comparison of german and american codefor nuclear design

© All Rights Reserved

21 views

comparison of german and american codefor nuclear design

© All Rights Reserved

- Ch 2 5 Selection of Steel Quality
- Moehle-Joints_c.pdf
- 01_Stress Analysis - Basics
- NIST TN 1714_High-Temperature Tensile Constitutive Data and Models for Structural Steels in Fire (Nov 2011
- ANALISIS_MUÑECA1 _PROYECTO
- Failure Theories May 2015
- Prediction of fatigue life of reinforced concrete bridges using Fracture Mechanics
- 16b06h
- 26-BucklindCrippling_CompressionCrippling
- Review and Enhancement of 3D Concrete Models for Large-scale Numerical Simulations of Concrete Structures
- Boundary Element Programming in Mechanics_104207485
- Bracing for Blast- MSC
- 18 Mechanical Properties Which Every Mechanical Engineer Should Know - Material Science - Mechanical Engineering Community
- Yan&Pun-2010
- Ramset Specifiers Anchoring Resource Book ANZ - TruBolt mechanical anchoring.pdf
- ESFUERZOS
- 2015 Tarque_Varum_Blondet Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis Full-scale UR Adobe Model
- SW Simulation Student
- muh-35-1-1-1005-32
- 1-s2.0-S1674775514000420-main

You are on page 1of 8

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267612906

Design Codes for Class 1, 2, 3 Components and

Piping

DOI: 10.1115/PVP2011-58090

CITATIONS READS

0 608

4 authors, including:

TV SD Energietechnik GmbH, Mannheim, E.ON Kernkraft GmbH, Hannover, Germany

14 PUBLICATIONS 7 CITATIONS 13 PUBLICATIONS 2 CITATIONS

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

B2 stress indices for thin walled straight pipes with D/t > 50 View project

662320) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Schau on 07 May 2015.

Proceedings of the ASME 2011 Pressure Vessels & Piping Division Conference

PVP2011

July 17-21, 2011, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

PVP2011-58090

Comparison of German KTA and ASME Nuclear Design Codes for Class 1, 2, 3

Components and Piping

Dr. Daniel Hofer Dr. Henry Schau Hseyin Ertugrul Karabaki

Plant Engineering Technical Service Component Technology

Mechanics Corporation E.ON Kernkraft GmbH

Westinghouse Electric TV SD Energietechnik Hannover, Germany

Germany Mannheim, Germany Phone: +49 511 439 3834

Mannheim, Germany Phone: +49 (621) 395-465 Ertugrul.Karabaki@eon-energie.com

Phone: +49 621 388 2190 henry.schau@tuev-sued.de

hoferd@westinghouse.com

Ralph Hill

Westinghouse Electric Company

Nuclear Services

Walls Mill, PA, USA

Phone: +1 724 722 6332

hillrs@westinghouse.com

This paper compares the design rules of the ASME Boiler Analysis and on Piping equations.

and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Division 1, Rules for The comparison is focused on light water reactor designs

Construction of Nuclear Facility Components, with German for temperatures below 400 C (no creep consideration) and

nuclear design standards for Class 1, 2, 3 components and is based on the current editions of the subject codes and

piping. The paper is focused on a comparison of the standards. It includes all standards and reports referenced by

equations for Design by Analysis and on Piping equations. the corresponding code or standard.

The ASME Section III Code has been used in combination A general description of boiler and pressure vessel

with design specifications for design of German nuclear standards in Germany is presented in volume three of the

power plants. Together with manufacturers, inspectors and Companion Guide to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel

power plant owners, the German regulatory authority decided Code [10]. The differences between US and European codes

to develop their own nuclear design standards. The current and standards for the Construction of LWR Pressure

versions being used are from 1992 and 1996. New versions of Components were analyzed by [9]. The KTA design standard

KTA design standards for pressure retaining components for the primary loop (KTA 3201.2) was contrasted with

(KTA 3201.2 and KTA 3211.2) are currently under international standards by [2]. This paper provides an

development. in-depth comparison of specific design rules for the KTA and

This comparison will cover the major differences between the ASME Section III design codes and standards related to

design rules for ASME Section III, Div. 1 and KTA standards pressure retaining components. In particular, KTA 3201.2

3201.2 and 3211.2 as well as code or standard organization and KTA 3211.2 are compared with ASME Section III,

by sections, paragraphs, articles and code development. Div. 1.

