You are on page 1of 35

BARC/1999/E/037

1N0000258 |
3
3
"ro

DEVELOPMENT OF A SOFTWARE FOR


THE ASME CODE QUALIFICATION OF
CLASS-1 NUCLEAR PIPING SYSTEMS
by
Rajesh Mishra, C. Umashankar, R. S. Soni, H. S. Kushwaha
and
V. Venkat Raj
Health, Safety & Environment Group

1999

3 1 - 11
BARC/1999/E/037

« GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
g ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

DEVELOPMENT OF A SOFTWARE FOR


THE ASME CODE QUALIFICATION OF
CLASS-I NUCLEAR PIPING SYSTEMS
by
RajeshMishra, C. Umashankar, R.S. Soni, H.S. Kushwaha
and
V.VenkatRaj
Health, Safely & Environment Group

BHABHA ATOMIC RESEARCH CENTRE


MUMBAI, INDIA
1999
BARC/1999/E/037

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION SHEET FOR TECHNICAL REPORT


(as per IS : 9400 -1980)

01 Security classification: Unclassified


0
02 Distribution: External

03 Report status: New

04 Series: BARC External

05 Report type: Technical Report

06 Report No.: BARC/1999/E/037

07 Part No. or Volume No.:

08 Contract No.:

10 Title and subtitle: Development of a software for the ASME Code qualification of
class-1 nuclear piping systems

11 Collation : 33 p., 4 figs., 3 tabs., ill.

13 Project No.:

20 Personal authors): Rajesh Mishra; C. Umashankar; R.S. Soni; H.S. Kushwaha;


V.VenkatRaj

21 Affiliation ofauthoifs): Health, Safety and Environment Group, Bhabha Atomic


Research Centre, Mumbai

22 Corporate authors): Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai - 400 085

23 Originating unit : Reactor Safety Division,


BARC, Mumbai
24 Sponsors) Name : Department of Atomic Energy

Type: Government

Contd... (ii)
-i-
30 Date of submission: October 1999

31 Publication/Issue date: November 1999

40 Publisher/Distributor: Head, Library and Information Services Division,

Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai

42 Form of distribution: Hard copy

50 Language of text: English

51 Language ofsummary: English


52 No. of references: 6 reft.

53 Gives data on:

60
Abstract: In nuclear industry, the designer often comes across the requirements of Class-1 piping
systems which need to be qualified for various normal and abnormal loading conditions. In order to
have quick design changes and the design reviews at various stages of design, it is quite helpful if a
dedicated software is available for the qualification of Class-1 piping systems. BARC has already
purchased a piping analysis software CAESAR-II and has used it for the Life Extension of Heavy
Water Plant, Kota. CAESAR-II facilitates the qualification of Class-2 and Class-3 piping systems
among others. However, the present version of CAESAR-II does not have the capability to perform
stress checks for the ASME Class-1 nuclear piping systems. With this requirement in mind and the
prohibitive costs of commercially available softwares for the Class-1 piping analyses, it was decided to
develop a separate software for this class of piping in such a way that the input and output details of
the piping from the CAESAR-II software can be made use of. This report principally contains the
details regarding development of a software for codal qualification of Class-1 nuclear piping as per
ASME Code Section-in, NB-3600. The entire work was carried out in three phases. The first phase
consisted of development of the routines for reading the output files obtained from the CAESAR-H
software, and converting them into required format for further processing. In this phase, the node-
wise informations available from the CAESAR-II output file were converted into element-wise
informations. The second phase was to develop a general subroutine for reading the various input
parameters such as diameter, wall thickness, corrosion allowance, bend radius and also to recognize
the bend elements based on the bend radius, directly from the input file of CAESER-II software. The
third phase was regarding the incorporation of the required steps for performing the ASME Codal
checks as per NB-3600 for Class-1 piping systems. The developed software has been tested analytically
for verification of the results and has been found to be performing satisfactorily.

70 Keywords/Descriptors: HEAVY WATER PLANTS; NUCLEAR INDUSTRY; PIPELINES;


VALIDATION; C CODES; LOSS OF COOLANT; PRESSURE DEPENDENCE; STRESSES;
STRESS ANALYSIS; REACTOR SAFETY; FLOWSHEETS; TESTING

71 INIS Subject Category: E2200

99 Supplementary elements:

•it-
ABSTRACT

In nuclear industry, the designer often comes across the requirements of


Class-1 piping systems which need to be qualified for various normal and abnormal
loading conditions. In order to have quick design changes and the design reviews at
various stages of design, it is quite helpful if a dedicated software is available for the
qualification of Class-1 piping systems. BARC has already purchased a piping analysis
software CAESAR-II and has used it for the Life Extension of Heavy Water Plant, Kota.
CAESAR-II facilitates the qualification of Class-2 and Class-3 piping systems among
others. However, the present version of CAESAR-II does not have the capability to
perform stress checks for the ASME Class-1 nuclear piping systems. With this
requirement in mind and the prohibitive costs of commercially available softwares for the
Class-1 piping analyses, it was decided to develop a separate software for this class of
piping in such a way that the input and output details of the piping from the CAESAR-II
software can be made use of. This report principally contains the details regarding
development of a software for codal qualification of Class-1 nuclear piping as per ASME
Code Section-Ill, NB-3600.

The entire work was carried out in three phases. The first phase consisted
of development of the routines for reading the output files obtained from the
CAESAR-II software, and converting them into required format for further processing.
In this phase, the node-wise informations available from the CAESAR-II output file were
converted into element-wise informations. The second phase was to develop a general
subroutine for reading the various input parameters such as diameter, wall thickness,
corrosion allowance, bend radius and also to recognize the bend elements based on the
bend radius, directly from the input file of CAESER-II software.

