© All Rights Reserved

166 views

© All Rights Reserved

- International Journal of Plasticity 22 (2006) 342–373 Www.elsevier.com/Locate/Ijplas
- Wall Thickness Calculation - ASME B31.8 2007 (Template)
- Wall Thickness Calculation - ASME B31.8 2007 (Template)
- UDR-1 Excel File
- Stress-Induced SofteningStress-induced softening and Hardening in a Bulk Metallic Glass
- Shear Ram capabilities study
- Use of Hydro test (G-10)
- EIS Paper July 2003 Fatigue Analysis Testing Dos Donts
- constitutive laws
- 10.1.1.123
- A Multi Axial Fatigue Analysis Method For
- 1 d Plasticity
- Metal forming-1.pdf
- seat1
- The Size Effect on Void Growth in Ductile Metals
- hot bends
- 1 d Plasticity
- Empirical Formulas for Collapse Resistance Under Nonuniform Loading
- Damage; Structures; Modal Analysis; Virtual Flexibility Matrix (VFM); Identification
- 20 Nonlinear Materials

You are on page 1of 8

PVP2010

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

PVP2010-25178

Toronto, Ontario, CANADA

usama.abdelsalam@amec.com

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

Rb

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

Where,

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

LTA.

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)

9 9

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)

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

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

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

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

1.0

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)

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.)

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

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

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

7 Copyright by ASME

2.5 2.5

2.0 2.0

1.5 1.5

Pall /PD

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

6.0

Lm(a)2 Lm(a)1 Lm(a)2

1.3

5.0

Thickness (mm)

4.0

taloc

Pall/PD

1.0

3.0

tmin

2.0

0.8

1.0

Lm(a)1

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

- International Journal of Plasticity 22 (2006) 342–373 Www.elsevier.com/Locate/IjplasUploaded byvishal
- Wall Thickness Calculation - ASME B31.8 2007 (Template)Uploaded byLU1228
- Wall Thickness Calculation - ASME B31.8 2007 (Template)Uploaded byHendra Yudistira
- UDR-1 Excel FileUploaded byshazan
- Stress-Induced SofteningStress-induced softening and Hardening in a Bulk Metallic GlassUploaded byLuanaBrazEEduardo
- Shear Ram capabilities studyUploaded byAnshul Jain
- Use of Hydro test (G-10)Uploaded byhardish_trivedi7005
- EIS Paper July 2003 Fatigue Analysis Testing Dos DontsUploaded bydeanf987
- constitutive lawsUploaded byrams519
- 10.1.1.123Uploaded byAbhishek Kumar
- A Multi Axial Fatigue Analysis Method ForUploaded byShivanand Arwat
- 1 d PlasticityUploaded byinsomniacsh
- Metal forming-1.pdfUploaded byY.K. Chen
- seat1Uploaded byMarina Cosic
- The Size Effect on Void Growth in Ductile MetalsUploaded byChandra Clark
- hot bendsUploaded byBiginch
- 1 d PlasticityUploaded byNilthson Noreña Valverde
- Empirical Formulas for Collapse Resistance Under Nonuniform LoadingUploaded byClOudyo Virgílio
- Damage; Structures; Modal Analysis; Virtual Flexibility Matrix (VFM); IdentificationUploaded bySEP-Publisher
- 20 Nonlinear MaterialsUploaded byAnonymous oTrMza
- TBE Filled in (Instrument Gas Filter Coalescer)_Updated 16 Aug 2016Uploaded bypragatheesk
- Loading Criteria in Theory of PlasticityUploaded byashwin85pc
- 08 Plasticity 07 Associated Flow RulesUploaded byVenkata Hareen Cherukuri
- M0711937 to M0712031 Certificado Tq 250 GalUploaded bydennis_1985
- Design of Saddle Support for Horizontal Pressure VesselUploaded byPratik Jain
- 6150618Uploaded bymazlum
- _XA(H,T,V) 216-316 Ald(ashra filter) PNB (2).PDFUploaded bybala
- Stress characteristics of plate-fin structures in the cool-down process of LNG heat exchanger.pdfUploaded byyamakun
- Design and Fabrication of a Modified Portable Biogas DigesterUploaded byjonnaline alfon
- Saddle Wear Plate Design.docxUploaded bysterling