Section 3 of this paper gives a general overview of all

1. INTRODUCTION German design standards. The design rules of KTA 3211.2

The objective of this paper is to compare the design rules are compared with Subsections NB, NC and ND of the

of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, ASME Code in Section 4 of this paper. For piping, this

Division 1, Rules for Construction of Nuclear Facility section contrasts the methods of Pressure Design, Design by

Components, (ASME Code) with German nuclear safety Analysis and Design by Rule. Stress intensity values of

standards for Class 1, 2, 3 components and piping. The paper materials are compared in Section 5. Special features of the

1 Copyright 2011 by ASME

analysis of German primary system components (KTA rules. The basic ideas about design analysis have been kept,

3201.2) are outlined in Section 6. while adding some design rules from German industrial

experience with pressure equipment. KTA design standards

2. NOMENCLATURE are generally compatible with the ASME Code but are

restricted to specific systems of light water reactors. For

A additional thickness to account for material erosion example, KTA 3211.2 is restricted to design rules for

and corrosion (ASME) pressure and activity retaining components and piping outside

c1 absolute value of the minus tolerance of wall the primary loop for light water reactors. Here, activity

thickness (KTA) retaining components are e. g. piping-systems or vessels,

c2 value accounting for wall thickness reduction which contain radioactive fluids or steam. In contrast, the

due to chemical or mechanical wear (KTA) ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code has a broader scope

da outside diameter of pipe (KTA) and is not restricted to specific systems or types of power

di inside diameter of pipe (KTA) plants. It can even be used for the design of advanced nuclear

D0 outside diameter of pipe (ASME) power plants such as high temperature reactors.

F multiplier applied to average stress for rupture in KTA standards apply for specific systems of power plants

100 000 hr (ASME) and contain rules and regulations for specific subjects like

p internal design pressure (KTA) materials or in-service inspection. A typical division of

P internal design pressure (ASME) subjects is presented with the standards for Pressure and

RmRT specified minimum tensile strength at room Activity Retaining Components of Systems Outside the

temperature (KTA) Primary Circuit. Here, KTA 3211.1 details materials, KTA

RmT specified minimum tensile strength above room 3211.2 outlines design and analysis, KTA 3211.3 contains

temperature (KTA) rules for manufacturing and KTA 3211.4 covers in-service

Rp0.2RT specified minimum yield strength at room inspection and operational monitoring. However, not all KTA

temperature (KTA) standards are divided in this manner.

Rp0.2T specified minimum yield strength above room There are 92 KTA standards in total and 15 are in

temperature (KTA) development. These standards cover radiation protection,

SC average stress to produce creep rate of transportation of nuclear waste and all other aspects of the

0.01 % / 1000 hr (ASME) safe operation of nuclear power plants. One of these aspects

Sm stress intensity (ASME and KTA) is the mechanical design, which is described in the following

SRavg average stress to cause rupture at the end of 9 safety standards:

100 000 hr (ASME)

SRmin minimum stress to cause rupture at the end of 3101.3: Design of Reactor Cores of Pressurized Water

100 000 hr (ASME) and Boiling Water Reactors; Part 3: Mechanical and

ST specified minimum tensile strength at room Thermal Design (under development)

temperature (ASME) 3201.2: Components of the Reactor Coolant Pressure

S TR T specified minimum tensile strength above room Boundary of Light Water Reactors; Part 2: Design and

temperature (ASME) Analysis

SY specified minimum yield strength at room 3211.2: Pressure and Activity Retaining Components

temperature (ASME) of Systems Outside the Primary Circuit; Part 2: Design

S YR Y specified minimum yield strength above room and Analysis

temperature (ASME) 3204: Reactor Pressure Vessel Internals

s0 calculated wall thickness (KTA) 3205.1: Component Support Structures with

sn nominal wall thickness (KTA) Non-integral Connections; Part 1: Component Support

tm minimum required wall thickness (ASME) Structures with Non-integral Connections for

y parameter to adjust the Boardman equation to the Components of the Reactor Coolant Pressure

Lam equation (ASME) Boundary of Light Water Reactors

3205.2: Component Support Structures with

3. KTA-DESIGN STANDARDS Non-integral Connections; Part 2: Component Support

In Germany, the Nuclear Safety Standards Commission Structures with Non-Integral Connections for Pressure