The third phase was regarding the incorporation of the required steps for
performing the ASME Codal checks as per NB-3600 for Class-1 piping systems. The
developed software has been tested analytically for verification of the results and has
been found to be performing satisfactorily.
CONTENTS

Page nos.
1.0 Introduction 3
2.0 Features of Existing Piping Analysis Software CAESAR-n 4
3.0 Need for a Separate Software for Class-1 Piping Qualification 4
4.0 Development of Post-Processor for Qualification of Class-1 Piping
4.1 Static Analysis 5
4.2 Dynamic Analysis (Inertial) 5
4.3 Missing Mass Correction 6
5.0 Procedure of Qualification for Class-1 Piping
5.1 General Requirements (As per NB-3651) 6
5.2 Consideration of Design Conditions (As per NB-3652) 7
5.3 Consideration of Level-A Service Limits (As per NB-3653) 8
5.4 Consideration of Level-B Service Limits (As per NB-3654) 11
5.5 Consideration of Level-C Service Limits (As per NB-3655) 12
5.6 Consideration of Level-D Service Limits (As per NB-3656) 12
5.6.1 As per Old Code 13
5.6.2 As per New Code( 1998 Edition) 13
6.0 Choice of FORTRAN Language for Development of the Software 13
7.0 Organisation of the Program
7.1Phase-I 14
7.2 Phase-II 15
7.3Phase-m 15
8.0 Testing 16
9.0 Conclusions 16
10.0 References 17
Tables 18
Figures 20
Appendix-A: Sample Formatted Tables for Various Files 24
1.0 Introduction

Piping forms an important segment of any industrial plant and acts as


lifeline for these plants. The importance of piping systems can be realized from the fact
that in many plants, the cost of piping approaches about 50-60% of the total plant cost.
In the nuclear industry, piping systems play a major role of carrying various radioactive
liquids from one equipment to the other. The very fact that these systems carry
radioactive liquids, calls for utmost care in their design and analysis in order to safeguard
the plant personnel as well as the public at large. The most crucial piping components in a
nuclear plant are those which form the part of primary pressure boundary, the failure of
which may result in direct release of fission products into the containment atmosphere.
Therefore, the primary pressure boundary piping is assigned the highest safety class i.e.,
the Safety Class-1 for its design and qualification. The design of such piping is usually
carried out by using the ASME Code, Section-in, Subsection-NB. It is required to
qualify the Class-1 piping not only for all the normal conditions, i.e. dead weight,
pressure, temperature etc. but also for the abnormal events like earthquake, Loss of
Coolant Accident (LOCA) etc.

While a number of softwares are available in the market for the piping
analysis, there are only a few commercially available softwares which have the
capability of performing the Class-1 piping qualification, viz. PS-CAEPIPE. However,
the cost of such softwares is abnormally high and unjustifiable.

BARC has already purchased a piping analysis software CAESAR-II and


has used it for the Life Extension of Heavy Water Plant, Kota. The software CAESAR-H,
has the capabilities for the qualification of piping systems designed as per ANSI B31.1,
B31.3 and various other codes including ASME Section-in, Subsections NC (for Class-2
piping) & ND (for Class-3 piping). This software has the main limitation that it does not
have the capability for qualification of Class-1 piping. Upgrading this software was
considered as an economical means of fulfilling the need for Class-1 piping qualification.

With an aim to develop an indigenous capability to fulfill the


aforementioned requirement, it was decided to develop a software which should be able
to interact with the input and output files of CEASAR-II for the generation of required
inputs for further processing. Thus, a separate software has been developed for the
qualification of Class-1 piping which uses the information obtained from static and
dynamic files of CAESAR-II software and also picks up the required input data for
qualification of the piping as per the requirements of ASME Section-in, Div.l,
Subsection-NB.
2.0 Features of Existing Piping Analysis Software CAESAR-II

CAESAR-H is a PC-based computer program (Ref.l). This software


package is an engineering tool used in the mechanical design and analysis of piping
systems. The CAESAR-II user creates a model of the piping system using simple straight
beam elements and curved pipe elements and defines the loading conditions imposed on
the system. With this input, CAESAR-H produces results in the form of deflections,
loads, and stresses throughout the system. Additionally, CAESAR-H also compares these
results with their codal limits and gives the stress output by expressing induced stress in
the form of percentage of allowable values.

CAESAR-II capabilities include the modeling of piping systems,


connected fittings, equipment, various supports etc., and analyzing them for the full
range of static and dynamic loads which may be imposed on the system. Therefore,
CAESAR-H is not only a good tool for new design, but it is also quite valuable in
troubleshooting or redesigning the existing systems. Other capabilities of this software
include the codal stress checks, analyses for water hammer and relief valve discharge
loads, calculations of stresses as per WRC-107 & WRC-297, equipment related checks,
fatigue leakage calculations, analysis of buried piping, etc. In addition to these, it has a
strong database of various pipe sizes, materials, valves, flanges, bellows, hangers, etc.

3.0 Need for a Separate Software for Class-1 Piping Qualification

In nuclear industry, the designer often comes across the requirements of


Class-1 piping systems which need to be qualified for various normal and abnormal
loading conditions. In order to have quick design changes and the design reviews at
various stages of design, it is quite helpful if a dedicated software is available for the
qualification of Class-1 piping systems. With this requirement in mind and the prohibitive
costs of commercially available softwares for the Class-1 piping analyses, it was decided
to develop a separate software for this class of piping in such a way that the input and
output details of the piping from the CAESAR-D software can be made use of. The
existing modules of CAES AR-II software could not be accessed for this development
since the source code is not available. Moreover, the Class-2 and Class-3 piping analysis
capabilities of CAESAR-II could not be explored for the qualification of Class-1 piping
on account of the following reasons:

(a) The procedure for qualification of piping systems for Class-1 piping is completely
different from the procedure adopted for Class-2 and Class-3 piping.

(b) The equations used in the code NB (Class-1) and the load combination checks
suggested in it, are different from those required to be carried out for codes NC
(Class-2) & ND (Class-3).
(c) Stress Intensification Factors (SDFs) used in the equations are different for NB (Class-
1) and NC (Class-2), ND (CIass-3) codes. The primary plus secondary stress check for
Class-1 piping uses Q & C2 stress indices whereas for the Class-2 and Class-3
pipings, i is used as the SIF.

(d) For Service Levels-A & B conditions, there is no elasto-plastic discontinuity analysis
procedure defined in codes NC (Class-2) & ND (Class-3) whereas these are well
defined in NB (Class-!) code.

