ASME III Design by Analysis - 2006

June 11, 2018 | Author: Timothy Hull | Category: Deformation (Engineering), Plasticity (Physics), Strength Of Materials, Stress (Mechanics), Bending
Report this link


Description

Gerry C.Slagis e-mail: [email protected] G C Slagis Associates, 258 Hillcrest Place, Pleasant Hill CA 94523-2184 ASME Section III Design-ByAnalysis Criteria Concepts and Stress Limits1 The ASME Section III design-by-analysis approach provides stress criteria for the design of nuclear components. Stresses are calculated elastically for the most part, although plastic analysis is recognized. Limits are specified for primary, secondary, and peak stresses. Inherent in these limits are factors of safety against several modes of failure. The purpose of this paper is to explain the design-by-analysis criteria and fundamental concepts behind the approach. Topics covered include the bases for the primary stress limits, shakedown to elastic action, fatigue, simplified elastic-plastic analysis, and thermal stress ratchet. Issues that are explored are separating primary and secondary stresses in finite element analyses, material ductility requirements, and the meaning of the fatigue penalty factor. 关DOI: 10.1115/1.2140797兴 Introduction The design-by-analysis concept was first introduced in 1963 with the publication of the nuclear vessels code 关1兴. In comparison to the nonnuclear vessels code, a lower factor of safety on pressure design is incorporated. To justify the lower factor of safety, detailed stress analysis and an evaluation of fatigue, including explicit consideration of thermal stresses, are required. Different categories of stress are assigned different allowable values. A criteria document 关2兴 to explain the design-by-analysis approach was published by ASME in 1969. For nuclear piping, a simplified design-by-analysis approach was first published in 1969 as USAS B31.7 关3兴. The Foreword section of B31.7 gives a description of the design philosophy for nuclear piping. The piping rules were incorporated with the vessel rules in 1971 when Section III was revised to include rules for all nuclear components. Some basic questions regarding interpretation of the design-byanalysis rules have come up in recent years. Some of these questions result from extensive use of finite element methods to determine stresses. For example, how are primary stresses extracted from a finite element analysis? The purpose of this document is to review the design-by-analysis criteria, discuss the fundamental concepts behind the criteria, and provide insight into some of the technical issues. The fragmented nature of code developments and the related literature makes it difficult to fully understand all aspects of the concepts involved. Discussions of the design-by-analysis criteria are based mainly on the 1974 Edition of the Section III Code although the stress limits are taken from the 2001 Code. The Code rules given in NB-3200 apply to any pressure retaining component. The piping rules given in NB-3600 are a simplified version of the NB-3200 rules. Some piping terms and criteria will be used to illustrate certain aspects of design-by-analysis. Criteria There are two basic concepts underlying the design-by-analysis criteria. First, stresses are categorized into three types with differ1 This is a minor revision of a paper 共PVP2004-2614兲 of the same title that was presented at the 2004 PVP Conference. Contributed by the Pressure Vessels and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received August 26, 2005; final manuscript received October 24, 2005. Review conducted by G. E. Otto Widera. Paper presented at the 2004 ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Division Conference 共PVP2004兲, July 25, 2004–July 29, 2004, San Diego, California, USA. Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology ent stress limits. Second, the stress limits change for different service levels. The three categories of stress are primary, secondary, and peak. Primary stresses are load controlled; secondary stresses are displacement controlled; and peak stresses are local in nature. Primary and secondary stresses can be membrane or bending. Stress limits are established for Design, Level A, Level B, Level C, and Level D loadings. Design conditions 共design pressure, design temperature, and design mechanical loads兲 establish the required wall thickness of the vessel. Level A conditions are those originally referred to as normal conditions 共1971 edition兲 and Level B as upset conditions. Level A and B loadings are expected to occur in the operation of the component. Stress limits for Level A and B are selected so that there is no damage to the component that requires repair. Level C stress limits permit large deformations in areas of structural discontinuity which may necessitate the removal of the component or support from service for inspection or repair of damage.2 Level D stress limits permit gross general deformations with some subsequent loss of dimensional stability and damage requiring repair, which may require removal of the component or support from service. The allowable limits of stress intensity from NB-3200 关4兴 are shown in Fig. 1 as given in the 2001 Edition. Secondary and peak stresses are not limited for Levels C and D on the basis that fatigue analysis is not required since only one such event is anticipated, followed by shutdown for inspection or repair 关5兴. NB3200 Level D limits are given in Appendix F of Section III. Sm, the allowable material stress intensity, is based on a fraction of the material yield stress and the ultimate stress. For ferritic steels, Sm 1 2 is the lower of 3 minimum tensile strength or 3 minimum yield 1 strength. For austenitic steels, Sm is the lower of 3 minimum tensile strength or 90% of the minimum yield strength. The increase to 90% of yield strength is to allow for the strain-hardening characteristics of austenitic steel. When the emergency 共Level C兲 and faulted 共Level D兲 conditions and stress limits were first identified in 1971, the probability of the condition occurring was discussed. For emergency—The conditions have a low probability of occurrence …; for faulted— Those combinations of conditions associated with extremely-lowprobability events. Elastic stress limits for piping for emergency and faulted were first defined in 1974. The probability of occurrence of the loads 2 Italics indicate wording taken from the Section III code document 共if no reference given兲 or the referenced document. Copyright © 2006 by ASME FEBRUARY 2006, Vol. 128 / 25 Downloaded 26 Jun 2007 to 24.3.32.154. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright, see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm The basic characteristic of a peak stress is that it does not cause any noticeable distortion and is objectionable only as a possible source of a fatigue crack or a brittle fracture. 1 NB-3200 design-by-analysis stress limits „2001… and an equal reliability approach was used as a technical basis for the stress limits. Basis for Stress Limits The code stress limits are derived from … application of limit design theory tempered by some engineering judgement and some conservative simplifications 关2兴. In the case of primary bending stress.5Sm for primary membrane-plus-bending was increased to 2. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright. The fundamental failure load of concern is the ultimate load to burst or plastic instability in the case of primary membrane stress. for example兲. secondary.asme. In 1982. the piping rules 共NB-3600兲 were changed to reclassify the ⌬T1 stress as a peak stress. The peak stress limit is intended to prevent fatigue failure as a result of cyclic loadings. If a piping system is subjected to a fluid temperature increase. But. the Design limit of 1. In piping terminology. Stress Definitions The definitions given in NB-3213 for primary. The basic characteristic of a secondary stress is that it is self-limiting. Plastic deformation 共yielding兲 is a functional concern more than a pressure boundary concern. the secondary stress is C3Eab共␣aTa-␣bTb兲.25Sm for emergency and 3Sm for faulted 关6兴. and to validate the application of elastic analysis when performing the fatigue evaluation. limit load is not the failure load. Pressure is an applied mechanical load. An applied moment to a horizontal cylinder from self-weight produces a primary bending stress. Failure Modes The fundamental failure mode of concern for a pressureretaining component is burst. The hoop stress in a cylinder to react the pressure load is a primary membrane stress. The peak stress is K3C3Eab共␣aTa-␣bTb兲. 128. Peak stress is that increment of stress which is additive to the primary plus secondary stresses by reason of local discontinuities or local thermal stress including the effects. The secondary stress is the equivalent linear stress produced by the radial temperature distribution in a cylindrical shell. A through-wall temperature gradient in a cylinder can cause a 26 / Vol. and peak stresses are given below. Another failure mode that is considered is plastic deformation.32. Secondary stress is a normal stress or a shear stress developed by the constraint of adjacent material or by self-constraint of the structure. In piping terminology. If the cylinder includes a local structural discontinuity.org/terms/Terms_Use. at least. if any. The basic characteristic of a primary stress is that it is not self-limiting. secondary stresses will also be created by a mechanical load. of stress concentrations. thermal expansion stresses are created. This use of an ideally plastic material without strain hardening has led some to conclude that limit load is the failure load. Transactions of the ASME Downloaded 26 Jun 2007 to 24.Fig. The peak stress is the difference between the actual stress and the equivalent linear stress resulting from a radial temperature distribution. Primary stresses which considerably exceed the yield strength will result in failure or. An owner of a vessel will not be pleased if a Level A or B loading results in observable deformation of the vessel. the failure mode of concern is ultimate collapse. FEBRUARY 2006 secondary stress 共general thermal stress兲 and a peak stress 共local thermal stress兲. in gross distortion. An axial temperature distribution in a cylindrical shell or a temperature difference between a nozzle and the shell to which it is attached can cause a secondary stress. For piping.cfm . peak stresses will be created.3.154. Primary stress is any normal stress or a shear stress developed by an imposed loading which is necessary to satisfy the laws of equilibrium of external and internal forces and moments. Thermal expansion also causes peak stress at a local structural discontinuity 共a girth butt weld. If the cylinder includes a gross structural discontinuity. A thermal stress is not classified as a primary stress. The key to understanding the difference between primary and secondary stresses is that primary stresses are required for equilibrium with an applied “mechanical” load. Section III 共NB-3213兲 defines limit analysis and allows the use of limit analysis to establish a lower bound to the collapse load. From the criteria document 关2兴 … The primary stress limits are intended to prevent plastic deformation and to provide a nominal factor of safety on the ductile burst pressure. see http://www. the secondary stress in straight pipe is E␣⌬T1 / 2共1 − ␯兲. Local yielding and minor distortions can satisfy the conditions which cause the stress to occur and failure from one application of the stress is not to be expected. These thermal expansion stresses 共restraint of free end displacement兲 are secondary stresses. The primary plus secondary stress limits are intended to prevent excessive plastic deformation leading to incremental collapse. and the peak stress is E␣⌬T2 / 共1 − ␯兲. 75 to 3. a value of ␣ times the limit