You are on page 1of 32

Mechanical

Engineering
News

VOLUME 29

JUNE 2000

TANK Version 2.10 Released


(by: Richard Ay)

TANK Version 2.10 was released in May of 2000. Version 2.10 updates the
software to comply with the latest editions and addenda of API-650 and API653. Version 2.10 also incorporates venting computations as per API-2000.
The dialog for the venting input data is shown in the figure below.

IN THIS ISSUE:
Whats New at COADE

FOR THE POWER,


PETROCHEMICAL AND
RELATED INDUSTRIES

Finite Element
Analysis
Options in
Vessel Software

> see story page 4

TANK Version 2.10 Released ........................ 1


PVElite Version 4.00 New Features ............... 2
PVElite 4.00 and CodeCalc 6.30 New Feature:
Finite Element Analysis Interface. ............. 4
Using the Full Potential of the COADE
Website ...................................................... 6

Technology You Can Use


Pitfalls of
Computerized
Analysis

> see story page 19


The COADE Mechanical Engineering
News Bulletin is published twice a year
from the COADE offices in Houston,
Texas. The Bulletin is intended to provide
information about software applications
and development for Mechanical
Engineers serving the power, petrochemical and related industries. Additionally, the
Bulletin serves as the official notification
vehicle for software errors discovered in
those Mechanical Engineering programs
offered by COADE.
2000 COADE, Inc. All rights reserved.

Mitered Bends
and other Gems

> see stories on


pages 16 and 23

Secrets of the
"Windows" Keys

> see story page 29

CAESAR II Version 4.20 Introduces New 3D


Interactive Graphics ................................... 8
Using CAESAR II ODBC Data Export .......... 11
Upgrading Databases from Access 97 to
Access 2000 ............................................ 14
Modeling Widely Spaced and Closely Spaced
Miter Bends in CAESAR II ....................... 16
Beam Element Models and the ASME B31
Codes ...................................................... 19
Undocumented CAESAR II Gems ............... 23
WRC 107: Elastic Analysis vs. Fatigue
Analysis ................................................... 24
PC Hardware for the Engineering User
(Part 29) ................................................... 29

Program Specifications
CAESAR II Notices ......................................
TANK Notices ...............................................
CodeCalc Notices ........................................
PVElite Notices ............................................

31
31
32
32

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

June 2000

One of the most important improvements to the software is a


modification to the allowable stress input dialog.

problems, such as component interference, much more noticeable.


The following example problem model was rendered and cut using
a cutting plane.

This dialog has been expanded to overcome a misconception many


users have regarding the specification of stainless steel data. For
stainless steels, API-650 provides a table of allowable stresses, as a
function of temperature. The actual allowable stress used during
the computations is not known until run-time, when the software
interpolates the API-provided table. Since the actual allowable is
unknown at the time of input, the data column for Sd is shown as
0.00. The presence of this zero value has alarmed many users, who
have subsequently attempted to specify the allowable stress, resulting
in improper behavior of the software.
For Version 2.10, this allowable stress input dialog has been
expanded to include the entire allowable stress versus temperature
table for any shell course constructed of stainless steel. This
expanded dialog is shown in the figure below.

BS-5500 Appendix G Calculations


Note that the data column for Sd is still shown as 0.00. This is
because the actual allowable stress is still unknown, until run-time.
The added allowable stress data (in the columns labeled SSD1
through SSD5) will hopefully make the intent of the input clearer,
and avoid future problems with the specification of stainless steels.

PVElite Version 4.00 New Features


(by: Scott Mayeux)

PVElite version 4.00 represents the latest advancements in COADEs


pressure vessel design and analysis software. This version contains
several new and exciting features. The major features are:

3D model viewer

BS5500 Appendix G local stress evaluation for round hollow


nozzles on spheres and cylindrical shells

DXF file generation

3D Viewer
This viewer is a stand-alone application that can read any PVElite
input file and render it. Some of the functionality includes real time
model rotation, zooming, panning, cutting planes, wire frame
viewing, tool tips and many others. The modeler makes many

Another major feature is the addition of BS-5500 Appendix G


calculations. This is essentially the British version of WRC 107/
297 but with some exceptions. One main difference is that this local
stress calculation is a part of the British pressure vessel code,
whereas WRC 107 and 297 are not part of ASME Codes Section
VIII Divisions 1 or 2. Another difference is that Appendix G
provides allowable stresses, whereas the WRC versions are not
specific in this area.
The input for Appendix G calculations is nearly identical to 107 or
297. Specify the loads, dimensional information and other data.
Then make the run. A sample BS-5500 problem is shown below.
Input Echo, Appendix G Item
Calc.

1,

Description: BS Nozzle

Diameter Basis for Vessel


Vbasis
Corrosion Allowance for Vessel
Cas
Vessel Diameter
Dv
Vessel Thickness
Tv
Vessel Shell Design Allowable Stress
f
Vessel Shell Yield Strength
fy
Allowable Stress Intensity Factor (Mem + Bend)
Allowable Stress Intensity Factor (Membrane)
Diameter Basis for Nozzle
Corrosion Allowance for Nozzle
Nozzle Diameter
Nozzle Thickness
Nozzle Inside Projection

OD
0.0000
2540.000
23.000
150.000
227.000
2.25
1.20

mm.
mm.
mm.
N/mm
N/mm

Nbasis
Can
Dn
Tn
h

OD
0.0000
219.000
15.200
0.000

mm.
mm.
mm.
mm.

Stiffened Length of Vessel Section


Offset from Left Tangent Line

L
Dx

3000.00
1500.00

mm.
mm.

Design Internal Pressure


Radial Load

Dp
Fr

1.10
4410.00

N/mm
N

June 2000

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

Circumferential Shear
Longitudinal Shear
Torsional Moment
Circumferential Moment
Longitudinal Moment

Fc
Fl
Mt
Mc
Ml

6600.00
6600.00
8900000.00
3630000.00
3630000.00

Longitudinal Stresses:
Membrane Component (Nx/t) due to:
Radial Load
1.3
1.3
1.3
Circ. Moment
-9.4
-9.4
-9.4
Long. Moment
-3.0
-3.0
3.0
Sub-Total loc.
-11.1
-11.1
-5.1
Pressure (fp)
123.1
123.1
123.1
Sub-Total(fxm)
112.0
112.0
118.0

N
N
Nmm
Nmm
Nmm

Stress Calculations at the Edge of the Nozzle Neck :


==================================================
Mean nozzle diameter / Mean Shell Diameter d/D:
Compute
rho =
rho =
rho =

1.3
-9.4
3.0
-5.1
123.1
118.0

1.3
9.4
3.0
13.7
123.1
136.8

1.3
9.4
3.0
13.7
123.1
136.8

1.3
9.4
-3.0
7.6
123.1
130.7

1.3
9.4
-3.0
7.6
123.1
130.7

Bending Component (6Mx/t) due to:


Radial Load
-5.1
5.1
-5.1
5.1
-5.1
5.1
-5.1
5.1
Circ. Moment
44.3
-44.3
44.3
-44.3
-44.3
44.3
-44.3
44.3
Long. Moment
44.4
-44.4
-44.4
44.4
-44.4
44.4
44.4
-44.4
Sub-Total(fxb)
83.6
-83.6
-5.2
5.2
-93.8
93.8
-5.0
5.0

Tot. Long. fx
195.6
28.4
112.9
123.2
43.0
230.6
125.8
135.7

0.0810

the value of Rho:


d/D * sqrt( D / ( 2 * ( ers - Cas ) ) )
203.80/ 2517.00 * sqrt( 2517.00 / ( 2 * ( 23.00 - 0.00 )))
0.60

Shear Stresses due to:


Torsion Moment
5.1
Circ. Shear
0.8
Long. Shear
0.8

The following are the curves of rho selected for the analysis:
Values of Rho: 0.500 (Curve1), 0.599 (Computed rho), 0.600 (Curve2)
Values of erb/ers for values of rho: 0.430, 0.540, 0.520, 0.660

5.1
0.8
0.8

5.1
0.8
0.8

5.1
0.8
0.8

5.1
0.8
0.8

5.1
0.8
0.8

5.1
0.8
0.8

5.1
0.8
0.8

Tot. Shear tau


6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8

Intermediate Values

L o n g i t u d i n a l
Circ.
Radial
At Point A
Point B
At C

K Factor
K
8.0000
8.0000
2.0348
Load over the Area
W
31432.2
-31432.2
31432.2
-4410.0
Equivalent Length
Le 2995.5542 2995.5542
3000.0000
3000.0000
Parameter
Cx
28.8717
28.8717
86.6150
86.6150
Parameter
C
86.6150
86.6150
28.8717
86.6150
Parameter
64r(Cx/r)
1.8431
1.8431
16.5877
16.5877
Parameter
2Cx/Le
0.0193
0.0193
0.0577
0.0577
Parameter
C/Cx
3.0000
3.0000
0.3333
1.0000
G6
G7
G8
G9

Curve
Curve
Curve
Curve

G6
G7
G8
G9

at
at
at
at

Value
Value
Value
Value

Zero
Zero
Zero
Zero

0.1645
0.1557
-0.1952
-0.1548

0.1645
0.1557
-0.1952
-0.1548

0.3364
0.2439
-0.2064
-0.1685

0.3364
0.2439
-0.2064
-0.1685

Circ.
Long.
Circ.
Long.

value
value
value
value

M
Mx
N
Nx

0.4890
0.6385
0.9461
0.9188

0.4890
0.6385
0.9461
0.9188

Curve
Curve
Curve
Curve

Value
Value
Value
Value

M3/W
Mx3/W
N3/W
Nx3/W

0.1245
0.0489
-0.0684
-0.1131

0.1245
0.0489
-0.0684
-0.1131

M2/W
Mx2/W
N2/W
Nx2/W

0.0609
0.0312
-0.0647
-0.1039

0.0609
0.0312
-0.0647
-0.1039

M/W
Mx/W
Nt/W
Nxt/W

0.1036
0.1245
-0.1306
-0.0509

0.1036
0.1245
-0.1306
-0.0509

Value
Value
Value
Value
Circ.
Long.
Circ.
Long.

value
value
value
value

Pressure Stress SIF

0.1953
0.1243
-0.1673
-0.1579

0.1953
0.1243
-0.1673
-0.1579

Q2
Out

0.1389
0.1013
-0.1624
-0.1534

Q3

Q4

In

Out

In

Out

In

Out

Circumferential Stresses:
Membrane Component (N/t) due to:
Radial Load
1.4
1.4
1.4
Circ. Moment
-9.9
-9.9
-9.9
Long. Moment
-7.8
-7.8
7.8
Sub-Total loc.
-16.3
-16.3
-0.8
Pressure (fp)
123.1
123.1
123.1
Sub-Total(fm)
106.8
106.8
122.3

1.4
-9.9
7.8
-0.8
123.1
122.3

1.4
9.9
7.8
19.1
123.1
142.2

1.4
9.9
7.8
19.1
123.1
142.2

1.4
9.9
-7.8
3.5
123.1
126.7

1.4
9.9
-7.8
3.5
123.1
126.7

Bending Component
Radial Load
Circ. Moment
Long. Moment
Sub-Total(fb)

6.9
-69.6
36.9
-25.7

-6.9
-69.6
-36.9
-113.5

6.9
69.6
36.9
113.5

-6.9
-69.6
36.9
-39.6

6.9
69.6
-36.9
39.6

(6M/t) due to:


-6.9
6.9
-6.9
69.6
-69.6
69.6
36.9
-36.9
-36.9
99.6
-99.6
25.7

126.9
85.9
-41.1

167.7
134.3
-33.4

Check of Buckling Stress (only if Row 4, 15 in Compression)


Row 4 + Row 10
83.3 -116.0
24.9
-26.5
0.0
0.0
Row15 + Row 21
72.5
-94.8
-10.2
0.1
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0

Check the Maximum Stresses versus defined Allowables:

Maximum Stress Intensity (Membrane + Bending) :


257.40 Allowable:
Maximum Compressive Stress
: -115.96 Allowable:
Maximum Membrane Stress
:
146.80 Allowable:

337.50
-204.00
180.00

Another new feature of version 4.00 is the DXF file generation


option. A DXF file is simply a text file in a very specific format.
This type of file is referred to as a Data Interchange File and can be
read by many programs including AutoCad, Intergraph and a host
of others to produce a drawing. The DXF file that PVElite produces
contains dimensional information that the user has entered during
model creation. This option is useful for those who are creating
drawings for fabrication or just to see what a vessel looks like for
bidding purposes.