4.0 Development of Post-Processor for Qualification of Class-1 Piping

Nuclear pipings are subjected to internal pressure, temperature and weight


under normal operating conditions. However, they are also designed to withstand upset
conditions like Operating basis Earthquake(OBE) and emergency conditions like, Safe
shutdown Earthquake(SSE). All the loadings are categorized into following service
levels, as defined in ASME section-in, Sub-section : NCA (Ref.2), and pipings have to be
qualified accordingly:

A) Design Condition : Design pressure, weight loading and OBE


B) Service level -A : Operating pressure, temperature
C) Service level -B : Pressure, temperature, OBE
D) Service level -C : Pressure, weight loading, SSE
E) Service level -D : Pressure, weight loading, SSE, Loss Of Coolant Accident
(LOCA)

Analysis of piping systems can be divided into the following three stages :

4.1 Static Analysis - This is carried out to evaluate the response of piping due to weight,
internal pressure and thermal loading.

4.2 Dynamic Analysis (Inertial) - This is carried out to evaluate the response due to
OBE and SSE. The earthquake loading is applied in two horizontal directions, i.e. North-
South, East-West and Vertical direction utilizing the respective site spectra or floor
response spectra.

The responses due to various modes are combined using any one of the
modal combination methods viz., Grouping method, 10% Square Root Sum of Squares
method (SRSS), Double Sum method (DSRSS), Absolute method & SRSS method.
Spatial combinations are carried out using SRSS method. The response due to Seismic
Anchor Movement (SAM) is also calculated and added with the inertial response in an
absolute manner.

4.3 Missing Mass Correction - In order to account for the missing mass in various
directions, which has not participated upto the floor ZPA (Zero Period Acceleration)
frequency or upto the cut-off frequency in the seismic inertial analysis, the rigid body
mode response is estimated by pseudostatic method, which uses the appropriate
acceleration value either corresponding to the floor ZPA or corresponding to the cut-off
frequency.

5.0 Procedure for Qualification of Class-1 Piping

Analysis of piping system should be carried out for the following stresses:

(i) Primary stress check: This is carried out to evaluate the stresses due to dead weight &
pressure loading,
(ii) Primary plus Secondary stress check : This is carried out to evaluate the stresses on
the piping system due to thermal expansion, thermal anchor movements and due to
earthquake loading,
(iii) Peak stress check : This analysis is carried out to find out peak stress intensity range
which is utilised for carrying out fatigue check on the system.

The various conditions to be satisfied in the analysis under various service


levels are as follows:

(i) Design condition : primary stress intensity limit to be satisfied


(ii) Level-A service limits: primary + secondary stress intensity range check
(iii) Level-B service limits : primary stress check and primary + secondary stress
intensity range check
(iv) Level-C service limits : primary stress check
(v) Level-D service limits: primary stress check

5.1 General Requirements (As per NB-3651)

To validate a design in accordance with these rules, it is necessary to


perform several piping analyses in accordance with the requirements of NB-3672 and to
use the moments and forces obtained from these analyses as required in NB-3650. After
evaluation of the forces and moments, the stresses are calculated and it is ensured that
they are within the allowable values, as prescribed by ASME, Sec.HI, Div.l, Subsection-
NB for Class-1 Components. Following nomenclature has been adopted while performing
the stress checks:

Mi,j = Moment about i-th axis due to j-th loading (for static case)

(Mi,n)k = Moment about i-th axis for n-th loading, with excitation in k-th direction (for
dynamic case).

Where,

i = x for x-direction
= y for x-direction
= z for x-direction

j = gr for gravity loading


= pr + th for pressure and thermal loading
= ps for pseudostatic rigid body response

n = OBE for operating Basis Earthquake loading


= SSE for Safe Shutdown Earthquake loading

k = N-S for Horizontal North-South direction


= E-W for Horizontal East-west direction
= VER for Vertical direction

5.2 Consideration of Design Conditions (As per NB-3652)

As per NB-3652, the primary stress intensity limit is satisfied if the


requirement of Equation (9) is met. The primary stress is any normal stress or a shear
stress developed by an imposed loading which is necessary to satisfy the laws of
equilibrium of external and internal forces and moments. The basic characteristic of a
primary stress is that it is not self-limiting.

P * Do Do * Mi
+ B2* <n.5Sm (9)
2*t 2*1
where,

Bl, B2 = Primary stress indices for the specific product under investigation
(NB-3680)
P - Design pressure, Kgf/mm2
Do = outside diameter of pipe, mm (NB-3683)
t = nominal wall thickness of product, mm (NB3683)
I a Moment of Inertia (mm4)
Mi = resultant moment due to a combination of Design Mechanical
Loads, Kgf-mm. All Design Mechanical loads and combinations
thereof shall be provided in the Design specification. In the
combination of loads, all directional moment components in
the same direction shall be combined before determining the
resultant moment (i.e., resultant moments from different load
sets shall not be used in calculating the moment Mi). If the
method of analysis for earthquake or other dynamic loads is such that
only magnitudes without relative algebraic signs are obtained, the
most conservative combination shall be assumed.

Here, Mi can be defined as follows:

X N.s = SQRT((( MX,OBE) N-S)2 + ((Mx.ps) N.s)2)


X B.W = SQRT((( MX,OBE) E-W)2 + ((Mx,re) E-W)2)
X VER = SQRT((( MX, O B E) VER)2 + ((Mx,re) VER)2)

2
MX,OBE= SQRT((X N.s) + (X E -w V + ( X V E R f)

M X = I Mx.gr I + MX, OBE

Similarly, My and Mz shall be calculated.

Then,

Mi = SQRT( ( Mx)2 + (My)2 + (Mz) 2 )

5.3 Consideration of Service Level A Limits (As per NB-3653)

Level-A is Normal operating condition for which satisfaction of primary


plus secondary stress intensity range is required as per NB-3653.1. Secondary stress is a
normal stress or a shear stress developed by the constraint of adjacent material or by self-
constraint of the structure. The basic character of a secondary stress is that it is self-
limiting.