established in NB-3221.43 for Level D.4P兲 where P is the design pressure 共1兲 The piping equation is similar to the cylindrical vessel equation given in NB-3324. The primary membrane stress limit for straight pipe 共NB-3640兲 for design pressure is met by meeting the design-by-rule minimum required wall thickness equation. FEBRUARY 2006. the moment at collapse is 50% higher than the moment at first yield.34. bar in tension as shown in Fig. NB-3600 for piping uses 1. For Level D. Applying any additional load causes the bar to deform until the failure strain is reached. the maximum load carrying capability of the bar is achieved. as given above.1 may be used. Consider the same rectangular cross-section bar with the added weight applied to cause bending as shown in Fig. the design-by-analysis criterion for primary membrane stress provides a factor of safety of 1.7 or 1. the allowable value of this stress intensity is 1.org/terms/Terms_Use. Ultimate failure 共plastic in stability/rupture兲 occurs when the primary membrane stress 1 reaches the ultimate strength of the material. where the factor ␣ is defined as the ratio of the load set producing a fully plastic section to the load set producing initial yielding in the extreme fibers of the section. as a parameter in Sm. Ultimate collapse for a ductile material occurs when a fully plastic hinge 3 The 1. Primary bending stresses are limited to ␣Sm 共or less if there is pressure stress兲. For a rectangular cross-section. But. The Code words are … This stress intensity is derived from the highest value across the thickness of a section of the general or local primary membrane stresses plus primary bending stresses produced by Design Pressure and other specified Design Mechanical Loads. For five different materials. Langer 关8. In design-by-rule.3. For piping for Level D. the primary bending stress limit is 50% higher than that for primary membrane. 3. t = PRo/共Sm + 0. accounts for the strain hardening characteristics of the material.5Sm. the minimum required wall thickness for a cylinder is specified for pressure design. the code uses Sm 共 3 yield or 3 ultimate兲. This minimum wall equation is not contained in NB-3200. Sm is 3 yield or 3 ultimate. Instead. the bar can withstand additional load. the bending stress increases until the outer fiber stress is at the yield stress of the material 共a weight of Wy in Fig. the elastically calculated membrane stress is limited to 0. 1兲. NB-3221. This means that the nominal factor of safety on burst 3 for piping for Level D is 2 or 1. 2. 128 / 27 Downloaded 26 Jun 2007 to 24. Yielding is spread across the section. Over 31 different formulas were considered. using Sm of 3 ultimate strength provides for a factor of safety of 3 on plastic instability or rupture failure. and the bar ruptures.9 standard describes burst test procedures for pipe fittings. For solid rectangular sections. Instead 2 1 of using Sy as the failure criterion. the theoretical burst pressure is dependent on the strain hardening exponent of the material. Maximum load carrying capacity occurs when the cross-section is fully plastic. Calculated burst pressure for straight pipe is given as P = 2St / Do where S is the specified minimum tensile strength.3 The bending stress in the bar is a primary stress that is required for equilibrium with the applied 2 1 external load. Vol. By the same reasoning. Hence. This means that the nominal factor of safety on burst is 1 / 0.5 on excessive plastic deformation 共yielding兲.3 refers to ␣Sm based on the shape factor for the section. The allowable 共from Fig.5Sm. 2 Rectangular cross-section bar in tension Pressure Design.3 and the Code requirement is in terms of the “Primary Membrane Plus Primary Bending Stress Intensity.7Su. the code primary membrane stress criterion provides a factor of safety of 1.9兴 discusses pressure design of vessels for burst and provides failure pressure data on PVRC disk tests for a range of materials. tm = PDo/2共Sm + 0. For other than solid rectangular sections. the elastically predicted bending stress allowable is 1Sy or 0. straight.154. is to provide a nominal factor of safety on burst of 3. Consider the limit analysis of a simple. The normal stress in the bar is a primary membrane stress that is required for equilibrium with the applied external load.5 on excessive deformation Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology 共yield兲 and a factor of safety of 3 on ultimate failure 共plastic instability or burst兲 for design pressure. A plastic hinge forms and the bar collapses—unlimited deformation occurs. The design-byanalysis criterion for primary bending permits no significant yielding for Design conditions. these formulas included elastic and plastic calculations. The final equation was selected since it … approximates satisfactorily the available room-temperature tubular bursting data 关7兴.5 for all tubular piping products. In NB-3200. the elastically calculated allowable pressure is double that of the allowable pressure for Design conditions.5P兲 共2兲 The piping equation was first adopted by the B31 Code in 1955. but excluding all secondary and peak stresses. the primary membrane stress is calculated by elastic analysis and compared to a stress limit of Sm 共for Design conditions as given in Fig.5Su. rectangular cross-section. Since the material is ductile. Once the cross-sectional stress reaches the yield stress. Primary Bending Stress. The intent of the cylindrical vessel equation. As weight is increased. Therefore. Reference 关7兴 discusses the derivation of this formula. The ASME B16.5. The limit is given in NB-3221.32. 3兲. but is contained in NB-3300 for vessels and NB-3600 for piping. Limit analysis is used to establish the stress limit for primary bending stress. 1兲 is 1.cfm .5 factor is for a rectangular beam. see http://www.asme. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright.Fig. Use of ultimate tensile strength. a minimum required wall thickness is not specified for pressure design. The use of ultimate tensile strength in addition to yield strength to specify Sm accounts for the strain hardening characteristics of the material. Assume an elastic-perfectly-plastic material model with a yield stress of Sy. the theoretical safety factor was found to vary from 2. Hence. Hence. the factor on cycles governs. This is reasonable since exceeding the limit does not cause failure.asme.” As shown in that section. an elastic-perfectly-plastic material model is used to develop this stress limit. Again. The criteria document 关2兴 gives an excellent discussion on the generation of the design fatigue curves. Meeting the 3Sm limit is a precondition for the fatigue analysis. One-half of the total stress range 共stress amplitude兲 is calculated and referred to as Salt.4共5兲 for determining the effect of superposition of different stress cycles. Secondary Stress. 1. was used to establish the design curve from the best-fit curve. the elastically calculated bending stress limit is 1. and then applied again. the elastically calculated bending stress is double that for Design 共3Sm versus 1. But. This means that the nominal factor of safety on ultimate collapse for Level D is 1 / 0. Limiting the thermal expansion stress range 共Pe兲 to 3Sm will ensure that the cyclic thermal expansion stresses by themselves will shakedown to elastic action. The purpose of the limit as stated in the criteria document 关2兴 is … to validate the application of elastic analysis when performing the fatigue evaluation. From the specified number of cycles. The criteria document also states the purpose is intended to prevent excessive plastic deformation leading to incremental collapse.5Su. 128. Consider a rectangular beam with a rotation that is applied. This behavior is called shakedown to elastic action. n. Two secondary stress limits are provided as shown in Fig. is evaluated.7 or 1. Entering the fatigue curve at Salt gives an allowable number of cycles N. This means that the nominal factor of 3 safety on collapse for piping for Level D is 2 or 1.Fig.5Su provides a factor of safety on ultimate collapse of 3 共for a design mechanical load兲. 4 Shakedown to elastic action 28 / Vol.5. The need to validate the fatigue evaluation will be discussed in the section on “Peak Stress. This is a basic piping design require- ment. The quantity PL + Pb + Q and the quantity Pe are both required to be less than 3Sm for Level A and B conditions. see http://www. combining primary stress range with secondary stress range will ensure that the combined primary-plus-secondary stress range 共PL + Pb + Q兲 will shakedown to elastic action.154.cfm . Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright.5Sm兲. A detailed procedure is specified in NB-3222. This is a displacement-controlled condition. the outer fiber will not yield. Peak Stress. A factor of 2 on stress and 20 on cycles. Since 3Sm is equivalent to 2Sy the design-by-analysis criterion does not impose a factor of safety on shakedown to elastic action. The best-fit data from small polished bar specimens are provided. 3 Rectangular cross-section bar in bending with the entire cross-section at Su exists. The 3Sm stress limit was developed by considering a cyclic secondary stress range. For Level D.org/terms/Terms_Use. the primary-plus-secondary stress range limit does not provide complete protection against ratcheting. whichever is largest. an elastic bending stress limit of 0. The elastically predicted moment stress corresponding to a fully plastic hinge is 1. Therefore. on subsequent half-cycles. For piping for Level D. and the accumulated damage must be less than or equal to one 共兺n / N 艋 1兲. In the low cycle region. the beam outer fiber will yield.5 times 0. FEBRUARY 2006 Transactions of the ASME Downloaded 26 Jun 2007 to 24.43. The damage from all stress cycles are added together. The total 共primary-plus-secondary-plus-peak兲 stress range for a stress cycle is calculated. The failure mode of concern is fatigue. The loading/unloading diagram is shown in Fig. 4. the fatigue damage is calculated as n / N.32. Hence. released. not the amplitude. The inherent factor on stress is signifi- Fig. For other secondary stresses 共Q兲. On the first half-cycle of rotation. the stress range. The magnitude of the rotation is such as to produce an elastically predicted bending stress of 2Sy or a strain of 2Sy / E.7Su. Design fatigue curves are given for various materials. The stress evaluation must include consideration of local structural discontinuities 共stress concentration兲. Peak stresses are a concern for fatigue.” Incremental collapse will be discussed in the section on “Thermal Stress Ratcheting.3. FEBRUARY 2006. a through-wall temperature distribution are given. A cumulative usage factor of 1 implies reasonable assurance that leakage will not occur in the design life. Questions concerning Ke are discussed in a later section 共Meaning of Ke兲. Hence. For pressure design. The inherent assumption is that the net section stresses and strains are elastic. Examples of thermal bending as given in NB-3213. in diameter on each cycle. Once the sustained pressure stress exceeds 0.3. including peak stress from local structural discontinuities. the primary membrane stress limit is intended to provide a nominal factor of safety of 3 on burst pressure. there is plastic cycling at the local structural discontinuity. A thermal stress range of 2Sy shakes down to elastic cycling as long as the pressure stress is less than 0. 