2.0455

Q1
In

257.4
228.8
-28.6

PVElite DXF File Interface

BS-5500 Appendix G Nozzle to Cylinder Stress Evaluation

Quadrant
Surface

Check of Total Stress Intensity (membrane + bending)


f1 Principle
209.7
30.3
149.3
124.8
45.7
f2 Principle
192.3
5.2
111.6
94.9
25.9
f2-f1
-17.4
-25.2
-37.7
-29.9
-19.8

To get PVElite to create such a file, fill in the data in the DXF
options tab as shown in the following figure. When the program
runs, up to 3 DXF files will be produced. The files contain the
drawing itself, the nozzle schedule and the bill of material. The
nozzle and the bill of material are optional. With the exception of
the scale factor, the other settings are saved in between sessions so
that they do not have to be checked repeatedly.
After the DXF files have been created, PVElite can invoke any
program available on the system capable of displaying a DXF file.
This is simply done by pressing a button on the toolbar after the files
have been created. Some companies have free DXF file viewers
that allow a file to be viewed and printed but not edited.

Tot. Circ. Str

206.4

7.2

148.0

96.6

28.7

255.7

87.0

166.3

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

June 2000

PVElite 4.00 and CodeCalc 6.30


New Feature: Finite Element
Analysis Interface
(by: Mandeep Singh)

PVElite Version 4.00 and CodeCalc 6.30 will introduce an interface


for gathering data to perform a finite element analysis (FEA) of
nozzle-to-shell junctions. This analysis uses an encapsulated finite
element program available from Paulin Research Group
(www.paulin.com). This interface will be available within the
WRC 107 module of PVElite and CodeCalc.

In addition to this basic capability, PVElite version 4.00 also


includes many vessel drawing blocks, like welding symbols and
others, that accompany our CADWorx/Pipe program.

When it is necessary to determine shell stresses at the edge of an


attachment (like a pipe nozzle-to- vessel intersection) due to external
loads, engineers will turn to Welding Research Council Bulletin
107. However, there are times when the applicability of this
bulletin is in question or a particular design is out of the scope of the
bulletin. A typical example might be a large nozzle. When the
nozzle diameter divided by the shell diameter is greater than 0.33,
many of the curves in WRC 107 may need to be extrapolated.
Doing so may lead to non-conservative results. In this case and
others, FEA is the best way to get accurate results. Other examples
where an FEA can be useful are vessel types not addressed by WRC
107, including those with reinforcing pads and Hillside and Lateral
nozzles.
FEA is a powerful tool when used correctly. Users should have an
understanding of the method and the experience to build the right
finite element model. Along with the time constraints, engineers
sometimes find it challenging to exploit the full benefits of FEA.
The FEA Black Box eases these concerns by providing relatively
easy input, automatic meshing, and the results for code stress checks
along with other finite element results.
To run an FEA on the nozzle-to-shell (or head) junction in PVElite,
users will select the WRC 107 module and set the analysis type as
FEA. Next, the nozzle geometry information is entered. Nozzles
can be integrally reinforced or pad-reinforced and can be of the
insert or abutting type. A typical dialog is shown in Fig. 1.

Version 4.00 of PVElite is scheduled for release in August 2000.

COADE Software Supports USB Port

Volume
25

No Parallel Port?
Need a USB ESL?
Let us know when you order your software.

June 2000

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


This example depicts an elliptical head in the vertical direction.
Thus the direction cosines are (0, 1, 0). The nozzle is also in the
vertical direction and is offset from the vessel centerline by 10
inches. The nozzle direction is specified from the nozzle centerline
going into the vessel so the direction cosines are (0, -1, 0). The
nozzle orientation reference vector defines the reference axis from
where the orientation of the nozzle can be measured by the nozzle
orientation angle. For example, if nozzle orientation reference axis
is along x-axis and nozzle orientation angle is zero then the nozzle
is located along the x-axis as seen in Fig. 3.
Three types of loadings can be entered: sustained, operating and
occasional. Operating and occasional loads are used for performing
the fatigue analysis. The next input is the miscellaneous information
for the FE model. This completes the input needed for performing
the FEA. Fig. 3 depicts the finite element discretization and a stress
contour.

Figure 1: A snapshot of CodeCalc showing the Design tab and


the nozzle details dialog.
The information in the vessel tab contains the vessel type. The
available vessel types are conical, cylindrical, elliptical, flat,
hemispherical and torispherical. Depending upon the type of the
vessel specified, additional data will be required to complete the
input for the shell or head. Finally, under the loads tab, loading
values as well as the vessel and nozzle orientation are entered
(Fig. 2).

Figure 3: The Finite Element Mesh and the Primary Membrane


Stress contour.
The FEA program generates graphical results showing various
stresses. The most important results are shown below:
1.
Figure 2: The Vessel-Nozzle orientation dialog.

ASME overstressed areas are reported. A sample printout is


shown here.

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

June 2000

ASME Overstressed Areas


Pad Edge Weld for Nozzle
Pl
20,116
psi

1.5(k)Smh
18,000
psi

1
Primary Membrane Load Case 2
Plot Reference:
1) Pl < 1.5(k)Smh
(SUS,Membrane) Case 2

111%

2.

The next report is the Highest Primary Stress Report. It


outlines the stresses at critical locations such as the nozzle-toshell junction and the edge of the pad.

3.

Highest Secondary and Fatigue Stress Reports are also


provided.

4.

Next, the program lists nozzle stress intensification factors for


use in a beam-type pipe stress analysis program such as
CAESAR II.

5.

The FEA program computes the maximum individual allowable


loads and simultaneously acting allowable loads. Both primary
and secondary loads are reported. A typical report is listed
here.

Allowable Loads
SECONDARY
Load Type (Range):
Axial Force
Inplane
Moment
Outplane Moment
Torsional Moment
Pressure

(lb.
)
(in. lb.)
(in. lb.)
(in. lb.)
(psi
)

Maximum
Individual
Occurring
398030.
5306513.
3358105.
2343568.
344.

Conservative
Simultaneous
Occurring
120631.
1137199.
719650.
710264.
111.

Realistic
Simultaneous
Occurring
180946.
2412363.
1526608.
1065396.
111.

(lb.
)
(in. lb.)
(in. lb.)
(in. lb.)
(psi
)

Maximum
Individual
Occurring
618455.
5998639.
5458219.
2938301.
422.

Conservative
Simultaneous
Occurring
178300.
1222872.
1182725.
847110.
111.

Realistic
Simultaneous
Occurring
267450.
2594104.
2508939.
1270665.
111.

PRIMARY
Load Type:
Axial Force
Inplane
Moment
Outplane Moment
Torsional Moment
Pressure

Using the Full Potential of the


COADE Website
(by: Richard Ay)

The purpose of the COADE website is to provide information to


users and potential users of COADE software products. The website
is, in essence, another support vehicle to which COADE devotes a
substantial amount of resources. The COADE website should be
considered a primary means of staying in contact with COADE,
especially if you are several time zones away from our home office
in Houston, Texas. This article explores the many avenues through
which information can be obtained from the website.
The COADE website has been designed to provide useful information
in a timely manner. There is virtually no fluff, hype, or other
baggage on this site. We dont have the time to spend on this, nor
do our users have the time to waste on worthless information.
Most of the site can be accessed via the navigation bar on the left of
the Home Page, shown in the figure below. The major topics of this
navigation bar are discussed in the paragraphs below. In the upper
right of the Home Page is a scrolling news banner. This section
scrolls current news and software release information. Below this is
a short list of items of greatest importance to users of COADE
software products.

The conservative simultaneous loads will produce stresses


that are approximately 60 to 70% of the allowable. The
realistic allowable simultaneous loads are the maximum loads
that can be applied simultaneously; they produce stresses that
are closer to 100% of the allowable. The maximum individual
occurring primary pressure can be taken as a finite element
calculation of the MAWP for the nozzle.
6.

Nozzle-Shell junction flexibilities are also available. These


flexibilities can be used to accurately model the flexibility of
the junction and can be included in the pipe stress program that
is used to model the piping system attached to the nozzle.

In PVElite, users will have a choice of performing either a WRC


107 or a finite element analysis from within the same module,
without redundant input. As with any finite element program, users
should visually check the finite element mesh for errors and make
sure the FEA results make sense from the stress analysis perspective.

In the top frame are several other important links. The Site Map
link produces a concise, single page view of the entire website. The
Search link provides a search form from which the entire website
can be scanned for a particular topic. The Contact Us link
produces a page detailing complete contact information for COADE,
as well as e-mail addresses of all COADE employees.

June 2000
Whats New:
This section of the website provides two quick ways to obtain the
latest COADE information. The first link in this section produces a
news file, which lists the latest developments at COADE. The
second link produces a website revision history. A quick perusal
of this page shows immediately whether or not you need to look
elsewhere on the site for new or updated information. This page
typically includes direct links to the referenced subjects, for quick
access.
(At the bottom of each page is the last modified date of the
page. Use this to determine how up-to-date the page is.)

Company Information:
Probably the two most useful pages in this section are the Travel
and Privacy Policy pages. The Travel page can be used to
acquire (COADE) area maps, local weather, area hotels, and driving
directions from the airport. This page also contains links to airline
and car rental sites. If you plan to attend a COADE seminar in
Houston, this page is invaluable.
Internet privacy is a key area of concern to most businesses and
individuals. The COADE Privacy Policy details exactly what
COADE does with any information acquired from website visitors.
In short, any personal information obtained from the website is used
solely for COADEs marketing and support efforts. This information
is not revealed to third parties.
Products:

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


(Note: Users who have registered their software via e-mail are
notified directly when an update is posted on our website.)
The download area also contains other useful files, such as the latest
ESL drivers, units conversion and other utilities.
The Discussion Forum link takes you to the "Summary" page of
the online discussion forums. These forums allow users to interact
with each other (and COADE) by posting ideas and questions for
comment from other users. These forums often provide alternative
view points to real world engineering problems encountered by our
users.
The Newsletters link produces a page listing all of the past issues
of Mechanical Engineering News. Complete newsletters in PDF
format are available as far back as 1993. Before 1993, only the
most important articles from the newsletters are available.
The Technical Articles link produces a list of COADE software
products, from which users can view a variety of articles specific to
each product. Articles here include FAQs (Frequently Asked
Questions), technical issues, and code comparisons. Articles on
using new features of the software can also be found here.
The Reference page produces a list of publications highly
recommended for users of COADE products. Most of these texts
have been used by COADE in the development of the software and,
therefore, make an excellent addition to your library.
The Links page produces a list of other websites that may be of
interest. This list includes COADE dealers, engineering society
links, vendor links, computer related links, search engine links, and
others.

The Product Details page of this section contains links to each


Product Description page of each of COADEs software programs.
These pages contain detailed program descriptions, update histories,
and links for demo downloads. At the bottom of the Product
Details page are additional links to pages describing the software
update policy and the latest versions of all products.

A regular review of the COADE website will keep you up to date


with the most recent edition of the software, provide access to the
COADE newsletters, and technical articles, and in general, keep
you informed of the latest developments at COADE.

The Seminars and Shows page contains information on COADE


seminars held in the COADE home office, as well as worldwide
seminars hosted through our international dealer network. The
Shows section of this page lists the upcoming shows and
conferences at which COADEs products will be exhibited.

CAESAR II Version 4.20


Introduces New 3D Interactive
Graphics
(by: Richard Ay)

Support:
The Support section of the navigation bar is the most important, and
most frequently used. The Downloads page of this section
produces a list of COADE software products, from which users can
view a list of files available for download. These files range from
examples to software updates. This section should be checked
frequently to ensure the latest edition of the software is in use.