This calculation is based upon the effect of changes which occur in


mechanical or thermal loading which take place as the system goes from one load set,
such as pressure, temperature, moment, and force loading, to any other load set which
follows it in time. It is the range of pressure, temperature, and moment between two load
sets which is to be used in the calculations. For example, one of the load sets to be
included is that corresponding to zero pressure, zero moment, and room temperature.
Equation (10) shall be satisfied for all pairs of load sets:

Po* Do Do* Mi
Sn m Cl* + C2* £ 3Sm (10)
2 *t 2*1

where,

C1.C2 = Secondary stress indices for the specific component under


investigation (NB-3680)

Do, t, I, Sm = as defined for Equation (9)

Po = Range of Service pressure, Kgf / mm2

Mi = Resultant range of moment which occurs when the system goes


from one service load set to another, Kgf-mm. Service loads
and combinations thereof shall be provided in the Design
specification. In the combination of moments from load sets, all
directional moments components in the same direction shall be
combined before determining the resultant moment (i.e. resultant
moments from different load sets shall not be used in calculating
the moment range Mi). Weight effects need not be considered in
determining the loading range since they are non-cyclic in
character. If the method of analysis is such that only magnitudes
without relative algebraic signs are obtained, the most
conservative combination shall be assumed. If a combination
includes reversing dynamic loads, Mi shall be either:

1) The resultant range of moment due to the combination of


all loads considering one-half the range of the reversing
dynamic loads; or
2) The resultant range of moment due to the full range of the
reversing dynamic loads alone, whichever is greater.

In case of Class-1 nuclear piping systems, the loadings under Service


Level A include pressure, weight and thermal loads only.
Thus, Mi can be defined as follows:

A= Mx.pr + tf,
B=
C=

Mi =SQRT( A 2 + B 2 + C 2 )

If the above equation (10) cannot be satisfied for all pairs of load sets, an
alternative approach, i.e. simplified elastic-plastic discontinuity analysis can be adopted
as given in NB 3653.6 which is as follows:

Only those pairs of load sets which do not satisfy Equation (10) need to
be considered. First Equation (12) shall be satisfied.

Do* Mi
C2 * £ 3Sm (12)
2*1

C2, Do, I = as defined in Eqns . (9), (10).

Mi = Resultant moment due to thermal expansion and thermal anchor


movements only.

Then, satisfy Equation (13):

Po*Do Do* Mi
Sn = Cl* + C2 * £ 3Sm (13)
2 *t 2*1

Mi = Resultant moment due to loads other than thermal bending and thermal expansion
stresses.

10
5.4 Consideration of Service Level B Limits (As per NB-3654)

Level-B is Upset condition for which the procedures for analyzing


Service loadings for which Level-B service limits are designated, are the same as those
given in NB-3653 for Level-A service limits.

Equation (9) should be satisfied as follows:

P*Do Do* Mi
+ B2* £ min(L8Sm,1.5Sy) —(9)
2* t 2*1

where,

Sy = Yield Stress at Service temp.

P = Pressure which shall be > 1.1 Pa

Pa (Allowable pressure)
= (2 Sm t)/( Do - 2yt ) where, y = 0.4

All other variables are as defined earlier.

The primary plus secondary stress intensity range for each pair of load sets
is checked as per equation (10) where,

Po* Do Do* Mi
Sn = Cl* + C2 * £ 3Sm (10)
2 *t 2*1

All parameters are same as defined above.

A= !Mx, pr+ th I + Mx, OBE (Mx, OBE as defined under design condition)

B= IMy, p r + t h I + My, OBE (My, OBE similar to Mx, OBE)

C= I Mz, pr+th I + Mz, OBE (Mz, OBE similar to Mx, OBE)

11
M u =SQRT( A 2 + B 2 + C 2 )

Mu = SQRT( (2* Mx, O BE) 2 +(2*My^ BE ) 2 +(2* Mz, OBE) 2)

Mi = max. {My, Mi,2}

If the above equation (10) cannot be satisfied for all pairs of load sets, an
alternative approach, i.e. simplified elastic-plastic discontinuity analysis can be adopted
as given in NB-3653.6 which is described above under Service Level-A condition.

5.5 Consideration of Service Level C Limits (As per NB-3655)

Service Level C represents Emergency condition. For service loadings


for which Level C limits are designated which do not include reversing dynamic loads or
have reversing dynamic loads combined with .nonreversing dynamic loads, the condition
of equation (9) of NB-3652 shall be satisfied as follows:

P * Do Do * Mi
B,* + B2* £ min (2.25 Sin, 1.8 Sy) (9)
2* t 2*1

where,

P = Coincident pressure which is > 1.5 Pa

(All other variables are as defined earlier.)

Mi is as defined under design condition, except that it is computed from SSE


moments, in place of OBE moments.

5.6 Consideration of Service Level D Limits (As per NB-3656)

Service Level D represents Faulted condition. For service loadings for


which Level D service limits are designated which do not include reversing dynamic
loads or have reversing dynamic loads combined with nonreversing dynamic loads,
equation (9) shall be satisfied as follows:

12
5.6.1 As Per Old Code

P * Do Do * Mi
B,* + B2* £ min(3Sm,2Sy) (9)
2*t 2*1

The permissible pressure shall not exceed 2.0 times the pressure Pa.

5.6.2 As Per New Code (1998 Edition)

In the new code, apart from the criteria for reversing dynamic loads that
are not required to combined with non reversing dynamic loads code has permitted to go
upto 4.5 Sm value. Apart from this kind of loading, the criteria defined above should be
followed. The stress due to weight and inertial loading due to reversing dynamic loads in
combination with the Level D coincident pressure shall not exceed the following:

P * Do Do * Me
- + B2* S 4.5 Sm (9)
2*t 2*1

where,
Me = the amplitude of the resultant moment due to inertia] loading from
earthquake, other reversing type dynamic events and weight.

