You are on page 1of 8

Proceedings of the ASME 2010 Pressure Vessels and Piping Division Conference

July 18-22, 2010, Bellevue, Washington, USA



Usama Abdelsalam & Dk Vijay

AMEC NSS Limited - Power & Process Americas

Toronto, Ontario, CANADA

ABSTRACT calculated from this equation is often called the pressure-

This paper addresses the application of the design by based thickness, tmin. For curved segments of pipe, NB-
analysis rules of the ASME B&PV Code SEC III 3642.1 Pipe Bends adopts the same equation for
Division 1 NB-3200 criteria on degraded Class 1 piping. determining the wall thickness for the straight segments
A tight radius pipe bend with a local thin area (LTA) of pipe with three limitations. Of special relevance to
located on the inner surface and super imposed on this paper, the second limitation, expressed in the form
general thinning region is considered using a detailed of Table NB-3642.1(b)-1 Bend Radius Versus
FEA model implementing idealized smooth axial and Thickness, guides the designer when ordering a pipe to
circumferential thickness profiles. A location dependent use a higher than tmin thickness for the pipe prior to
thinning rate function is developed (based on the bending.
smoothed profiles and the assumed original thickness Under NB-3630 Piping Design And Analysis Criteria
distribution) to predict the wall thickness distribution at it is stated that (c) When a design does not satisfy the
the end of an arbitrary evaluation period. Internal requirements of NB-3640 Pressure Design and NB-
pressure and dead weight loads are statically applied. 3650 Analysis of Piping Products, the more detailed
Linear elastic analysis is performed and the results are alternative analysis given in NB-3200 or the
checked against the ASME Code criteria for the primary experimental stress analysis of Appendix II may be used
stress intensity. It is demonstrated that a local wall to obtain stress values for comparison with the criteria
thickness considerably below the pressure based of NB-3200 Design By Analysis. Considering the
thickness for the corresponding straight pipe segment design pressure loading, the design by analysis rules of
meets the requirements of the ASME Code SEC III for NB-3221 requires that general primary membrane stress
the primary stresses. The effect of the extent of the local intensity, Pm, meet the Sm limit (NB-3221.1), the local
thin area in the axial direction is explored. This paper membrane stress intensity, PL, meet the 1.5Sm limit (NB-
also compares the allowable pressure obtained from 3221.2) and the primary membrane (Pm or PL) plus
elastic analysis of NB-3221 and limit analysis of NB- primary bending stress intensity, Pb meet the 1.5Sm limit
3228.1. (NB-3621.3).
INTRODUCTION During operation under flow accelerated corrosion
The pressure requirement in the ASME Code SEC III (FAC) favourable conditions, pipes experience general
protects against the catastrophic collapse of the designed and/or local wall thinning depending on the piping
components due to a single application of the primary geometry and the fluid flow characteristics. For fitness
load. The basic criterion for internal pressure loading for service assessments, the wall thickness loss needs to
under the ASME Code SEC III NB-3600 Piping be evaluated. The ASME Code SEC III, being a
Design is given in NB-3640 Pressure Design[1]. This construction code, does not provide guidance as to how
criterion is applicable for straight pipe segments as to deal with locally thinned areas (LTA). SEC XI Code
described in NB-3641.1 and the wall thickness Case N-597-2 of SEC XI of the ASME Code [2]
1 Copyright by ASME
provides evaluation procedures and acceptance criteria Section II Part D. A linear-elastic isotropic material
to justify continued operation of Class 1, 2 & 3 piping model, using the properties of ASME material SA-106
items subject to wall thinning. The technical basis for the Grade B, is used for the analysis. The material properties
Code Case is provided by D. Scarth et. al [4]. Validation used are as follows:
for these procedures is performed by comparing with Elastic Modulus, E = 26.7x106 psi (at 605 oF)
field rupture data and pipe burst test data [3]. Reinhardt Poissons Ratio, = 0.3
& Zobeiry [5] studied the plastic failure mechanisms in a Allowable Stress Intensity, Sm =17.26 Ksi
locally thinned cylinder using the finite element method.
Pressure Based Thickness
The authors of this paper analyzed double tight radius The pressure based thickness, tmin, is calculated in
pipe bends with general and local wall thinning using accordance with the ASME Section III, NB-3641.1(1) as
idealized wall thickness profiles implemented in detailed follows [1]:
finite element models [7]. In these analyses, pressure
loading assessments of typical CANDU feeder pipe PDo
tmin = +A (1)
bends are performed according to the ASME Code SEC 2( S m + Py )
III NB-3221 criteria. These feeder pipes are made of
where P is the internal Design Pressure (1455psig), A is
Low Carbon Steel Grade B. The detailed modelling of
the Corrosion Allowance (not used), Y is equal to 0.4,
the local thin area is achieved through smooth axial and
and Sm is the max allowable stress intensity for the
circumferential thickness profiles based on the measured
material at the design temperature (17.26 Ksi at 605oF).
thickness data. The concept of a location dependent