One of the major enhancements to CAESAR II incorporated in the


4.20 release is the new 3D graphics engine. This new graphics
engine is based on the HOOPS library. COADE is actively
incorporating HOOPS into its software, i.e. PVElite and CodeCalc.
These new graphics provide the CAESAR II user with additional
review capabilities, as well as more powerful interactive control
over the model. The following paragraphs discuss many of these
new 3D graphics features.
7

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


The HOOPS Graphics Context Menu:

June 2000
Zoom Window Used to zoom on a specific region of the model,
using a standard rubber band box.

Most Windows software programs support Context menus, available


by clicking the right mouse button. These Context menus vary in
content according to the currently active software window, hence
the use of the term context. The HOOPS graphics in CAESAR II
also support a Context menu. While in the 3D graphics, clicking the
right mouse button brings up the context menu shown below. Each
of these menu choices displays a secondary menu with various
graphics operations.

The first menu option is Operators, which contains options for the
global manipulation of the graphic image. The second menu option
is Views, which contains options to quickly orientate the image into
the three standard planar views and the isometric view. The third
menu option is Projections, which provides various viewing options.
The fourth menu option is Properties, which presently only provides
a single option to change the colors of the various plot items. Each
of these menu options is discussed in the paragraphs below.
The Operators menu provides global manipulation options, as
shown in the figure below. These operations are:
Annotate

Used to place user defined text on the plot, from a


leader line. Note, this text cannot be saved with
the job.

The Views menu provides four predefined views. Using these


options, you can quickly rotate the model to a specific orientation.
These views are:
XY Plane

This option produces a view looking at the model


in the XY plane, looking down the Z axis.

XZ Plane

This option produces a view looking at the model


in the XZ plane, looking down the Y axis.

YZ Plane

This option produces a view looking at the model


in the YZ plane, looking down the X axis.

Isometric

This option produces a standard Isometric view.

Element Select Used to select a particular element. A small


information dialog pops up describing the
elements node numbers and delta coordinates.
The [Spreadsheet] button can be used to bring up
the entire spreadsheet associated with the selected
element.
Orbit

Used to rotate the model with the mouse.

Pan

Used to move the model within the Window.

Zoom Extents

Used to zoom out such that the entire model can


be seen in the Window.

Real Time Zoom Used to activate an interactive zoom, whereby


moving the mouse left and right zooms the model
in and out.

The Projections menu provides three different viewing


perspectives. These perspectives are:
Orthographic

This option produces an orthographic view of the


model.

Perspective

This option produces a perspective view of the


model. This is probably the most useful view.

June 2000
Stretched to Window
This option produces a stretched view
of the model, such that the model fills the entire
Window.

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


After clicking this [Customization Button], a dialog box is presented
which allows for the removal or reordering of all toolbar buttons.
Buttons can be removed by moving the selector in the right hand list
box to the desired button, and clicking on the [Remove] button.
(Removed items can be put back on the toolbar by selecting them in
the left hand list box and clicking on the [Add] button.) Buttons can
be reordered by selecting them and then clicking the [Move Up] or
[Move Down] buttons. This modification dialog box is shown in
the figure below.

The Properties menu provides a single option to manipulate the


colors of the display items. This color control option produces the
dialog shown below. Selecting an item in this list and clicking on
the [Change] button produces the standard color control dialog.

In addition to the use of this formal customization dialog, individual


buttons can be removed or repositioned by holding down the [Shift]
key and dragging the necessary button. To remove a button, drag it
off the graphics window, using the left mouse button. To reposition
a button, drag it to the desired location, using the left mouse button.

The rotating spring hanger is used to actively view the color


selection combinations before altering the entire plot window. This
is a useful tool to prevent the user from selecting unsatisfactory
color combinations that would make information invisible.
HOOPS Manipulations:

Multiple viewports is another user-controllable feature of the HOOPS


graphics. CAESAR II has provided the 4 Views graphics option
for many years. This option, however, provides only four static
views: X axis, Y axis, Z axis, and Isometric. The HOOPS graphics
on the other hand provide up to 4 views, that can be sized, rotated,
and annotated by the user. The figure below shows the initial
HOOPS view when these graphics are activated. Notice the two
splitter bars, one at the far left of the lower scroll bar, and one at the
very top of the right scroll bar.

Another feature of the HOOPS Graphics is the ability to adjust the


graphics toolbar for the purpose of rearranging or removing buttons.
There are a number of ways to make these adjustments as discussed
here. The first method is to right click on the tool bar. This will
bring up a button, shown in the figure below, which activates the
modification dialog box.

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


Using the left mouse button, grab the lower left splitter bar and drag
it to the right. This will split the graphics window into two panes,
left and right. When the mouse button is released, both panes are
updated, with the Z axis view in the left pane and the isometric (or
original view) in the right pane. This modification to the graphics
view is shown in the figure below.

June 2000
Element Details:
Data interrogation has always been the most important feature of
the CAESAR II graphics system. Users must have the capability to
ensure the correct model is being analyzed. The HOOPS graphics
expand these interrogation abilities.
For quick details about an element or node point, click on the
Object Selection Button (the white arrow pointing to the upper left).
Now put the mouse cursor over the object of interest. An information
bubble will appear describing the major properties of the object
beneath the cursor. A typical information bubble is shown in the
figure below.

Again using the left mouse button, grab the upper right splitter bar
and drag it down. This will split the two existing panes into two
additional panes, upper and lower. When the mouse button is
released, all four panes are updated, with the Z axis view in the
lower left pane, the isometric (or original view) in the lower right
pane, the X axis view in the upper left pane, and the Y axis view in
the upper right pane. This modification to the graphics view is
shown in the figure below.

Moving the mouse cursor off of the piping system causes this
information bubble to disappear. Pointing to a different object,
displays its information bubble.
Previous versions of CAESAR II allowed users to view element
diameters, thicknesses, and temperatures by simply placing values
on pipe elements. The new 3D graphics instead generate a color
table, where each color represents a different diameter, or thickness,
or temperature. The corresponding pipe elements are shaded in the
same color. The thickness data is shown in the figure below.

The image in all of these panes can be manipulated individually.


Each pane can be rotated, panned, or zoomed independently of the
other panes.
10

June 2000

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

Using CAESAR II ODBC


Data Export
(By: Pat Jenakanandhini)

Before the release of CAESAR II 4.20, users of the stress analysis


program frequently requested that we include a feature for
customizing the stress, force, and other reports. These customization
requests frequently dealt with formatting issues like font settings,
page margins, etc. Therefore, in CAESAR II version 4.20, we
implemented ODBC export, which allows the user to create and
change reports in a way that was not possible in previous versions.
This article will explain the benefits of the new feature and how it
can be used to the fullest advantage.
One of the most useful features of the new 3D graphics system is the
interactive association of the graphic elements (i.e. the pipes) and
the input spreadsheet. Using the Object Selection Button (the white
arrow pointing to the upper left), click on any element in the model.
If the spreadsheet is being viewed simultaneously with the graphics,
the spreadsheet data is reset to correspond to the element graphically
selected. This is shown in the figure below.

The ODBC export feature in CAESAR II uses Microsoft Access


to enable the user to create reports that display selected data in a
customized format. Access allows the creation of custom reports
whose formatting features can be manipulated like those of a
MicrosoftWord document. Using the CAESAR II ODBC export
feature requires setting up a data source name (DSN). Instructions
are provided in the CAESAR II 4.20 User Guide (page 3-18).
For users who are not familiar with Access, the following is a brief
description of the terms used in this article.

This figure shows that element 75-80 has been selected (since it has
been redrawn in gray). The spreadsheet has been updated to
correspond to the data associated with this same element, 75-80.
Assuming enough screen real estate is available, the entire
spreadsheet for the selected element can be viewed and its data
modified.
These new 3D graphics are under continual development. Each
new revision to CAESAR II will provide more features and
capabilities to the graphic representation of the model.

What is a database? A database is a collection of data that is


organized so that its contents can easily be accessed, managed,
and updated. The most prevalent type of database is the
relational database, a tabular database in which data is defined
so that it can be reorganized and accessed in a number of
different ways.

What is a table? A table is a collection of data about a specific


topic, such as products or suppliers. Using a separate table for
each topic means that you store that data only once, which
makes your database more efficient and reduces data-entry
errors.

What is a query? A query is a set of search conditions that is


enacted on database tables. Queries are used to view, change,
and analyze data in different ways. You can also use them as
the source of records for reports.

What is a report? A report is an effective way to present data


in a printed format. Reports allow control over the scope and
presentation of data, allowing the user to display the information
as required.

What is a filter? A filter is a set of criteria applied to data in


order to show a subset of the data or to sort the data.

Access is a program that combines the above features into one


application. It is part of the Microsoft Office suite and is available
with the Professional Edition.

11

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

June 2000

CAESAR II version 4.20 is accompanied by a template database


that contains sample reports. The current template database, updated
with the 000502 build, includes a convenient form (automatically
displayed) for accessing the reports and six tables that hold all data
resulting from the static analysis of a model:

RESTRAINTS: Contains calculated results of all restraints


used in the module.

DISPLACEMENTS: Contains calculated results for all


displacements the model undergoes.

LOCAL_ELEMENT_FORCES: Contains calculated results


for all local forces and moments experienced by elements in
the model.

GLOBAL_ELEMENT_FORCES: Contains calculated results


for all global forces and moments experienced by elements in
the model.

STRESSES: Contains calculated results for all stresses, code


stresses, and SIFs for elements in the model.

HANGERS: Contains calculated results for hangers used in


the model if applicable.

Figure 2: Selecting type of reports for view/print


With the job name and report chosen, the user can then either view
or print the report. The user also has the ability to view the report by
load case or by element/node. In the first case, the load cases are
listed with elements/nodes under them. In the second option, the
elements/nodes are listed by load case. The report chosen will be
displayed as shown below.

At the present time, only static results are available for ODBC
export. To query these database tables for reports, the user must
first enable the ODBC Data Export function. The program will then
require the user to specify a location to which the database will be
saved. From this location, the user can access the report templates.
Shown below is the form provided for accessing the reports.

Figure 3: Screen capture of sample report


The above discussion focused on how to use the existing reports
available through the template database. Access allows
CAESAR II users to selectively view and print data through filters
and queries. The filter method is easier to use, but the query method
offers more flexibility.
Filter Method: The following steps outline the process of applying
a filter:
Figure 1: Report choice form from CAESAR II template
database
Several jobs can be exported to the same database. Therefore, the
user must first choose the job name from JOBNAME list box or
select the View All Jobs check box.
After selecting the job name from the list, the user then selects
which reports need to be viewed or printed. These choices can be
made by selecting the appropriate check boxes as shown below.

12

1.

Open the database specified in the CAESAR II Configuration/


Setup module.

2.

Select the Tables tab or button and double-click on the name


of the table. The table is then displayed as shown below.

June 2000

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


Another option is to use Filter For to search for specific nodes or
elements exhibiting certain characteristics. For example, the Filter
For option can be used to search the PRCT_STRF or the
PRCT_STRT fields for values greater (> operator) than 90. Since
those fields hold percentages of code stresses versus allowable
stresses, it would be a quick way of reviewing elements that are
either overstressed or close to being overstressed.

Figure 4: Stress table


Note: If the table contains data from different jobs, apply the first
filter to the job name.
3.

Apply a filter to any of the fields in the table. The filter options
can be accessed by right-clicking on the field where the user
wishes to apply the filter. For example, if you want to only
view data for the job CRYNOS._A, right-click on any
JOBNAME row with the data CRYNOS._A and select Filter
By Selection as shown below. A filter will then be applied that
only shows records from CRYNOS._A.

Important Note: The filter option by default uses the logical AND
operator to conduct searches. Therefore, when searching values of
PRCT_STRF, PRCT_STRT, or any other numerical fields, care
must be taken not to mutually exclude filters. For instance, if there
are values specified for both PRCT_STRF and PRCT_STRT, the
filter will attempt to obey both filters and may not find any data,
whereas there might be elements where only the FROM node i.e.
PRCT_STRF will be overstressed. In such a case, the user should
opt to use the query method that is more flexible.
Query Method: The following steps will outline how to create a
simple query for displaying elements that are overstressed.
1.

Open the Access database as specified in the CAESAR II


Configuration/Setup module.

2.

Select the Queries tab or button and then pick Create Query
in Design View.