6.0 Choice of FORTRAN Language for Development of the Software

FORTRAN (FORMULA TRANSLATION) is the oldest, but still one of


the most widely used, computer programming languages scientific and engineering
applications (Ref.4). Its continued success is not only due to its power and versatility in
dealing with computationally intensive problems and the availability of a wide range of
specialized mathematical and statistical library programs, but also due to its efficiency
and rapid program execution.

Introduced by IBM in the late 1950's, FORTRAN has gone through a


number of revisions, with FORTRAN-IV being the first standardized version issued in
1966, by American National Standards Institute (ANSI). The version (FORTRAN 77) is
more compatible with the principles of structured programming and various other features
such as the improved capabilities in manipulating non-numeric data and in processing
external files. A newer version (FORTRAN 90) with significant upgradation is also

13
available in the market. Here, the software development work has been carried out using
Microsoft FORTRAN (Refs,5&6).

7.0 Organisation of the Program

A flowchart detailing the various steps required for the software


development is shown in Fig 1. The work was carried out in the following three phases:

a) Phase - 1 : Development of module for reading the required parameters from the
output of CAESAR-H, basically the moments for both static and
dynamic load cases.

b) Phase • II: Development of module for reading the required parameters from the
input sheet of CAESAR-II, like diameter, wall thickness, corrosion
allowance, bend radius and pressure.

c) Phase - III: Development of modules for carrying out calculations as per


ASME Code Section III, Subsection NB, for various service levels
and for checking the results as per the code specified limits and to
display the results in presentable formats.

7.1 Phase-I

Phase-I, deals with reading the results from the CAESAR-H software
output neutral files. A sample dynamic output sheet obtained from CAESAR-H is shown
as Table A-l in Appendix A.

The main aim is to pick up the moments from the output files of
CAESAR-II. For picking up of the values from the format of the neutral files, the work
would have been simple if there is no random variation in the CAESAR-H output. But
this was not the case, there were variations, in the formatting of the outputs obtained from
CAESAR-II. Thus, the whole work was becoming more and more challenging and
interesting.

Phase-I work involved the development of two small modules for reading
the "STATIC" & "DYNAMIC" outputs from the CAESAR-U and subsequently to be
written in intermediate files. The working and reliability of the programs have been

14
checked for various real life problems. A sample intermediate file obtained from the
developed program is attached as Table A-2 in Appendix A.

7.2 Phase-II

Phase-H deals with the picking up of the required element parameters


from the input sheet,, such as the diameter, wall thickness, corrosion allowance, bend
radius and pressure. The aim was to incorporate element-wise data in the final output
sheet and also to specify the type, whether straight pipe or bend, corresponding to the
element number. The CAESAR-H input neutral file provides only node-wise data and
also adds complications further with variations in format, in each and every page. Hence,
significant effort was required to pick-up the required input data, node-wise and to
convert them into element-wise, with due recognition for element types. A sample input
neutral file obtained from CAESAR-II is shown in the attached Table A-3 in Appendix A.

Another requirement was to discard those elements for which a 'RIGID


WEIGHT' was specified in input sheet (Since CAESAR-II output files omits results for
such elements). This required special logic to be incorporated in the software, while
reading the input neutral files to recognize the rigid elements and discard them. The final
part of phase-II was to obtain the read data in a required format in an intermediate file, so
that it can be used as and when required in the main program in Phase-ID (Software
which is evolved for "ASME CODAL CHECK" for class-I piping systems as per NB-
3600). These picked-up values are to be utilized for satisfying equations 9 and 10 as
described above, as per the requirements of various service levels. A sample intermediate
file generated by developed program with the aforementioned aim in mind, is attached
as Table A-4 in Appendix A.

7.3 Phase-Ill

This phase utilizes the intermediate input & output files generated with the
help of software modules developed under Phase-I and Phase-II. Phase-Hi, is the final
part of this program. The main aim of this phase is the qualification of Class-1 piping
for various load cases, as per ASME^code NB-3600 as described in para 5.0 above.

A sample output file generated by the developed software (after


performing various calculations as per the requirements of NB-3600) is shown as Table
A-5 (Design condition and Level-D service-level) & Table A-6 (for service levels A, B &
C) which are given in Appendix-A. These output sheets also show the final results in
comparison with the permissible limits specified by the ASME code.

15
8.0 Testing

A typical real-life plant problem has been solved using the developed
software and the comparison of results obtained from developed software to that obtained
analytically is included in this report. The piping layout as shown in Fig. 2 is connected
with three process towers. Various supporting arrangements i.e. anchors, directional
restraints and hangers on this layout is shown in Fig. 3. Mathematical model developed
using piping analysis software CAESAR-H is shown in Fig. 4.

The results were obtained as per the requirements for the different load conditions
using Equation (9) and Equation (10) using the developed software. The results obtained
from developed software for a few typical locations (both bend and straight pipe
locations) for various service levels were checked analytically as well and the
comparative results are shown in tabular forms in Tables 1-3. As evident from these
tables, the results obtained from the developed software are found to be in excellent
agreement with the analytical ones, thus ensuring that the developed software is capable
of performing the required ASME code qualification for Class-1 nuclear piping systems.

9.0 Conclusions

A software for Class-1 piping system qualification has been developed and
tested successfully. This software incorporates following capabilities to facilitate the user:

1. The software picks-up the output forces directly from the output neutral files of
CAESAR-II.

2. The software picks-up the required input parameters from CAESAR-U input neutral
file directly.

3. The software has demonstrated capability for qualifying Class-1 piping for various
service levels as per ASME Section-Ill Subsection NCA load combinations.

4. A few practical test problems were solved using the software developed. The results
obtained from the software agree well with the analytical results.