Therefore, the pressure-based thickness calculated using
thinning rate function is later on introduced [8]. In
the above formula is,
addition, results from elastic plastic limit load analyses
tmin = 0.124 in  3.15 mm
(NB-3228.1) are presented and compared to the results
from the linear elastic rules of the ASME Code (NB-
3221). Allowable Local Thickness for Bends
For pipe bend, the following equation is provided by the
In this paper, the main focus is to demonstrate the ability
ASME Code SEC XI Code Case N-597-2 for the
to qualify very thin local spots using the detailed FEA
calculation of the allowable local wall thickness (taloc):
approach following the elastic rules of the ASME Code
SEC III NB-3221. A tight radius pipe bend with general t aloc 0.5
0.5 + (2)
thinning and one locally thinned area is studied. The t min Rmin
LTA is located on the inner surface of the bend. Results 1+ cos L
are presented for the analysis models to show the effect
of the axial extension of the LTA on the life of the bend. where,
Results from plastic limit load analysis are also Rmin pipe mean radius based on tmin
presented. Rb bend radius
L Circumferential Coordinate
FINITE ELEMENT MODEL Therefore the required thickness for the tight radius bend
Geometry in consideration is 1.238 tmin on the intrados (L = 180o)
The nominal piping cross-section dimensions used to and 0.878 tmin on the extrados (L = 0 o).
build the geometric models are:
Thinned Model
Outer Diameter, Do = 3.03 in (76.96 mm)
Thickness measurements of CANDU feeder bends are
Nominal Thickness, tnom = 0.276 in (7.01 mm)
performed using a bracelet tool that has 14 probes
The bend dimensions are as follows:
equally spaced along the circumference covering a 140o
Bend Angle, = 73o
angle. For the intrados scan, the tool is centred with the
Bend Radius, Rb = 4.5 in (114.3 mm)
intrados of the tight radius bend and moved axially to
Finite Element Mesh cover the entire bend. Similarly, the tool is centered with
A uniform finite element mesh is used with 45 and 72 the extrados, left cheek and right cheek and moved
elements distributed along the axial and circumferential axially along the bend. Figure 1 shows the developed
directions, respectively. In the through thickness axial and circumferential thickness profiles implemented
direction, three layers ANSYS 20-node SOLID95 brick in the FEA model of the tight radius. The left graph
element are used. The fine mesh size used ensures shows the axial distribution of the cross section
converged results. minimum of the measured thickness data from the six
thickness scans. The right graph shows the
Material Model
circumferential distribution of the measure thickness
The numerical values for the material properties used in
values from the six probe tool used close to the weld.
the analysis models are obtained from the ASME Code
2 Copyright by ASME
Location Dependent Thinning Rate The finite element mesh used in this analysis is evenly
The idealized axial and circumferential profiles as divided in both the axial and circumferential directions.
implemented in the FEA models are used as basis to A very fine mesh is used with three layers of ANSYS
develop the projected idealized profiles corresponding to SOLID95 (20 node) brick elements through the
a target evaluation period. Applying a uniform thinning thickness. In the axial and circumferential directions, 45
rate over the entire length of the bend leads to a simple and 72 elements are used, respectively. A mesh
uniform shift of the thickness distribution to lower sensitivity analysis was performed showing that this
values. This uniform treatment is overly conservative or mesh produces converged results in both the elastic and
non-conservative considering that not all locations plastic analyses.
started with the same thickness (extrados started thinner
and the intrados started thicker than the nominal ELASTIC ANALYSIS
thickness as a result of the bending operation during The finite element analysis is organized as follows:
manufacturing of the bend). For instance, if the thinnest Apply the internal pressure as a static load and
spot is at the intrados, assuming a uniform thinning rate perform a linear elastic finite element analysis.
produces a too conservative estimate of the projected Linearize the resulting stress solution across the wall
thickness on the extrados. thickness to obtain the corresponding membrane,
and membrane plus bending stress intensities.
A location dependent thinning rate function is developed Examine the membrane and membrane-plus-bending
based on the smooth thickness profiles (ensuring a lower stress intensities against the ASME SEC III NB-
bound on the measured thickness distribution) and an 3221 criteria.
assumed original thickness distribution to account for
the thicker intrados and the thinner extrados produced as The question often arise at what point should the
a result of the bending operation. It is assumed that the linearization be performed since the maximum output
percentage increase in the intrados wall thickness is from the linearization operation is not necessarily at the
equal to the percentage decrease in the extrados wall point having the maximum stress. In this paper, the
thickness preserving the material volume. In this linearization operation is performed over the whole tight