(KTA) has the task to issue nuclear safety standards for topics and Activity-Retaining Components in Systems

in the area of nuclear technology. The KTA standards are Outside the Primary Circuit

issued where a consensus between experts of the 3401.2: Steel Containment Vessels; Part 2: Analysis

manufacturers, the operators of nuclear power plants, and Design

authorized experts and state officials is apparent and supports 3902: Design of Lifting Equipment in Nuclear Power

their application. The KTA standards are published by the Plants

German authorities, are therefore required by federal 3905: Load Attaching Points on Loads in Nuclear

regulation and thereby made into law. The standards are Power Plants

published online, too (www.kta-gs.de). Some standards are

translated to English (e. g. KTA 3201.2 or KTA 3211.2). The equivalent KTA design standards for ASME Section III

KTA design rules were originally derived from ASME Div. 1 Subsections are given in Table I of this paper. Each

2 Copyright 2011 by ASME

design standard is developed by a workgroup of 10 20 4. COMPARISON OF DESIGN RULES FOR

people. These workgroups typically consist of one KTA PRESSURE AND ACTIVITY RETAINING

representative and stakeholders from various organizations COMPONENTS

related to nuclear power, such as BMU representatives

(Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation 4.1 Pressure design

and Nuclear Safety), nuclear power plant engineers, ASME outlines rules for pressure design in NB-, NC-,

inspectors, manufacturers, scientists from research institutes ND-3132. The formula given to calculate the required wall

and reactor safety institute representatives. The workgroups thickness of straight pipes tm is based on the following

review the standards to ensure that the information is still equation [3]:

state-of-the-art and additionally change or add rules if needed.

PD0

Standard revisions are submitted for approval to tm = +A (1)

Unterausschuss Mechanische Komponenten, the 2(S m + Py )

KTA-subcommittee for mechanical design. Upon approval a The value of A is used to represent an additional thickness

new version of the safety standard is published by the to account for material erosion and corrosion and to provide

German government. However, if a standard revision is resistance against mechanical damage. All other variables and

rejected, the workgroup has to resubmit a new version. The tolerances are explained in NB-, NC-, ND-3641.1. The stress

aim of KTA is to have stricter design rules for nuclear power intensity Sm must be replaced by S in the equation for Class 2

plants than those of conventional industry. KTA standards and 3 components. This equation is called the Boardman

quote other Industry standards such as codes of Deutsches equation when y = 0.4 [10]. It was introduced as an

Institut fr Normung (DIN), which is the German Institute for approximation of the Lam equation, which calculates the

Standardization, and are not stand-alone documents like elastic hoop stress at the inside diameter of a thick-walled

ASME. straight pipe under internal pressure. The Boardman equation

In Germany, the most current standard editions of KTA must duplicates the results of the Lam equation with an error not

be used for design work in existing power plants. Currently, more than plus or minus 1 per cent for the range D0/tm 5,

the editions of KTA 3211.2 and 3201.2, which are being used which is the entire useful range. For D0/tm 6 the error is

are from 1992 and 1996, respectively. These editions have entirely on the safe side [4]. The use of either the Boardman

not been updated because there has not been any new or Lame equation implies brittle fracture and is therefore not

construction and any design standard changes affect compatible with Tresca (shear stress theory). This is

modification and installation work in operating plants. In the questionable from a mechanical perspective, but leads to

US, modifications in plants are generally performed more conservative results.

according to the ASME code edition which was used during The required wall thickness tm determines which pipe

the construction phase of the plant. Therefore, code changes schedule is used. All components and fittings must

do not affect design work in existing power plants. Unlike correspond with the schedule of the straight pipe and are

KTA, ASME publishes a new code edition every three years generally chosen in accordance with design codes such as

and an annually published addenda, keeping the code up to B16.5, B16.9 or B16.11, which list pressure tested products

date. (see Table NCA-7100-1) for flanges, fittings and socket

welds. This is because the burst pressure of a pressure tested

TABLE I. STRUCTURE OF ASME, SECTION III, DIV. 1 AND product is greater than that of a straight pipe of the same

CORRESPONDING KTA DESIGN STANDARDS

schedule. In order to design special products, appendices or

ASME Section III, Div. code cases may have to be used. For example Class 2 and

corresponding KTA standard Class 3 flanges are designed using the rules provided in

1 Subsection Mandatory Appendix XI, Rules for Bolted Flange

NB (Class 1 Components) KTA 3201.2 and KTA 3211.2 Connections for Class 2 and 3 Components and Class MC

Vessels, or lugs are designed according to Code Case

NC (Class 2 Components) KTA 3211.2 N-318-5.