3.

As prompted, select the table to be queried as shown


below:

Figure 5: Filter by selection


4.

The user can export the resulting data to Microsoft Word or


Microsoft Excel for formatting or analyzing. These features
can be accessed by selecting Office Links from the Tools menu
in Microsoft Access as shown below:
Figure 7: Table selection for query wizard

Figure 6: Office links export


A user can also opt to use the Filter Excluding Selection. This
feature is most useful when the user wants to view only records
belonging to either the sustained (SUS) or expansion (EXP) load
cases. To do this, select the operating (OPE) load case and then
apply a filter excluding the selection.

4.

To review overstressed elements, select the STRESSES table


and click on Add. Then click Close to finish the table selection
process.

5.

Select all the fields in the table by double-clicking on the * as


shown below.

6.

Pick the JOBNAME, PRCT_STRF, and PRCT_STRT fields


to set criteria for those fields. The JOBNAME field contains
the name of the job(s) that exist in the database. Note that the
name needs to be enclosed in quotations. The PRCT_STRF

13

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


and the PRCT_STRT fields contain the percentage of code
stress compared to the allowable stress for the FROM node
and TO node respectively.

June 2000
COADE Inc. recommends that readers interested in furthering
their Access knowledge consult Microsoft Access 2000 Bible, by
Cary Prague and Michael Irwin, available at the COADE website
(http://www.coade.com) in association with Amazon.com and can
be found under the category Reference Materials.

Upgrading Databases from


Access 97 to Access 2000
(by Pat Jenakanandhini)

When attempting to write CAESAR II output to an Access Database,


an error message is displayed stating an unrecognized format
error has been encountered, as shown in the figure below. What
causes this?
Figure 8: Setting up the query
7.

Specify the criteria so the data will be selected if PRCT_STRF


OR PRCT_STRT is greater than 100. If the percentage is
greater than 100, then obviously we are dealing with an
overstressed element.

8.

Test the query by clicking on the Run icon as shown here.

Figure 9: Run the query


If there are any overstressed elements in the model, the results
will be displayed as shown below.

This error occurs if a user has upgraded the user database (as
specified in the CAESAR II Configuration file) to Access 2000.
CAESAR II 4.20 provides a template database in Access 97
format. This was done so Access 97 users can use the data export
utility. The template database is stored in the CAESAR\SYSTEM
directory.
To solve this problem:
1.

Upgrade the template database.

2.

Upgrade the User DSN to point to the upgraded template


database.

Upgrading the template database:


Figure 10: Query result
9.

Save this query, so it can be used either in a report created


using the Access report writer or can be exported to Microsoft
Word or Excel.

10. To create the report within Access, select the Reports tab and
use the Report Wizard to select the query created earlier.
11. To export the data to Word or Excel, select Office Links from
the Tools menu.
The CAESAR II ODBC Data Export feature allows users to
selectively create reports that address their concerns using commonly
available productivity tools such as Microsoft Office. More
information about Access can be obtained from reference books.

14

1.

Open Microsoft Access 2000 without opening any specific


database.

2.

To upgrade the template database, go to the Tools/ Database


Utilities/Convert Database/To Current Access Database
Version as shown below:

June 2000
3.

4.

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

You will be asked to select the database to convert FROM as


shown below. Browse to the CAESAR\SYSTEM directory,
pick CAESARII.MDB from the list and click Convert.

2.

A window showing details of the DSN will appear similar to


the one shown below. Click on the Select button to change the
database affected by this DSN.

3.

A browse window will appear. Select the file named


caesarII2k.mdb and click on the OK button.

You will be asked to name the Database you are converting


into. Name the file CAESARII2K.mdb and click Save as
shown below. Make sure you save the file in the
CAESAR\SYSTEM directory only!

You have now completed upgrading the template database to Access


2000.
Updating the user DSN:
1.

Select START/Settings/Control Panel/ODBC Data Sources.


A window looking similar to the one shown below will appear.
Select C2_OUT_ACCESS by clicking on it once and then
click on Configure.

15

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


4.

June 2000

You will notice that the DSN is now updated as shown below.
DO NOT change the data source name. Click on the OK
button and then again on OK to close the ODBC Data Sources
window.

You have now successfully updated your DSN.


CAESAR II will now allow you to export data results to Access
2000.

Modeling Widely Spaced


and Closely Spaced Miter Bends
in CAESAR II
(by: Dave Diehl)

CAESAR II automatically calculates and applies code-defined stress


intensification factors (SIFs) to all identified points in the piping
systemtees, bends, and such. This SIF reflects the reduced
strength of the component compared to straight pipe (or, actually, a
girth butt weld). The SIF is based on the flexibility characteristic of
the component which is a function of the component geometry.
This stress intensification factor allows the use of a material (and
temperature) basis for allowed stress without worry of component
type. Its simpler to increase the calculated stress rather than
reduce the allowed stress level throughout the system. This SIF
data was developed in A.C. Markls work published in the late 40s
and is found in most piping codes (e.g. B31.3 Appendix D) in use
today. This article examines the definition and treatment of two of
these componentsthe closely spaced and widely spaced miter
bend.
Definitions
A few definitions are in order. A miter joint is a change in pipe
direction through proper cutting and welding of straight pipe. A
single cut, 90 degree miter has two pipe ends prepared at 45

16

degrees, a two-cut 90 degree miter uses three pieces each with a 30


degree end, and so on. The number of cuts is required information
for miter definition in CAESAR II. Think of the number of cuts as
the number of changes in direction through the joint. (The overall
change in direction is determined by the pipe entering and exiting
the miter joint.) Appendix D of B31.3 clearly shows that a closely
spaced miter group (c-s) acts as a single component, such as an
elbow, while a group of widely-spaced miter joints (w-s) are
treated as individual joints separated by straight lengths of pipe.
This distinction is required in CAESAR II input as well. The
question then is, how far apart can these cuts be before a c-s group
becomes a set of individual w-s cuts. The piping codes provide a
test for this distance between cuts (or changes in direction)if the
spacing between cuts (s) is less than a certain amount s !r 2 (1 + tan ) ,
(where r2 is the mean radius of matching pipe and is one-half angle
between adjacent miter axes, the cuts are treated as a single
component and, if the spacing is greater, the cuts are considered
single miters between straight runs of pipe. Of course, there must
be at least two changes in direction to test for a closely spaced miter
since one cut, alone, is widely spaced.
What importance is this distinction between widely spaced and
closely spaced miters? What impact does it have on the CAESAR II
model? A good place to find the answer is Appendix D of the B31
codes Flexibility and Stress Intensification Factors. This is where
a good part of Markls work resides. Markl developed flexibility
characteristics (h) for piping components based on component
geometry. This h value is used to calculate the flexibility factor (k)
for the component. This flexibility factor is used directly in
calculation of the components overall stiffness as it is used in
CAESAR II. Looking first at the flexibility characteristich for
bends, c-s miters and w-s miters is the same: T R1 r2 2 . The
equations for the miters appear different in Appendix D because the
bend radii (R1) in each case is replaced with the parameters from
which they are derivedfor c-s miters R1 = s cot 2 and for w-s
miters R1 = r2 (1 + cot ) 2 . Again, is one-half of the change in
direction of the individual cut; = 45 for a single cut 90 degree
miter and = 15 for a three-cut 90 degree miter. The flexibility
5
factor, k, for both c-s and w-s miters is the same: 1.52 h 6 . (The
flexibility factor for bends is 1.65 h .) The in-plane and out-ofplane stress intensification factors (ii & io, respectively) for all
2
miters is 0.9 h 3 . Except for the equivalent bend radius, R1 the
closely spaced and widely spaced miters are treated the same.
CAESAR II Terms
To include the Appendix D flexibility and stress intensification
factors, simply click on Bend in the input screen as you enter the
bend (the bend node is the elements To Node). Remember that
the overall bend or miter angle is defined by the orientation of the
elements entering and leaving the bend. CAESAR II input for the
bend or miter appears in the auxiliary data area of the screen. A
sample is shown in Figure 1 below. The mitered component is
specified by entering an integer in the miter points fieldentering 1

June 2000

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

indicates a w-s miter while a value greater than one signifies a c-s
miter. The angle theta used in the miter calculations is set by the
overall miter angle (angle) and the number of cuts
(n) = angle 2n . The bend radius or the effective miter radius
defaults to 1.5 times the nominal pipe size (long radius). This
radius field should be updated to reflect the actual or effective
radius of the component. Determining this effective radius for
mitered components is simplified by the bend SIF scratchpad. This
scratchpad calculates the miter spacing based on the overall bend
angle and two user valuesbend radius and number of miter cuts.
This scratchpad is shown in Figure 2. Keep an eye on the miter
spacing as you change the bend radius or the number of cuts. This
value s is back-calculated from the equivalent radius formula for cs miters R1 = s cot 2 . If this miter spacing is greater than
the c-s spacing limit in the scratchpad, you have a widely
spaced miter and it must be coded as suchas straight runs
connected by single miters. Using the approximate default bend
radius of 1.5OD, this means that a 90 degree miter requires more
than three cuts to be considered closely spaced. Alternatively, your
equivalent miter radius could be reduced to meet the spacing
requirement. A subtle point (developed in the example below) is
that CAESAR II will use the w-s values for flexibility and stress
intensification for those joints that do not meet the c-s requirements
even if they are entered as a multiple-cut component.

Figure 1

Figure 2
NOTE 23 The MITERED BEND at 20 is WIDELY SPACED.
A typical user, in a rush to get results, will code through the miter
joint by checking on bend and specifying the number of cuts. The
default radius is usually ignored. It will not be until the error
checker that the program warns the user with Note 23 that the
multiple-cut miter does not qualify as a multi-cut, closely spaced
miter component. This component should be modeled as a series of
widely spaced (single) miters separated by straight pipe. What does
CAESAR II do in this situation? Again, if the number of cuts is
greater than one, a c-s miter is assumed. The overall miter angle is
defined by the pipes entering and exiting the miter and the bend
radius will default to one and one-half times the nominal OD. The
programs error processor will check the calculated miter spacing
and report if the mitered component fails the c-s check using the
Appendix D definition of maximum spacing of closely spaced
cuts s !r 2 (1 + tan ) . If the group is considered widely spaced,
CAESAR II will use the widely spaced flexibility and stress
intensification factors in the analysis. (These w-s values will also
be displayed in the bend scratchpad.). OK, so the program uses the
wrong flexibility and stress intensification factors. How wrong are
they? Is it a conservative error? Using the data in the scratchpad
above, the difference between widely and closely spaced parameters
is less than 20 percent and the program, in using the w-s data, will
use the stiffer, weaker numbers. You could say that it is conservative.
Except for the effect of the straight pipe! Remember, the code
treats the c-s miter as a single component with the flexibility and
stress intensification factors applied across the entire, multi-cut
component. The widely spaced miter data applies to the single cut
and the spacing between the cuts is treated as regular pipe. What is
the effect of the straight runs on the widely spaced model? The
significance of the straight runs will be examined using sensitivity
study. Rather than trying to think through the mathematics, the
program will be treated as a black box. Two small models will be
built, one with the straight runs through the miter and one without.

