mesh. Today a top-down method is instead generally used. A solid model is created and the program automatically divides it into nodes and elements. With this procedure the correct selection of elements is fundamental. Element selection There are a lot of different elements available in general purpose FEM programs while dedicated programs may have only one or two elements available. Its important anyway to know the different elements in order to understand if the program at our disposal is suitable for the work to be done.

Elements differs for many characteristics. The dimensionality is the most evident but non necessary the most important. Let's give a look to all the element attributes. Dimensionality Elements can have 1, 2 or 3 dimensions. Its extremely important to realize that his difference doesnt translate in the dimensions of the system analyzed. 1D elements (for example beams) can be used to build a 2D or 3D model. Nodes Each element possesses a set of distinguishing points called nodes. Nodes serve a dual purpose: definition of element geometry and home for degrees of freedom. When a distinction is necessary we call the former geometric nodes and the latter connection nodes. For most elements studied here, geometric and connector nodes are the same. Nodes are usually located at the corners or end points of elements, but some higher-order elements have nodes also placed on sides or faces or the interior of the element. Geometry The geometry of the element is defined by the placement of the geometric nodal points. Most elements used in practice have fairly simple geometries. In one-dimension, elements are usually straight lines or curved segments. In two dimensions they are of triangular or quadrilateral shape. In three dimensions the most common shapes are tetrahedra, prisms and bricks. Degrees of Freedom The element degrees of freedom (DOF) specify the state of the element. They also function as handles through which adjacent elements are connected. The DOF for many (but not all) elements are the displacement and rotation components at the nodes. Nodal Forces There is always a set of nodal forces in a one-to-one correspondence with degrees of freedom. Constitutive Properties For a mechanical element these are relations that specify the material behavior. (for example the elastic modulus E and the thermal coefficient of expansion ).

Fabrication Properties For mechanical elements these are fabrication properties which have been integrated out from the element dimensionality. Examples are cross sectional properties elements such as bars and beams as well as the thickness of a plate or shell element. Caesar II uses pipe elements (i.e. beam elements with pressure added) while Nozzle Pro uses shell (2D) or brick (3D) elements. We will mostly use shell elements for our purposes.

Step 2: Analysis In this step, the geometry, constraints, mechanical properties and loads are applied to generate matrix equations for each element, which are then assembled to generate a global matrix equation of the structure. The form of the individual equations, as well as the structural equation is always,

[F] = [K][u]
where [F] = External force matrix. [K] = Global stiffness matrix [u] = Displacement matrix The equation is then solved for deflections. Using the deflection values, strain, stress, and reactions are calculated. All the results are stored and can be used to create graphic plots and charts in the post analysis. Step 3: Post processing This is the last step in a finite element analysis. Results obtained in step 2 are usually in the form of raw data and difficult to interpret. In post analysis, a CAD program is utilized to manipulate the data for generating deflected shape of the structure, creating stress plots, animation, etc. A graphical representation of the results is very useful in understanding behaviour of the structure The 3 steps can be done by different programs specialized in each of them. However the 3 steps are usually integrated in one single program (Caesar II and Nozzle pro belong to this category)

CALCULATION EXAMPLE
You dont need to understand the details of this calculation. Above all, its useful to understand the way in which a FEM calculation is carried on inside the software.

Lets consider a beam as shown in the figure below.

A beam element has a total of four degrees of freedom, two at each node, two deflections and two rotations, namely, v1, 1, v2, and 2. Since there are four degrees of freedom, the size of the stiffness matrix of a beam element has the size 4 x 4. It can be derived from the elementary formulas for the beam.

Stiffness matrix For the beam shown, determine the displacements and slopes at the nodes, forces in each element, and reactions at the supports.

The beam structure is discretized into three elements and 4-nodes, as shown.

We are going to execute the following steps. find the element stiffness matrix for each element assemble the stiffness matrix for the complete system apply the boundary conditions solve for node deflection (internal forces and reactions are calculated by back-substituting the deflections in the structural equation).

For element 1 and 2 the stiffness matrix is

while for element 3 is

The global stiffness matrix will be (with K = (K) x [L3/(EI)])

We can reduce the size of the stiffness matrix by applying the given boundary conditions. v1 = 1 = 0 v2 = 0 v4 = 0 node 1 is fixed node 2 has no vertical deflection, but its free to rotate. node 4 is fixed.