ND (Class 3 Components) KTA 3211.2 Dimensioning is detailed in Section 6 of KTA. Unlike

ASME, in KTA dimensioning is required even in cases of

NE (Class MC Components) KTA 3401.2

standard product design. It has to be done according to one of

primary system: the following procedures:

KTA 3201.2 Sections 5.3.6 and

8.5 for integral areas of 1. in accordance with Annex A of KTA

component support structures 2. verification of primary stresses

KTA 3205.1 for non-integral

3. limit analysis

areas

NF (Supports) 4. shakedown analysis

other than primary system:

5. strain limiting load method

KTA 3211.2 Sections 5.3.6 and 6. proof of stability

8.6 for integral areas of

component support structures

KTA 3205.2 for non-integral Annex A of KTA 3211.2 contains rules for standard

areas product design but any of procedures 1- 6 may be used. The

NG (Core Support Structures) KTA 3204 stress allowables for pressure design are given in Table 6.7-1

3 Copyright 2011 by ASME

of KTA 3211.2, Section 6. For non-standard product design 4.2 Design by Analysis

only methods 2 6 may be used. There are no explanations or Design rules for Design by Analysis are defined in

safety-margins provided for methods 4 and 5 in KTA 3211.2. subsection NB-3200 for Class 1 components. Subsection

The methods of Annex A (A 2, dimensioning of parts of the NC-3200 contains Alternative Design Rules for Vessels. The

pressure retaining wall) are based on German design rules were intended to be a duplicate of the former ASME

standards for non-nuclear plants: Section VIII, Division 2 rules for pressure vessels. There is

no subsection ND-3200. Therefore, a general analysis can

AD-Merkbltter (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Druckbehlter only be performed according to Section NB and NC.

= workgroup pressure vessels) The Design Basis of ASME is described in NCA-2140. It

TRD (Technischen Regeln fr Dampfkessel = addresses the operating plant design, service, and test

Technical Regulations for Boilers) loadings that are required to be considered in design. Four

DIN-Normen (Deutsches Institut fr Normung = Service Limits are established and designated as Service

German Institute for Standardization) Limit, which are defined as follows: Level A, Level B, Level

VDI-Richtlinien (Verein Deutscher Ingenieure = C and Level D. These correspond, respectively, to plant and

Association for German Engineers) system operating conditions commonly referred to as normal,

upset, emergency, and faulted. The integrity for Design,

The KTA formula for Pressure Design of straight pipes is Service and Test Loadings has to be proven. The stress

derived from the equation for hoop stress p of a thick walled intensity factors Sm (Class 1) and S (Classes 2 and 3) have to

cylinder using Tresca theory and is not based on the be used to calculate the Design, Service and Test Limits with

Lam-equation like ASME. It is assumed that the material the analysis methods listed below:

behavior is elastic-ideal plastic with yield stress Sm. The

series expansion of the logarithmic equation is then as 1. elastic analysis

follows: 2. plastic analysis (e. g. limit analysis)

d 3. collapse load analysis

p = S m ln a

di 4. plastic instability analysis

(2) 5. interaction method

2 s0 1 s0

2

= Sm 1 + + ...

3 (d a s0 )

2

d a s0 Not all of the given analysis methods are permitted for use

for all service levels. For Level D Service Limits, inelastic

The variables p, da, di and s0 are design pressure, outside analysis-methods are permitted in accordance with

diameter, inside diameter and wall thickness, respectively. Nonmandatory Appendix, Rules for Evaluation of Service

The KTA formula is the antecedent of the series expansion Loadings With Level D Service Limits, Appendix, F-1320.

(KTA 3211.2, A 2.2-1): Tresca theory (maximum shear stress theory) has to be

da p used to perform proof of structural integrity. If plastic

s0 = (3) analyses are performed with FEM-software the computer

2S m + p

code automatically uses v. Mises theory (maximum distortion

The discrepancy between the exact solution and the strain energy theory) to calculate the plastic behavior, which

approximation of KTA is less than 1% for ratios da/di < 1.4. conflicts with the ASME Code. NB-3227.4 contains design

KTA allows for a discrepancy of 2% by restricting the criteria to limit triaxial stress states for all Service Levels

equation for ratios of da/di < 1.7. As in ASME, the stress except Level D:

intensity Sm must be replaced by S in the equation for Class 2

and 3 components. The nominal wall thickness sn, which is 4.3 Design by Rule

comparable to the required wall thickness tm of ASME, is Design rules for component specific analysis of ASME are

then calculated by adding c1 and c2 to the wall thickness s0: defined in Subsections NB, NC and ND 3300-3600. The

exception is Subsection NC, in which ASME provides

sn = s0 + c1 + c2 (4) alternative design rules for vessels in NC-3200 for Class 2

c1 is the absolute value of the minus tolerance, which is components in addition to those of NC-3300. Design criteria

based on the fabrication tolerance and c2 is a value that for the following components are presented in both codes

accounts for wall thickness reduction due to wear (details see (NX represents Subsections NB, NC and ND):

Section 6.5 of KTA 3211.2).

