16-17 March 2010

Turbine Hall
The CastleGate
Melbourne Street
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 2JQ
Seminar Proceedings
Pressure Systems Group
Bolted
FlanGed JointS:
new MethodS
and PracticeS
improving the world through engineering
Photo courtesy of Hydratight























© 2010 The Institution of Mechanical Engineers, unless otherwise stated.


The copyright in these papers is the property of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers unless otherwise indicated. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of
private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright,
Designs and Patent Act 1988, no part may be reproduced in any form or by any
means without permission. Enquiries should be addressed to:

Director of Publication and Information Services, The Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, 1 Birdcage Walk, London SW1H 9JJ, telephone: 020 7222 7899.

The Institution is not responsible for any statement contained in these papers.
Data, discussion and conclusions developed by the authors are for information only
and are not intended for use without independent substantiating investigation on
the part of potential users. Opinions expressed are those of the author and not
necessarily those of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers.


Registered Charity Number 206882







CONTENTS



1. Set t i ng t he Scene
Robert Noble, Hydratight
© Robert Noble

2. Fl ange Sel ect i on
Dr David Nash, University of Strathclyde
Simon Earland, Earland Engineering
© Dr David Nash & Simon Earland

3. Gask et Sel ect i on
Dr Gavin Smith, Novus Sealing Limited
© Dr Gavin Smit h, Novus Sealing Limit ed

4. Mat er i al Sel ect i on f or I ndust r i al Fast ener s
Rod Corbett, James Walker Rotabolt
© Rod Corbet t

5. Tr adi t i onal Fl ange Desi gn Met hods
Warren Brown, The Equity Engineering Group
© Warren Brown

6. Over vi ew of Dev el opment s i n EN 1591
Manfred Schaaf, AMTEC Services GmbH
© Manfred Schaaf

7. Fai l ur e Mechani sms of Bol t ed Joi nt s
- Bol t i ng Aspect s
Bill Eccles, Bolt Science Limited
© Bolt Science Limit ed

Seal f ai l ur e f r om a gask et s per spect i ve
Dene Halkyard, Flexitallic
© Flexitallic Ltd

8. Eur opean Emi ssi ons Legi sl at i on
Dr Brian Ellis, European Sealing Association
© Dr Brian S. Ellis


1

2

9. Tensi on Cont r ol , t he k ey t o Bol t ed Fl ange Rel i abi l i t y
Rod Corbett, James Walker Rotabolt
© Rod Corbet t

Ti ght eni ng Techni ques f or Bol t ed Fl anged Joi nt s
Tony Scrivens, Hydratight
No cont ent in proceedings

10. Management of t he I nt egr i t y of Bol t ed Joi nt s f or
Pr essur i sed Sy st ems
Robert Noble, Hydratight
© Robert Noble

11. ASME PCC- 1 Updat es
Warren Brown, The Equity Engineering Group
© Warren Brown

12. Qual i f i cat i on of Per sonnel Compet ency –
DD CEN/ TS 1591- 4
John Hoyes, Flexitallic Ltd
© J. R. Hoyes of Flexit allic

13. A r egul at or y per spect i ve on bol t ed j oi nt s at hi gh hazar d
si t es
Iain Paterson, HSE Offshore Division
© Healt h & Safet y Execut ive

14. Leak Management
Ed Versluis, James Walker Rotabolt
© James Walker

15. Case st udi es
No content in proceedings
3

4








Set t i ng t he Scene
Robert Noble, Hydratight



























© Rober t Nobl e
5

6
Setting the Scene
Robert Noble
Technical Services
Leader Hydratight
The World is beginning to realise the bolted joint is
just as critical as the Welded Joint?
Welded Joint
Coded
Welder
Material
Control
Documented
Procedure
NDT
Verification
Hydro-
tested
Competent
Personnel
Documented
Procedure
Hydro-
tested
Material
Control
Integrity
tested
Bolted Joint
In Service Inspection
Records
Records
Permanent joint Subject to Breakout
7
Is the bolted joint a permanent or temporary
Joint?
Consider this please:-
Consider this question:-
PED applies to permanent joining with permanent
joints defined in Article 1 as:
“2.8. 'Permanent joints` means joints which
cannot be disconnected except by destructive
methods”
The Bolted Flanged joint being capable of
disconnection therefore is viewed as temporary!
This is an advantage – not a reason for reduced
standards of management and control.
The Bolted Joint and the PED:-
8
The Permanent Joint and the PED:-
3.1.2. Permanent joining
• Permanent joints and adjacent zones must be free of any surface or
internal defects detrimental to the safety of the equipment.
• The properties of permanent joints must meet the minimum properties
specified for the materials to be joined unless other relevant property
values are specifically taken into account in the design calculations.
• For pressure equipment, permanent joining of components which contribute
to the pressure resistance of equipment and components which are
directly attached to them must be carried out by suitably qualified
personnel according to suitable operating procedures.
• For pressure equipment in categories II, III and IV, operating procedures
and personnel must be approved by a competent third party which, at
the manufacturer's discretion, may be:
—a notified body,
—a third-party organization recognized by a Member State
• To carry out these approvals the third party must perform examinations
and tests as set out in the appropriate harmonized standards or equivalent
examinations and tests or must have them performed.
EQMS no:5144-AC
Standards and concern around Bolted
Joints are becoming more prevalent
9
• Improved Training and Competence
• Improved Design Codes
• Improve guidance on determining correct
bolt load.
• A trend towards increased bolt load.
• Focus on Gasket performance.
• Inspection of Bolted Joints.
• Improved Management of Bolted Joints
Trends in industry and standards:-
10








Fl ange Sel ect i on
Dr David Nash, University of Strathclyde &
Simon Earland, Earland Engineering


























© Dr Davi d Nash & Si mon Ear l and
11

12


Fl ange Sel ect i on

Simon Earland, Earland Engineering Ltd & David Nash, University of Strathclyde

I NTRODUCTI ON

This paper covers the important features of the main types of flange and indicates some
typical uses.
Flanges are used for a variety of applications in pressure systems, including piping, valves,
nozzles and access openings on vessels and other equipment, and girth flanges on vessels and
heat exchangers. Many of these flanges will be standard, “off the shelf” items; others will be
custom designed for a specific application.
Normally, flanges are specified on the basis of a pressure requirement. Thereafter, other
loadings and deflection or leakage requirements, or even welding, installation or access
requirements may drive the rationale for flange selection. The intention of this paper is to
present an overview of bolted flange types, including both standard and specialist flange
designs.

STANDARD FLANGES

The most common type of flange used for pressure equipment is the standard piping flange.
These are supplied in accordance with various national and international standards such as:
• EN 1092 – Flanges and their joints – Circular flanges for pipes, valves, fittings and
accessories, PN designated
• EN 1759 – Flanges and their joints – Circular flanges for pipes, valves, fittings and
accessories, class designated
• ASME B16.5 – Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings: NPS ½ through NPS 24 Metric/Inch
Standard
• ASME B16.47 – Large Diameter Steel Flanges: NPS 26 through NPS 60 Metric/Inch
Standard
• EN ISO 10423 (ANSI/API Specification 6A) - Petroleum and natural gas industries.
Drilling and production equipment. Wellhead and Christmas tree equipment

Flanges to ASME B16.5 are often referred to as “ANSI” flanges because the standard was
originally published by ANSI (American National Standards Institute), but it is now published
by ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers). The European standard EN 1759 is
based on the ANSI/ASME standard B16.5, and EN 1092 is based on DIN standard flanges.
Flanges are selected according to their nominal size, DN for metric or NPS for inch sizes (also
referred to as NB), and their pressure - temperature rating.

The main advantages of these standard flanges are:
• Readily available from a range of manufacturers
• Design calculations are not normally required
• Pressure ratings recognised by the main piping and pressure vessel design codes
• Standard dimensions
• Wide range of gaskets available in standard sizes

Disadvantages:
• They tend to be overly large and heavy compared with modern designs
• Some problems with high seating stress gaskets and low pressure rating flanges

There are two main systems for flange rating, the American system of class designated flanges
given in ASME B16.5 and EN 1759, and the European system of PN designated flanges given in
EN 1092 Parts 1, 2, 3 and 4.

In the oil, gas and petro-chemical industries class designated flanges are generally specified.
The same is true in other industries, such as chemicals and pharmaceuticals where the plant is
operated by an American based company. For plants operated by European based companies
PN designated flanges are often specified.

13
Cl ass desi gnat ed f l anges

ASME B16.5 and EN 1759 cover sizes from NPS ½ to NPS 24, and flanges are specified by
the designations Class 150, Class 300, Class 400, Class 600, Class 900, Class 1500 and Class
2500.
These flanges are often referred to as 150 lb (or 150#), 300 lb, etc. The class designations of
these flanges correspond to the pressure ratings in psig at elevated temperature, typically
567°F (297°C) for class 150 and 860°F (460°C) for class 300 and above for carbon steel A-
105 material. The pressure ratings in psig at ambient temperature are much higher than the
class designation. For example, the pressure rating of a Class 150 flange in ASTM A-105
material at ambient temperature is 285 psi, and the rating of a Class 300 flange is 740 psi.
The maximum working pressures are tabulated against temperature, and tables are provided
for various groups of materials. Standard flange dimensions are also tabulated. In ASME B16.5
tables are provided in both metric units (bars and mm) and US customary units (psig and
inches).
ASME B16.5 covers a wide range of carbon and alloy steels, stainless steels and nickel alloys.
In EN 1759 Part 1 covers steel flanges, Part 3 covers copper alloy flanges and Part 4 covers
aluminium alloy flanges.

