International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies

E-ISSN22498974

Research Paper

DESIGN AND STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF PRESSURE

VESSEL DUE TO CHANGE OF NOZZLE LOCATION AND
SHELL THICKNESS
Shaik Abdul Lathuef 1 and K.Chandra sekhar 2

Address for Correspondence

1

PG Student, 2Associate Professor

Department of Mechanical Engineering, QIS College of Engineering and Technology, Ongole, Andhra Pradesh.
ABSTRACT
In the past several years there have been significant changes to the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
Boiler and Pressure Vessel (B&PV) Code and the use of international pressure vessel codes such as EN13445. This paper
discusses some of the potential unintended consequences related to Governing Thickness of shell as per ASME. Here have a
scope to change the code values by take the minimum governing thickness of pressure vessel shell to the desired
requirements and also relocate of nozzle location to minimize the stresses in the shell. A low value of the factor of safety
results in economy of material this will lead to thinner and more flexible and economical vessels. Here we evaluated the
stress in the vessel by Zick analysis approach.
KEYWORDS: Design procedure, nozzles orientation, stress calculation

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Pressure vessels are probably one of the most wide
spread equipment within the different industrial
sectors. In fact, there is no industrial plant without
pressure vessels, steam boilers, tanks, autoclaves,
collectors, heat exchangers, pipes etc. For many years
an ISO committee (ISO TC/11, Annaratone 2007)
was dedicated to study pressure vessels and provide
design guidelines with necessary codes and design
procedure of pressure vessel as per ASME sec VIII
Div-1 to adequately cover the intended subject
matter. However, even when the code includes
specific regulations to determine the thickness of the
different components, and taking minimum thickness
it will leads to make thinning vessel with required
factor of safety at design temperature and pressure.
With minimum thickness of the shell we can make
light weight vessel and low cost vessel. At the same
time it may operate at safe conditions facing some
issues related to structural analysis by evaluating the
L.P zick analysis are exhaustively taken into
consideration.
In thin cylindrical shell following stresses were
induced due to internal pressure.
1. Circumferential stress(hoop stress)
The circumferential stress has the tendency to split up
the cylindrical shell into two troughs.
c = P R / t

Fig:1Circumferential
Fig:2 Longitudinal
stress (hoop stress)
stress.
2. Longitudinal stress.
The longitudinal stress has the tendency to split up
the cylinder shell into two cyliders.
=PR/2t
2.0 Design Criteria
These equipment usually present in industrial plants,
are used as filter vessel, gas and vapor storage
IJAERS/Vol. I/ Issue II/January-March, 2012/218-221

systems. The following design procedure shows an

example of pressurized horizontal steel tank used as
storage vessel in processing plant. Governing
Thickness tg as per UCS 66(a) have a scope to
modify Some extent in which this can be minimize
the thickness of vessel shell with required factor of
safety, by using higher strength materials for vessel
construction and change in nozzle location. The Code
procedure is to followed to determine the vessel
thickness within an effective factor of safety.
Design Data
Code of Design and Construction
= ASME Sec VIII Div -1
Fluid handled
= Water
Working Pressure
= 9Kg/cm
Design Pressure-Internal P =10.0Kg/cm
Design Pressure (External) = Nil
Nominal inside diameter D = 100cm
corroded inside radius R = (D/2)+ Ca
= (100/2) +1.5 = 50.15 cm
Weld joint efficiency E = 1
Nominal inside crown radius L = 90mm
Applicable loadings on vessel as per UG-2
1. Internal design Pressure
2. Vessel supports
Hydro static test pressure =1.3PE= 1.3101
= 13 Kg/cm as per UG-99
Pressure relief device requirements as per UG 125(a)
All pressure vessels within the scope of ASME code
division, irrespective of size or pressure, shall be
provided with pressure relief device .A Suitable
pressure relief device is provided by the client in the
connected piping and hence the connection for the
same is not provided on the vessels.
Drain opening requirements as per UG - 25 (f)
Vessel subjected to corrosion shall be supplied with a
suitable drain opening at the lowest A 50 NB drain
pipe connection is provided at the bottom of the
vessel, end point practicable in the vessel.
Inspection opening requirement as per UG- 46 (C)
This Vessel is provided with hand hole opening of
DN 150,one on each Dished end.