- Winkler Curved Beam TheoryUploaded byMuluken Temesgen
- 1a.Saipem1_STOCKSUploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- Natural Frequency of a Submerged RingUploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- RyanBylardRyanBylardFinalReportHeadTube696.pdfUploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- Meshing Tutorial Ans.sysUploaded byCortesar Manu
- Pipe Simulation Using ANSYS – A Quick Introduction.pdfUploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- Book2Uploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- Ommundsen, Marius LoenUploaded byYiorgos Pericleous
- Finite Element Analysis of Marine Buried Pipeline Upheaval Buckling in Clayey Backfill With Cover MaterialUploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- The Key to Sucessful Bending PracticesUploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- Wall Thinning Acceptance Criteria for Degraded Carbon Steel Piping Systems Using FAD Methodology.pdfUploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- 6.10-6.13Uploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- FEAUploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- IntegrationUploaded bygocherke
- Winkler Curved Beam TheoryUploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- FEAC FinalUploaded bymgilbel
- CST (1).pptUploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- CE595 Section 5-1Uploaded byCialla Knowles
- 用微分求积法求解梁的弹塑性问题Uploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- ABAQUS ElementsUploaded bytlili_adnene
- Chap5Uploaded byAnonymous dWtqWj4qj
- 6in Pipe High Curvature (Autosaved)Uploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- nrcs144p2_033533.xlsUploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- Excel Data (Write).txtUploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- FEMPrimer-Part1Uploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- ES128 IntroUploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- TopicsUploaded byZhiqiang Gu
- About Asme ViiiUploaded byZhiqiang Gu

- Hydrotest Full Details_and CalculationUploaded byDipak Patel
- Gearless TransmissionUploaded byRoyalAryans
- Kim, Chen, Kim - 2002 - Estimation Methods for Fatigue Properties of Steels Under Axial and Torsional LoadingUploaded byoffayev
- Plaxis Material ModelsUploaded byRoman
- 1-s2.0-S0894916612600226-mainUploaded bykishore0019
- Abaqus Analysis Users Manual-Volume_5Uploaded byhfathollahi
- Analysis of Continuous Prestressed ConcreteUploaded byGeorge Chris
- BAB 2 Balok Sederhana UpdateUploaded bylareta
- Transition of Deformation MechanismsUploaded byDaniel
- Design for Blast and Seismic.pdfUploaded byHyunkyoun Jin
- Measurements of the Reduction Due to Proof Loads of Residual Stresses in Simulated Pressure Vessel WeldsUploaded bySteve Hornsey
- Curran_2004_PhD-27584Uploaded byRizsa Sufyan Tsaori
- Introductin to Engineering MaterialsUploaded byrkanna2006
- neutral.pdfUploaded byΈνκινουαν Κόγκ Αδάμου
- Brinell TestUploaded byAlexanderGaleanoCaicedo
- Machine DesignUploaded bySatyavinaykumar Tokala
- Topic 8 - Deformation of SolidsUploaded byargh
- Ashraf+Bastawros+PublicationsUploaded byMohsin Butt
- 1-5 Polymers & Ceramics 12Uploaded byairguys
- 22 Force Extension Graphs 297t0x2Uploaded byNafees Sabri
- DEVELOPMENT OF A FERRITIC DUCTILE CAST IRON FOR INCREASED LIFE IN EXHAUST APPLICATIONSFerro Fundido FerriticoUploaded byCaio Fazzioli Tavares
- AZ31B PhasesUploaded byMangesh Pantawane
- 1. Damage and Plasticity for Concrete BehaviorUploaded byJosé Antonio Cornetero Urpeque
- Clapeyron + CrossUploaded byDexsen Guo
- Weld Joint Mismatch KoçakUploaded byAlberto Hibino
- F97105DcHN9sUaKMooUbUploaded byPadmanava
- czm-ppt-2011Uploaded bytraidia
- H27.pdfUploaded byHồ Thắng
- 13048Uploaded byamin2193
- Die MaterialsUploaded byNageswara Rao Suthraye