17

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

June 2000

If the results are similar, the model is not sensitive to the differences.
If the differences are significant, the better model should be used.
An Example
An example will review the concepts presented so far. Run a 12
inch nominal, standard wall, A106 Gr.B pipe from 10 to 20 ten feet
in the Y direction with an anchor at 10. Specify a bend at 20 and,
leaving the radius at 18 inches, enter 3 for the number of miter
points. Add the second element from 20 to 30 as 10 feet in X.
Check the bend scratchpad to review the miter spacing and stress
intensification factors. This data is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 3
Bend SIF Scratchpad

The spacing between cuts is shown as 9.646 inches and the stress
intensification factor is 3.285. Checking the Appendix D calculations
with r2 = 6.1875 , = 15 ; s = r2 (1 + tan ) = 7.845 . With the
scratchpad spacing (9.646) greater than the limit for closely spaced
miters (7.845), either the equivalent radius should be reduced or
this group of miter cuts should be modeled as three single cut
miters. If changing the radius, either use the equation
R1 ! (r2 / 2)((1 + tan ) (tan )) or test values in the bend scratchpad.
For this example, the miters will be modeled as a series of single
cuts.
A strategy for modeling the example as a w-s miter group
A three-miter component has two elements separated by these three
cuts. For simplicity, we will replace the overall group with four
elementsthese two elements plus two extensions of the existing
pipe in and out of the group (the existing Y and X runs). Using the
scratchpad length L=9.646; these extensions will be L/2 long and
the two new runs will be L long. These four pipes will be bounded
by the node sequence 100, 200, 300, 400, 500 and single miter cuts
will be specified at 200, 300 & 400. In this example we will
produce a miter group that maintains the face-to-face dimension of
a standard welding elbow, i.e. radius = 1.5OD = 18 inches. The
spacing between cuts, then, will be the same as the scratchpad value
of 9.646 inches. The extensions will be half that or 4.823 inches.
Now add these new elements. First break 10 to 20 (the ten foot run
in Y) 8 to 6 from 10 (18 inches from 20) by adding node 100. The
four miter elements will be inserted after this new element 10 to
100. Insert 100 to 200 as a 4.823 inch (L/2) run in the Y direction.
For easy input, all new elements will be entered in the Y direction.
The orientation of the new elements will be set in a second pass
through the group. Now insert 200 to 300 after 100 to 200 and
make it 9.646 inches (L) and follow it with 300 to 400, also L long
and finally, 400 to 500 4.823 inches or L/2 long. Adjust the
orientation of the new elements using the Block and Rotate features
of the List Processor (see Figure 3).

18

First, in the element list, block the three elements 200 to 300
through 400 to 500. Rotate this block 30 degrees about the Z axis
(again, 10 to 20 was in Y and 20 to 30 was in X). The overall
change in direction is 90 degrees and with three cuts, each change
will be 30 degrees. Now block only 300 to 400 and 400 to 500 and
again rotate 30 degrees about Z. Finally block and rotate 400 to
500 the same 30 degrees about Z. Now go back to the input
screens and specify bends at 200, 300, and 400 with Miter Points =
1. To clean up the model, delete element 100 to 20 and break 20 to
30 by adding node 500 18 inches from 20 and delete element 20 to
500. The plot should look good and the bend scratchpad will show
that s = 9.646 inches and the SIF is 3.285. These are the w-s miter
numbers. If you would change the equivalent radius now, the
spacing would change but since the number of cuts is 1, the flexibility
and stress intensification factors will stay at the w-s calculations
the spacing has no effect on w-s miters.
Comparing the results of the correct and incorrect modela
sensitivity study
How does this new model compare with the improperly coded, 3cut miter model? A quick analysis of this simple system will reveal
the significance of this proper model. Place a 0.1 inch displacement
at node 30 on both the quick & dirty, miter = 3 job and the fancy,
3 single-cut job and run an analysis of the displacement case. The
anchor load on the incorrect model is 178 lbf and the anchor load
on the correct model is 219 lbf. The maximum stress in the
incorrect model is 1600 psi and the maximum stress in the correct
model is 1889 psi. The stresses change but not as a result of the
SIFs; these stress intensification factors are the same in both
models. It is the bending moments that are different and these are
different because the correct model is stifferthose short, straight
runs do play a role here. The numbers here are low but the change is
about 20 percent. The model is sensitive to this change.
You might have seen Note 23 (The MITERED BEND is
WIDELY SPACED) in the error checker and ignored it in the past.
You might not have known the reason or impact of such a modeling
condition. If you knew what it meant, the remedy might have been
too costlywith confusing angles and lengths of pipe. Here, we

June 2000
have reviewed the background and cause of this message by
examining the nature of closely spaced and widely spaced mitered
components. If there is more than one miter cut specified for a
CAESAR II bend, it better be a closely spaced miter. If it
doesnt pass the c-s miter test, CAESAR II will apply flexibility
and stress intensification factors for a w-s miter, but that will not
fully address the issue. The individual runs between cuts should be
modeled. This article reviews a quick and painless way to build
that model and it illustrates the significance of that change.

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


Static Modeling pitfalls
(The Missing Mid Span Node)
First, we will explore the concept that data output at any particular
point requires a node.

Beam Element Models


and the ASME B31 Codes
(by: John C. Luf, Morrison Knudsen Corporation, Cleveland, Ohio, U.S.A.)

In the 1920s through 1950s Markl et al. performed their first set of
fatigue tests on piping components and wrote his benchmark paper
Piping Flexibility Analysis. Afterwards and in conjunction
with this paper, the B31 rules for Expansion and Flexibility section
6 were modified by Markl and subgroup(s) membersH.C.E.
Meyer, R. Michael, S.W. Spielvogel, N. Blair, H.V. WallStrom.
For the most part, these changes have gone largely unmodified and
Markl's work is still quoted and referenced today.
The codes (B31.1 and B31.3) approach is predicated to a great
extent upon simplified methods of analysis and evaluation, i.e. no
design rules per Section III NB3200 Design by Analysis etc. As
such, the single dimension beam element structural analysis programs
such as CAESAR II and other Pipe Stress Analysis programs
have been used quite successfully for a wide variety of piping
systems. Code (SIFs) Stress Intensification Factors and flexibility
factors improve the analytical results of these programs. The codes
assume that the predominant loads imposed by weight, displacements,
and other loads (not including pressure) primarily result in bending
stresses.

Typically, when busily engaged in creating a model, the analyst


goes from point to point (from fitting to fitting or support point to
support point) and does not necessarily give thought to the issue of
whether additional data nodes are required. Ordinarily this might
result in an incorrect model, which would give incorrect results. A
typical single pipe element from a model might look like Figure 1. I
am sure that a lot of people go along from support to support
without any added considerations. However, this can lead to some
incorrect results.
If this span was not based upon a precalculated span chart and it was
critical to determine the maximum bending stress combined with
pressure Sl and the maximum sag, this model would yield the
following results.

Limitations of beam elements


CAESAR IIs beam elements, like all beam elements, are unable to
do certain things. Richard Ay quite often refers to CAESAR II
Model Elements as Stick Figure Elements. What he means by this
is, in essence, the beam element is a single dimensional entity. It
does not know where its O.D. is per se. It only knows mathematically
what effect the O.D. has on its structural strength and stiffness.
Likewise in the three dimensions x, y, and z it only knows where its
centerline (or neutral axis is).
Also because of this, it does not know where the stresses CAESAR II
calculates are on an element, i.e., top side or bottom of the pipe is
not known; therefore, calculated stresses are along the centerline
only.

When we look at the sustained stress calculation results, things at


casual glance appear to be fine

19

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

June 2000

One might notice that the highest sustained stress is shown at node
10. However, the calculation of the code stress Sl is a combination
of bending stress due to weight + axial pressure stress. Therefore,
the maximum bending stress should be at the midpoint of the
element and could be based upon the classic beam formula
Mmax occurs at midspan but look where CAESAR II thinks the
maximum stress is! Not at midspan, what happened?

Loading
Mmax at point (C)
2

wl
Mmax :=
8

Looking at a deflected plot (Fig. 5), things now make sense as well.

Well lets take a look at sag or deflection. Looking at Fig. 3 we see


that CAESAR II shows that there is no sag!

If we would add many nodes the deflected plot would assume the
correctly curved shape, but the mid span deflection of 2.706
would not change.

CAESAR II must be broken you say! Well as the Old French


proverb states It is a poor workman who blames his tools! Lets
modify the model by adding a single node!
Looking at the improved model (Fig. 4)(improved by adding a
midspan node), we see the following result for stress:
All of sudden things make sense again! So maybe there is nothing
wrong with CAESAR II after all.

So what happened? Well the only way that a beam element program
can extract data from a model is at node points. The only places
where mathematical results can exist are at node points. In the first
model, the analyst busily built the model without asking the
question At what locations am I likely to pick up the maximum
stress of any code type stress? If this would have been considered,
the analyst would have added the midspan node. Well shouldnt
CAESAR II have known this and added a node?
Currently no beam element program that I know of is equipped with
Artificial Intelligence of this type. Therefore, the analyst needs to
provide adult supervision of the program at all times. Conversely in
the hands of an unskilled person any computer program will yield
inaccurate results. In instances where failures have gone to court
(Hartford, Connecticut Arena roof collapse) invariably the unskilled
user is held to account for the mis-modeling.
One thing that CAESAR II does by default in the current version is
to add a mid point node on an elbow. This small change is an
enormous help. Previously, users could identify an elbow so that
the correct Code SIF was applied but lacked the mid point node.
This lack of a node on occasion could result in a missed high
stress in an elbow, similar to the above example.

20

June 2000
The missing small diameter Sockolet/ Weldolet/ Pipet
These welded attachments are commonly used for all types of pipeon-pipe intersections. They are commonly used for drains, vents,
and instrument connections. Clearly in B31.3 and B31.1 they are
assigned SIFs. Yet most analysts ignore their increase in SIF for
both the header location as well as the branch. The addition of this
to a pipe element that is part of the header, is branch diameter
independent! A copy of B31.3 Table D300 shows that the formulas
for k, io, II, and h do not require the branch geometry to come into
play at all.

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


Piping Support Systems ISBN 0-07-058931-3. The program will
give a weight reaction at a +y support in the model. If the cylinder
is a high D/T ratio pipe with a large pressure load and small contact
length the local wall may become overstressed.

Line Contact

Hidden thermal growth


The assignment of boundary conditions at supports is sometimes
done in the flick of a keystroke with no regard to what may really be
happening. An example that comes to mind is secondary thermal
growth at a point of pipe support.

Once more, no node and no SIF may mean an incorrect and


overstressed system.

Water Cooled
Pedestal
Pump Case

3"
Insulation

Localized effects
In the real world, round cylinders do not behave as a single
dimensional beam element does. What I mean is that in a beam
element model, the circular properties are assumed constant from
one end of the element to the other. This is ordinarily not a
problem; however, it may lead to under-estimation of stresses in
some cases. I quote B31.3:
TABLE D300 NOTES (1)
Stress intensification and
flexibility factor data in Table D300 are for use in the
absence of more directly applicable data (see para. 319.3.6).
Their validity has been demonstrated for D/T 100.
What this means is, the simple SIFs and Flexibility Factors in the
code(s), which beam element programs such as CAESAR II use,
may not be appropriate for very thin high D/T ratio pipes. Indeed
when you realize that Markl's original work was based on 4NPS
standard weight pipe (D/T=19.6) you should realize the farther you
stray from that D/T, the less accurate your SIF and flexibility factors
will be. (And, no, 99.99 is not necessarily OK, and 100.01 is not
necessarily wrong.)
Other local effects that CAESAR II and other beam element
programs do not deal with are the localized effects of line loads.
Line loading is what occurs when a cylinder sits upon a flat surface.
This effect is discussed in Tom Van Laans book Piping and

24 NPS
Pipe

18"
6"

Side View of pump and suction piping

For example take a design where a fixed support is placed close to a


pump nozzle on a high temperature system (say 600F). At this
temperature carbon steel will grow approximately 1/16 for every
foot of metal. In the side view is an example of a base trunnion used
to support a piece of very hot process piping.
Now ordinarily one would hope to see a spring can in a location
close to a sensitive piece of rotating equipment, but the analyst saw
no problems with the load reactions on the pump nozzle.
Indeed when you looked at the restraint loads they were within
allowable loading and yet evidence from the field suggested that the
pump was overloaded. When one looked over the modeling, the
beam element model was made up in a simplistic fashion. It takes

21

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

June 2000

very little imagination to see that the simple model missed the
additional 1/16 + upward growth of the trunnion. When this
hidden growth was accounted for, the overturning moment on the
pump was enormous! Yet here again the analyst had acceptable
loads from the model. The print out all looks good the pump must
be bad! Well I guess thats why fixed supports around hot equipment
are a bad idea. It also reinforces the notion that single dimension
beam element models must be given adult supervision at all times.
Caesar II
Nodes

Anchor
R

Neither B31.1 nor B31.3 provide any specific guidance on


compressive loads. B31.3 does advise the designer to evaluate for
them and to be watchful of them.