investigation, a 7% (maximum at the center) thicker than radius bend region and all the points representing all the
nominal intrados and 7% (maximum at the center) classification lines are checked for compliance with the
thinner than nominal extrados are used to approximate NB-3221 criteria.
the original thickness. This increase and decrease in the The above procedure is followed and the finite element
initial wall thickness is consistent with data obtained analyses are conducted with different minimum local
from thickness measurements of inlet feeders (where in- thicknesses as shown in Figure 5 (Four cases
significant thinning occurs) and spare bends. In addition, representing the original thickness, tloc,min=2.55,
it is assumed that the middle of the bend has the tloc,min=1.99, and tloc,min=1.53 mm). Figures 6, 7, 8, and 9
maximum non-uniformity and the ends have perfectly show the primary membrane stress intensity results for
uniform thickness distribution. the four cases considered. The horizontal axes represent
Figure 2 shows the original and idealized thickness the axial direction starting from the Grayloc hub weld
distributions in both the axial (left) and circumferential (Left graph) or the circumferential direction starting
(right) directions. Each point on these graphs represent a from the centre of the extrados (Right graph). The left
through thickness measurement from one node on the vertical axis represents the membrane stress intensity.
inner bend surface to the corresponding node on the Each point on these graphs represents the result of stress
outer surface. Figure 3 shows the axial and linearization along a path (Classification Line) going
circumferential distribution of the thinning rate as from one node on the inner surface to a corresponding
calculated from the Original Thickness distribution node on the outer surface of the bend. Only the
and the Idealized Thickness distribution plotted in membrane stresses are presented here since these were
Figure 2. The maximum thinning rate in the model is limiting. In these figures, the primary membrane stress
0.26 mm/EFPY close to the intrados of the bend at the intensity in the general thinned areas (Pm) is compared to
beginning of the bend where EFPY stands for Effective Sm represented by a horizontal line. Stress intensity
Full Power Year of continuous operation. The maximum points below the Sm line meet the general membrane
thinning rate at the extrados is 0.13 mm/EFPY. Figure 4 stress intensity criterion of ASME SEC III NB-3221.1.
shows two longitudinal sections (on the left) and a The local primary membrane stress intensity (PL) in the
transverse section (on the right) of the tight radius bend locally thinned areas is compared to 1.5Sm represented
and the Grayloc hub (fitting) showing areas of general by a second horizontal line. Stress intensity points below
and local thinning. the 1.5Sm line meet the local primary membrane stress
criterion of ASME SEC III NB-3221.2 as long as the
extent of the region with stress intensity higher than
3 Copyright by ASME
1.1Sm is limited by (Rmintmin) in both the axial and 3221.2), and Primary Membrane Plus Primary Bending
circumferential directions (Rmin is the mean radius and Stress intensity (NB-3221.3) need not be satisfied at a
tmin is the pressure based wall thickness). The primary specific location if it can be shown by limit analysis the
membrane (Pm or PL) plus primary bending (Pb) stress specified loadings do not exceed two-thirds of the lower
intensity everywhere is compared to 1.5Sm. Stress bound collapse load. This statement is converted to the
intensity points below the 1.5Sm line meet the ASME following mathematical form:
SEC III NB-3221.3. PD (2/3) PC OR PC /PD 1.5
It can be seen that the local thinned area manifested
PD Design Pressure
itself in higher local stresses approaching the criteria
PC Collapse Pressure
lines as the minimum local thickness decreases from the
The same finite element analysis models used for the
nominal. Figure 8 shows the results corresponding to the
linear elastic analyses are used for the limit load
maximum qualified operation (tloc,min = 1.99 mm) for this
analysis. The finite element analysis results are post-
particular bend with the particular thinning profiles.
processed to produce the load-displacement curves for
Figure 9 shows the results corresponding to an extended
selected points in the tight radius bend region. For each
operating period where the NB-3221 criteria are not met
load-displacement curve, a tangent line (elastic line) is
since both the axial and circumferential extents of the
developed starting from the origin (0, 0). The angle that
local stress area are beyond rt. This particular case is
this line is making with the vertical axis is . A second
handled using plastic analysis.
line (double slope line) is developed with an angle
In Figure 10, the left graph represents the results where tan() = 2 tan(). The intersection point between
obtained from the FEA using uniform axial and the double slope line (making an angle with the
circumferential thickness profiles over the entire bend. vertical axis) and the load-displacement curve defines
As shown, the minimum acceptable uniform thickness the limit load.
corresponding to the design pressure is 1.215 tmin. The
It is noted that the Code allowable stress intensities are
right graph shows the results of the analysis using the