5. Vol. and even plastic strains at local discontinuities.3 for austenitic steel 共3兲 It should be noted that under certain combinations of steady state and cyclic loadings there is a possibility of large distortions developing as the result of ratchet action. there will be significant secondary bending stresses at the discontinuity. S1 and S2 for shakedown to elastic action. A cumulative usage factor of 1 does not mean that a crack has initiated or that a crack has propagated through the wall. the deformation increases by a nearly equal amount for each cycle. are compared to a design curve to determine the allowable number of stress cycles. The ordinate is the thermal stress. Ductility 3. Only the peak stresses at the local structural discontinuity are in the plastic regime. Elastically predicted total stress amplitude. Simplified Elastic-Plastic Analysis. If the primary-plus-secondary stress range exceeds 3Sm.asme. Materials acceptable for code use are specified. These tests were run to the point of separation of the specimen. Salt. for Sn 艌 3mSm Fig. there is an incremental plastic strain on each cycle of loading. 5 Bree diagram Ke = 1/n = 5 for carbon steel The maximum value for Ke is a significant design problem for severe thermal transients.154. but minimum ductility is not one of the specified parameters used for material selection. Thermal Stress Ratchet. and 共3兲 stress produced by the temperature difference between a nozzle and the shell to which it is attached.5Sy. the cylinder will permanently grow Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology The design-by-analysis criteria presume ductile material behavior. The primary-plus-secondary-plus-peak stress range amplitude. The maximum allowable range of thermal stress. With zero pressure. In a cylindrical shell with a gross structural discontinuity. The Ke factor can be substantial. a thermal stress range of 2Sy will result in ratcheting for an elastic-perfectly plastic material model. 共2兲 the bending stress produced by an axial temperature distribution in a cylindrical shell. The fatigue design method is straightforward. One quote from this document 共1964兲 is … The amount of ductility required to insure satisfactory performance of a pressure vessel has never been definitively established. The Bree analysis 关11兴 considers a cylinder with a steady-state pressure load 共primary membrane stress兲 and a linear through-the-wall temperature distribution 共secondary bending thermal stress兲 that is applied and then removed. Only the hoop direction is considered. is multiplied by Ke. the primary-plus-secondary stress range limit of 共P + Q ⬍ 3Sm = 2Sy兲 does provide protection against ratcheting as long as the sustained primary membrane hoop stress is less than 0. 128 / 29 Downloaded 26 Jun 2007 to 24.cfm .13 are 共1兲 the equivalent linear stress produced by the radial temperature distribution in a cylindrical shell. “Thermal bending” is not specifically defined in NB-3228. Typical yield strains from secondary stress. the precondition for the fatigue analysis is that the primary-plus-secondary stresses shakedown to elastic action. Therefore. For R1 and R2. is given for a linear temperature distribution and a parabolic temperature distribution. A common question is—“Does the fatigue design curve represent crack initiation or crack propagation through the wall thickness?” My answer is—The objective of the fatigue design method is to prevent a leakage failure of the pressure boundary.32. thermal bending in piping terms are E␣⌬T1 / 2共1 − ␯兲 and C3Eab共␣aTa − ␣bTb兲. a thermal stress range of 2Sy shakes down to elastic cycling. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright. The primary-plussecondary stress range limit of 3Sm may be exceeded for a stress cycle including thermal bending if a penalty is taken on the fatigue evaluation 关NB-3228. are not that large in comparison to elongation to failure of 33% or more for typical carbon steels. that is. Material characteristics and ductility are discussed in Ref. By comparison with the piping rules prior to 1982.” the hoop membrane stress is limited to 2 / 3Sy. Thermal stress ratchet is discussed in NB-3222. The primary-plus-secondary stress range limit does not provide complete protection against ratcheting. a plastic strain correction factor. The original 共1963兲 fatigue design curves were based on small polished bar specimen test data. The ratchet phenomenon can be quantified by the Bree diagram as shown in Fig.5Sy. Limits for one particular loading. The material must have sufficient ductility such that the burst pressure of the cylinder is not significantly reduced. P for plastic cycling. These limits are based on the work of Miller 关10兴. as a function of the steady-state pressure stress. Allowing secondary stresses to exceed the yield strength of the material requires that the material have sufficient ductility to accommodate the required plastic flow without failure.cantly larger than 2 in the low cycle region.5.5Sy.5. As discussed in the section on “Pressure Design. Material properties are elastic-perfectly-plastic.org/terms/Terms_Use. If ratcheting occurs. which is very detrimental to fatigue life. A one-dimensional analysis is performed. 关12兴. and R1 and R2 for ratcheting. see http://www. There are two other aspects of the design-by-analysis criteria that are only directly applicable if the material has sufficient ductility.5 Simplified Elastic-Plastic Analysis兴. The regimes are E for elastic behavior. 7兲. Judgment is definitely required. ␴r . then the restraining effect of the compatibility moment reduces the bending stress in the plate. . ␴l . Limit analysis implicitly assumes that the material possesses sufficient post-yield ductility to ensure that the limit analysis is appropriate for the specified geometry. And with FEA comes many questions on interpretation of results. Many different methods have been tried. If the flat plate is analyzed as a vessel/plate structure. The project report 关13兴 is very informative with a discussion of Fig. NB-3222-1兲. but this is unreasonable. Pressure causes a hoop membrane stress of pR/ t 共thin wall approximation兲 resulting in hoop strain and growth in diameter. then the moment is classified as secondary.32. The problem is compounded by the fact that the stress intensity referred to as Pb or Q . If the flat plate is analyzed by itself without the restraining effect of the compatibility end moment. ␶lt .asme. shell analysis was the standard method for determining stresses in a vessel.org/terms/Terms_Use. Now. 7 Moment in flat plate with and without discontinuity moment 30 / Vol. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright. Consider a long cylindrical vessel with a thickness change in the middle 共gross structural discontinuity兲 subjected to internal pressure 共Fig. the shear and moment at the discontinuity are secondary in nature. but sets of six quantities representing the six stress components ␴t . . Finite Element Analysis (FEA) When design-by-analysis was developed. do not represent single quantities. This geometry is an exception to the rule as noted in Table NB-3217-1. The first problem was linearization. If there is no mechanical load. membrane stress and bending stress are a direct output of the analysis. ␶lr . Stresses in the flat plate are dependent on the magnitude of the end moment. the thickness change is assumed to be sufficiently removed from the vessel ends so that end conditions do not affect the stress analysis at the discontinuity location. the stress is secondary in nature.cfm . common practice is to select a “cut line” on the model and interpolate between discrete stress output points to determine the average 共membrane兲 and linear 共bending兲 stresses across the wall. and the compatibility moment is classified as primary. FEBRUARY 2006 Transactions of the ASME Downloaded 26 Jun 2007 to 24. 6兲. But whether the moment is classified as secondary or primary depends on how the flat plate is evaluated for pressure design. The internal shear and moment are required for displacement compatibility at the vessel/plate joint. An internal shear and moment are required to restore compatibility at the joint. In this example. see http://www.154. Is it Primary or Secondary? A perennial problem in running FEA is determining the primary stress from total stress results.3.Fig. I disagree. The fallback position seems to be to consider all stresses as primary. identification of primary stresses versus secondary stresses is relatively straightforward but still requires judgment. The stress criteria apply. Hence. The hoop membrane stress is required for equilibrium with the applied pressure 共primary membrane兲. Consider a second geometry—a cylindrical vessel with a flat plate closure 共Fig. 6 Discontinuity analysis The code also allows the primary stress limits to be exceeded if it can be shown by limit analysis that the specified loadings do not exceed two-thirds of the lower bound collapse load. Simplify the structural model by assuming an abrupt change in thickness for the stress analysis. With shell analysis. Pressure is an internal mechanical load. The key to resolving a stress distribution into primary and secondary components is to understand that the primary stress is required for equilibrium with an applied mechanical load. And. A PVRC project was established to provide guidance. To determine membrane stress or bending stress. ␶rt 共footnote 2 to Fig. The implementation of FEA and the interpretation of results need to be improved. Some people say that design-by-analysis stress criteria are not applicable for FEA. The growth is larger in the thinner member with the higher hoop stress. or if stress is a result of compatibility considerations at a gross structural discontinuity. 128. The internal shear and moment are self-equilibrating and are not required for equilibrium with a mechanical load. the more common analysis method is FEA. This method was originally developed for piping and published in 1969 in B31. then that stress is secondary. For a rectangular section. the nominal factor of safety is reduced to 1. The limit for bending is higher than for membrane because of the plastic hinge effect. Acceptable number of cycles is determined from a design fatigue curve. the allowable number of cycles is very low because of the high Ke penalty factor on the fatigue evaluation. or collapse. The primary-plus-secondary stress range limit of 3Sm is to ensure shakedown to elastic action of the through-wall membrane and bending stresses. If the stress is not required for equilibrium with the applied load. The strain concentration factor applied to thermal bending is based on the Neuber rule. are secondary. For primary stresses. and recommendation for a two separate factors approach as was done in B31. is detrimental to fatigue life.4 The intent of the 1 / n factor is a critical issue. Cylinder burst test data indicate that failure will occur when the hoop membrane stress reaches the ultimate stress of the material. discussion of the problems with the 1 / n approach.43. Included in Ref.5. Secondary stresses are limited to require shakedown to elastic action to ensure the applicability of the fatigue evaluation. the sim4 The quoted Ref. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright. therefore. Stress limits are derived from application of limit design theory.5⫻ Su / 3兲 provides a factor of safety on ultimate collapse of 3 for a design mechanical load.3 for austenitic steel兲 has been a concern for design.3. and the P + Q stress is needed in the transition element to determine Ke for the fatigue evaluation. A knowledgeable engineer is able to separate primary from secondary in FEA results at a discontinuity using the principle that the primary stress is that required for equilibrium with the applied load. Recalling the criteria. A Ke factor of 1 / n is not applied to the thermal bending stress. Secondary thermal gradient stresses 共thermal bending in NB-3200 terms兲 could exceed 3Sm provided a penalty was taken on the fatigue analysis. 