16
10.0 References

1. Piping Analysis Software CAESAR-D, Version 3.23, COADE Inc. Houston, Texas,
USA

2. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section-Ill, Div. 1, Sub-section NCA, 1998

3. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Sectiori-III, Div. 1, Sub-section NB, 1998

4. Microsoft Fortran, Reference guide. Version 5.5

5. Fortran 77 by Schaum Series, McGraw Hill Publications

6. Computer Programming in Fortran 77 by V. Rajaraman

17
TABLE 1 : Comparison of Results obtained from the Software with the Analytical Results
for Test Problem (Figs.2-4) (Design condition Eq. 9 (Ref.3))

Node no. Type Contents Analytical From


software
109 Bend Resultant Moment 0.38743E7 0.38743E7
(Kgf-mm)

Induced Stresses 2.7623 2.760


(Kgf/mm2)
50 Straight Pipe Resultant Moment 0.73169E7 0.7316917
(Kgf-mm)

Induced Stresses 7.2596 7.2623


(Kgf/mm2)

TABLE 2 : Comparison of Results obtained from the Software with the Analytical Results
for Test Problem (Figs.2-4)

Service Level Node No. Contents Analytical From


(Element software
type)
Design 10 Resultant Moment 1.70019E9 1.7006E9
Condition (Straight (Kgf-mm)
(eq. 9) Pipe)
Induced Stresses 4.647206 4.648
(Kgf/mm2)
Level - A 10 Resultant Moment 0.01132E9 0.01129E9
(eq. 10) (Straight (Kgf-mm)
Pipe)
Induced Stresses 0.0112 0.011
(Kgf/mm2)
Level - B 10 Resultant moment 3.38745E9 3.3878E9
(eq. 10) (Straight (Kgf-mm)
Pipe)
Induced Stresses 9.26255 9.263
(Kgf/rrlm2)
Level - C 10 Resultant Moment 2.05627E9 2.0549E9
(eq. 9) (Straight (Kgf-mm)
Pipe)
Induced Stresses 5.5245 5.521
(Kgf/mm2)

18
TABLE 3 : Comparison of Results obtained from the Software with the Analytical Results
for Test Problem (Figs.2-4)

Service Level Node No. Contents Analytical From


(Element software
type)
Design 119 Induced Stresses 2.0617 2.062
Condition (Bend) (Kgf/mm2)
(eq.9)
Level - A 119 Induced Stresses 0.0031 0.003
(eq. 10) (Bend) (Kgf/mm2)

Level - B 119 Induced Stresses 2.6385 2.64


(eq. 10) (Bend) (Kgf/mm2)

Level - C 119 Induced Stresses 1.8651 1.864


(eq-9) (Bend) (Kgf/mm2)

Level - D 119 Induced Stresses 2.0617 2.062


(eq. 9) (Bend) (Kgf/mm2)

19
c CAESER-II INPUT
NEUTRAL FILE
y-L 7
READ GEOMETRICAL,
DATA

( *
CEASER-II OUTPUT
NEUTRAL FILE y-i READ FORCES
AND MOMENTS

( CODAL QUALIFICATION OF CLASS-I PIPING SYSTEM

CHECK PRESSURE DESIGN (NB 3640, EQ.3)


U - |PDo/2(SE+Py)l+A
t •
CHECK FOR DESIGN CONDITION (Wt+Pr+OBE)(NB 3652. EQ.9)

- ^ SERVICE LEVEL - A ^ -
NO (Pr+TH) YES
IF CHECK FOR
-—_ CREEP REQUIRED ^*-

CHECK FOR (Pr+Th)fNB 3653. EQ.IO; CHECK FOR CREEP (NB 3653. EQ.IO)
<
''1k + Ca*$?-<3 S«
SERVICE LEVEL B EQ.9 CHECK
Cj^-« J3 S m

R PDo . R M 1.8 S,

SERVICE LEVEL - B
YES NO
(TH+OBE) NB 3654. EQ.10
(TH+0BE)>(2 OBE)
USE RESULTANT MOMENT (Mo) USE RESULTANT MOMENT (Mo)
DUE TO (TH-»-OBE)LOADINGS DUE TO 20BE LOADINGS
PDo Mo

1
SERVICE LEVEL-C (Wt+Pr+SSE)(NB 3655, EQ. 9)
r | ^ S Sm

SERVICE LEVEL - 0
(Wt+Pr+SSE+LOCA)
F CHECK REOD. AS
PER OLD CODE
AS PER NEW CODE AS PER OLD CODE
S . - 4 . 5 Sm .5 S»
CHECK AS PER NB 3656, EQ.9

FIL£NAME:RM1

FIG. 1: FLOW CHART UTILISED FOR THE SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT

20
1617TE

PROCESS
TOWERS

ro

PPELME

FLANGED VALVE

NOZZLE

FIG. 2: 3-D SCHEMATIC LAYOUT OF THE TEST PROBLEM


1617TE
SYMBOLS

- ORECTIONM.
4E8TRAMT

FIG. 3: TEST PROBLEM - PIPING SUPPORT DETAILS


1617TE 1180

=IG. 4; MATHEMATICAL MODEL OF THE TEST PROBLEM


Appendix-A
CAESAR II Ver 3.23 Job: N22IN Date NOV 27,1998 Time 18:25 Page: 1
Licensed To: BARC ID 15257
LOCAL FORCE REPORT, Forces on Elements

(OCC)SHOCK CASE # 1

NODE —• Forces(KgtJ . HCj m e n c s \ i\.y . nui


a i

TOTALS.. .. Fa Fb Fc Ma Mb Me
MODE MAX .. Fa/Mode Fb/Mode Fc/Mode Ma /Mode Mb/Mode Me/Mode

100 13 * 39 12 48776 19342 38663

11 ** 37 8 41057 14524 36185

1 x(i) •** i :Ml) 2 ;5(1) 1 X(l) 1 X(l) 1 X(l)

108 13 39 12 48776 18405 30895

n 37 8 41057 14792 28744

1 x(i) i :Ml) 2 !S{1) 1 X(l) 1 X(l) 1 X(l)

108 13 39 11 48776 18405 30895


n 37 8 41057 14792 28744
1 X(l) 1 }((1) 2 55(1) 1 X(l) 1 X(l) 1 X(l)
109 13 39 11 22004 14477 35484
9 37 7 16878 12877 29629

109 13 39 10 22004 14477 35484


9 36 7 16878 12877 29629
1) 1 1Ml) 1 }Ml) 1 X(l) 1 X(l) 1 X(l)
110 10 39 13 2761 7602 22505
7 36 11 1721 6862 17849
1) 1 JC(l) 1 >C(l) 2 Z(l) 1 X(l) 2 Z(l)