ASME B16. 47 covers sizes from NPS 26 to NPS 60, and flanges are specified by the
designations Class 75, Class 150, Class 300, Class 400, Class 600 and Class 900. This
standard covers two series of flanges – Series A, which were previously known as MSS SP-44;
and Series B, which were previously know as API-605.
Tables of pressure/ temperature ratings and standard dimensions are provided in US
customary units only. The pressure – temperature rating tables are basically the same as
those in ASME B16.5 except for the addition of Class 75.

EN I SO 10423 is identical to ANSI / API Speci f i cat i on 6A and covers flanges for high
pressure applications, such as wellhead and “Christmas tree” equipment used in the oil and
gas industry. Three types of flange are covered (all ring joint type):
• Type 6B flanges are available as weld neck, threaded, integral (long weld neck) or blind
flanges and the bolting force reacts on the metallic ring gasket.
• Type 6BX flanges are available as weld neck, integral (long weld neck) or blind flanges.
The bolting force can react on the raised face of the flanges when the ring-joint gasket
has been properly seated. This prevents damage to the flange or gasket from excessive
bolt torque, but is not essential for proper functioning of the flange.
• Segmented flanges have a recessed face, and the bolting force can react on the surface
outside the recessed face of the flange when the ring-joint gasket has been properly
seated. This prevents damage to the flange or gasket from excessive bolt torque, but is
not essential for proper functioning of the flange.

The maximum rated working pressures and size ranges of type 6B, 6BX and segmented
flanges are given in Table 1.
Table 1 – Rated working pressures and size ranges of flanges to EN ISO 10423

Rat ed
w or k i ng
pr essur e
Fl ange si ze r ange
mm (in)

MPa (psi) Type 6B Ty pe 6BX Segment ed
13.8 (2000) 52 to 540 (2
1
/
16
to 21
¼)
680 to 762 (26 ¾ to 30) -
20.7 (3000) 52 to 527 (2
1
/
16
to 20
¾)
680 to 762 (26 ¾ to 30) -
34.5 (5000) 52 to 279 (2
1
/
16
to 11) 346 to 540 (13
5
/
8
to 21
¼)
35 to 103 x 108
(1
3
/
8
to 4
1
/
16
x 4 ¼)
69.0 (10000) - 46 to 540 (1
13
/
16
to 21
¼)
-
103.5 (15000) - 46 to 476 (1
13
/
16
to 18
¾)
-
138.0 (20000) - 46 to 346 (1
13
/
16
to 13
5
/
8
)
-


14
Standard flange dimensions are tabulated in both metric units (mm) and US customary units
(inches). Information is given in the standard for evaluating the rated working pressure for
elevated temperatures.
A new edition of EN ISO 10423 was published in December 2009, but has not yet been issued
as a BS EN ISO standard.

PN desi gnat ed f l anges

EN 1092 covers the pressure designations PN 2.5, PN 6, PN 10, PN 16, PN 25, PN 40, PN 63,
PN 100, PN 160, PN 250, PN 320 and PN 400, and sizes from DN 10 up to DN 4000 (for PN 2.5
flanges). The upper size limit reduces for the higher pressure ratings.
The PN designation indicates the pressure rating of the flange in bars at ambient temperature.
The maximum allowable pressures at other temperatures are obtained from the pressure -
temperature rating tables given in the appropriate part of EN 1092. Part 1 covers steel flanges,
Part 2 covers cast iron flanges, Part 3 covers copper alloy flanges and Part 4 covers aluminium
alloy flanges. Standard flange dimensions are also tabulated.

Fl ange conf i gur at i ons

Standard flanges are available in a variety of combinations of type of flange and facing. The
types of flange include weld neck, long weld neck, slip-on, socket welding, lapped, threaded
and blind.
The most commonly used facings are raised face, flat face and ring joint, but other facings
such as tongue and groove and O-ring groove are also used.

Wel d neck - this type of flange has a tapered hub at the back of the flange and is butt welded
to the pipe or nozzle neck, as shown if Figure 1. The butt weld can be subjected to volumetric
examination (radiography or ultrasonics) to ensure a high integrity joint. This type of flange is
widely used in the oil, gas, petro-chemical and power generation industries.

Figure 1 - Weld neck flange

Long w el d neck - this type of flange is used for nozzles on equipment as an alternative to
using thick walled pipe. The nozzle neck is replaced by an extended parallel hub at the back of
the flange, as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2 - Long weld neck flange



15
Sl i p- on - this type of flange fits over the outside of the pipe or nozzle neck and is attached
with fillet welds at the back and the face of the flange, as shown in Figure 3. The welds can
only be checked by surface examination techniques. This type of flange is not recommended
for high temperature applications or cyclic service.

Figure 3 - Slip-on flange

Rai sed f ace. Figure 4 shows a flange with a raised face for gasket seating. This is the
standard facing for use with gaskets which are located inside the bolt circle, and a wide range
of gaskets is available.

Figure 4 - Raised face flange

Fl at f ace. The face of the flange is flat, as shown in Figure 5, and is used in conjunction with a
full face gasket which extends beyond the bolt circle. Relatively soft gasket materials are
generally used. This type of facing is best suited to low pressure applications, and has the
advantage that the gaps between the flange faces at the inside and outside surfaces can be
eliminated where cleanliness is important.

Figure 5 - Flat face flange

Ri ng j oi nt . The face of the flange has a groove for use with a metallic ring type joint, as
shown in Figure 6. Ring joint facings are generally used in high pressure and/or high
temperature applications.

Figure 6 - Ring joint flange

16



COMPACT FLANGED CONNECTI ONS ( CFC)

There are various proprietary flange designs on the market as an alternative to the standard
flanges described above, including Taper-Lok, Vector SPO, Desflex and Verax. There are many
others.
Compact flanges are used in a variety of industries, including oil and gas (onshore, offshore
and subsea applications), petro-chemical and power generation.

The advantages include:
• Many designs use a reusable seal.
• High quality of leak tightness.
• Compact design reduces space and weight (up to 70% lighter than the conventional
flanges).
• Reduced weight gives substantial cost benefit with expensive materials.
• Smaller bolt diameters making assembly and installation easier.

Disadvantages
• Most piping and vessel codes do not give automatic exemption from design calculations.
• Can only be joined to another flange of the same type.
• Some designs have male and female flanges.
• Most designs require flanges to be separated to insert or remove seal.

Nor sok L005

The only standard for compact flanges is the Norwegian Norsok L-005, however a committee
draft of an ISO standard based on Norsok L-005 has recently been issued for comments.
The Norsok standard is based on common principles utilized by VERAX, Vector International AS
and Off.N.Galperti SpA.

The compact flange described below (and in clause 5 of the Norsok standard) is based on the
SPO compact flange developed by Vector International AS.
The flange face includes a slightly convex bevel with the highest point, called the heel,
adjacent to the bore and a small outer wedge around the outer diameter of the flange. The
assembly is made up by tightening the flange bolting which pulls the two connector halves
together.

Axial forces are exerted on the taper of the metal seal ring and translated into a radial sealing
force. As the bolt load is increased the bevel is closed and face to face contact is achieved at
the outer wedge. Most of the bolt pre-load is transferred as compressive forces between the
flange faces at the bore.

The flange design incorporates two independent seals. The first is created by application of
seal seating stress at the flange heel. The heel contact will be maintained for pressure values
up to 1.8 times the flange rating at room temperature. The main seal is the IX seal ring. The
seal ring force is provided by the elastic stored energy in the stressed seal ring. Any leakage at
the heel will give internal pressure acting on the seal ring thereby increasing the sealing
action.

The design aims to prevent exposure to oxygen and other corrosive agents to prevent
corrosion of the flange faces, the stressed length of the bolts and the seal ring.
When the flange is bolted up the back face of the flange is parallel to the flange face in order
to prevent bending of the bolts in the assembled condition.

Flanges covered by a class of Clause 5 of Norsok L-005 will stand the maximum rating of the
corresponding ASME B16.5 class over the temperature range covered by the Norsok standard.
Tables of standard dimensions are provided for sizes in the range DN 16 (NPS ½) to DN 1200
(NPS 48), except for CL 2500 which has an upper limit of DN 600 (NPS 24).



17
Table 2 – Pressure class designation and ASME rating ceiling values to ASME B16.5

Pr essur e cl ass Cl ass
abbr evi at i on
Nomi nal
pr essur e
ASME pr essur e r at i ng cei l i ng
val ues
psig barg
Class 150 CL 150 PN 20 290 20.0
Class 300 CL 300 PN 50 750 51.7
Class 600 CL 600 PN 110 1500 103.4
Class 900 CL 900 PN 150 2250 155.2
Class 1500 CL 1500 PN 260 3750 258.6
Class 2500 CL 2500 PN 420 6250 431.0

Taper - Lok ®

The Taper-Lok® Weld Neck Assembly is a compact flange comprised of a male flange, a
female flange, a seal ring, and a complete set of studs and nuts.
Taper-Lok® is a registered trade mark of Taper-Lok Corporation.
The design is made up of two converging angles based on the wedge principle. The male nose
is a 20° angle cone, and the female contains a 10° pocket. The Taper-Lok® seal ring, with
comparable angles, sits in between the flange components and acts as a “door stop” by
creating a wedge. The tapered seal ring geometry design ensures a significant length of the
sealing surfaces as contact forces are generated between both the male and female
components; this geometry is what gives all Taper-Lok® flanges a self-energizing and
pressure-energizing seal. Taper-Lok® flanges require lower bolt loads than standard
connections. The seal ring is generally made of the same material as the flange and is
reusable.
Standard Taper-Lok® connection sizes range from 1/2" to 83" with varying wall thicknesses,
sealing pressures up to 40,000 psi, and temperatures ranging from -350º to 1600º F.
Variations of the basic weld neck design are available for blind flanges, long weld neck flanges,
heat exchanger closures, swivel flanges and other applications.