The reduced stiffness matrix is

Substituting the values of E = 1.4 x 106 psi L = 5 ft I = 2.4 in4 K = 200 lb/in F = 100 lb
we obtain

Solving, we get 2 = -0.0032 rad v3 = -0.4412 in 3 = - 0.0095 rad

SOURCES OF ERROR IN THE FEM

The three main sources of error in a typical FEM calculation are discretization errors, formulation errors and numerical errors. Discretization error results from using an inadequate mesh. Some sources of inadequacy are elements too sparse or too skewed. For example the mesh on the left is clearly insufficient while the mesh on the right is dense enough and the elements are quite regularly shaped.

Formulation error results from the use of elements that don't precisely describe the behavior of the physical problem. Remember that the FEM analysis is not a complete representation the reality. Its important not to be deceived by the accuracy of the 3D model. The FEM analysis can detect only the effects that the used element is designed for. A linear element cant detect large deflections, buckling or other nonlinearities, an elastic model cant detect plasticization, an isotropic element cant be used to model an anisotropic material. The FEM analysis, as any other engineering calculation, is as good as the input used. Numerical error occurs as a result of numerical calculation procedures, and includes truncation errors and round off errors. Numerical error is therefore a problem mainly concerning the FEM vendors and developers. From the user point of view, its important to specify input with an adequate number of significant digits.

NOZZLE PRO
NozzlePRO is a component analysis tool for piping and pressure vessels.

We will perform two examples, a tee SIF calculation and a nozzle load verification.

SIF calculation
connection type header properties branch properties

pad properties

connection type we choose cylinder as base shell type and pad as nozzle type. header and branch properties as per piping classes. pad properties The pad thickness is generally the same of the header. The pad width is at least the radius of the branch. The tilt angle is optional. In this case we analyze a 45 degrees branch.

Loads For this calculation only pressure should be entered Orientation Choose the most convenient to you Material properties You can take these values from norms or Caesar II material database

The only option relevant to us is the one that specifies if the SIF calculated are for the header or the branch. B31.3 doesnt make a distinction between the two values but they are quite different. We have to run the program twice in order to have both values.

structured vs unstructured mesh We can see that Nozzle Pro uses a structured mesh for this calculation even it is capable of managing unstructured mesh. What is the difference between the two? We have a structured mesh when each node has the same valence, i.e. is connected to the same number of other elements. On the left we have a structured mesh with valence R=4. On the right we have an unstructured mesh with valence going from 3 to 5.

The unstructured mesh is usually used for systems having complex shape that cant be easily meshed in a structured way. Other things being equal, the structured mesh is always to be preferred. Output Nozzle pro gives a lengthy output but we are interested only in the section
Stress Intensification Factors Branch/Nozzle Sif Summary Peak 1.391 1.305 0.758 3.314 2.830 Primary 1.643 1.518 0.991 3.502 3.166 Secondary 2.060 1.934 1.123 4.910 4.192

Axial : Inplane : Outplane: Torsion : Pressure:

We read from the Nozzle pro manual that The values to be used in a pipe stress analysis are the peak stress intensification factors. The primary and secondary SIFs should be ignored for B31 applications, (there is no place is in the B31 Codes to use them.). Any SIFs calculated that are less than one should be increased to one before they are used. (See the torsional SIF below.) It is not unusual that a component is stronger than a girth weld in the attached pipe. (This is what the SIF is based on.) FEA results echo this result. If the component is big and thick, compared to the attached pipe, then the SIF could easily be less than 1.0. SIFs less than 1.0 should never be used in a pipe stress analysis however. Always increase the value to 1.0 before using it. So the values to be used in Caesar II calculation are the one in bold but the outplane SIF, being less than 1.0, should be increased to 1.0. So SIF inplane = 1.305 SIF outplane = 1.000 For the branch we repeat the same calculation with the option unflagged

Stress Intensification Factors Branch/Nozzle Sif Summary Peak 9.262 2.785 6.537 13.172 2.848 Primary 4.753 1.554 2.496 4.755 3.166 Secondary 13.722 4.126 9.684 19.514 4.219

Axial : Inplane : Outplane: Torsion : Pressure:

We see that the SIF for the branch are much higher than the headers ones. Moreover for the branch the outplane SIF is usually much higher than the inplane SIF.

Nozzle verification
We now perform a verification of a vessel nozzle

Most of the input values are similar to the ones required for Tee calculations. Id like to explain the optional values highlighted above. The ends of the vessel are points where the stiffness is much greater than the shell because of the heads reinforcements. So knowing the distance of the nozzle from the vessel ends, NozzlePro can perform a more realistic calculation. In this case we opted to check a tangential nozzle. The misalignment between the nozzle and the vessel axes is the parameter Hillside Offset. The following image explains the reference axes for a tangential nozzle.