* The largest dynamic force that occured during the event


** The largest modal component
*** largest modal component due to mode (1),loading direction (X)i
load component number (1)

TABLE A-1:A typical dynamic output sheet obtained from piping analysis
software CEASAR-II for the layout shown in Fig.2

25
ELEMENT NODE MOMENT (Kgf-mm)
No. No. Mx My Mz M*

1 100 -.23800E+04 .53968E+05 .11944E+05 .55325E+05


108 .23800E+04 . 54258E+05 -.12050E+-05 .55631E+05

2 108 -.23800E+04 .54258E+05 -.12050E+05 .55631E+05


109 .10321E+05 .34133E+05 .71200E+04 .36363E+05

3 109 -.10321E+05 .34133E+05 -.71200E+04 .36363E+05


110 .12450E+05 .23380E+04 -.19810E+04 .12822E+05

4 110 -.12450E+05 .23380E+04 -.19810E+04 .12822E+05


115 .12450E+05 .14602E+05 .18480E+04 .19278E+05
5 115 -.12450E+05 .14602E+05 -.18480E+04 .19278E+05
118 .12450E+05 .26732E+05 .16560E+04 .29535E+05
6 118 -.12450E+05 .11197E+05 .24330E+05 .29535E+05
119 -.11419E+05 .12646E+05 -.30550E+05 .34980E+05
7 119 -11419E+05 .12646E+05 .30550E+05 .34980E+05
120 -.26618E+05 .10566E+05 -.33980E+04 .28839E+05
8 120 .26618E+05 .33980E+04 -.10566E+05 .28839E+05
130 -.26618E+05 .69031E+05 .88240E+04 .74509E+05
9 130 .26667E+05 .69031E+05 -.86760E+04 .74510E+05
138 -.26667E+05 .60250E+05 .85540E+04 .66441E+05
10 138 -26667E+05 .85540E+04 -.60250E+05 .66441E+05
139 .33380E+04 .87800E+03 .14939E+05 .15333E+05
11 139 -.33380E+04 .87800E+03 -.14939E+05 .15333E+05
140 -.13940E+04 .11256E+05 -.23613E+05 .26196E+05

* M = sqrt (Mx * Mx + My * My + Mz * Mz}

TABLE A-2: A typical sheet showing intermediate file generated


by the module of the developed software from the
CEASAR-II static output neutral file for problem
shown in Pig.2.

26
CAESAR I I VERS 3 . 2 3 JOBNAME:N22IN NOV 271998 6:19pm Page 1
L i c e n s e d To: BARC . ID: 15257

PIPE DATA

From 100 To 110 DY= -950.000 mm.


PIPE
Dia= 168.275 mm. Wall= 10.972 mm. Insul= 40.000 mm. Cor= 6.0000 mm.
GENERAL
Tl= 25 C T2= 21 C Pl= .2040 Kg./sq.mm P2= .1620 Kg./sq.mm
Mat= (l)LOW CARBON STEEL E= 20741 Kg./sq.mm v = .292
Density= .0080 kg./cu.cm. Insul= .0001 kg./cu.cm.
Fluid= .00021280 kg./cu.cm.
BEND at "TO" end
Radius= 75.0.000 mm. (user) Bend Angle= 90.000 Angle/Node @1= 45.00 109
Angle/Node @2= .00 108
RESTRAINTS
Node 100 ANC
SIF's & TEE'S
Node 110 <No Type Specified> Sif(in)= 2.373 Sif(out)= 2.373
ALLOWABLE STRESSES
B31.1 (1992) Sc= 12 Kg./sq.mm Shl= 12 Kg./sq.mm Sh2= 12 Kg./sq.m
m
From 110 To 115 DZ= -1000.000 mm.

From 115 To 120 DZ= -1110.000 mm.


BEND at "TO" end
Radius= 750.000 mm. (user) Bend Angle= 90.000 Angle/Node @1= 45.00 119
Angle/Node @2= .00 118
SIF's & TEE'S
Node 120 <No Type Specified> Sif(in)= 2.373 Sif(out)= 2.373
From 120 To 130 DX= -1818.440 mm. DY= -704.110 mm.
RESTRAINTS
Node 130 Y K= 3832 Kg./mm

From 130 To 140 DX= -779.560 mm. DY= -296.890 mm.


BEND at "TO" end
Radius= 750.000 mm. (user) Bend Angle= 90.000 Angle/Node @1= 45.00 139
Angle/Node ®2= .00 138
SIF's & TEE'S
Node 140 <No Type Specified> Sif(in)= 2.373 Sif(out)= 2.373

TABLE A-3:Input neutral file generated from piping analysis software CAESAR-II
for the problem shown in Fig.2

27
ELEMENT NODE O.D. THICK- CORROSION BEND PRESS. ELE.
No. No. NESS ALLOWANCE RADIUS (DESIGN) TYPE
(ram) (mm) (mm) (ram) (kgf/sq.mm)

1 100 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend


108 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend
2 108 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend
109 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend
3 109 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend
110 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend

4 110 168.27 10.97 6.00 .00 .204 str


115 168.27 10.97 6.00 .00 .204 str
5 115 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend
118 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend
6 118 168.27 10;97 *6.00 750.00 .204 bend
119 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend
7 119 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend
120 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend
8 120 168.27 10.97 6.00 .00 .204 str
130 168.27 10.97 6.00 .00 .204 str
9 130 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend
138 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend
10 138 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend
139 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend
11 139 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend
140 168.27 10.97 6.00 750.00 .204 bend

12 140 168.27 10.97 6.00 .00 .204 str


143 168.27 10.97 6.00 .00 .204 str

13 143 168.27 10.97 6.00 .00 .204 str


146 168.27 10.97 6.00 .00 .204 str

14 146 168.27 10.97 6.00 .00 -204 str


147 168.27 10.97 6.00 .00 .204 str

15 147 168.27 10.97 6.00 .00 .204 str


150 168.27 10.97 6.00 .00 .204 str

16 150 168.27 10.97 6.00 .00 .204 str


160 168.27 10.97 6.00 .00 .204 str

17 190 168.27 7,11 .00 .00 .204 str


200 168.27 7.11 .00 .00 .204 str

TABLE A-4: A typical intermediate input file generated for the problem shown
in Fig.2, by the module of the developed software from the input
neutral file (TABLE A-3)