International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies

Table.1 Material selection and specifications.

Table.2 Governing thickness as per UCS66(a)

3.0 Design calculations

E-ISSN22498974

Nozzles N1 & N2 along with reinforcement pads are

attached to the vessel with full penetration welding
and as per UW-15(b), since nozzle configuration is to
fig. UW-16(c), it is exempted from strength
calculation.
The saddle at the lowest section must resist the
horizontal force (F).
3.5 Stress Calculations
STRESS CALCULATIONSA FOR 8MM SHELL
THICKNESS (L. P. Zick Analysis as per Pressure
Vessel handbook by Eugene F. Megyesy):
Table 3.Parametrs For Zick Analysis

3.1 Shell thickness calculation under internal

pressure for horizontal vessel-As Per UG- 27(c)
Reqrd. Thickness (tr) = (PR/(SE-0.6P))
= (1050.15/(1406.141- 0.610)) = 0.358 cm
Total shell thickness= tr + Ca
= 0.358 + 0.15 = 0.508 cm
Code minimum required thickness as per
UG16(b)(4)
+Ca = 0.25+0.15= 0.4cm
For reducing pressure vessel weight we consider the
plate thickness here as t =8mm instead of governing
thickness 12mm.as per UCS 66(a).
Since t > tcode and > tr+Ca, Provided plate thickness
is adequate.
Since 8 mm > 4 mm & 5.08 mm, provided plate
thickness is adequate.
3.2 Dished head thickness (pressure on concave
side) as per UG-32 (d)
Type of dished head 2:1 Ellipsoidal
tr- Required minimum thickness after forming =
PD/(2SE-0.2P)
= 10100.3/(21406.11-0.210) = 0.3569 cm
Total thickness of dished head trf = tr + forming
allowance + corrosion allowance
trf = 0.3569+0.1+0.15 = 0.606 cm
Code minimum required thickness as per UG16(b)(4) = 0.25+Ca=0.25+0.15= 0.4 cm
tr/L = 0.36/90= 0.003966
Since tr/L is > 0.002, applied formula as per UG32(d) for thickness calculation is satisfied
For low value of factor of safety the plate
thickness can taken here as t =8mm
Verification as per UG-32(b)
t rhs = 0.321cm
trhs+Ca = 0.321+0.15 = 0.47 cm
Since t > trf, > tcode and > trhs+Ca, provided nominal
plate thickness is adequate.
Since 8mm > 6.06 mm, 4 mm & 4.7 mm, provided
nominal plate thickness is adequate.
3.3 Nozzle Neck thickness as per UG-45 for
Nozzles N1 & N2,N3 & N4.
Don Outer diameter for N1 & N2, = 16.83 cm
Don Outer diameter for N3 & N4.= 6.03cm
3.4.Nozzle attachment weld path strength check
for Nozzles as per UG-41

IJAERS/Vol. I/ Issue II/January-March, 2012/218-221

D = Out side diameter of the

vessel
A= Dist. From tangent line of
head to the center of saddle
b= Width of saddle
H=depth of dish head
L= Length of vessel tan-tan
P=Internal design pressure
Q=Load on one saddle
R= outside radius of sheel
ts thickness of shell
tw = thickness of wear plate
Ts = shell thk + wear plate thk
ts2 = shell thk2 + wear plate
thk2
Web plate thickness =
= Contact angle
Shell Material =
Allowable Stress,S =
Yield Point, Fy=
Saddle material =
Allowable Stress, =
Yield Point =
Joint Efficiency, E =