Desf l ex

The Desflex compact flange is manufactured by Destec Engineering Ltd and uses a ‘D’ type
metal-to-metal seal which is flush with the bore of the flange. The flange stresses during
assembly are controlled by limiting the flange rotation via a small gap at the outer edge of the
flange. The flanges are more resistant to external bending, and excessive bolt tightening
cannot overstress the flange.
Desflex flanges are available in sizes from 1” NPS up to 40” NPS, and pressure rating classes
300, 600, 900, 1500 and 2500. Destec provide their own pressure rating tables that are based
on the stress analysis methodology in ASME VIII Division 1, Appendix 2.
Desflex flanges are available as weld neck, blind and swivel flanges.

Ver ax

The concept of the Verax compact flange (VCF) originated as far back as the early 1950s. The
VCF does not principally use seal rings or a gasket, although these can be added if required.
This means that normal installation and assembly of equipment can be easier as components
should slip into place. Since there is no gasket present, the assembly operates in a ‘static
mode’. Verax specify that the bolts should be tightened to 80% of the yield strength, so once
assembled and tightened, the bolt loads remain steady and do not change over time when the
pressure is applied. This is not the case with a gasketted joint.
Verax claim that the VCF reduces corrosion in the assembly as neither the flange faces nor the
loaded part of the bolts are exposed to the internal media or external environment. As there is
full metal-to-metal contact, interface corrosion is eliminated.

The VCF system performs well on the failure mode evaluation analysis, and risk of leakage is
minimised with this approach. Annual monitoring of the VCF system is not required and VCF
systems comply with the 4 year schedule in accordance with US-EPA legislation.
The VCF must be handled with care and be assembled correctly. Most VCF joints have a
greater number of smaller bolts than standard flanges. This gives more uniform bolt load
around the circumference and better feel for the operator, but takes more time.
18
In addition, the mating faces must be scratch free. Some minor scratches are permitted, but
since this face is the primary seal, good operator training and installation procedure must be
adopted.

PROPRI ETARY CLAMP CONNECTORS

Clamp connectors consist of a pair of hubs for that are welded to the ends of the pipe (similar
to a flange), and a seal ring; but the normal flange bolts are replaced by a clamp set, which
can be rotated around the hubs to suit the most practical position.
There are several designs available, including Grayloc, Taper-Lok, Vector Techlok and Destec.
Clamp connectors are used in a variety of industries, including oil and gas (onshore, offshore
and subsea applications), petro-chemical and power generation.

The advantages include:
• Many designs use a reusable seal.
• High quality of leak tightness.
• Smaller and lighter than conventional flanges.
• Only four bolts to tighten, making maintenance simpler and quicker.
• No periodic retightening of the bolts is required when the connector is in service.

Disadvantages
• Most piping and vessel codes do not give automatic exemption from design calculations.
• Can only be joined to another flange of the same type.
• Some designs have male and female flanges.

Compared to a standard flange, clamp connectors are significantly lighter and smaller. There
are only four bolts to tighten, making maintenance considerably simpler and quicker. No
periodic retightening of the bolts is required when the connector is in service.

Gr ayl oc®

The Grayloc connector has three basic components – the met al seal r i ng, the two hubs and
the cl amp assembl y.
The metal seal ring achieves a self-energised and pressure-energised bore seal that will hold
vacuum or external pressures. The hubs are welded to the ends of the pipe, and as they are
drawn together by the clamp assembly the seal ring lips deflect against the inner sealing
surface of the hub, forming a self-energising seal. The two piece clamp assembly is the
primary pressure retaining component, not the bolting. The clamp carries all the internal
pressure loads as well as axial and bending loads transmitted by the pipe.
Grayloc is a registered trade mark of Oceaneering International Inc.

Taper - Lok ®
The Taper-Lok Clamp Connector is similar to the Grayloc connector, but utilises the tapered
sealing ring as fitted to the Taper-Lok compact flange.

Vect or Techl ok
The Vector Techlok Clamp Connector is similar to the Grayloc connector, and utilises a self-
energised and pressure-energised metal seal ring at the bore of the flange.

Dest ec G- Range
The Destec G-Range clamp connector is also similar to the Grayloc connector, and utilises a
self-energised and pressure-energised metal seal ring at the bore of the flange.

CUSTOM DESI GNED FLANGES

Custom designed flanges are used when the diameter does not match that of a
standard flange, or when a better optimised design is required. For example, standard ASME
B16.5 flanges generally have a fairly small number of large bolts, rather than a larger number
of smaller bolts. This increases the bolt circle diameter and flange outside diameter, which in
turn increase the bending moment in the flange and hence the flange thickness. The end result
is a flange that is considerably heavier than an optimised design. When expensive alloy
materials are being used this will have significant cost implications.

19
Flange design methods are given in most pressure vessel design codes, such as EN 13445,
ASME VIII and PD 5500. Most of these are based on what is generally known as the “Taylor
Forge Method”. Alternative design methods are given in the EN 1591 series of standard. These
design methods will be covered by other presentations at this seminar.
Custom designed flanges are commonly used for the girth flanges in shell and tube heat
exchangers, vessels and other pressure equipment where there is a requirement for sections
to be removable.

The advantages of using a custom designed flange are:
• Can be designed for the specific design conditions.
• Designed for specific flange, bolting and gasket materials.
• Usually smaller and lighter than a standard flange.

Disadvantages:
• Design calculations must be performed.
• Longer delivery time compared with a standard “off the shelf” flange.
• Total cost may be greater than a standard flange.

QUI CK RELEASE OPENI NGS

Many bolted flanged joints stay in service for long periods (several years) without being
dismantled. Others, such as access openings, may be dismantled and reassembled on a
regular basis, and this will affect the type of flange selected.
One option is to use a design similar to a traditional bolted flange, but with swing bolts or
quick release clamps instead of conventional through bolting.

Figure 7 - Quick release clamp

For access openings various types of quick release manways are available. These are generally
significantly lighter than a standard blind flange, and with fewer bolts.
All these openings still require the loosening of a number of bolts in order to gain access. If
more rapid access is required there are several proprietary quick release openings on the
market, including those offered by GD Engineering, Perry Equipment Corporation, Pipeline
Engineering and T D Williamson. These are not strictly bolted flanged connections, but they
serve the same purpose.

These are usually in the form of a hinged door with some form of quick acting locking
mechanism instead of bolts. Various safety features are incorporated to ensure that the door
cannot be opened while the equipment is pressurised.





20
Typical quick opening closure applications include:
• Pipeline pig traps
• Filters
• Coalescers
• Strainers
• Separators
• Meter skid systems
• Hydrocyclones

The main advantages are:
• Rapid access
• Reusable seal
• Safety interlocks

Disadvantages
• High cost compared to a standard flange

CONCLUSI ONS

The standard flange has served the pressures systems industry reasonably well for over 80
years. However, due to increasingly more demanding operational requirements, various
manufacturers and industries have adjusted, improved and even redesigned the bolted flange
over time.

The main issues of strength, deflection, leakage, weight and cost remain, and users must be
fully aware of the design basis and operational limits of each system.


21

22








Gask et Sel ect i on
Dr Gavin Smith, Novus Sealing Limited



























© Dr Gavi n Smi t h, Novus Seal i ng Li mi t ed
23

24
Gasket Selection
Dr Gavin Smith, Technical Director
Novus Sealing Limited
To ensure safe operation of a bolted 
flange connection the gasket must be:
•Correctly SELECTED
•Of the right QUALITY
•Properly ASSEMBLED
25
•The gasket should be suitable for the 
design or operating conditions:
•The process fluid at the operating 
temperature 
•The operating temperature
•The operating pressure
Fluid Temperature Pressure
•There is a wealth of data from both 
gasket manufacturers and plant 
history on the compatibility of 
gasket materials with process fluids
•However, despite all this knowledge 
problems do occur
•A good (or bad) example are the 
numerous failures of nitrile 
elastomer seals that occurred on the 
change from Diesel to Bio‐Diesel
26
Failure of Nitrile 
Gaskets in Bio‐Diesel
•Gaskets may seal well initially 
but can fail over time at 
temperature
• Creep and Stress Relaxation
•A gasket may seal well 
initially but over time will lose 
load which may result in 
flange leakage 
•Oxidation 
•Graphite will oxidise at 
elevated temperature at a 
rate determined by the 
temperature, the oxygen 
concentration and the quality
27
Oxidation of Graphite in a Spiral Wound Gasket
•The resistance of a gasket 
material to the internal 
pressure is related to its ability 
to withstand the load applied. 
•Gasket Stress is the key 
parameter: Defined as the as 
the total applied bolt load 
divided by the compressed area 
of the gasket
•Gasket stress defines the load 
bearing characteristics of the 
gasket and is used to calculate 
the torque applied to the bolts 
during assembly. 
28
Every gasket has a minimum and maximum stress
1
2 3 4 5 11 6 7 8 9 10 12
Stud Number
G
a
s
k
e
t
 
 
S
t
r
e
s
s
Min
Max
Non‐metallic gaskets have a low minimum and low 
maximum stress
1
2 3 4 5 11 6 7 8 9 10 12
Stud Number
G
a
s
k
e
t
 
 
S
t
r
e
s
s
Min
Max
29
Metallic gaskets have a high minimum 
and high maximum stress
1
2 3 4 5 11 6 7 8 9 10 12
Stud Number
G
a
s
k
e
t
 