+Y

Side View of pump and suction piping

Whats in a code?
CAESAR II , when used with either B31.3 or B31.1 as a piping
code, analyzes piping systems per those codes rules. SIF, flexibility
factors and load combinations are automatically selected. However
lets look at some interesting facets of these rules.
Feeling squeezed?
Both of these codes presume that your piping system is somewhat
normal, as far as layout and restraints are concerned. What do I
mean by normal? Well lets take a look at the following situation

Beam element models are unable to predict the complex nature of


buckling phenomena. It is three dimensional in nature, besides
which, who would ever want to have a design with over a half
million pounds of restraint load????
Summary of concepts:

" The B31.3 and B31.1 codes are simplified codes. They do not
provide specific direction on three-dimensional analysis of
piping systems ala three-dimensional finite element models.

" The code SIFs and flexibility factors shown in, for instance,
Table D of B31.3 are used by beam element models to provide
a more realistic set of reactions and stresses. These factors
have limitations based upon D/T ratios as stated in the B31.3
code.

" The analyst should place nodes in areas of probable high


stresses or deflections. The analyst must have some feel for
what is being analyzed prior to the modeling effort. In case of
doubt, add a node(s).

" If a high stress or a deflection occurs in a location without a


node at or near it, the beam element model will miss the
stress/deflection.

" Secondary growth issues should always be considered.


Remember the beam element does not know where the diameter
of the element is. Dont be misled by full volume or rendered
plots that show pipe outer diameters.

" Local effects such as line loads must be reviewed by methods


Interesting isnt it? I have seen people have layouts just like this
buried in the middle of an involved system. Lets see what guidance
an analysis gives us.

22

other than the Beam Element model; this effect is particularly


acute in higher D/T ratio piping.

June 2000

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

" If you are designing pipe columns neither CAESAR II, nor
the B31.1 and B31.3 codes are very helpful. This phenomena
can and does occur in jacketed piping systems where the core
and jacket pipes experience different temperatures. Be
AWARE OF THIS SITUATION!

length segmentssimilar to the Near/Mid/Far node sequence


normally built around bends. (The final number of elements, N,
will satisfy the relationship: N < 3*pi*BendRadius/Lb<2.4*N.)

" Adult supervision OF ANY COMPUTERIZED SOLUTION


IS ALWAYS NECESSARY! Experience and judgment are
a prerequisite to successful use of any CAE tool.

" When modeled correctly and used within the norms of expected
beam element behavior in systems where bending loads are
the predominant issues of concern, beam element models
have been quite successfully used in combination with ASME
Code factors. The knowledgeable analyst can extend the use
of beam element models into higher D/T ratio piping system
analysis by addressing localized concerns.

Undocumented CAESAR II Gems


(by: Dave Diehl)

A couple of months ago I was building a CAESAR II buried piping


model. I defined the soil data and defined which sections were
buried and clicked on bury the system. Once the program listed
Model conversion complete, I realized an input error and, instead
of clicking on either the OK or Cancel buttons at the bottom of
the window, I clicked on the Close (X) button at the top right corner
of the window. The restraints were not added and control was
returned to the Underground Pipe Generator but I was surprised to
find that the model now had all the extra soil model nodes. Right
away I remembered a previous user request
Soil provides continuous support along the pipe. CAESAR II has
no continuous support model. Instead, for buried pipe, CAESAR II
adds a series of regular point supports along the line. However,
there are two soil effects to considersoil friction which loads the
pipe axially and soil bearing which loads the pipe in the lateral
direction (see Figure 1). The buried pipe modeler addresses both
the axial and transverse soil conditions by the density of point
supports added to the line. A good bearing soil model (near
changes in direction or at tees and such) requires many point
supports while the axial soil model is adequately addressed with
only a few supports. The CAESAR II documentation refers to
these areas as Zone 1 and Zone 3 respectively. Zone 1 support
spacing is set by foundation theory with four nodes (three elements)
equally spaced through this bearing zone, L b .
) 0.25 K is the translational stiffness of the
Lb = 0.65 (4 E I
K
tr

tr

soil. Zone 3 node/restraint spacing is simply 100*OD. Zone 2 node


spacing starts at 1.5 times Zone 1 lengths at the Zone 1 end and
progresses linearly to 50*OD at the Zone 3 end by adding two
intermediate lengths. In addition, CAESAR II will add 1 or more
nodes through the bend breaking the bend into two or more equal

Figure 1
We have received requests from a few users who are not happy with
the number of restraints around the bend. The problem is the bend
restraints may not be close enough to eliminate bending around the
nodebending which would not be possible in a proper bearing/
foundation model. Again, CAESAR II is modeling the continuous
soil support by a series of point supports; if they are not close
enough, an unrealistic bending moment develops (see Figure 2).
The obvious work-around is to break the bend by hand into a
series of bends and let CAESAR II add the additional bend restraints
to each of these segments. This is not easy. You have to have a
good handle on analytical geometry to set the tangent intersection
points for this series of small angle bends.

Figure 2
Well, here I am looking at a job that now has a whole lot more nodes
around the bend. The modeler even maintained the bend designation
through these back-to-back partial bends so each node is a change
in direction with a bend. All I need to do is to continue in the buried
pipe modeler and bury this modified model once again. My node
density is automatically increased without me or CAESAR II doing
anything more.
So, if you are running large radius (50*OD) bends (or any other
radius for that matter) through the buried pipe modeler, you can add
a node at the start and end of each bend and bury only the bends
(by specifying a soil model number for these segments) on the first

23

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


pass and return to the soil modeler. Now with a denser node, pack
around these bends, and bury the entire system to complete the
model.
The second gem just came up last month at a trade show in
GermanyACHEMA 2000. A rather large user (in CAESAR II
work, not in personal stature) asked if we could add a feature in the
program to relate their many isometric drawings to their respective
CAESAR II analyses. I saw this as a legitimate and important
request but outside the scope of our program. My initial response
reflected my point of viewI said user discipline was the best
answer. Organizing data in individual folders and controlling job
names was the immediate solution to the users dilemma. He
persisted. He is responsible for more than a dozen CAESAR II
installations and the piping analyses may span several drawings. It
would be difficult for him to control naming conventions and any
mistakes would result in lost time in their correction.
Rising to the cause (or bait), I tried another approach. While he was
standing there I typed a string in the input title page, saved the job,
and then used Windows Explorer to find that string. It worked! I
typed 12345 in the title page and saved the job. When I went out to
Windows Explorer, I right-clicked on the folder I wanted to search,
clicked on Find, and in the Containing text field typed in 12345.
Sure enough, Windows Explorer listed my CAESAR II input file.
While not the elegant programmed solution he was asking for, the
user now has a method of searching all CAESAR II jobs in a folder
or directory for key words or phrases such as line number or
equipment ID. This approach is readily available to all who use the
title page in annotating their analyses.

WRC 107: Elastic Analysis vs.


Fatigue Analysis
(by: Mandeep Singh & Tom Van Laan)

This article aims to clarify the use of the Welding Research Council
Bulletin 107 to perform Elastic and/or Fatigue analysis on vesselattachment junctions. The topic is complex and the user is advised
to refer to the WRC Bulletin 107, ASME Section VIII Div. 2
paragraphs: AD-160, AD-560, App. 4 and App. 5, before using
this software.
The Welding Research Council (WRC) Bulletin 107 is implemented
in COADEs CAESAR II , CodeCalc, and PVElite programs. In
the rest of this article, these programs will be collectively referred to
as the software unless otherwise noted.
In many cases it is necessary to check loadings on nozzles and
attachments at the shell junction. As a result of these loadings, local
stresses are induced at the intersection of the components. These
loads can be determined from a pipe stress program such as

24

June 2000
CAESAR II or PVElite in the case of lug supports. Stress
classifications for these loads are Primary, Secondary, and Peak.
Primary stress is necessary to satisfy the equilibrium conditions
with the external imposed loading such as P*A and M/Z. It may
also be called load-controlled stress (ASME Code Case N-47-28).
They are not self-limiting in nature and can cause ductile rupture or
a complete loss of load carrying capacity due to the plastic collapse
of the structure upon single application of load (ASME). Secondary
stress is developed as result of imposed strain. Secondary stress is a
global self-limiting stress. The examples include some bending
stresses and the stress due to thermal expansion; however, Peak
stress is a localized self-limiting stress. It causes no objectionable
distortion but it may be a possible source of fatigue failure.
Depending upon the type of loading, the design should be checked
for these stresses.
Section AD-160 of the ASME VIII Div 2 Code provides the
guidelines indicating when a fatigue analysis is required and when
an elastic analysis will suffice. One of the conditions for materials
with minimum tensile strength not exceeding 80 ksi is that the total
number of expected cycles does not exceed 1000. The expected
cycles include full-range pressure cycles, operating cycles, effective
number of changes in metal temperatures between two adjacent
points in the pressure vessel and temperature cycles. (The user
should refer to Section AD-160 for complete list of guidelines.) In
an elastic analysis, the primary and secondary stresses are taken into
account and the effect of peak stress is neglected. For fatigue
analysis all the stress categories are evaluated in a combined manner.
Peak stress is computed by applying both the stress concentration
factors and Pressure Stress Indices, defined in the following
paragraph.
Peak stress intensities resulting from internal pressure are needed
for performing fatigue analysis. They can be computed using the
Section AD-560 Alternative Rules for Nozzle Design instead of
Article 4-6 (Stresses in openings for fatigue analysis) when all the
conditions of AD-560.1 through AD-560.6 are met. This alternative
method is implemented in the software. With this method, a base
stress value is multiplied by certain factors to get the intensified
stress at different locations in the shell. These factors are known as
Pressure Stress Indices and are given in the Table AD-560.7.
Pressure Stress Indices, sometimes referred as Pressure Stress
Concentration factors, are only applied to the internal pressure
stress.
Stress Concentration Factors Kn and Kb factors are used to compute
the highest peak stress due to external piping loads. Peak stresses
are usually localized at discontinuities such as fillets and transitions.
The membrane and bending stresses are modified using the Stress
Concentration Factors Kn and Kb respectively. The program uses
the fillet radius between the Vessel and the Nozzle to estimate the
Kn and Kb values using WRC 107 Appendix B equations (3) and
(4).

June 2000
If an elastic analysis is the only requirement, then the following
points should be kept in mind when using the WRC 107 module:

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


Or
2.

Set up different types of load cases (sustained, expansion and


occasional).

Include pressure thrust if needed.

Do not include pressure stress indices.

Do not include stress concentration factors Kn and Kb (this is


done by omitting the fillet radius between the vessel and
nozzle).

Use stress summation to compare the actual stress to the


allowable stress.

Stress Summation Method


The ASME Section VIII Division 2 code provides for an elaborate
procedure to analyze the local stresses in vessels and nozzles
(Appendix 4-1 Mandatory Design Based on Stress Analysis).
This approach is used to compute the overall stress intensities on
the vessel/nozzle intersection. The local stresses resulting from
sustained, expansion and occasional loads are combined with
pressure stresses into code-defined stress categories and compared
with their respective allowable stress values. Hence, the name
Stress Summation is used to identify the method.
If a fatigue analysis is required then elastic analysis will still be
required. Furthermore, there will be additional checks for fatigue
stress. For performing fatigue analysis, we need to calculate or
estimate Peak stress intensities. Fatigue analysis can be performed
through these steps:
1.

First, set up the range pair and load cycles (e.g. Installed to
operating, pressure fluctuations) for the fatigue loading.

2.

Now evaluate each load range using the WRC 107 module one
by one. Enter each cyclic load as a sustained load and leave the
other types of loads blank.

3.

Include Pressure Thrust if needed.

4.

Include stress concentration factors Kn and Kb, by entering


the fillet radius between the vessel and nozzle. Doing so will
compute the peak stress due to applied loads.

Automatically include the Pressure Stress Indices and perform


stress summations. Use the program's results for Stress Intensity
(Pm+Pl+Q+F) and ignore the results for first two equations
(Pm and Pm+Pl) and ignore the comparison to the allowable
stresses. This method is illustrated in the example below.