The calculated minimum wall thicknesses of both Vessels (ASME: NX-3300, KTA: Sec. 8.2)

equations are nearly identical. For a specific example Pumps (ASME: NX-3400, KTA: Sec. 8.3)

(Tdesign = 700 F, Pdesign = 2000 psig, D0 = 16 and Valves (ASME: NX-3500, KTA: Sec. 8.4)

Sm = 15.1 kSi) the required wall thickness of ASME is 1 % Piping (ASME: NX-3600, KTA: Sec. 8.5)

higher than for KTA. In this example, extremes of values for

Pdesign and Sm were chosen in order to highlight the The component specific design criteria of KTA 3211.2 are

discrepancy between the equations. Despite this discrepancy nearly identical to the methods of ASME. However, there are

the values only differ by 1%. In most cases the results of both some exceptions. In this paper, only the design rules for

equations are nearly identical, differing by less than 1%. piping are compared.

For Class 2 and 3 piping the limitation of the primary stress

4 Copyright 2011 by ASME

intensity can be performed based on identical equations in margins for tensile strengths are at least 14% higher in KTA

KTA and ASME or an additional equation in KTA which whereas the safety margins for yield strengths are only

contains an i-value instead of B-index. An additional slightly higher (7%) than those of ASME. Therefore, KTA is

difference is that for KTA, B-indices can only be used for slightly conservative compared to ASME as a result of the

d/t 50 (d: outside diameter, t: wall thickness). The range of higher safety margins. For Class 1 components, the safety

resultant moments and amplitudes of longitudinal forces margins are comparable.

resulting from anchor motions due to reversing type dynamic

level D loadings are not limited in KTA. In NB-3656 (4) TABLE II. COMPARISON BETWEEN CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING

ALLOWABLE STRESS VALUES FOR CLASS 2 AND 3 DESIGN OF

ASME provides a limit of 6.0 Sm for the amplitude of ASME (SECTION II, TABLE 1-100) AND KTA 3211.2 (TABLE

reversing bending stresses and a limit of Sm for axial 6.6-1)

stresses caused by normal forces. In KTA 3211.2, dynamic

anchor motions have to be evaluated with equations (8.5-82) Criteria KTA 3211.2 Comparison

and (8.5-84) for the integrity proofs of service levels A and B. ASME

for S ferritic austenitic ASME/KTA

5. MATERIALS Tensile

ASME Section II provides all information for the design Strength ST/3.5 RmRT/4.0 RmRT/4.0 1.14

at RT

analysis regarding material properties. If a material is not Tensile

listed in Section II, it generally cannot be used. When Strength 1.1STRT/3.5 - - -

sufficient data is available for a non-listed material, an above RT

application for a code case can be submitted to ASME for Yield

Strength 2/3 SY Rp0.2RT/1.6 Rp0.2RT/1.6 1.07

approval. at RT

KTA does not have a general section dedicated to materials 2/3 SYRY Rp0.2T/1.1

comparable to ASME Section II. The regulations are Yield

non-uniform in the different KTA standards. For KTA 3211.2, Strength or Rp0.2T/1.6 or 1.07 (ferritic)

above RT

the materials which are permitted are listed in KTA 3211.1. 0.9 SYRY Rp0.2T/1.5

The stress intensities S and Sm are calculated with Table 6.6-1

of KTA 3211.2 based on the material properties, which are Favg SR avg

Stress

- - -

provided in Annex A of KTA 3211.1. The criteria to Rupture

0.8 SR min

calculate S and Sm correspond nearly with Tables 1-100 Creep

(criteria for establishing allowable stress values for tables 1A 1.0 Sc - - -

Rate

and 1B) and 2-100(a) (criteria for establishing allowable

stress values for tables 2A and 2B) of ASME Section II, Part TABLE III. COMPARISON BETWEEN CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING

ALLOWABLE STRESS VALUES FOR CLASS 1 DESIGN OF ASME

D, respectively (see Tables II and III of this paper). In case of

(SECTION II, TABLE 2-100(A)) AND KTA 3211.2 (TABLE 6.6-1)

the pressure design, KTA 3211.2 has additional requirements

for determining stress intensities, which are based on German KTA 3211.2

Criteria Comparison

design standards of non-nuclear plants. In the case of KTA, ASME

the allowable stresses are based on yield- and tensile strength for Sm ferritic austenitic ASME/KTA

of the material at room- and elevated temperature. The yield Tensile

strength (Rp0.2) is defined as the stress value that results in a Strength ST/3.0 RmRT/3.0 RmRT/3.0 1.00

plastic strain of 0.2 % after unloading. For some austenitic at RT

materials (criteria see KTA 3211.2, Table 6.6 1) Rp1.0 may be Tensile

Strength 1.1STRT/3.0 RmT/2.7 RmT/2.7 0.99

taken in lieu of Rp0.2. In this case, Rp1.0 is defined as the stress above RT

value that results in a plastic strain of 1.0 % after unloading. Yield

KTA limits the design temperature to 400 C whereas the Strength 2/3 SY - Rp0.2RT/1.5 1.00

at RT

temperature limit of ASME is provided by the temperature

range for which the allowable stresses and material properties 2/3 SYRY Rp0.2T/1.1

Yield

are listed in Section II. Typically this limit is around 400 C Strength or Rp0.2T/1.5 or 1.00 (ferritic)

but there are materials that are permitted to be used at higher above RT

0.9 SYRY Rp0.2T/1.5

temperatures. In case of ASME, stress rupture and creep rate

are taken into consideration at high temperatures to determine

the allowable stresses for Class 2 and 3 design. All criteria 6. SPECIAL FEATURES OF KTA 3201.2

for establishing the allowable stress values S and Sm are KTA 3201.2 is the German design and analysis standard for

provided in tables 1-100 and 2-100(a) of ASME Section II, components of the reactor coolant pressure boundary

Part D, respectively. There are no detailed explanations (primary circuit). The general structure is similar to KTA

presented in Section II, Appendices 1 and 2, regarding when 3211.2 except that it only contains design rules for Class 1

to use 2/3 or 0.9 times the yield strength above room components and piping. It provides additional analysis

temperature. The safety-factors of KTA and ASME are procedures for the general analysis of mechanical behavior.

different for Class 2 and 3. E. g. for S-values KTA divides the Similar to ASME, NB-3228.1, limit analysis is permitted

tensile strength by 4 and ASME by 3.5 (see Tables II and III and detailed in KTA 3201.2, Chapter 7.7.4. However, this

of this paper). For Class 2 and 3 components, the safety method is prohibited for use in KTA 3211.2. Borrowing from

5 Copyright 2011 by ASME

ASME, KTA 3201.2 contains Table 7.7-8 with factors for specifications are needed for the analysis and there are no

limiting strains for non-linear elastic materials (Table Y-2 in restrictions on reactor designs. KTA standards have a

ASME 2007 Section II, Part D). The tables are nearly temperature restriction of 400 C and are focused on the

identical except for two differences. In KTA 3201.2 a factor design of light water reactors.

of 1.0 is added for a permanent strain of 20%, and, as in In the comparison of ASME and KTA consider these

ASME, the table is not restricted to nickel, high nickel alloys major points:

and high alloy steels.

A concept for the analysis of brittle fracture is incorporated The equations to determine stress intensities for Class

into KTA 3201.2 (Section 7.9). This section includes a NDT 1 components are nearly identical in both codes and

temperature concept, fracture mechanics concept and rules standards, but KTA has higher requirements for the

for in-service inspection. ASME covers fracture mechanics in stress intensities of Class 2 and 3 components.

Section XI and does not provide any equations in Section III. Although the equations for pressure design for KTA

KTA has plans to publish an in-depth fracture mechanics and ASME are based on different failure theories, the

standard for pressure retaining components, which will be resulting required wall thicknesses for straight pipes

KTA 3206 (Nachweise zum Bruchausschluss fr are almost identical.

druckfhrende Komponenten in Kernkraftwerken). For Design by Analysis, KTA allows the use of v.

Design criteria for the avoidance of thermal stress Mises theory in addition to Tresca while ASME is

ratcheting are given in KTA 3201.2, Section 7.13 and ASME restricted to Tresca but allows more analysis methods.

