The integrity of pressure vessels is paramount in various industrial applications, and ensuring their resilience under external nozzle loads is a critical design consideration. This technical article discusses the two commonly employed methodologies for evaluating pressure vessels subjected to such loads: hand calculations based on the Welding Research Council (WRC) Bulletin 107 and finite element analysis (FEA).
The Necessity of External Nozzle Load Evaluation:
As mandated by Paragraph UG-22 of Section VIII, Division 1 of the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code, the impact of external nozzle loads must be accounted for in pressure vessel design. While negligible for smaller instrument-related nozzles, substantial loads can arise from larger inlet and outlet connections. Ignoring these forces can lead to significant stress-related issues and potential vessel failure.
Method 1: WRC 107/297/537 – A Tried-and-True Approach:
WRC 107, along with related bulletins like WRC 297 and 537, offers a well-established method for hand-calculating external nozzle loads. This empirical approach leverages a series of graphs and equations to analyze stresses at the vessel-nozzle junction. While straightforward, it requires familiarity with the method's underlying assumptions and limitations. Fortunately, most pressure vessel design software incorporates WRC 107 capabilities, but even when using software, a thorough understanding of WRC 107 remains crucial for validating results.
Method 2: Finite Element Analysis – Power and Precision:
FEA has emerged as a powerful tool for evaluating pressure vessels subjected to external nozzle loads. This computational method offers numerous advantages, particularly for complex geometries or situations where WRC 107 limitations apply. However, utilizing FEA effectively requires extensive expertise in the method itself, along with a firm grasp of the applicable requirements and acceptance criteria outlined in Section VIII, Division 2 of the ASME code. The ability to accurately classify stresses obtained from the FEA results (primary, secondary, membrane, bending, etc.) is essential for proper interpretation.
Combining Results: A Holistic View
Regardless of the chosen method, the resulting stresses from external nozzle loads must be combined with those arising from other load cases, such as internal pressure and deadweight. Most pressure vessel design software automatically performs this crucial step. Manual calculations, however, necessitate meticulous integration of stresses from all sources to ensure a comprehensive evaluation.
Understanding the Source of External Nozzle Loads:
The origin of the external nozzle loads plays a vital role in their accuracy. "Standard nozzle load tables," based solely on nozzle size rather than function, often present overly conservative values. These generic tables, with their "round numbers" and uniform magnitudes regardless of direction, can lead to unnecessary reinforcement or design modifications. In contrast, external nozzle loads derived from specific piping system stress analyses are generally more accurate. However, beware of excessively conservative loads arising from piping models with completely constrained connections that treat the pressure vessel as an unwavering anchor. A more realistic evaluation can be achieved by incorporating the pressure vessel's actual stiffness values into the piping stress analysis.
Reducing Unnecessary Conservatism: Optimizing Design and Cost:
Overly conservative nozzle loads can inflate pressure vessel material requirements and construction costs. If the loads originate from a piping analysis, consider collaborating with the piping analyst to refine the model with accurate stiffness values for the pressure vessel-nozzle interface. This collaborative approach can significantly reduce conservatism and potentially result in lighter, more cost-effective designs.
Conclusion: Expertise, Collaboration, and Compliance
Evaluating pressure vessels for external nozzle loads demands expertise in either WRC 107 or FEA, along with a nuanced understanding of associated software, method limitations, and the relevant sections of the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code. Critically assessing the source of the loads and collaborating with piping analysts to refine them where necessary can help optimize design efficiency and avoid unnecessary conservatism. By prioritizing knowledge, collaboration, and compliance, engineers can ensure the structural integrity and optimal performance of pressure vessels subjected to external nozzle loads.
Universal Engineering services(UES) can do Engineering of modular substations. Our Structural Engineers can design offshore container modules, skids packages, cargo baskets, steel structural frames, lifting analysis of offshore structures,etc to clients all over the middle east countries like UAE, Oman, Qatar, Saudi and Kuwait for petrochemical, power and oil and gas industry. We also offers reliable offshore and onshore design of structures as per D.N.V. 2.7.1 and we are diversified into Structural Design, Engineering & Analysis for the Industrial, Offshore and Oil & Gas industry.
**The content of this article is taken from web open source. The blogs are intended only to give technical knowledge to young engineers. Any engineering calculators, technical equations and write ups are only for reference and educational purpose.
Comments