1016

mm

40

in

350

mm

13.78

in

150
310
1250
10
1085
508
8
8
16
128

mm
mm
mm
Kg/Cm2 g
Kg
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm

5.91
12.20
49.21
142.23
2391.34
20
0.314
0.314
0.629
5.03

in
in
in
psi
lb
in
in
in
in
in

0.47
120

in
Deg

20000
34700

psi
psi

16600
36000
1

psi
psi

12
mm
120
Deg
SA 516 Gr 70
1406.14
Kg/Cm2
2439.7
Kg/Cm2
SA 36
1167.01
Kg/Cm2
2531.05
Kg/Cm2

Longitudinal Stress:
S1- Stress at saddles (Tension):
S1=(QA((1-((1-A/L)+(R2-H2/(2AL)))/
(1+4H/3L))/K1R2ts
For 8mm Shell S1= 246.39psi S1=1.698MPA
Stress at saddles (Compression)
The compression stress is not factor in a steel vessel
where t/R 0.005
S2- Stress at midpan.
S2=((QL)/4) (1+2 ((R2-H2)/L2))/(1+4H/3L))(4A/L))/( R2ts)
For8mm Shell S2= 67.098PSI, or S1=0.46237 MPa
SL-Stress due to internal pressure For 8mm shell
=PR/2ts = (142.2320.08)/(20.315) psi
= 4533.6psi (or) 31.25MPa
Sum of tension stresses For 8mm
=246.39+67.058+4533.6=4847 psi (or)
= 33.42 Mpa
Check # Allowable stress (S) * Joint Efficiency =
=200001 =20000 psi(or)= 137.89 MPa
The sum of tension stresses does not exceed the stress
value of the girth seam, Hence it is safe.
Tangential Shear:
S3-Tangential
shear
in
Shell
(shell
not
stiffned):Check # A> R/2 = 13.78 > 20.08/2
= 13.78 > 10.04 TRUE
The applicable formulae is
S3=K2Q/Rts ((L-2A)/(L+(4/3)H))

International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies

Here thicknessof (Ts) is taken the sum of shell
thickness+wear plate thickness
Tangential shear in shell FOR 8mm =73.2Psi (or)
=0.59Mpa
S2 shall not exceed 0.8 times the allowable stress
value of vessel material.
Check # S2 < 0.8S =73.2 < 16000 psi
The tangential shear does not exceed the 0.8 times of
allowable stress value of the material.
Hence it is safe.
Circumferential Stress:
S4-Stress at horn of the saddle:
check # L< 8R= 49.21 < 820.79 = TRUE
Applicable Formulae is
S4=-(Q/(4Ts(b+1.56(RTs))))-((12K6QR)/(LtTs2))

E-ISSN22498974

The actual allowable stress of the material does not

exceed the two thirds of the yield point of the
material, then it is safe. And all the induced stress
below the allowable stress then the design is safe.
Here all induced stress in the vessel for the given
design considerations is bellow the allowable
stresses. so design is safe, and Provided plate
thickness is adequate.
4.0 ANALYSIS OF PRESSURE VESSEL
ANSYS is a general purpose finite element modeling
package for numerically solving a wide variety of
mechanical problems.
In order to validate stress analysis here zick analysis
and stress calculations were done. By taking
minimum wall thick in all aspects the thickness 8mm
is satisfied. with factor of safety less as compared
with code required may satisfy the code specification
also by examining the stress with zick analysis and
have a another criteria to minimize the stress in the
vessel with minimum thickness of the shell by
changing the nozzle location ,here nozzle(vent, drain)
is placed in the dished end instead of shell. By the
ANSYS report here observed that the equivalent
(von-mises) stress, maximum principal stress, and
stress intensity were decrease by placing the vent
and drain in the dished end. Analysis conducted
under the same internal pressure and fixed supports
with 8mm shell thickness. The purpose of this was to
ensure that the results of the finite element analyses
were compared to the analytical findings is same.