NB-3222.5, but the concepts differ. In KTA 3201.2 four The equations for piping analysis in both codes are

methods are provided for proving that thermal stress almost identical but the stress intensification factors

ratcheting remains within acceptable limits: differ.

Evaluation by limitation of strain (7.13.2.3)

General evaluation by elastic-plastic analysis (7.13.3) [1] 2007 ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code, 2007

Specific evaluation by measurement (7.13.4) Edition. Juli 1, 2007

The first method is based on the Bree-Diagram [5]. Elastic [2] Bieniussa K.W., 1987, German codes and standards

shakedown occurs when the combination of primary and concerning metallic nuclear power plant components

secondary stresses are within the stress limits of the equations Present state and trends expected. Nuclear Engineering

(7.13-5) (7.13-7). For method 2, the plastic strain increment and Design, Volume 98, Issue 3, Pages 279-281.

of each thermal cycle is calculated. Then the sum of all

plastic strain increments is determined and the value must be [3] Braun, C F & CO, 1969, A Review of Piping and

2%. Pressure Vessel. Code Design Criteria. San Francisco,

KTA provides strain limits in 7.13.3 (3) for method 3, CA, Technical Report 217 prepared for US Atomic

which is the general evaluation by elastic-plastic analysis. Energy Commission.

These limits are 5% for base metal and 2.5% for welded

joints, respectively. However, ASME does not distinguish [4] Buxton, W J Burrows, W R , 1951, Formula for pipe

between base metal and welded joints and provides a general thickness. Transactions of the ASME.

limit of 5.0% in NB-3228.4 for shakedown analyses. Within

the section, KTA explicitly notes that the material model [5] Bree J., 1967, Elastic-plastic behaviour of thin tubes

used in this analysis shall be suited to realistically the cyclic subjected to internal pressure and intermittent high-heat

strain (7.13.3 (1)). Therefore, one is not obligated to use the fluxes with application to fast-nuclear-reactor fuel

Chaboche hardening rule; other hardening rules such as elements. Journal of strain analysis, vol. 2 no. 3.

Ohno-Wang, which provide a more realistic description of

the hardening behavior, may be utilized. As a fourth method, [6] KTA 3201.2, Components of the Reactor Coolant

KTA outlines that the avoidance of thermal stress ratcheting Pressure Boundary of Light Water Reactors; Part 2:

can be proved by measurement (7.13.4). In this case the strain Design and Analysis. Safety Standards of the Nuclear

limits are identical to method 3. ASME only offers methods 1 Safety Standards Commission (KTA), June 1996 (incl.

and 3 in NB-3222.5 and NB-3228.4(b), respectively. rectification from BAnz 129, 13.07.00).

The established ASME Section III and KTA codes and Components of Systems Outside the Primary Circuit;

standards provide comprehensive methods for the design and Part 2: Design and Analysis. Safety Standards of the

analysis of nuclear components, which are broadly equivalent. Nuclear Safety Standards Commission (KTA), June

There are some detailed variations between the codes and 1992.

standards. For example, ASME is a fully integrated code with

a more general scope than KTA, which quotes other Industry [8] KTA Standards, Der Kerntechnische Ausschuss (KTA).

standards and regulatory guides and therefore is not http://www.kta-gs.de

integrated. Within ASME, no additional codes or

6 Copyright 2011 by ASME

[9] Maurer H. A. Deckers, J., 1983, Comparison of US and [10] Rao, K. R. 2002, Companion Guide to the ASME Boiler

European Codes and Regulations for the Construction and Pressure Vessel Code; Criteria and Commentary on

of LWR. Chicago, IL, presented at SMIRT 7. Select Aspects of the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel

and Piping Codes. ASME Press.