28
Stress checks for Design condition & Service Level D using code equation (9)

ELE. NODE ELE. INDUCED STRESS ALLOWABLE STRESS LIMITS


NO. NO. TYPE DESIGN LEVEL D DESIGN LEVEL D
kgf /tm2 Kgf/mm2 kgf/mm2 Kgf/mm2
1 100 bend 2.42 .20Sm 2.42 .20Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
108 bend 2.38 .20Sm 2.38 . 20Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
2 108 bend 2.38 ,20Sm 2.38 .20Sra 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
109 bend 2.18 .18Sm 2.18 .18Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
3 109 bend 2.18 .18Sm 2.18 .18Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
110 bend 1.88 .16Sm 1.88 .16Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
4 110 str 2.08 .17Sm 2.09 .17Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
115 str 2.05 .17Sm 2.06 .17Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sro
5 115 bend 1.85 .15Sm 1.85 .15Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
118 bend 1.92 .16Sm 1.92 .16Sra. 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
6 118 bend 1.92 .16Sra 1.92 .16Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
119 bend 2.06 .17Sm 2.06 ,17Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
7 119 bend 2.06 .17Sm 2.06 ,17Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
120 bend 2.17 .18Sm 2.17 .18Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
8 120 str 2.36 .20Sm 2.36 ,20Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
130 str 2.63 .22Sm 2.63 .22Sra 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
9 130 bend 2.46 .21Sm 2.46 .21Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
138 bend 2.39 .20Sm 2.39 ,20Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
10 138 bend 2.39 .20Sm 2.39 .20Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
139 bend 1.84 .15Sm 1.84 ,15Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
11 139 bend 1.84 ,15Sm 1.84 .15Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
140 bend 1.82 .15Sm 1.82 .15Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
12 140 str 2.04 .17Sm 2.04 ,17Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
143 str 2.14 .18Sm 2.14 .18Sra 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
13 143 str 2.14 .18Sm 2.14 .18Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3 Sin
146 str 2.28 .19Sm 2.28 .19Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
14 146 str 2.28 .19Sm 2.28 .19Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
147 str 2.15 .18Sm 2.15 .18Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
15 147 str 2.15 .18Sm 2.15 .18Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm
150 str 2.81 .23Sm 2.81 .23Sm 18.0 1.5Sm 36.0 3Sm

TABLE A-5: A sample output sheet generated by the developed software for the
Test Problem (Figs.2-4)

29
Stress checks for Service Levels A(eq.10),B(eq.10) & C(eq.9) using code

ELE. NODE ELE. INDUCED-STRESS ALLOWABLE LIMIT: LEVEL


No. No. TYPE LEVEL C LEVEL A LEVEL B C A B
kgf/mm2 Kgf/mm2 kgf/mm2
1 100 bend 2.08 .17Sm .004 .OOSiti 3.74 .31Sm 2.25Sm 3 Sin 3Sm
108 bend 2.08 .17Sm .004 .OOSrn 3.59 .30Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
2 108 bend 2.08 .17Sm .004 -OOSm 3.59 .3 0Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
109 bend 1.88 .16Sm .004 .OOSro 3.07 .26Sm 2.2 5Sm 3Sm 3Sm
3 109 bend 1.88 .16Sm .004 .OOSm 3.07 .26Sm 2.2 5Sm 3 Sin 3Sm
110 bend 1.63 .14Sm .004 . OOSm 2.42 .20Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
4 110 str 1.85 .15Sm .002 .OOSm 2.04 .17Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
115 str 1.92 .16Sm .002 .OOSm 1.91 .16Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
5 115 bend 1.69 .14Sm .004 .OOSm 2.21 .18Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
118 bend 1.81 .15Sm .003 .OOSm 2.21 .18Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
6 118 bend 1.81 .15Sm .003 .OOSm 2.21 .18Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
119 bend 1.86 .16Sm .003 .OOSm 2.64 ,22Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
7 119 bend 1.86 .16Sm .003 .OOSm 2.64 .22Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
120 bend 1.79 .15Sm .003 .OOSm 2.81 .23Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
8 120 str 2.01 .17Sm .002 .OOSm 2.28 .19Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
130 str 2.46 .21Sm .003 .OOSm 2.21 .18Sm 2.2 5Sm 3Sm 3Sm
9 130 bend 2.28 .19Sm .005 .OOSm 2.69 .22Sm 2.2 5Sm 3Sm 3Sm
138 bend 2.19 .18Sm .005 .OOSm 2.69 .22Sm 2.2 5Sm 3Sm 3Sm
10 138 bend 2.19 .18Sm .005 .OOSm 2.69 .22Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
139 bend 1.65 .14Sm .003 .OOSm 2.48 .21Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
11 139 bend 1.65 .14Sm .003 .OOSm 2.48 .21Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
140 bend 1.77 .15Sm .004 .OOSm 2.16 .18Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
12 140 str 1.98 .17Sm .003 .OOSm 1.88 .16Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
143 str 2.11 .18Sm .004 .OOSm 1.84 .15Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
13 143 str 2.11 .18Sm .004 .OOSm 1.84 .15Sm 2 .25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
146 str 2.20 . 18Sm .008 .OOSm 2.08 .17Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
14 146 str 2.20 .18Sm .008 .OOSm 2.08 -17Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
147 str 1.76 .15Sm .013 .OOSm 2.38 .20Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
15 147 str 1.76 .15Sm .013 .OOSm 2.38 .20Sm 2.25Sm 3Sm 3Sm
150 str 2.68 .22Sm .017 .OOSm 2.55 .21Sm 2.2 5Sm 3 Sin 3Sm

TABLE A-6: Other sample output sheet generated by the developed software for
the Problem shown in Fig.2, showing codal checks for Service
Levels A, B & C.

30
Published by : Dr.Vijai Kumar, Head Library & Information Services Division
Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai - 400 085, India.