This is the visualization of our nozzle. Its interesting to highlight the nice mesh that NozzlePro performs around the nozzle. Below there are the loads considered in this example calculation.

Output NozzlePro produces a lengthy output. Id like to comment the most relevant parts. NozzlePro performs many stress checks, divided in primary, secondary e fatigue stress.

ASME Code Stress Output Plots 1) Pl < 1.5(k)Smh (SUS,Membrane) Case 2 2) Qb < 3(Smh) (SUS,Bending) Case 2 3) Pl+Pb+Q < 3(Smavg) (OPE,Inside) Case 3 4) Pl+Pb+Q < 3(Smavg) (OPE,Outside) Case 3 5) Pl+Pb+Q+F < Sa (SIF,Outside) Case 5 6) Pl+Pb+Q+F < Sa (SIF,Outside) Case 6 7) Pl+Pb+Q+F < Sa (SIF,Outside) Case 7 8) Pl+Pb+Q+F < Sa (SIF,Outside) Case 8 9) Pl+Pb+Q+F < Sa (SIF,Outside) Case 9 10) Pl+Pb+Q < 3(Smavg) (EXP,Inside) Case 4 11) Pl+Pb+Q < 3(Smavg) (EXP,Outside) Case 4 12) Pl+Pb+Q+F < Sa (EXP,Inside) Case 4 13) Pl+Pb+Q+F < Sa (EXP,Outside) Case 4

In this case there are no overstressed points in the system.

ASME Overstressed Areas

*** NO OVERSTRESSED NODES IN THIS MODEL ***

We show one of the many visual stress reports that NozzlePro produces.

NozzlePro can show also the deformed shape (of course with deformations scaled) .

Allowable loads The output contains two more interesting paragraph. The first is relative to the allowable loads.

SECONDARY Load Type (Range): Axial Force Inplane Moment Outplane Moment Torsional Moment Pressure ( N (mm. (mm. (mm. (MPa ) N ) N ) N ) )

Maximum Individual Occuring 133650. 40088440. 20529998. 14063388. 2.21

Conservative Simultaneous Occuring 38814. 8232365. 4215939. 4007574. 0.35

Realistic Simultaneous Occuring 58221. 17463484. 8943358. 6011360. 0.35

PRIMARY Load Type: Axial Force Inplane Moment Outplane Moment Torsional Moment Pressure ( N (mm. (mm. (mm. (MPa ) N ) N ) N ) )

Maximum Individual Occuring 211859. 48944544. 37654200. 20141812. 1.62

Conservative Simultaneous Occuring 55355. 9152881. 6956743. 5326808. 0.35

Realistic Simultaneous Occuring 83032. 19416192. 14757482. 7990212. 0.35

In this example put the loads as input and made a stress check but its possible also to ask NozzlePro the allowable loads for the nozzle without introducing any loads in input. Maximum Individual Occuring Loads are the maximum allowed values of the respective loads if all other load components are zero. This is of little interest for the stress engineer. Conservative Allowable Simultaneous Loads are the maximum loads that can be applied simultaneously producing an expected stress within 50-70% of the allowable. Realistic Allowable Simultaneous Loads are similar to the previous ones with the only difference that expected stress is now near the allowable limit. We note that NozzlePro gives the allowable loads in terms of axial force and moments, without considering tangential and circumferential forces. Of course, knowing the nozzle length and direction, its possible to translate the allowable moments in allowable forces at the nozzle flange.

Flexibilities Finally NozzlePro gives the stiffness that can be used in a piping, "beam-type" analysis of the intersection.
Axial Translational Stiffness Inplane Rotational Stiffness Outplane Rotational Stiffness Torsional Rotational Stiffness = = = = 73230. 237098080. 69247872. 189539568. N /mm. mm. N /deg mm. N /deg mm. N /deg

Its very important that we use this values properly in the Caesar model in order to avoid serious mistakes. In particular 1) The stiffnesses should be inserted at the surface of the branch/header or nozzle/vessel junction. 2) The general characteristics to be used are the ones relative to the branch pipe. 3) Stiffnesses not calculated should be made rigid. 4) Sometimes a stiffness is not generated because the finite element model is stiffer than the piping model. In this case the beam model alone, without stiffnesses, should suffice.

The RYY is the inplane direction, and the RZZ is the outplane rotational direction. The stiffnesses should be inserted between nodes 15 and 20.