The total stress intensity (Pm+Pl+Q+F) is a combination of the


effect of external loads intensified by Kn and Kb factors and
internal pressure intensified by pressure stress indices. This is the
Peak stress intensity needed for performing fatigue analysis. Now
use this total stress intensity value in conjunction with ASME
Section VIII Div 2, Appendix 4 and 5 rules and the fatigue curves to
compute cumulative usage.
The following example illustrates these topics using the CAESAR II
WRC 107. This is similar to the WRC 107 module in CodeCalc/
PVElite, but we will note the differences as we go along.
Example:
The cylindrical vessels details are:
Vessel:
Outer diameter:
Thickness:

120 inch
1.0 inch

Nozzle:
Nominal diameter: 10 inch (10.75 inch actual )
Schedule:
80S (thk. 0.5 inch)
Elastic analysis will be performed first followed by fatigue analysis.
Elastic analysis: For the elastic analysis, loads are specified in
sustained, expansion and occasional categories. The vessel
information is entered first. The input for Fillet Radius between
Vessel and Nozzle should be left blank. This will serve as an
indication to CAESAR II software that Stress Concentration Factors
(Kn and Kb) should not be included in analysis (Fig. 1). In
CodeCalc, there is an explicit checkbox for the same. Moreover,
the Include Pressure Stress Indices check box should be left
unchecked. Peak stress is neglected from the analysis by not
including the effect of stress concentration factors (Kn and Kb) and
pressure stress indices.

There are two ways to combine the stresses due to external loads
with the ones due to internal pressure:
1.

Calculate the pressure stress by hand (using AD-560.7 to


manually apply Pressure Stress Indices) and combine with
stresses due to external loads. Do not check the checkbox to
automatically include pressure stress indices and do not
perform stress summations.

25

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

June 2000

Figure 1: Vessel Data

Figure 2: Sustained loads

Nozzle data input is next. This is a radial nozzle along the X-axis.
The direction of the nozzle is from the nozzle pointing towards the
center of the vessel. This convention makes the axial force consistent
with the WRC 107 convention, in which the axial force P is
positive pointing into the vessel. In this case the direction cosines
of the nozzle are (-1, 0. 0). Next, we will enter the forces and
moments acting on this nozzle.

The external piping loads can also be automatically brought in from


a CAESAR II piping models output by clicking the Get Loads
from Output button. With a complete input, the analysis can be
executed by pressing the appropriate button. The results will include
stress intensity due to individual load cases. The Stress Summation
option in the software implements the rules given in Section VIII
Div 2 for combining different types of stresses. Perform the stress
summation and examine the results.

On the input screen for sustained loads there is a check box that
prompts for inclusion of pressure thrust. Pressure thrust is the force
exerted on an attachment such as a nozzle due to the internal
pressure of the cylinder to which it is attached. The inclusion of this
force depends on the flexibility, configuration, and restraint
information of the piping system attached to the nozzle. Pressure
thrust is a topic of a separate article and will be addressed in future.
However, we will assume the piping system on the other side is
flexible and the box will be checked (Fig. 2).
Next, the expansion and the occasional loads should be entered
(Fig. 3). There is not an additional internal pressure in this occasional
load case, so that entry will be zero.

Figure 3: Occasional loads

26

June 2000

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

Vessel Stress Summation @ Nozzle Junction


Division 2 Stress Indices not applied

Type of
|
Stress values at
Stress Intensity
|
(lb./sq.in.)
|
Location
|
Au
Al
Bu
Bl
Cu
Cl
Du
Dl
|Circ. Pm (SUS)
|
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850
Circ. Pm (OCC)
|
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Circ. Pm (TOTAL)
|
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850
Circ. Pl (SUS)
|
1350
1350
2922
2922
2157
2157
1645
1645
Circ. Pl (OCC)
|
-43
-43
743
743
493
493
129
129
Circ. Pl (TOTAL)
|
1307
1307
3665
3665
2650
2650
1774
1774
Circ. Q (SUS)
|
4578 -4578
8886 -8886 14539 -14539
4119 -4119
Circ. Q (EXP)
|
-37
15
107
-53
169
-145
-79
83
Circ. Q (OCC)
|
26
-26
2180 -2180
5250 -5250 -2192
2192
Circ. Q (TOTAL)
|
4567 -4589 11173 -11119 19958 -19934
1848 -1844
Long. Pm (SUS)
|
4387
4387
4387
4387
4387
4387
4387
4387
Long. Pm (OCC)
|
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Long. Pm (TOTAL)
|
4387
4387
4387
4387
4387
4387
4387
4387
Long. Pl (SUS)
|
1688
1688
2114
2114
2494
2494
1778
1778
Long. Pl (OCC)
|
205
205
417
417
605
605
95
95
Long. Pl (TOTAL)
|
1893
1893
2531
2531
3099
3099
1873
1873
Long. Q (SUS)
|
6210 -6210 13020 -13020
9599 -9599
3827 -3827
Long. Q (EXP)
|
-44
48
136
-112
108
-76
-38
38
Long. Q (OCC)
|
-126
126
3278 -3278
3161 -3161
-961
961
Long. Q (TOTAL)
|
6040 -6036 16434 -16410 12868 -12836
2828 -2828

Shear Pm (SUS)
|
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Shear Pm (OCC)
|
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Shear Pm (TOTAL)
|
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Shear Pl (SUS)
|
88
88
-88
-88
-148
-148
148
148
Shear Pl (OCC)
|
88
88
-88
-88
-148
-148
148
148
Shear Pl (TOTAL)
|
176
176
-176
-176
-296
-296
296
296
Shear Q (SUS)
|
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
Shear Q (EXP)
|
2
2
2
2
4
4
0
0
Shear Q (OCC)
|
231
231
231
231
231
231
231
231
Shear Q (TOTAL)
|
398
398
398
398
400
400
396
396

S.I. Pm (SUS)
|
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850

S.I. Pm (SUS+OCC)
|
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850
8850

S.I. Pm+Pl (SUS)


| 10201 10201 11773 11773 11012 11012 10500 10500

S.I. Pm+Pl (SUS+OCC)| 10164 10164 12520 12520 11521 11521 10643 10643

S.I. Pm+Pl+Q (TOTAL)| 14854


5629 23798 10897 31458
8437 12608
8868

A pipe stress program such as CAESAR II can be used to set up the


range load pairs and get the range loading from the output. An
article Fatigue Analysis Using CAESAR II in the December
1998 newsletter elaborates on performing the fatigue analysis (also
available on COADEs website www.coade.com).
In this case, we get following range loading,
Fx = 2500 lb
Fy = 3500 lb
Fz = 2500 lb
Mx = 2600 ft-lb
My = 2900 ft-lb
Mz = 6000 ft-lb
In the WRC 107 module, we include the effect of the stress
concentration on external loads (by specifying the fillet radius) and
internal pressure (via a checkbox), as shown in the Fig. 4.

Vessel Stress Summation @ Nozzle Junction

Type of
|
Max. S.I.
S.I. Allowable |
Result
Stress Intensity
|
(lb./sq.in.)
|
|
S.I. Pm (SUS)
|
8850
23300
|
Passed
S.I. Pm (SUS+OCC)
|
8850
27960
|
Passed
S.I. Pm+Pl (SUS)
|
11773
34950
|
Passed
S.I. Pm+Pl (SUS+OCC)|
12520
41940
|
Passed
S.I. Pm+Pl+Q (TOTAL)|
31458
69900
|
Passed

Table 1: Results of the Elastic Analysis


Figure 4: Vessel Data in the Fatigue case
The results are shown in Table 1. The maximum values of stress for
each of the eight locations are compared to the allowables, to
determine if the junction failed or passed. All the stress combinations
passed in this case. This completes the elastic stress analysis of the
nozzle-shell junction.
Now suppose there are some cyclic loadings to consider. The
information needed to perform the fatigue analysis for the cyclic
condition is shown below:
Temperature variation from ambient (70F) to 250F coupled with
pressure variation of 200 psi: 10,000 cycles.

The fatigue load case cannot be classified as sustained, expansion


or occasional; however, in order to use the WRC 107 software, the
loads must be entered under one of these categories. Since a
pressure value is also needed, these loadings should be sustained
loads. This will not make a difference for our purpose.
After running the WRC 107 analysis, you can use the stress
summation to automatically combine the stress intensity due to
internal pressure with the stress intensity due to external loading.
(Note: This combination can also be done manually).
From the stress summation output, the maximum stress intensity is
needed for performing the fatigue analysis. This value is highlighted
in Table 2.

27

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


ANALYSIS REPORT: WRC 107
Vessel Stresses @ Nozzle Junction

|
Stress values at
Type of
|
(lb./sq.in.)
|
Stress
Load|
Au
Al
Bu
Bl
Cu
Cl
Du
Dl
|
Circ. Memb. P -Pl |
3000
3000
3000
3000
2671
2671
2671
2671
Circ. Bend. P -Q |
8470 -8470
8470 -8470 11737 -11737 11737 -11737
Circ. Memb. MC -Pl |
0
0
0
0
265
265
-265
-265
Circ. Bend. MC -Q |
0
0
0
0
4836 -4836 -4836
4836
Circ. Memb. ML -Pl | -1966 -1966
1966
1966
0
0
0
0
Circ. Bend. ML -Q | -4827
4827
4827 -4827
0
0
0
0
|
Total Circ. Stress |
4677 -2609 18263 -8331 19509 -13637
9307 -4495

Long. Memb. P -Pl |


2671
2671
2671
2671
3000
3000
3000
3000
Long. Bend. P -Q | 12097 -12097 12097 -12097
8446 -8446
8446 -8446
Long. Memb. MC -Pl |
0
0
0
0
371
371
-371
-371
Long. Bend. MC -Q |
0
0
0
0
2679 -2679 -2679
2679
Long. Memb. ML -Pl |
-533
-533
533
533
0
0
0
0
Long. Bend. ML -Q | -7631
7631
7631 -7631
0
0
0
0
|
Total Long. Stress |
6604 -2328 22932 -16524 14496 -7754
8396 -3138

Shear
VC -Pl |
148
148
-148
-148
0
0
0
0
Shear
VL -Pl |
0
0
0
0
-207
-207
207
207
Shear
MT -Pl |
171
171
171
171
171
171
171
171
|
Total Shear Stress |
319
319
23
23
-36
-36
378
378

Stress Intensity
|
6655
2817 22932 16524 19509 13637
9443
4593

Stress Intensity due to external loadings


Vessel Stress Summation @ Nozzle Junction
Division 2 Stress Indices are applied

Type of
|
Stress values at
Stress Intensity
|
(lb./sq.in.)
|
Location
|
Au
Al
Bu
Bl
Cu
Cl
Du
Dl
|
Circ. Pm (SUS)
| 10620 27435 10620 27435 23010 -1770 23010 -1770
Circ. Pl (SUS)
|
1034
1034
4966
4966
2936
2936
2406
2406
Circ. Q (SUS)
|
3643 -3643 13297 -13297 16573 -16573
6901 -6901

Long. Pm (SUS)
|
4387
-877
4387
-877
9214
4387
9214
4387
Long. Pl (SUS)
|
2138
2138
3204
3204
3371
3371
2629
2629
Long. Q (SUS)
|
4466 -4466 19728 -19728 11125 -11125
5767 -5767

Shear Pm (SUS)
|
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Shear Pl (SUS)
|
148
148
-148
-148
-207
-207
207
207
Shear Q (SUS)
|
171
171
171
171
171
171
171
171

S.I. Pm (SUS)
| 10620 28312 10620 28312 23010
6157 23010
6157

S.I. Pm+Pl (SUS)


| 11658 28469 15588 32401 25949
7764 25419
7022

S.I. Pm+Pl+Q (TOTAL)| 15320 28038 28883 36505 42519 15407 32326
7551

Type of
|
Max. S.I.
S.I. Allowable |
Result
Stress Intensity
|
(lb./sq.in.)
|
|
S.I. Pm (SUS)
|
28312
23300
|
Failed
S.I. Pm+Pl (SUS)
|
32401
34950
|
Passed
S.I. Pm+Pl+Q (TOTAL)|
42519
69900
|
Passed

Table 2: Stress Intensities for Fatigue case.