For 8mm= 1440.14Psi = 9.929 MPa

S4 shall not exceed 1.5 times the allowable stress
value of shell material.
200001.5 = 30000
psi(or) = 206.844 MPa
The S4 does not exceed the 1.5 times of the allowable
stress value, it is safe.
S5-Stress at bottom of shell:
S5 = - (K7Q/(Ts(b+1.56(RTs)))
S5 = - (1817.418/7.215)
S5 FOR 8mm PLATE= 251.90Psi (or) =1.736MPa
S5 shall not exceed the compression yield point
multiplied by 0.5
=34700 0.5 = 17349.99 psi = 119.62 MPa
S5 does not exceed the compression yield point
multiplied by 0.5, it is safe.
S6-Circumferential Stress:
PR/ts=9066 psi(or) 62.5Mpa
Table .4 Stress analysis on saddle and shell by zick Analysis

Graph.1 Stress in shell with allowable stress by zick Analysis

Table 5. Ansys values for 8 mm plate with five orientation of nozzle locations
Nozzle location

Total Deformation
mm

Von Mises stress

MPa

on the shell left end

on the shell middle
on the shell right end
on dished end
on dished end

0.2787
0.2204
0.2201
0.2019
0.2029

135.8
146.52
148.89
75.792
75.585

IJAERS/Vol. I/ Issue II/January-March, 2012/218-221

Maximum
Principal stress
Mpa
129.54
133.33
128.06
80.749
80.401

Stress Intensity Mpa

154.82
166.00
169.04
82.315
82.071

International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies

E-ISSN22498974

Graph.2 Plotted results for 8mm plate with five orientation of nozzle locations

5.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Fig:3 Total deformation of 8mm shell thickness

Fig.4 Stress intensity of pressure vessel

Fig.5 Directional deformation of vessel

Fig.6 Equivalent (von-mises)stress of vessel

6.0 CONCLUSIONS
A numerical design study was performed to examine
the structural failure of pressure vessels exposed to
internal pressure by varying the shell thickness and
nozzle location.
By inspecting these plots it apparent that the
minimum thickness 8mm will taken safe for design
conditions. Instead of Governing Thickness tg as per
UCS 66(a) of vessel thickness of the shell as taken
10mm for ASME section XIII-div-1 pressure vessel.
For this given operating temperature and pressure
conditions and observed that the location of the
nozzles on the dished end with hillside orientation for
minimum stress concentration.
By inspecting these plots it is apparent that the 8mm
thickness shell will suitable for designed condition
with safe condition and economically benefit.
Whenever wet take high factor of safety it may lead
to safe operating condition but as a design engineer
have to know the low value for the factor of safety
results in economy of material. And also investigate

new techniques to reduce the stresses and use of

higher strength materials and lower safety factors
resulted in thinner vessels.
REFERENCES

IJAERS/Vol. I/ Issue II/January-March, 2012/218-221

1. Stresses in Large Horizontal Cylindrical Pressure Vessels

on Two Saddle Supports by L. P. Zick.Original paper
published in September 1951 "THE WELDING JOURNAL
RESEARCH SUPPLEMENT."
2. Location of reboiler return inlet nozzle and its effect on
Distillation Column article@processenggservices.com, 0052009 Process Engineering Services.
3. Optimal wall-thickness of the spherical pressure vessel with
respect to criterion about minimal mass and equivalent
stressdraankozak,
josipserti.ANNALS
OF
THE
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING HUNEDOARA 2006
TOME IV. Fascicole 2 Understanding How Changes in
Pressure Vessel Codes May Impact Pressure Vessel
Performance .Patrick J. Sullivan Highlander Engineering
Services 2008, PLLC Argyle, NY
4. Results of fea analyses at nozzle/shell junctions subjected to
external loads steven R. Massey charlie S. HsiehBlack &
veatch pritchardInc-2009