 
S
t
r
e
s
s
Min
Max
2” Flange Size by Pressure Class
30
Setting the target stress
1
2 3 4 5 11 6 7 8 9 10 12
Stud Number
G
a
s
k
e
t
 
 
S
t
r
e
s
s
Min
Max
Target 
Stress
1
2 3 4 5 11 6 7 8 9 10 12
Stud Number
G
a
s
k
e
t
 
 
S
t
r
e
s
s
Max
Target 
Stress
Temperature effects will reduce the stress on the 
gasket significantly (all gasket relax!)
Service 
Stress
Relaxation
31
1
2 3 4 5 11 6 7 8 9 10 12
Stud Number
G
a
s
k
e
t
 
 
S
t
r
e
s
s
Max
Target 
Stress
Solution is to set stud loads high and select a 
gasket with high resistance to relaxation
Service 
Stress
Relaxation
Min
Gasket Selection for Heat Exchangers
• Gasket Load Loss from 
Relaxation
• Inability to Tolerate Relative 
Movement Between the 
Flanges
The two main reasons flange 
connections on heat exchangers 
leak are: 
32
Differential Expansion in a Heat Exchanger
Differential Radial Expansion Of Channel and Shell Flanges, Relative To The Tubesheet, Over
21 Days
-0.01
-0.009
-0.008
-0.007
-0.006
-0.005
-0.004
-0.003
-0.002
-0.001
0
0.001
0.002
2
1
:
0
8
1
1
:
3
8
2
:
0
8
1
6
:
3
8
7
:
0
8
2
1
:
3
8
1
2
:
0
8
2
:
3
8
1
7
:
0
8
7
:
3
8
2
2
:
0
8
1
2
:
3
8
3
:
0
8
1
7
:
3
8
8
:
0
8
2
2
:
3
8
1
3
:
0
8
3
:
3
8
1
8
:
0
8
8
:
3
8
2
3
:
0
8
1
3
:
3
8
4
:
0
8
1
8
:
3
8
9
:
0
8
2
3
:
3
8
1
4
:
0
8
4
:
3
8
1
9
:
0
8
9
:
3
8
0
:
0
8
1
4
:
3
8
5
:
0
8
1
9
:
3
8
1
0
:
0
8
"X" Axis Shows Time With Data Taken Every 30 Minutes
D
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
i
a
l

G
r
o
w
t
h
,

R
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

t
o

t
h
e

T
u
b
e
s
h
e
e
t

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r
,

i
n

I
n
c
h
e
s
Channel Flange Shell Flange
Startup Following
A Plant Shutdown
Exchanger Channel Side
Flow Stalls
Second Restart of
Exchanger
Normal Operation
For This Exchanger
Effect of Differential Expansion
•Differential Expansion leads to 
differential movement between 
the mating flanges
•Flange movement results in 
shearing of the gasket or leads to 
slippage at the gasket / flange 
interface
•Double Jacketed gaskets are 
unable to tolerate this movement 
between the flanges. 
33
Failure of a Double Jacketed Gasket
Graphite faced gaskets are the best 
solution for heat exchanger applications
•Corrugated Metal Gasket
•Camprofile Gasket
•Spiral Wound Gasket
34
Quality
•Once the gasket has been correctly selected 
it must be manufactured to the highest 
quality
•Unfortunately, failures do to poor quality 
gaskets remain a problem
•As an example, lets have a look at the 
Camprofile….
The sealing integrity of a Camprofile relies 
upon precise standards of machining
35
There are three methods of manufacture
• Bend and weld pre‐profiled strip
• Bend and weld strip and profile
• Laser cut rings and lathe profile
Failure due to poor quality weld
36
Failure due to poor quality weld
Bend and Weld construction. Poor!
37
Bend and Weld Construction
Really Poor!!
Welds must be machined down to the 
same height as the metal core
Failure Point –
thinner material 
and no serrations
38
The best solution is no welds
All graphite looks the same, but looks 
can be deceiving!!!
Low Quality Graphite High Quality Graphite
Basic oxidation test at 600°C, 4 hours
39
But ash content does not guarantee 
oxidation rate
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Sample A Sample B Sample C Sample D Sample E
W
e
i
g
h
t

L
o
s
s


%
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Sample A Sample B Sample C Sample D Sample E
A
s
h

c
o
n
t
e
n
t

%
Ash Content
Weight Loss
The reliability of the flanged joint depends on 
competent control of the joint making process
Well lubricated 
studs and nuts
Controlled 
Tightening
Trained 
technicians
40
Conclusions
• A gasket is a relatively low cost item but it is critical to the
safe operation of any plant. 
•To ensure safe operation a gasket must be:
•Correctly Selected
•Of the right quality
•Properly Assembled
•Use your gasket provider. They have a wealth of data and 
experience that can ensure a leak free, safe plant.
Contact Details
Dr Gavin Smith
Technical Director
Novus Sealing Limited
Tel: 07785247202
email: gsmith@novussealing.com
41

42








Mat er i al Sel ect i on f or
I ndust r i al Fast ener s
Rod Corbett, James Walker Rotabolt

























© Rod Cor bet t
43

44
Mat er i al Sel ect i on f or I ndust r i al Fast ener s

Rod Cor bet t , Managi ng Di r ect or , JamesWal k er Rot abol t

1 I nt r oduct i on

Material selection for fasteners depends on the service environment, the load
carrying requirement and the cost of a joint for an expected service life.

The main selection categories are :-

Tensile and fatigue strength
Elevated and cryogenic temperatures
Corrosion resistance

One or more of these categories has to be analysed for a particular application
before the fastener material is selected.

2 Tensi l e and Fat i gue st r engt h

The main considerations for bolt strength selection in any environment are:-

Achievement of design bolt tension/joint compression/gasket seating stress.
Assured joint reliability
Increased fatigue life
Service load carrying capability in tensile and shear.
Reduced equipment build costs – fewer, smaller bolts for the same service.

Generally, tensile strength is the most important consideration in fastener
selection. The bolt has one objective – to deliver a known level of bolt tension
and subsequent equal and opposite compression in the flanged joint, within a safe
elastic strength margin. This level of tension when achieved delivers assured
joint reliability – no leaks from pressure containment, no fatigue failure, no self
loosening, and no structural slip.

2. 1 Har denabi l i t y

ISO 898 10.9 grade is widely used for high performance structural usage e.g.
cranes. This strength level combines high strength with good ductility. Higher
strength grades such as 12.9 and 14.9 have decreasing ductility and increased
susceptibility to brittle failure so 10.9 is an optimum choice in difficult
environments. For strength of 1040 MPa minimum, fasteners can be
manufactured from low alloy steels. The main alloying elements Chromium,
Nickel and Molybdenum enhance the mechanical properties of the steel.

Their main effect on carbon steel is to increasing hardenability.

This must no be confused with hardness which is dependant mainly on carbon
content. The higher the carbon content, the higher the hardness, potentially.

Other alloying elements that are normally present in steel also affect
hardenability.





45
The list of hardenability agents are as follows:

Car bon

Carbon is a strong aid to hardenability. It is advisable to control carbon contents.
However, excessive carbon decreases forge-ability, causes embrittlement
problems in heat treatment as well as room temperature/low temperature
applications.

Manganese

Strongly increases hardenability. However, it reduces forgeability.

Chr omi um
Mol ybdenum
Bor on
}

Most effective hardenability agents


When present in a small amounts (0.001%) it has a pronounced effect,
particularly in lower carbon steels.

Their effect on hardenability is demonstrated in the presentation slides covering
tensile strength. You will note that boron is the most powerful agent. The use of
plain carbon boron steels are not recommended for use in large diameter, high
strength, and high performance applications such as large diameter slew ring
bolting. Boron should only be used to boost hardenability of low alloy steels
maybe for larger diameter fasteners however it is important to consider the
operating environment especially with respect to stress corrosion cracking and
elevated temperatures. Note that for larger diameters, steels with greater alloy
content are needed. For strength levels greater than 1220 MPa, 826M40 or SAE
4340 should be selected. Finally, although different materials have the same
tensile strength, their fatigue properties can be different.

2. 2 I deal mat er i al f or hi gh st r engt h

Ideal pre-requisites for candidate materials to be used in the manufacture of high
strength, high performance fasteners could be: -

The tempering temperature of at least 480C allows the material to be used in
fasteners that will satisfy several different markets.

A threaded fastener is really a component containing a series of notches. The
criterion for high notch strength is that the material’s notched tensile strength (at
kt = 6) must be equal or greater than the materials smooth bar tensile strength.

The material must have sufficient ductility at high strength levels and minimum
7% elongation is indicative of this.

Hardenability through a 2 inch diameter enables the manufacture of fasteners
throughout a size range, and subsequently satisfies.

Be hot and cold forgeable

Materials are resistant to environmental embrittlement. Although stress levels
have a big say in susceptibility, increasing alloy content, especially molybdenum
also increases resistance.

46
Good thread fatigue resistance as the most common form of bolt failure is
fatigue.

2. 3 Appl i cat i on of hi gh st r engt h bol t i ng

We have mentioned that increased tensile strength enables the use of fewer and
smaller diameter fasteners, resulting in weight reduction.

This is of prime importance in the aerospace industry but is important in other
industries as reduced weight means reduced cost (smaller bolt quantities,
reduced diameters, smaller number of bolt holes, less tightening cycles). This
design concept as also been used in the design of latest technology wellhead
equipment where traditional 8 or 12 bolt flanges have been reduced to four or six
bolts of the same diameter. Whilst alloy steels and super alloys are capable of
developing much higher strength levels, their strength to weight ratio is not as
good as titanium. This advantage along with its excellent corrosion resistance
would seem attractive to the offshore industry but as yet hasn’t been used
extensively.