- Ch 2 5 Selection of Steel QualityUploaded byMihajloDjurdjevic
- Moehle-Joints_c.pdfUploaded bytrabajosic
- 01_Stress Analysis - BasicsUploaded byJacey Jane
- NIST TN 1714_High-Temperature Tensile Constitutive Data and Models for Structural Steels in Fire (Nov 2011Uploaded bytt3340
- ANALISIS_MUÑECA1 _PROYECTOUploaded byMA Gualpa
- Failure Theories May 2015Uploaded byYashasCR
- Prediction of fatigue life of reinforced concrete bridges using Fracture MechanicsUploaded byRatna Sai
- 16b06hUploaded byVaibhav Bhoir
- 26-BucklindCrippling_CompressionCripplingUploaded byvaler1989
- Review and Enhancement of 3D Concrete Models for Large-scale Numerical Simulations of Concrete StructuresUploaded bycxw
- Boundary Element Programming in Mechanics_104207485Uploaded byapmapm
- Bracing for Blast- MSCUploaded byHyunkyoun Jin
- 18 Mechanical Properties Which Every Mechanical Engineer Should Know - Material Science - Mechanical Engineering CommunityUploaded byKaran Singh
- Yan&Pun-2010Uploaded bysaded05
- Ramset Specifiers Anchoring Resource Book ANZ - TruBolt mechanical anchoring.pdfUploaded byGibbs Per
- ESFUERZOSUploaded byJuanCastro
- 2015 Tarque_Varum_Blondet Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis Full-scale UR Adobe ModelUploaded byJordy Araiza
- SW Simulation StudentUploaded bysugii97
- muh-35-1-1-1005-32Uploaded bySam Samoura
- 1-s2.0-S1674775514000420-mainUploaded byMilton Teran
- deUploaded byNguyễn Văn Thường
- Mechanical_properties_of_structural_steelUploaded byphairy
- Stress NoteUploaded byChan Kin Cheung
- 2. ELMES - Failure Theories for Static LoadingUploaded byKennn
- Triaxial Tests on Weakly Bonded Soil WitUploaded byDr-Moamen Raouf
- clark1976.pdfUploaded byLuis Ariel B. Morillo
- 9783319171173-c2Uploaded bytheo
- Gusset GuidanceUploaded bydfv91
- High Strength Steel in FireUploaded byRecep Vatansever
- Group 04. Sajjad+Noorullah+BilalUploaded bysajjaduet

- Hydraulic CalnUploaded byAniruddh Singh
- Worm GearsUploaded byAniruddh Singh
- GearsUploaded byAniruddh Singh
- Gear Ratios & TorqueUploaded byAjay Govind
- NPCIL Holidays 2018Uploaded byAniruddh Singh
- Schedule October 2017Uploaded byAniruddh Singh
- TorsionUploaded byRenganayagi Balaji
- HE Standards Catalogue AlupuramUploaded bytushar7000
- garmin-etrex-30Uploaded byAniruddh Singh

- Appraisal of Government PropertiesUploaded byAireen Bonghanoy
- Experimental Txt BookUploaded bylakshmisagar
- Hydrocracking.PDFUploaded byAkarsha Srivastava
- Torque Converter & Hydraulic Ratchet System - 4thUploaded byfalconalnajjar
- Phycoremediation and biogas potential of native algal isolates from soil and wastewaterUploaded bysanjukec
- AirUploaded byImran_firdousi
- 02 Radialverdichter Basis e 04 RotorUploaded byHatem Abd El Rahman
- Finex ProcessUploaded byduvanp92
- ABB motor catalog frame 315 & 355.pdfUploaded bySUBHASH
- C2 Representing Reactions IntermediateUploaded bydownendscience
- Grundfosliterature-3302695Uploaded bychzenko
- Imperfection of Solid & Atom MovementsUploaded byFadli Ikhsan
- Sex - Abstinence and Spiritual BlissUploaded byAdonis Alexander
- 1987Uploaded bybobothebioguy
- Pompa Manuala de Transfer Jp 04Uploaded bymih4i
- Lignocellulolytic enzymes: Biomass to biofuel.Uploaded byIJAR Journal
- d35s5Uploaded byrodrigoborges10
- Condensed intro to Tesla Transformers.pdfUploaded bySteve M
- A Playing card Reader's NotebookUploaded byines.achabal173
- Final Round and ClincherUploaded byponcatoera
- VDO Gauge InstallationUploaded byurule2k
- Engineering ThermodynamicsUploaded byNandakumar Basavaraj
- 3 Phase SystemUploaded byAuji Zaharudin
- Vitodens_200-B2HA_sm_tdm (1)Uploaded byctlbdorin
- RTS Cooling and Heating Loads Examples - IP Units rev 2005~1Uploaded byjacobojosue
- SunFields Specification NAF121-128-135GK ENGUploaded bykhemrajmahadew
- AQA-PHYA1-W-MS-JAN09Uploaded bysuperpooh
- StarDiesel Common Rail.pdfUploaded byaddelyn_robescu8794
- Guia VSD Chiller YorkUploaded byEliel Andarcia
- PP2SpecsUploaded byDom Starkey