based on Tresca yield criterion. However, the Code does
local axial and circumferential thickness profiles (as
not explicitly or implicitly prohibit the use of von Mises
summarized in Figure 5). As shown, the minimum
yield criterion in plastic analyses. For instance, under
acceptable local wall thickness is significantly lower
NB-3228.6 (Reversing Dynamic Loading in Piping), the
than the pressure based thickness (0.631 tmin =1.99mm)
equivalent strain is calculated using the von Mises yield
for the specific axial and circumferential extents of the
criterion. The von Mises yield criterion is also used in
SEC III Div 1 NH Appendix T sub-article T-1411 to
LTA AXIAL EXTENT calculate the effective stress. Therefore, von Mises yield
The axial extent of the locally thinned area is varied criterion is used in the analysis presented in this paper
preserving the same circumferential extent and the without any correction to Trescas.
corresponding models are analyzed to calculate the
Figure 12 shows the load displacement curve and the
corresponding allowable pressure using the linear elastic
limit load for the minimum local thickness of 1.53 mm
criteria of NB-3221. The right graph on Figure 11 shows
that did not meet the NB-3221 linear elastic criteria as
how the axial extent is measured considering the
represented by Figure 9. The calculated limit load is 1.65
pressure-based thickness (tmin) and the allowable local PD. On the same figure, the von Mises color contours are
thickness (taloc) based on Equation (2). The axial extent is
plotted corresponding to the design pressure and the
measured between the two intersection points of the line
limit load. At the design pressure the stresses are shown
representing the thickness distribution and the horizontal
to be in the elastic range. At the limit load pressure, a
lines representing tmin and taloc producing Lm(a)1 and Lm(a)2,
plastic zone is developed but still surrounded by elastic
respectively. On the right graph, the allowable pressure
material providing support that delays the unbounded
is plotted against the two axial distances Lm(a)1 and Lm(a)2.
plastic deformation at higher pressures.
As can be seen, the allowable pressure decreases as the
axial extent of the local thin area increases. It can also be CONCLUSIONS
seen that the axial extent beyond which the allowable The ASME Code SEC III NB-3200 is used to assess the
pressure will fall below the design pressure is around 2.0 structural integrity of thinned tight radius pipe bends
rt. under internal pressure loading. Three dimensional finite
element models are constructed to simulate general and
PLASTIC ANALYSIS local inner wall thinning. The thinning profiles are
The ASME SEC III NB-3228.1 Limit Analysis states smoothly varied in both the axial and circumferential
that The limits on General Membrane Stress Intensity
directions and are constructed as lower bounds to the
(NB-3221.1), Local Membrane Stress Intensity (NB-
measured wall thickness distribution over the entire tight
4 Copyright by ASME
radius bend region. A location dependent thinning rate Conference, PVP2009, July 26-30, 2009, Prague,
function is developed to provide an estimate for the wall Czech Republic.
thickness at the end of an arbitrary evaluation period. 4. D. A. Scarth, et al., Supplementary Technical Basis
for ASME Section XI Code Case N-597-2,
Results from the linear elastic FEA are checked against
Proceedings of PVP2006-ICPVT-11, 2006 ASME
the ASME Code criteria of NB-3221. Different cases
Pressure Vessels and Piping Division Conference,
were presented showing the significant margin of safety
July 23-27, 2006, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
in the original design and the acceptability of very thin
5. Wolf Reinhardt and Nima Zobeiry, Implications of
local area close to the fitting with limited axial and
Limit Analysis on the Evaluation of Locally Thinned
circumferential extents. The plastic limit load criterion
Vessels and Piping, Proceedings of the ASME
of NB-3228.1 is used to show additional margin over the
2009 Pressure Vessels and Piping Division
linear elastic criteria of NB-3221.
Conference, PVP2009-77896, Prague, Czech
REFERENCES Republic, July 26-30, 2009.
1. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, 6. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section II,
Rules for Construction of Nuclear Power Plants, Part D, Material Properties, 2004.
2007. 7. Usama Abdelsalam and Dk Vijay, Finite Element
2. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Case N- Modelling of Locally Thinned Short Radius Pipe
597-2: Requirements for Analytical Evaluation of Bends, Presented at the 8th International Conference
Pipe Wall Thinning, Section XI, Division 1, on CANDU Maintenance (CMC2008), Toronto,
Approval Date: November 18, 2003, ASME Boiler Ontario, November 16-18, 2008.
and Pressure Vessel Code. 8. Usama Abdelsalam and Dk Vijay, Detailed FEA of
3. Kunio Hasegawa, et. Al, Assessment of Piping Locally Thinned Pipe Bends, 20th International
Field Failures and Burst Tests on Carbon Steel Pipes Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor
with Local Wall Thinning Using ASME Section XI Technology (SMiRT 20), SMiRT20-Division 3,
Code Case N-597-2, Proceedings of the ASME Paper 2575, Espoo, Finland, August 9-14, 2009.
2009 Pressure Vessels and Piping Division
7 7.0