2. 3. 1 Tr ue St r engt h of bol t i ng

Medium carbon low alloy steels are used for high strength bolting that is used in a
wide range of environmental conditions ranging from the benign to the hostile.
Alloy steel bolting is relatively low cost but has a limited service life.

The increasing demand in most industries for longer service life with reduced
maintenance costs has led to the assessment and use of non-ferrous alloys which
have inherently superior environmental resistance. One design pre-requisite for
the candidate alloy is that it has similar mechanical strength and properties to the
alloy steel.

Many of the new alloy developments are produced with similar UTS and 0.2%
proof stress values to their steel counterparts. 0.2% proof stress is a traditional
bench mark for a bolt’s yield strength. The following schematic shows typical
stress strain curves for alloy steels and non-ferrous alloys. They may have
similar 0.2% proof stress values but their true elastic limit is significantly
different. With many alloys designed for use in hostile environment it is a fact
that their elastic strength capacity is significantly less than their medium carbon
low alloy steel counterparts. The effective strength reduction can be as much as
30-35% below the 0.2% proof stress value compared with a nominal 12-15%
with alloy steels. Indeed the British Steel Advisory centre has recommended that
engineers use elastic strength assessments based on 60% of the specified 0.2%
proof stress for austenitic stainless alloys.





47














48


Incremental load extensions tests, carried out on M22 all thread and double
ended studs manufactured from the relevant alloys, revealed the following true
elastic limits for various materials.

Alloy condition 0.2% proof true elastic
Stress N/mm2 limit
N/mm2
Monel k500 GR MA 18 655 475

Ferralium 225 fully heat treat 649 441

Marinel 21A ------------- 720 487

Titanium Beta C solution treated 834 679

Titanium 6AL-4V ELI solution treated 830 593

Austenitic Stainless Work hardened 600 360

These substantial reductions in effective fastener strength are very significant in
energy industries, especially when you consider how most of these fasteners are
installed. Hydraulic tensioning is the most common tightening method for larger
diameter studs. Because of the need to compensate for load transfer relaxation
the studs have to be hydraulically overloaded appreciably in excess of the design
tension target. Initial fastener diameter selection will be based on the latter and
the materials specified 0.2% proof stress. With most of the non-ferrous bolting
alloys having up to 30% lower effective elastic strength compared to the
specification bench mark the prospect of yielding or even breaking bolts on
installation is significant.

2.3. 2 Causes of l ow el ast i c st r engt h i n al l oy st eel s

Whilst the above schematic indicates a relatively high elastic limit for alloy steels,
recent findings suggest that larger diameter bolting can have much lower elastic
strength than that suggested by its certified 0.2% proof stress. Bolting made
from alloys such as EN24, EN25, EN26 and larger diameter B7 are showing
between 25-40% deficiencies compared to their certified proof street values. This
is especially so for stud bolting that is made simply by thread forming bar stock
that is already supplied in a heat treated condition that matches the required
finished fastener mechanical properties; rather than heat treating the finished
fastener to the specific fastener mechanical properties. There are a number of
reasons that could explain this low elastic strength. Bar stock, such as EN24’V’,
is produced for the manufacture of any metallic component, not just bolts; quite
often the properties are at the bottom of the tensile range. Also the
manufacturing process leaves residual stresses in the bolt and when further
process deformation occurs, say during bar straightening etc., the effect is to
lower a bolts yield or flow stress. This is illustrated in the following schematic.


49



There are consequences for in-service performance. It is difficult to know if a bolt
has been yielded on tightening. If it does occur, the following results:-

Reduced joint clamp loads
Bolt is highly stressed, with likely increased hardness. This maybe significant in
terms of resistance to environmental embrittlement.

Both situations are potentially detrimental to the performance of the bolted joint.


50
3 Cor r osi on r esi st ance

Selection here not only depends on required strength but on the service
environment too. Ordinary alloy steel fasteners may be perfectly satisfactory in
certain applications and environments where merely protected by a surface
coating. They can be more cost effective than corrosion resistance materials.

However, let us concentrate on severe conditions where the fastener must have a
long life in a hostile environment.

3. 1 The most common gr oup of mat er i al s i s st ai nl ess st eel s.

As the name implies, these steels are more resistant to rusting and staining than
plain carbon and lower alloy steels. The superior corrosion resistance is brought
about by the addition of chromium.

These are the four basic types:-

3. 1. 1 Aust eni t i c st ai nl ess

E.g. 18% chromium -12% nickel

This type of material cannot be strengthened by heat treatment. Any strength
this stainless steel has comes from cold work or deformation during its production
cycle e.g. during raw material bar rolling or cold forging and thread rolling. As
indicated previously, their true elastic limit is significantly lower than the
specification stated 0.2% Proof Stress.

3. 1. 2 Mar t ensi t i c

These steels are hardenable by heat treatment in the same way as carbon alloy
steels. Strength levels similar to low alloy steels can be achieved up to 1200 MPa
subject to section size. It is worth noting however that these steels are also
prone to lower than expected elastic limits compared to the specification stated
0.2 % Proof stress value.

3. 1. 3 Pr eci pi t at i on har deni ng

Precipitation hardening is a heat treatment process similar to hardening and
tempering with low alloy steels. This heat treatment can develop strength levels
as high as 1500 MPa with alloys such as PH13-8Mo and A286. In the offshore
industry the derivative for A286 is B17 or A453 660 grade primarily used for sour
gas applications or where higher strength is needed compared to austenitic
stainless steel.

3.1. 4 Fer r i t i c st ai nl ess st eel s

There is no demand for fasteners made from this material, they cannot be heat
treated and tend to be very notch sensitive and have very poor creep strength.
The material is used predominantly in acid handling applications.

The nominal compositions for stainless steels seem similar. However, the alloy
contents in the composition matrix determine whether the stainless steel is
austenitic or martensitic etc. Nickel and Nickel equivalent elements, such as
manganese, promote austenite. Chromium and chromium equivalent elements
such as molybdenum, promote martensite and ferrite type stainless steels.

51
3. 2 Cupr o Ni ck el s and Hi gh Ni ck el al l oy s

One family of corrosion resistant materials used in the offshore industry are
Cupr o Ni ck el s. As the name suggests the main elements in the alloys are
Copper and Nickel. Monel K 500, Marinel and more recently Nibron have all been
used but as with the stainless steels their true strength is significantly below that
suggested by the 0.2% Proof Stress stated in relevant specifications.

Many applications can be accommodated with fasteners made from
aforementioned materials. However, once the environment severity increases
even further, materials such as Inco 718 and Hastelloy have to be used.

For the most severe, extreme cases e.g. sour gas environments at the bottom of
the oceanic oil wells, proprietary alloys called Multiphase will provide a fastener
with the optimum solution. This alloy is a nickel cobalt quaternary, available in
two compositions, and has ultra high strength 1800 MPa and fatigue resistance. It
is also immune to stress corrosion cracking and hydrogen embrittlement.

3. 3 Env i r onment al Embr i t t l ement

A very common environmental failure mechanism is stress corrosion cracking
(SCC). A combination of stress, susceptibility and a corrosive environment
causes stress corrosion cracking. Initial pitting of the metal surface takes place
and leads to a stress concentration. The effect is cumulative and, in a highly
stressed joint, it can lead to very sudden failure. Both trans and intergranular
attack of the metal takes place in SCC but the failure is generally characterised
by a brittle intergranular fracture. The amount of corrosion involved can be very
small but its effect can be catastrophic.

SCC can be avoided through material selection based on the following factors:-

Keep the material stress below a critical threshold level for that alloy.
Use a stress corrosion cracking free alloy e.g. Multiphase, Inco 718.
Protect the fastener from corrosion e.g. surface coat alloy steels.

A typical application of SCC prevention is on offshore pedestal cranes where most
slew ring bolting/boom bolting is now 10.9 strength grade. At 12.9 grade the
maximum specification alloy hardness exceeds the threshold for many medium
carbon low alloy steels so they become susceptible.

The same stress threshold concept exists for other embrittlement failures such as
hydrogen embrittlement (HE). Whilst generally there is no corrosion in this type
of failure, the failure mode is virtually identical to SCC. Hydrogen diffuses into
small voids near to the surface of the metal, and embrittles the lattice structure,
thereby lowering the threshold stress level for brittle failure.

Possible sources for this hydrogen are:
1. Using alternative cleaning methods e.g. the use of dry cleaning methods
such as aluminium blasting instead of an acid pickle.
2. Ensure post plating baking procedures are carried out to drive out any
hydrogen that has diffused into the fastener during plating;
3. At the joint design stage, ensure compatibility of joint materials.





52
4 El evat ed t emper at ur e appl i cat i ons.

The creep and rupture strength of steel can be greatly improved by the addition
of alloying elements.

Molybdenum greatly increases creep and rupture strength.

Tungsten and vanadium have a similar effect.

Chromium has a negative effect on heat resistance, but one needs chromium
present for oxidation resistance.

Cobalt increases the hot tensile strength and temper resistance.

These elements therefore, are very important in selecting materials for elevated
temperature fasteners.

The following groups of materials are used for elevated temperature applications.

Alloy steels (up to 10% alloy content)
Austenitic stainless steels
Precipitation hardening stainless steels.

All these are iron based materials and are generally used from 350C to 550C.

Alloys based on Iron, Nickel, Chromium and Molybdenum, for example B17/660
grade, are used at temperatures up to 650C.