关14兴 that I do not agree with— The ASME III NB 3200 rule for Ke definition is clearly devoted to elastic-follow-up effects as stated in Ref. the B31. Sm is the lesser of 2 / 3Sy or 1 / 3Su. The 1968 edition of Section III did not have simplified elasticplastic rules to allow secondary stresses to exceed 3Sm. ␣ is 1. there are major problems with the approach in my opinion. stress categories.linearization. example problems. However. The Level C and D stress limits permit large deformations that may require repair or replacement of the component. A mechanical load can also cause secondary stresses. required for compatibility at a gross structural discontinuity. There is one statement in Ref.7 approach included two penalty factors—a notch factor and a plastic strain redistribution factor. There was no technique available to qualify the piping for fatigue without a simplified elasticplastic method. Peak stresses are a concern for fatigue. A secondary stress is displacement controlled and is self-limiting. 3. or peak. and a single fatigue penalty factor Ke was introduced. Primary membrane stresses are limited to 1Sm for Design conditions. The A factor was eliminated.org/terms/Terms_Use.7 approach was developed. Only primary stresses are evaluated for Level C and D. Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology plified elastic-plastic rules for piping were revised and comparable rules were introduced into NB-3200. For many of the high thermal transient situations in nuclear applications. or a through-wall temperature distribution. The n parameter is the strain hardening exponent for the material.cfm .asme. For Level D. Plastic cycling at a local structural discontinuity. an elastic bending stress limit of 0. Thermal expansion in a piping system. This is unreasonable in my opinion.7 rules were incorporated into Section III in 1971.7. Implicit in the Level C and D limits are lower factors of safety against failure based on lower probability of occurrence of the load.5Su 共1. When the B31.” This is a significant limitation. To understand the use of Ke it is necessary to review the development of the simplified elastic-plastic method. The structural element approach does not seem to be workable for fatigue damage calculations. The problem in Class 1 nuclear piping was that secondary thermal gradient stresses were exceeding the 3Sm shakedown to elastic action limit in many cases.154. many analyses are performed to determine thermal gradient stresses for the fatigue evaluation. The plastic strain redistribution factor accounts for underestimation of strain by elastic analysis at a gross structural discontinuity when the weaker member yields. 6 is Ref.7 approach is explained by Tagart in Ref. is not a mechanical load and. Factors of 2 on stress and 20 on FEBRUARY 2006. The elastically predicted primary-plus-secondary-plus peak stress range for each unique stress cycle is used in the fatigue evaluation. 1 / n is only applied to the mechanical stress. Primary stresses are a concern for deformation. 128 / 31 Downloaded 26 Jun 2007 to 24. Ke = 1. but limit load is not the failure criterion for primary stress. The background and technical basis for the B31. Pressure is a mechanical load and causes primary stress. The notch factor accounts for detrimental effects of plastic cycling at a stress concentration. and recommendations. The report also recommends determination of P + Q at a “structural element” not a “transition element. the primary stress limits for Design provide for a nominal factor of safety of 3 on burst. The maximum thermal gradient stress is usually in the transition element. plastic cycling rather than elastic cycling will occur.32. secondary. Hence. Reference 关14兴 discusses a different procedure for calculating the fatigue penalty factor as proposed for use in the French code. The elastically predicted moment stress corresponding to a fully plastic hinge is 1. the nominal factor of safety is reduced to 1. burst. The B31. A full discussion of the development of the simplified elasticplastic rules is given by Slagis 关15兴. But the report gives the impression that the only other solution is to consider all membrane and bending stresses at a discontinuity as primary.43.7 关3兴. Vol. Meaning of Ke The maximum value of Ke 共1 / n equal to 5 for carbon steel. 关15兴 are summaries of test data. membrane plus bending兲 are limited to ␣Sm for Design conditions. The secondary stress limit also provides protection against ratcheting as long as the hoop membrane pressure stress is less than 0. Hence. Primary bending stresses 共actually. Hence. Primary stresses are required for equilibrium with an internal or external applied mechanical load. the range of primary-plus-secondary stress including thermal bending may exceed the 3Sm shakedown criterion if a penalty factor is taken on fatigue. Burst and collapse are the fundamental failure modes of concern for primary stress.0 for Sn 艋 3Sm = 1. The report is oriented to proper determination of membrane stress and bending stress without categorization as primary or secondary.0关共1 − n兲/n共m − 1兲兴 ⫻关共共Sn/3Sm兲 − 1兲兴 = 1/n for 3Sm ⬍ Sn ⬍ 3mSm for Sn 艌 3mSm 共4兲 The single Ke factor with a maximum of 1 / n is based on the work of Langer 关9兴. Stresses from internal forces and moments. Summary Stresses are categorized as primary. The design fatigue curve is based on best-fit polished bar specimen data. such as a notch. see http://www. For Level D. If the through-wall membrane and/or bending stresses exceed the limit. In my experience. produces a secondary stress. a separate “equilibrium” analysis or plastic analysis is recommended.5Sy.5Su. 关16兴. 关9兴 in this document. This may be a workable solution. 6. J. M.. C. A cumulative usage factor of 1 implies reasonable assurance that leakage will not occur in the design life.7 material parameters outer radius primary-plus-secondary-plus peak stress amplitude material allowable stress range of primary-plus-secondary stress intensity total stress intensity range material ultimate tensile strength material yield stress through-wall mean temperature minimum required wall thickness coefficient of thermal expansion Poisson’s ratio linear portion of through-wall temperature gradient nonlinear portion of through-wall temperature gradient References 关1兴 ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III. limits are placed on thermal stress from through-wall temperature distributions as a function of the value of sustained pressure membrane stress. 