6 6.0

5 5.0
Wall Thickness (mm)
Wall Thickness (mm)

4 4.0
Idealized Profile tmin tmin
3 3.0

Idealized Profile
2 2.0
14-probe Extrados 14-probe Intrados
E,1 E,2 E,3 E,4 E,5 E,6
1 14-probe Left Cheek 14-probe Right Cheek 1.0
I,1 I,2 I,3 I,4 I,5 I,6
6-Probe Extrados 6-Probe Intrados
0 0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
Axial Distance Along Bend Centerline (mm) Circumferencial Angle (Deg)

Figure 1: Axial & Circumferential Thickness Profiles (tloc,min=2.55 mm = 0.810 tmin)

9 9

Original Thickness Original Thickness

8 8

7 7

6 6
tp (mm)

tp (mm)

5 5

4 4
tmin tmin
3 3
Idealized Thickness
2 2
Idealized Thickness
1 1 RC Intrados LC

0 0
0 15 30 45 60 75 0 90 180 270 360
Axial Distance (Deg.) Circumferential Distance (Deg.)

Figure 2: FEA Original & Idealized Thickness Distributions (tloc,min =2.55 mm = 0.810 tmin)

5 Copyright by ASME
0.3 0.3

0.25 0.25
Thinning Rate, t R (mm/EFPY)

Thinning Rate, t R (mm/EFPY)

0.2 0.2

0.15 0.15

0.1 0.1

0.05 0.05

RC Intrados LC
0 0
0 15 30 45 60 75 0 90 180 270 360

Axial Distance (Deg.) Circumferential Distance (Deg.)