Nickel based alloys e.g. Nimonic, Waspaloy and Inco 718 are used where
operating temperatures range from 650C to 850C. With temperatures in this
region, creep, oxidation and hot strength are major problems. Materials selected
for these applications therefore, contain sufficient quantities of Nickel,
molybdenum and cobalt.

For extreme temperatures greater than 1000C, refractory materials based on
tantalum have to be used.

For the final environment we will cover on material selection, we will go from the
extreme of very high temperature to the opposite of low temperature or
cryogenic application.

5 Cr y ogeni c Appl i cat i ons

Selection for cryogenic applications is dependant mainly on the crystallographic
structure of the candidate material.

Alloys with the body centre cubic structures lose ductility at lower temperatures
and tend to have a threshold temperature below which they go brittle. Materials
selected for cryogenic applications tend to have faced centred cubic structures.


53








Typical selection use for low temperature applications range from :-
Iron based – A320 L7(BCC structure),
Austenitic stainless B8, (FCC structure)
A453 660/B17; Nickel based alloys include Inco 718 and Nimonic 80.

Many materials have a limited temperature range usage but the above illustrates
that selection for elevated temperatures features the same alloys for cryogenic
applications. Inco 718, PH13–8MO, A286, Wasploy and B17 have the advantage
of a wide temperature range. They all show excellent strength and ductility at low
temperatures, and retain tensile strength at their maximum utilisation
temperature. In offshore and energy sectors, alloys such as B8/B17 are used for
high and low temperature service.





54
6 Mat er i al Speci f i cat i ons

6. 1 St r uct ur al Bol t i ng

Most of the high performance structural bolting in industry is specified to a
strength level and is manufactured from medium carbon low alloy steels. In the
main, specifications such as 1SO 898, BS3692 allow the bolt manufacturer to
make the material selection for the strength grade required unless otherwise
stated by the customer. Provided he meets some basic minimum alloying
element requirement, he is supposed to have the experience and knowledge to
make the selection and thereby guarantee the mechanical property specification
e.g. 8.8 or 10.9 etc. The same can be said for SAE J429. A traditional imperial
material specification is BS1768 which also categorises by strength grade. The
DIN Euronorm specification tends to be different and categorises by material with
the material strength grade being determined by the bar stock or bolt diameter in
that material.

6. 1. 1 St r engt h.

The all embracing standard is covered by the B7 designation. The ultimate
tensile strength of B7 is regarded as high in energy industry and is a bench mark
for all other types of environmental alloy bolting such as duplex stainless and
cupro-nickel. Compared to structural steels, specifications such as ISO 898 10.9
grade, B7 strength is significantly lower however the lower hardness tends to be
below threshold levels for environmental embrittlement such as SCC and
hydrogen.

Comparative table B& versus 8.8 versus 10.9

B7 is covered by A193 and the similar BS 4882. The material alloy is a medium
carbon low alloy steel containing nominally 1% Chromium and 0.25%
Molybdenum. Both specifications are typified using a constant composition over
the full bolt diameter range. This means for larger diameter bolts, the B7 alloy
has insufficient hardenability to provide constant tensile strength across this
range – Table . where the highest entry level B& strength is required on larger
diameters, designers often call for A540 B24. The alloy here is more commonly
known as SAE 4340. It is capable of much higher strengths than B7 and its
chromium, molybdenum and high nickel content of 2% creates deep hardenability
enabling high strength and ductility at the largest bolt diameters.

The A193 and BS 4882 specs extend to an elevated temperature capability
because of the alloy composition. BS 4882 stretches out the use of B7 to approx
450 C and then by adding Vanadium to create B16, the V resists tempering
effects pushing its allowable design usage to 525C. One could argue this is the
material’s absolute limit so great care on service longevity and replacement
strategy has to be taken along with assured control on installed design bolt
tension objectives if it is to provide a cost effective bolted joint at these maximum
temperatures.

The B7 designation is mirrored by L7 for low temperature usage. Mechanically
and composition wise they are identical, the only difference being L7 has a low
temperature charpy test requirement. This qualifies it to be used at
temperatures of the order of minus 100C. As with B7, larger diameters have
lower tensile strength because of hardenability constraints.
Once again where there is a requirement for the larger diameters to have the
highest specification strength, L43 (4340) alloy must be used.

55
The increased toughness at through hardened strength from the higher nickel is
especially effective at lower temperatures found in LNG operations for example.
A320 also has some other strange material options including a plain carbon steel
with added Boron for hardenability. Having no experience of such a requirement,
the author can only summise, it is an economy option for high volume, small
diameter bolting on a process site;

6. 1. 2 Envi r onment al sel ect i on - Low er Bol t St r engt h.

Where medium carbon low alloy steel fasteners are required to operate in
corrosion environments they need to be resistant to embrittlement mechanisms
such as stress corrosion and hydrogen. Immunity can be achieved by reducing
the strength/hardness of the fastener below a threshold value below which the
mechanism will not initiate.

In terms of hydrogen embrittlement and general stress corrosion cracking the
standard B7 strength hardness of the chromium molybdenum alloy is low enough
to ensure these types of failure will not occur. However certain, hostile
environments are such that the strength level has to be reduced to an even lower
threshold. Operating environments with high sulphur/hydrogen sulphide present
are such an example; the failure mechanism in these environments is sulphide
stress cracking. A193 and BS4882 designate the lower strength B7M as the
selection grade for such an environment.

6. 1. 3 El evat ed / Hi gh t emper at ur e/ cr yogeni c appl i cat i ons.

Where operating temperatures exceed the absolute maximums for medium
carbon low alloy steels, the use of austenitic and precipitation hardening steel
alloys must be used for resistance to heat , creep and oxidisation and maintain
installed bolt tension/joint compression.

Austenitic stainless steels are designated B8. There are two versions, one high
strength A193 B8 class 2 or BS4882 B8X; the other low strength A193 B8 class I
or BS4882 B8 not ‘X’ categorised. The lower strength B8, is in the carbide
solution treated condition and has a constant low tensile strength across the full
size range. Because austenitic stainless steels cannot be heat treated to increase
strength, higher strength requirements must come from the cold working and
subsequent deformation induced during fastener manufacture. As with larger
diameter carbon steel bolts having through hardening constraints for a certain
alloy composition, the effect of the cold work/deforming forces go from maximum
at bolt surface layers and steadily reduce the closer you get to the bolt cross
section core. On larger diameters the effect of higher strength surface layers
diminishes in terms of overall tensile strength of the total bolt cross section. BS
4882 illustrates clearly the rapid drop off in tensile strength, particularly the 0.2%
proof stress strength of B8X on bolt diameters in excess of 19mm diameter.

This is especially significant for flange bolting where metallic/semi metallic
gaskets are used. These gaskets require generally higher seating stresses and
subsequent design bolt stress to seal. Reducing proof stress and true elastic limit
potentially 30% below these tabulated values makes strength selection of B8
crucial. The situation becomes even more complex if hydraulic tensioner
tightening is being considered for installation. The hydraulic overload that has to
be applied to compensate for relaxation losses reduces the safety margin on
usable elastic strength or even disqualifies this methodology as bolt yield could be
exceeded.

56
Where gasket seating stress and true elastic limit is an issue, precipitation
hardening steels such as BS4882 B17 need to be considered. This alloy can boost
its strength thru’ heat treatment so is a natural selection option for higher
performance gasketted flanged joints. The similar ASTM designation is A450 660
grade. These materials also have a higher temperature capability up to 650/675.

For even higher bolt temperatures, high nickel super alloys such as Nimonic 80
and Inco 718 provide high strength with creep and oxidisation resistance in these
severe environments. The BS4882 categorisation for Nimonic bolting, is B80.

For cryogenic applications beyond the capability of medium carbon alloy steels
material selection mirrors that for high temperatures. Alloy selection is the same
and the same limiting strength factors apply in terms of providing the required
level of elastic strength enabling the bolt to deliver the design bolt tension that
assures bolted joint reliability/zero leak performance. Service temperatures down
to minus 200 – 250C are within these materials’ ranges for good strength and
ductility/toughness.

7 Summar y

Material selection for any bolted application in terms of mechanical properties,
operating environment and service life is straightforward. The complications start
when budgeted cost does not correlate with technical/service specification. The
Offshore industry is notorious for stating extended service life but then being
totally unrealistic in the money it is prepared to spend on the fastener selected to
achieve the requirement. Often one ends up with coated alloy steel bolts being
used, rather than an inherent corrosion resistant bolt, against a 25 year life
expectancy in the splash zone. Similar lack of realism occurs on petrochemical
bolting exposed to high service temperatures and extended periods between
planned outages. Often medium carbon low alloy steel is the final selection when
precipitation hardening stainless bolts should have been used. Generally lower
cost alloy steels can be used in the more hostile environments but planned
maintenance / change out times will be shorter and more frequent. It’s all down
to cost and subsequent in service risk.



57

58








Tr adi t i onal Fl ange Desi gn
Met hods
Warren Brown, The Equity Engineering Group

























© War r en Br ow n
59

60
Tr adi t i onal Fl ange Desi gn Met hods

Warren Brown, Ph.D., P.Eng.
Principal Engineer, The Equity Engineering Group
Shaker Heights, Ohio, USA
Email: iwbrown@equityeng.com


I nt r oduct i on

Early research in design and analysis of bolted joints was conducted in the 1920’s to 1940’s in
Germany, the UK and the USA. The findings of this early work led to flanged joint design rules
being introduced by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) in the 1940’s. The
design method has remained largely unchanged since that time. Other international methods of
design have been introduced recently, most notably the CEN EN-1591 method, however the ASME
method remains the most widely accepted and most popular method of flange joint design. The
method has given very good service across a wide variety of applications, and the fact that it has
remained largely unchanged is testimony to its effectiveness. However, the method is not without
issue and, while flange design issues represent a relatively small portion of the leakage that occurs
in practice, there continues to be a number of failures associated with poor design.