Maximum Stress
Intensity value for
Fatigue analylsis

This is the Stress


Intensity of interest
Intensified Stress
Intensity due to
internal pressure

The primary membrane stress, which by definition is the average


stress across the thickness, is varying across the thickness as seen in
the results (Table 2). This happens because we apply pressure
stress indices to compute the peak stress. The WRC 107 program

28

June 2000
computed a stress intensity of 42,519 psi. This is actually the total
stress intensity including the effect of peak stress thus,
S.I: Pm + Pl + Q + F = 42,519 psi.
In a future release of the software, modifications will be incorporated
to make it easier to perform fatigue analysis. Since there is no stress
reversal, this is a stress range (Sr). Therefore, alternating stress
intensity is,
Sa = 1/2 * Sr = 1/2*42519 = 21259.5 psi.
Correct the Sa for the design temperature in accordance with Section
VIII Div 2 Appendix 5 5-110.3(f) by multiplying by the ratio of
modulus of elasticity given on the design curve to the value used in
this analysis.
Sa = 21259.5 * (30/29.25) = 21804.6 psi.
From the figure FIG. 5-110.1 in App. 5 Sec. VIII Div. 2 (for UTS
80 ksi), shown here in Fig. 6, the number of allowable cycles are for
21,805 psi. is:
N = 75,000 cycles (Allowed)
n = 10,000 cycles (Actual)

Figure 6: Design Fatigue Curve (5-110.1) from Sec. VIII Div. 2


Therefore, the Cumulative Usage factor U is:
U = n/N = 10000/75000 = 0.133
U = 0.133 < 1.0 so the design meets the specified requirements.
If we have other cyclic loads, then their effect can be combined to
obtain the total usage factor.
Utot = n1/N1 + n2/N2 +
Again the total usage factor must be less than or equal to 1.0 for a
design to be acceptable.

June 2000

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


[Win]+[Tab]

Hardware / Software for the


Engineering User (Part 29)
(by: Richard Ay)

This article will focus on the use of the Windows keys on the
keyboard, optimizing your use of Windows Explorer, and the related
issue of file associations. (The information for this article has
been obtained from Ziff Davis tips and PC Magazine.)
The Windows Keys:
Most newer keyboards include two Windows keys, outside of the
[Alt] keys on the keyboard. These keys are labeled with the
Windows logo. Simply pressing the Windows key brings up the
Start Menu. This seems like quite a wastetwo keys to only
bring up the Start Menu? What else are these Windows keys used
for?
Actually, there are a number of things the Windows keys will do for
you, when used in combination with another key on the keyboard.
These key combinations are described in the table below. In this
table, the notation [Win] refers to the Windows key.
[Win]+[E]

[Win]+[F]

This key combination launches Windows


Explorer. The result of launching
Explorer in this fashion is that its initial
display has all drives collapsed.
This key combination launches the Find
Files dialog box. Ordinarily, from
Windows Explorer, the tool menu
would be used, followed by Find, and
then Files or Folders. This key
combination avoids this menu nesting,
and displays the dialog directly.

This key combination cycles through the


programs on the task bar. Once the
desired program has the focus, [Enter]
will bring its window to the top of the
display.

Windows Explorer:
Windows Explorer is the main file management / navigation tool for
Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows NT. Typically, when
(Windows) Explorer is launched, its initial window displays the
contents of Drive C. There are a number of command line switches
that can be used to alter the way Explorer starts up. These command
line switches are discussed in the following paragraphs. For
testing purposes, it is suggested that a DOS box be utilized. Once
specific configurations have been deemed desirable, they can be set
in the Target setting of the desktop shortcut.

Explorer [Enter]
This command launches Explorer, supposedly in single pane
view. However, testing reveals that this command results in
a double pane view with Drive C expanded.

Explorer /n [Enter]
This command launches Explorer, in a single pane view.
The content of the view is the Desktop. To change the view,
the drop list should be used. This will allow the selection of
the various system drives.

Explorer /e [Enter]
This command launches Explorer, in a two pane view. The
content of the view is the Desktop.

Explorer subobject [Enter]


This command launches Explorer, in a single pane view.
This command option is used to specify the drive or folder to
be opened by Explorer. The content of the view is the
subobject, for instance e:

[Win]+[M]

This key combination minimizes all open


windows to the task bar. This basically
clears the desktop, while leaving all
running applications intact.

Explorer /select, subobject [Enter]


This command launches Explorer, and specifies the initial file
or folder to be selected. The parent folder of the selected file
(or folder) is opened.

[Win]+[R]

This key combination opens the Run


dialog box.

[Win]+[Break]

This key combination opens the System


Properties dialog box. Ordinarily, you
would have to right click on the My
Computer desktop icon, then select
properties to obtain this dialog box. This
key combination displays this dialog
directly.

Explorer /root, object [Enter]


This command launches Explorer. The display is initially
opened to object; however, you cannot navigate above this
root.

[Win]+[F1]

The best way to use these command switches is to use them from a
DOS box, and decide the settings best for your installation. Then,
modify the Explorer shortcut on the desktop. This is shown in the
following figure.

This key combination brings up Windows


NT help, regardless of the current
program. [F1] alone typically brings up
the help on the current program.
29

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

June 2000

Assume we double click on the UK.FRM file, for which there is no


application associated. If we assume this is a text file, we can
associate NOTEPAD with the .FRM suffix, for all subsequent
double clicks, as shown in the figure above.
This setting (in the Target Edit box) launches Explorer, in a twopane view with all drives collapsed. To create this specification,
right click on the Explorer icon on the desktop. From the resulting
context menu, select Properties. When the Explorer Properties
dialog is displayed, click on the Shortcut tab. The desired
configuration switches can then be specified in the Target Edit
box.
File Associations:
When in Windows Explorer, double clicking on a data file typically
invokes the associated software application. For example, double
clicking on a .doc file usually invokes Microsoft Word, double
clicking on a ._a file will typically invoke CAESAR II. These
data file - software application associations are typically defined
when the software is installed, but can also be defined in Explorer.
Double clicking on a data file that does not have an associated
application brings up a dialog for you to choose the application to
associate with the data file. This is shown in the following figure.

30

Explorer also provides the ability to remove data file - software


application associations. This is accomplished by clicking on the
[View] menu, followed by [Folder Options], then the [File Types]
tab. This will produce a dialog showing the registered file types and
the application associated with them. Selecting a file type and
clicking on the [Remove] button will remove the data file - software
application association for the selected data file. This is shown for
the .FRM file in the figure below.

June 2000
If using Windows NT, you can view these file associations at the
Command Prompt (i.e. a DOS box) by issuing the assoc command.
If the list is too long, you can always pipe it into the more
command.

COADE Mechanical Engineering News


10) Piping Input Module: Corrected a stack overflow condition
with the delta fields.
Corrected a data association for input listings.
Corrected a problem accessing the CADWorx database.
Fixed in the 000509 build.

CAESAR II Notices
Listed below are those errors & omissions in the CAESAR II
program that have been identified since the last newsletter. These
corrections are available for download from our website. Unless
otherwise stated, all of these changes and corrections are contained
in the 000502 build of Version 4.20.
1) Static Analysis Setup Module: Corrected the wave plot
routines to properly handle the wave/current directions.
Corrected a problem with wind data, where running dynamics
in a different units system could corrupt a user-defined
elevation table. Fixed in 000512 build
2) Structural Input Module: Corrected a plotting problem
with the orientation of non-symmetric cross sections.
3) Dynamic Force/Stress Computation Module: Corrected a
memory allocation problem.
4) Animation Module: Corrected a plotting problem with the
orientation of models viewed along one of the orthogonal
global axis.
Corrected the data display in the element viewer for time
history results.
5) Intergraph Interface: Corrected a problem accessing the
4.20 material data base.
Corrected the interpretation of nodes flagged as anchor
points.
6) Miscellaneous Module: Corrected the equation for the
flange factor F1.
Corrected a units conversion problem. Fixed in 000509
build.
7) Offshore DLL: Corrected a convergence problem with the
Stokes wave theory.
8) Static Force/Stress Module: Corrected a problem generating
ODBC output for load cases existing at only the stress level.
9) PCF Interface: Corrected to prevent some rigid elements
from being interpreted as bends.

11) CADWorx Valve/Flange Data Base: Completely replaced


the CADWorx data directories to provide up-to-date data.
12) WRC107 Module: Corrected the units conversion of the
pressure value for output reporting.
13) Static & Dynamic Output Modules: Corrected a units
conversion error when generating input listings of concentrated
force data. Fixed in 000509 build.

TANK Notices
Listed below are those errors & omissions in the TANK program
that have been identified since the last newsletter. These corrections
are available for download from our website. Unless otherwise
stated, all of these changes and corrections are contained in the
000217 build.
1) Input Module: Corrected the handling of user units files
when located in the data directory instead of the \tank\system
directory. This problem was corrected in the 000217 build of
Version 2.00
Corrected a problem with the sizing scratchpad for the
diameter variation table. This problem was corrected in
the 000217 build of Version 2.00
An incorrect date check was included in the initial release
of Version 2.10. This problem was corrected in the 000605
build of Version 2.10.
2) Solution Module: Corrected the determination of the percent
roof weight supported by the shell for supported cone roof
tanks, supported by only a single center column. This problem
was corrected in the 000217 build of Version 2.00.
3) Error Check Module: The error checker in Version 2.10 did
not allow roofs to be turned off, according to the setting in the
input file. This problem was corrected in the 000605 build of
Version 2.10.
4) Units Files: An error in the data for Pressure Loading in the
2.10 units files caused incorrect roof live load input. New
units files were generated for the build of 000614.

31

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

June 2000
6) WRC 107:

CodeCalc Notices

Fixed a file sharing problem when more than one instance


of the same program was being run.

Listed below are those errors & omissions in the CodeCalc program
that have been identified since the last newsletter. These corrections
are available for download from our website.

PVElite Notices

1) Window Interactions:
Memory issues (Issues arising out of the memory overwrite)
in CodeCalc were fixed in subsequent builds (117 and
315). This caused aborts for no apparent reason while
entering data.
Addressed the unit conversion glitch for input in nonEnglish units.
Addressed the unit conversion of design temperature that
caused incorrect references to material-allowable stresses
in non-English units.
Corrected the conversion of tubesheet corrosion allowance
into user units.
The program was not remembering the occurrence number
for the material. This occurred for the new files created after
the 117 build. This was addressed in the 501 build.
Printing issues for windows 95/98 computers are resolved.
2) Floating head:
For full-face gaskets, the program was computing the
incorrect bolt loads (nonconservative error).
3) Horizontal vessel:
During wind load application, in the calculation of the area
for transverse wind load, the head length for torispherical
and flat head was not converted to feet units. This has been
corrected now.
4) Rectangular vessel:
For A4 vessel, the value of delta parameter was not being
converted to non-English units. This only affected the
display and not the calculations.

Listed below are those errors & omissions in the PVElite program
that have been identified since the last newsletter. These corrections
are available for download from our website.
1) All of the notices listed in the CodeCalc section.
2) The program was using table 2a/2b allowable stresses for
Division 2 flanges when table 1a/1b should have been used.
This error was introduced in version 3.6.
3) For BS-5500 lap joint flanges, the program was using all 4
moments instead of only 1, thereby producing a conservative
flange design.
4) For horizontal vessels that had a "section type" stiffener entry
in the saddle dialog, the program would compute a conservative
saddle weight.
5) In non-English units, the ANSI flange lookup would multiply
some dimensions by the conversion constant (when
unnecessary), producing a recognizable error. The graphic
would become noticeably distorted.
6) Corrected the computation of the axial force at the small/large
end junction of the cone for the horizontal vessel. The program
was computing a conservative solution.
7) For computing the MOI checks for the cone-cylinder junction,
the program was considering total length of the attached shell
instead of the distance to the adjacent stiffener. Previous
implementation was usually a conservative one.
8) For large hub type nozzles, an adjustment was made to the
appendix 1-7 routines for the proper computation and inertia
calculations when the vertical limit cut through or was above
the bevel.

5) Summary:
Fixed the summary for UG-45, as it was erroneously printing
out the message UG-45 failed for the Manway openings.

COADE Engineering Software


12777 Jones Rd. Suite 480
Houston, Texas 77070
32

Tel: 281-890-4566
Fax: 281-890-3301

Web: www.coade.com
E-Mail: techsupport@coade.com