1972. Two penalty factors were specified in the B31.. these stresses are E␣⌬T1 / 2共1 − ␯兲 and C3Eab共␣aTa − ␣bTb兲. pp. A. Counc. J. 2共3兲. “Meaning of Ke in Design-by-Analysis Fatigue Evaluation. “PVRC Interpretive Report of Pressure Vessel Research. Bull..” J. and Hollinger. New York. Counc. 1959. 1967.” Weld. Ratcheting is incremental deformation on each cycle of loading.. New York. “Thermal-Stress Ratchet Mechanism in Pressure Vessels.. “PVRC Interpretive Report of Pressure Vessel Research. ASME. A Decade of Progress. S. A Decade of Progress. J. General loading cases can be evaluated by the Bree diagram.. 关3兴 USA Standard Code for Pressure Piping. 1991. NB-3200 contains code rules on “Thermal Stress Ratchet.. The plastic strain redistribution factor accounts for underestimation of plastic strain by elastic analysis at a gross structural discontinuity. Res.154. Res.7. 361. Counc. Strain Anal. 关13兴 Hechmer. W. H. 429. Res.7 piping secondary thermal stress index outer diameter modulus of elasticity average modulus of two sides of a joint piping peak thermal stress index plastic strain correction factor 32 / Vol... pp. Analysis. J.. A measure of “sufficient ductility” has not been quantified to date. B. 4–34 关reprinted from Weld. Bull.” 关2兴 Criteria of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code for Design by Analysis in Sections III and VIII. W. “A Wall Thickness Formula for High-Pressure.” ASME Paper No. Res. Section I—Design Considerations. Michel. One major problem in finite element analysis is separating primary stresses from secondary stresses.” in Pressure Vessel and Piping: Design and Analysis.” in Pressure Vessel and Piping: Design and Analysis. Res. “Design-Stress Basis for Pressure Vessels. Section 2—Material Considerations. “Extreme Loads and Their Evaluation With ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Limits. pp. New York. R..” USAS B31. The design curve is not based on crack initiation.cfm . 128. 关12兴 Gross. Volume 3. A Decade of Progress. ASME. Mech.. 关8兴 Langer. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright. D. J.” PVP2005-71420. 1972. 关9兴 Langer. 关4兴 ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III. 关7兴 Burrows. W. Nomenclature A C3 Do E Eab K3 Ke ⫽ ⫽ ⫽ ⫽ ⫽ ⫽ ⫽ notch factor in B31. 52A-151.. 1982...7 method—a notch factor and a plastic strain redistribution factor. “Rules for Construction of Nuclear Vessels.. 2005. Analysis. 190–196.. and Stevenson.” To prevent ratcheting. R.. “Rules for Construction of Nuclear Facility Components.. shear and local bending moment stresses at a gross structural discontinuity are secondary in nature. Bull.cycles are used on the best-fit data curve to obtain the design curve. 95.” 关5兴 Bohm. 1972. “Elastic-Plastic Behavior of Thin Tubes Subjected to Internal Pressure and Intermittent High-Heat Fluxes with Application to Fast-NuclearReactor Fuel Elements.32. 81.” J. is extremely conservative and should be revised. Vagner.7–1969.. High-Temperature Piping. 2001 Edition. pp. 关11兴 Bree. D. G. In piping terms. 1972. 1963 Edition. is taken on the fatigue analysis. ASME. L. 关15兴 Slagis.” Pressure Vessel and Piping: Design Technology—1982—A Decade of Progress. The notch factor accounts for plastic cycling at a local structural discontinuity.n⫽ Ro ⫽ Salt ⫽ Sm ⫽ Sn ⫽ Sp ⫽ Su ⫽ Sy ⫽ T ⫽ tm ⫽ ␣ ⫽ ␯ ⫽ ⌬T1 ⫽ ⌬T2 ⫽ plastic strain redistribution factor in B31. 1964兴... F. and Rankin. The maximum value for Ke. 226–238. 1998. ASME. ASME. Morel. 1991. The critical parameters are a sustained primary stress and a cyclic secondary stress.asme. B. Heliot. G. pp. 1968兴. and Faidy. Materials and Fabrication.” in Pressure Vessel and Piping: Design and Analysis. Ke. 8–60 关reprinted from Weld. J.. “Basis of Current Dynamic Stress Criteria for Piping. C. R. Bull. ASME. “3D Stress Criteria Guidelines for Application. 68-PVP-3. 95. 1952. Thermal bending is the secondary bending from a through-wall temperature gradient or a mean temperature difference. The analyst must exercise competent engineering judgment.” Weld. Division 2. L. The design-by-analysis criteria implicitly assume materials with sufficient ductility to accommodate the required plastic flow without failure.” Weld. 关6兴 Slagis. ASME.” in Pressure Vessel and Piping: Design and Analysis. 1 / n. 367. 1969.. Analysis. The burst pressure of a vessel with a gross structural discontinuity could be significantly reduced if the material does not have sufficient ductility. “Improvements on Fatigue Analysis Methods for the Design of Nuclear Components Subjected to the French RCC-M Code. 6. pp. pp. 1964兴. Simplified elastic-plastic analysis rules are provided in designby-analysis. 关10兴 Miller. Basic Eng. Bull.. “Nuclear Power Piping. “Plastic Fatigue Analysis of Pressure Components. FEBRUARY 2006 K␧ ⫽ m. see http://www. C. G. The key to making a decision is that primary stresses are required for equilibrium with an applied mechanical load.org/terms/Terms_Use. J. Volume 1. Direct application of the design-byanalysis criteria to high strength materials with low ductility is questionable in my opinion. 15–16. The simplified elastic-plastic analysis method was first developed for piping and published in B31.3. This is a one-dimensional analysis based on elastic-perfectly plastic material behavior.. This is the approach that should be adopted for design-by-analysis. p. Counc. J. 209–226 关reprint of ASME Paper No. 415– 418. 1971兴. A.. Counc. Transactions of the ASME Downloaded 26 Jun 2007 to 24. 84–94 关reprinted from Exp. In general. A Decade of Progress. Volume 1. G. The primary-plus-secondary stress range limit of 3Sm may be exceeded for thermal bending provided a penalty factor. New York. Volume 1. 关16兴 Tagart. F. 关14兴 Grandemange. pp..


Comments

Copyright © 2024 UPDOCS Inc.