In the engineering field, one often expects the latest methods to be the best and, in fact, that
they will eventually render the older, more traditional methods obsolete. However, in the case of
flange design, the traditional ASME method still holds significant advantage over newer methods
and, with minor alterations and improvements, the method can be modified to ensure an extremely
high integrity joint design.

Tr adi t i onal ASME Met hod ver sus Ot her Codes

A comparison of current code design methods (noting that other additional international codes,
such as BS 55000 or AS1210, the Australian Pressure Vessel Code, are largely based on one of the
listed methods) was performed for Welding Research Council bulletin 514 “Flange Design: Status of
Present Rules”. The table outlines some of the key differences and similarities in the methods. One
of the most common comparisons is between the EN1591 method, based on the TGL 32903/13,
and the ASME method. Such comparisons usually highlighting the lack of a mechanical interaction
calculation in the ASME method and the advantages that calculation offers when performed using
the EN1591 method. However, the comparisons generally neglect one of the other key differences
between the methods, which is the treatment of hub to flange and shell to hub interaction. For the
most common flange design, weld neck flanges, the ASME method is based on the calculation of
the shell, hub and flange ring as connected series, whereas the EN1591 method does not account
for the shell restraint and approximates the effect of the hub with an equivalent increase of the
flange ring moment of inertia. While this method is undoubtedly an acceptable and proven flange
design method, this approximation means that some of the advanced methods that can now be
applied to flange design, such as mechanical interaction, thermal effects and determining flange
strength limits will not be as accurate or even possible to perform with the current EN1591
method.

In fact, recent work into determining the acceptable limits for assembly bolt load, to avoid
damage to the flange, have shown that the inclusion of the effects of the hub and shell (both in
terms of rigidity and stress locations) is essential. In addition, many of the advantages of the
EN1591 method, such as the inclusion of mechanical interaction, can be relatively easily added to
the ASME design method.
61
Unfortunately, any such improvements to the ASME method are not likely to be included in the
code updates in the near future, so it is advisable to step outside the standard design and analysis
practices in order to improve on the traditional ASME design method. The following sections will
outline the major areas of improvement that are required, whether there is a plan for inclusion of
them in the ASME code eventually and what can be done in the interim to improve the existing
method.

Requi r ed I mpr ovement s t o t he Cur r ent ASME Desi gn Met hod

Inadequate Gasket Design Basis
One of the most significant areas of improvement that has received the bulk of the focus, in
terms of research, over the past 20 years is the need to better determine operating limits for the
gasket and apply that to flange design. The research effort commenced with the realization that
there was no reliable standard method of determining the values of “m” and “y” for new gasket
types that are not presently listed in Appendix 2. In addition to the need to determine the
minimum stress required to seal the joint and the minimum seating stress for a given gasket, in
flange design it would also be a significant advantage to know the bounds of application that are
acceptable for a given gasket. These bounds include such aspects as the maximum permissible
gasket stress (versus temperature) and the maximum permissible flange rotation (also versus
temperature). Unfortunately, in spite of the level of research into these topics, there is presently no
standard ASME or ASTM test methods that can be adopted for improving the ASME code and many
of the current international test methods that have already been adopted do not adequately
address the requirement or have inherent problems that make their application questionable.

In addition to the above mentioned improvements, the present “m” value used in the code
accounts for the required gasket sealing stress during operation and part of the reduction in gasket
load caused by pressure (which is why it is higher for stiffer gaskets). In most cases, the simple
ASME code method using the “m” value will result in a conservative treatment of the effects of
mechanical interaction in reducing the bolt load as pressure is applied. However, in some cases,
and in particular for large diameter joints with stiffer gaskets, the simple method currently
employed does not adequately cover the effects of mechanical interaction in reducing the gasket
load over and above the amount of the hydrostatic end force. Joints with a larger diameter and
stiffer gaskets will typically see a reduction in bolt load once pressure is applied and this means
that the total gasket load lost is the sum of the hydrostatic end force and the bolt load loss. For
those joints, there is risk that the current ASME method will provide a joint design that is prone to
leakage.

Disconnect Between Design and Operation
One of leading causes of joint leakage in the field is an inadequate initial assembly bolt load. In
many cases, this can be directly traced back to disconnect between the bolt load used for flange
design and the bolt load that must be applied in practice to achieve a leak free joint (typically in
excess of double the design load). Many well meaning engineers have fallen into the trap of
thinking that, because “code limits should never be exceeded”, the assembly bolt load should be
limited to the code design bolt load. This invariably provides an excellent training lesson for the
engineer in question when practically every joint leaks on start-up. There is no reason why the bolt
load used for flange design must be so low, other than to meet the current expected norms of
pressure vessel design for material stress limits.






62
Inadequate Joint Design for Integrity
Even though the majority of joints designed to the ASME code operate without incident, there
are categories of joints that have repeatedly proven to be susceptible to leakage due to design
issues. These include large diameter, low pressure joints, refinery flanges with ≤19mm  (≤¾ inch)
diameter bolts and higher pressure flanges with larger bolts (≥75mm, ≥3 inches). There is also a
class of flanges that is more difficult to define, where the current design practices (including the
now mandatory flange rotation limit) result in a flange that meets code design but will plastically
deform and take on permanent flange rotation set at relatively low bolt loads (often at a load
corresponding to 50% of bolt yield or less).

In the case of low pressure joints, one of the issues is that these fall into the category where
the simple treatment of elastic interaction in the code is non-conservative and, on top of that, they
often have inadequate bolting and flange strength to deliver sufficient gasket seating stress.
Similarly, in the case of ≤¾ inch bolted flanges, there is most often insufficient bolt area available
to provide adequate gasket stress for seating and/or operational considerations (resulting in the
need to assemble the joints to in excess of 70% of bolt yield to achieve adequate gasket assembly
stress levels). The larger diameter bolt flanges have the opposite problem; they have so much bolt
area available that the gasket stress often exceeds twice the yield of the flange material, resulting
in deformation of the flange, over-compression of the gasket, inadequate elastic rebound and
subsequent leakage. The fix in this case is relatively simple; increase the gasket width to obtain a
lower initial assembly stress. Unfortunately there is little that can be done for a flange that will
yield prior to sufficient bolt load being applied to the gasket. One successful fix has been to
strengthen the flange with additional backing-rings applied between the nuts and existing flanges,
but these rings are relatively a poor solution, requiring an extremely thick backing ring to make
any appreciable difference, when compared to identifying the issue and making the integral flange
ring thicker at the design stage prior to fabrication.

Inadequate Joint Design at Temperature
A common cause of joint leakage for high temperature, larger diameter flanges is the effect of
thermal transients during operation. The bolt load can increase or decrease during operation due to
variations in process conditions and such changes can cause joint leakage if sufficiently high. In
addition, flanges that are relatively thin compared to the shell that they are attached to (flange
thickness less than five times the shell thickness) are likely to lose a significant amount of bolt load
during the initial stages of any high temperature process start-up, due to the shell forcing flange
ring rotation. The effects of temperature can be accounted for, both at the design stage and later
in the operation stage when selecting the appropriate assembly bolt load, by increasing the
assembly bolt load over and above the stress required to seal the gasket, the expected relaxation
stress and the loss in bolt load due to pressure and temperature. However, to allow for this at the
design stage, it is necessary to determine the transient temperatures of the joint components and
apply those temperatures to a mechanical interaction analysis to establish the associated change in
bolt stress.

In addition to the transient effects of temperature on bolt load, there is also long term
relaxation of the joint components. Due to micro-plasticity, relaxation of stress levels in materials
occurs at temperatures much lower than normally expected for creep (above only 200°C (400°F) in
carbon steel, for example). This means that, if not accounted for, there may be inadequate bolt
load remaining to seal the joint for the expected life of the joint. Once again however, if the
expected amount of component relaxation is known, then it is possible to select an assembly bolt
stress level that will ensure sufficient long-term gasket stress exists during operation and thereby
avoid joint leakage. Alternatively, it is possible to adjust the flange and/or bolt geometry and
materials at the design stage to reduce the expected amount of creep/relaxation that will occur.


63
Miscellaneous Improvements
While the following items cause fewer leakage issues, they are relatively easily addressed at the
design stage, and therefore warrant inclusion in this section. In the present ASME VIII, Div. 1,
Appendix 2 design method, there is no procedure outlined to address the effects of external
bending moments or external forces during operation on the integrity of the joint. Once again, if
this operational loading is quantified at the design stage, it is possible to strengthen the flange and
select an appropriate assembly bolt load to ensure that leakage will not occur.

For lower pressure joints, and especially those with very thin gaskets, there is presently no limit
in the Appendix 2 design method for flange bolt hole spacing. There are limits in other codes, such
as ASME III and TEMA, but at present it is possible to design a flange that meets the ASME VIII
code, but has bolt spacing that will result in regions of insufficient gasket stress between bolts,
which may lead to leakage.

For slip-on flanges that are designed to the ASME code, there is a clause that allows them to be
assessed as either integral (shell restrains the hub and the hub is assumed to taper over the hub
height, like a weld neck flange) or loose (shell is not connected to the hub). Obviously the real case
is neither of these and, in fact, using either of the methods can result in much higher stress levels
at the shell to hub junction than for similarly designed weld neck flanges. Additionally, the flange
rotation (and therefore mechanical interaction if calculated) will not be accurate due to the poor
representation of the hub and/or the connection of the hub to the shell.