Figure 3: FEA Model Thinning Rate Distributions (tloc,min = 2.55 mm = 0.810 tmin)

Figure 4: FEA Model Axial & Transverse Sections

8.0 8.0

7.0 7.0
tnom tnom
6.0 L m(a) 6.0 Lm(t)
Thickness (mm)
Thickness (mm)

5.0 5.0

taloc 4.0 4.0 taloc

3.0 3.0
tmin tmin
2.0 tloc,m in=2.55 mm 2.0 tloc,min=2.55 mm
tloc,m in=1.99 mm 1.0 tloc,min=1.99 mm
tloc,m in=1.53 mm tloc,min=1.53 mm
0.0 0.0
-15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240
Axial Distance (mm) Circumferential Distance (mm)

Figure 5: LTA Axial & Circumferential Extent at Different Evaluation Periods

6 Copyright by ASME
30 30

1.5 Sm 1.5 Sm
25 25

20 1.1 Sm 20 1.1 Sm
Pm (Ksi)

Pm (Ksi)
Sm Sm
15 15

10 10

5 5

RC Intrados LC
0 0
0 15 30 45 60 75 0 90 180 270 360
Axial Distance (Deg.) Circumferential Distance (Deg.)

Figure 6: Primary Membrane Stress Intensity (Nominal Thickness)

30 20 30 20

1.5 Sm RC Intrados LC
1.5 Sm 18 18
25 25
16 16

14 14
20 1.1 Sm 20 1.1 Sm

Thickness (mm)

Thickness (mm)
12 12
Pm (Ksi)

Pm (Ksi)
Sm Sm
15 10 15 10

8 8
10 10
6 6

4 4
5 5
tmin tmin Thickness 2
Thickness 2

0 0 0 0
0 15 30 45 60 75 0 90 180 270 360

Axial Distance (Deg.) Circumferential Distance (Deg.)

Figure 7: Primary Membrane Stress Intensity (tloc,min = 2.55 mm = 0.810 tmin)

30 20 30 20

1.5 Sm RC Intrados LC
1.5 Sm 18 18
25 25
16 16

14 14
20 1.1 Sm 20 1.1 Sm
Thickness (mm)

Thickness (mm)
12 12
Pm (Ksi)

Pm (Ksi)

Sm Sm
15 10 15 10

8 8
10 10
6 6

4 4
5 5
tmin tmin Thickness 2
Thickness 2

0 0 0 0
0 15 30 45 60 75 0 90 180 270 360

Axial Distance (Deg.) Circumferential Distance (Deg.)

Figure 8: Primary Membrane Stress Intensity (tloc,min = 1.99 mm = 0.631 tmin)

30 20 30 20

RC Intrados LC
1.5 Sm 18 1.5 Sm 18
25 25
16 16

14 14
20 1.1 Sm 20 1.1 Sm
Thickness (mm)

Thickness (mm)

12 12
Pm (Ksi)

Pm (Ksi)

Sm Sm
15 10 15 10

8 8
10 10
6 6

4 4
5 5
tmin tmin Thickness 2
Thickness 2

0 0 0 0
0 15 30 45 60 75 0 90 180 270 360

Axial Distance (Deg.) Circumferential Distance (Deg.)

Figure 9: Primary Membrane Stress Intensity (tloc,min = 1.53 mm = 0.486 tmin)

7 Copyright by ASME
2.5 2.5

tuniform/tmin = 1.215 tloc,min/tmin = 0.631

2.0 2.0

1.5 1.5

Pall /PD

1.0 1.0

0.5 0.5
Not Acceptable Acceptable
Not Acceptable Acceptable
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
tuniform / tmin tloc,min / tmin

Figure 10: Liner Elastic Allowable Pressure for Uniform & Local Thickness
7.0 1.5

Lm(a)2 Lm(a)1 Lm(a)2
Thickness (mm)




0.0 0.5
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
Axial Distance (mm) Lm (a)/(rt)

Figure 11: LTA Axial Extent & Allowable Pressure (tloc,min = 1.99 mm = 0.631 tmin)

Figure 12: Limit Pressure & Von Mises Stresses (tloc,min = 1.53 mm = 0.486 tmin)

8 Copyright by ASME