Pr oposed ASME Code Rev i si ons

As can be seen in the updated Table 1, the latest version of Appendix BFJ (the intended update
to ASME VIII, Div. 1 Appendix 2) includes most of the additional design improvements listed above
in one form or another. The work is still at an early stage in many cases and requires some
clarification and improvement prior to implementation, but at least the intent is there to make the
improvements. Unfortunately, the fact that the basis for Appendix BFJ is leakage based design,
means that there is little likelihood that it will be approved for publication in the near future and
therefore the other improvements are being held from publication as a consequence. There is a
significant amount of trepidation regarding the use of leakage based flange design among the
ASME code community. Industry experience with the leakage based method present in Appendix
BFJ is the converse of experience with the existing ASME code flange design method; one was
rapidly installed and has remained relatively unchanged for over sixty years, while the other has
been around for almost twenty years and has yet to gain any measurable acceptance within
industry. The reasons for the lack of acceptance of the method are numerous, but unfortunately
there has been little progress in addressing the issues, which undoubtedly points to significant
underlying problems. Even the currently proposed path forward, to include the appendix as an
optional non-mandatory requirement to the code, which would only be performed as a secondary
check to the existing Appendix 2 design, is still unlikely to meet with success. Therefore, in the
near term, designers and end-users will need to look to some of the following non-code methods
outlined in order to improve ASME code joint integrity at the design stage.

Non- Code I mpr ovement s t o t he ASME Desi gn Met hod

Inadequate Gasket Design Basis
Unfortunately, the first item off the list is one where there really is no good standardized
solution to the problem. Individuals have had much success with the implementation of relatively
simple gasket stress limits (a required seating stress, a minimum stress required during operation
and a maximum permissible gasket stress & rotation). However the method of establishing these
stress limits is non-standard and is usually a combination of both laboratory test results and field
experience (as in Brown [1], for example).
64
The Pressure Vessel Research Council – Sealing Reliability Council is presently attempting to
bring together current laboratory methods and end-user experience to establish suitable standard
procedures for determining these values, however as of present none exist.

Equations to include the effects of mechanical interaction on bolt load have been available since
just after the release of the present code method (Wesstrom, et. al. [2]). By incorporating the
equations outlined in that paper, or one of the many subsequent papers written by others using
this method, it is possible to accurately determine the effect of applied pressure on bolt load and,
therefore, on residual gasket stress during operation.

Disconnect Between Design and Operation
The issue of a design bolt load that is significantly less than the bolt load required to seal the
joint is being addressed by post construction documents such as ASME PCC-1 Appendix O
“Assembly Bolt Load Selection” [3], however it is good practice to think in terms of the actual
assembly load when designing the joint. For example, the original ASME code method did not
include assessment of the tangential stress at the hub to shell junction, because at the design bolt
loads typically used, this stress is always smaller than the other regions (Waters, et. al. [4]).
However, if the flanges are analyzed at normal assembly bolt load levels, then this stress can be
significant and is one of the indicators of an inadequate flange design. In addition, when gasket
stress limits are established by test, then these must be compared to actual expected bolt stress
levels, rather than design stress levels. Therefore, it is generally necessary to either adjust the
acceptable code bolt load and limits or perform a separate assessment after the code design
assessment to account for component limits based on actual bolt load.

Inadequate Joint Design for Integrity
The issues with large diameter low pressure joints are partially resolved by performing the
aforementioned mechanical interaction analysis. The remainder of the issues for those joints and
also for the excessively small and excessively large diameter bolt size joints are resolved by
specifying an acceptable ratio of bolt to gasket area that must be met for flange design. For
example, a suitable area ratio range for common graphite based gaskets used in refining (spiral
wound with inner & outer rings, kamprofile and corrugated) is a gasket area divided by bolt area
ratio of between 2.0 and 1.2, resulting in an assembly gasket stress of between 170 MPa and 240
MPa (25 ksi and 35 ksi) for an assembly bolt stress of 345 MPa (50 ksi). The gasket area should be
based on full width for the perimeter portion and half width for the pass partition portion.

In addition to controlling the relative bolt and gasket area ratios, it is good practice to ensure
that the flange is not the weak component in the joint. This ensures that it will not be possible to
damage the flange during assembly by applying excessive bolt load and it also enables the full
range of bolt stress to be used to seal the joint if it is required. Recent work in determining the
maximum acceptable load that a flange will take, which formed the basis of ASME PCC-1 Appendix
O, has established elastic assessment limits that give an indication of when the flange ring will
undergo gross plastic deformation (have permanent rotational deformation). The work is
summarized in a series of ASME PVP conference papers (Brown et. al. [5] to Brown [7]), however
the limits used in the papers changed with time as the method developed and so an overall
summary of the development is also planned to be published as Welding Research Council Bulletin
528. Using the equations and limits outlined in the papers, it is possible to determine both the
flange strength and the location of the flange weakness, which can be used as a limit during design
for the ensuring the flange is capable of taking, say, >80% of bolt yield. The method can also be
used as a post-construction calculation for the upper limit on assembly bolt load for flanges
designed without this minimum strength requirement.



65
Inadequate Joint Design at Temperature
The transient joint component temperatures and associated severity of mechanical effects of
temperature can be assessed, where appropriate, using the methods outlined in Brown [8].
However, this is generally only necessary where the temperature exceeds 200°C (400°F) for flanges
≤1500 mm (≤60 inches) in diameter and where the temperature exceeds 150°C (300°F) for larger
diameter flanges. Additionally, assessment should be performed where significant difference in
thermal expansion properties exist between the flange, shell or bolts.

A recent ASME-LLC project (Brown [9]) examined the long term characteristics of high
temperature flange design. The conclusions of the project were that it was relatively simple to
incorporate the effects of material creep/relaxation into the ASME code design process; however
the material properties presently available for doing so are generally inadequate for wholesale
inclusion of the method into the design process. What is required prior to the inclusion of these
effects is that, at least for common materials, the relaxation characteristics of flange and bolt
materials are established by extensive testing in a controlled environment. However, there is
sufficient data available that the techniques outlined in the project report can be applied in a
limited fashion. For example, an “order of magnitude” assessment of the effect on joint life to
leakage of, say, higher initial bolt loads, or retightening the bolts during operation, or different
magnitudes of bending moments on the joint is possible.

There has been significant research into the extent of gasket relaxation that may be expected,
however only a small portion of it can be applied in practice. The existing standard tests do not
provide long term relaxation results and so are not suitable for determining the amount of
relaxation for a significant portion of the gasket types being employed in practice (graphite based
gaskets, for example). Once again, individuals are finding success with using simple percentage
relaxation values determined from laboratory tests and field experience that serve to, at the least,
account for the majority of the effect of relaxation (Brown [1]).

Miscellaneous Improvements
The Koves method was recently introduced into the 2007 version of ASME VIII, Div. 2 to
account for the effect of bending moments on flange operation, and these equations can also be
used when analyzing Div. 1 flanges.

There are a number of existing codes and references that offer guidance on maximum
acceptable bolt spacing. These methods and a simple analytical equation for determining a design
limit are outlined in Koves [10].

An extension of the original Waters [4] design method to include integral flanges with straight
hubs (slip-on flanges that are welded to the shell) is outlined in Brown [11]. The paper provides
alternate flange factors that may be used in the standard ASME code flange design method to
accurately determine stress levels and flange rotation.

Concl usi ons
It is the opinion of the author that the Traditional ASME design method remains the best option
for designing and analyzing flanges. It is a sound foundation, based on a comprehensive
assessment of the joint behavior that creates an excellent platform from which to improve in order
to obtain leak free joint design.

66

Tabl e 1 – Compar i son of Fl ange Desi gn Met hods ( updat ed WRC Bul l et i n 514, Tabl e 1)



Aspect of Fl anged Joi nt Desi gn
ASME
VI I I ,
di v . 1,
App 2
ASME
VI I I ,
di v . 2,
New
Rul es
1

ASME
Append.
BFJ
2

EN1344
5-
3: 2002,
Sect . 11
EN1591: 2
001
3

Flange Design Basis Taylor-
Forge
Taylor-
Forge
Taylor-
Forge
Taylor-
Forge
TGL
32903/13
Includes effect of joint mechanical interaction Partial
4
Partial
4
Yes Partial
4
Yes
Flange Stress Check Yes Yes Yes Yes Partial
5

Flange Rotation Check Yes Yes Yes Yes
Check on Lap Joint Stub Shear Stress Yes Yes Yes
Check on Lap Joint Stub Bearing Stress Yes
Check on Lap Joint Stub Bending Stress Yes Yes
Design of Seal Welded Joints Yes
Gasket Loads based on “m” & “y” Yes Yes Yes
Gasket Loads based on leakage Yes Yes
Flange Allowable Stress Basis S
T
/3.5,
S
y
/1.5
S
T
/2.4,
S
y
/1.5
TBD
6
S
T
/2.4,
7

S
y
/1.5
S
T
/2.4,
S
y
/1.5
Austenitic Allowable Stress Increase Allowed No Yes
8
TBD
6
No Yes (?)
Bolt Allowable Stress Basis S
T
/4,
9

S
y
/1.5
S
T
/4,
S
y
/1.5
TBD
6
S
T
/4,
S
y
/3
10

S
T
/2.4,
S
y
/1.5
Gasket Effective Width Basis Simplified Simplified Simplified Simplified Calculate
Includes Gasket Creep/Relaxation Partial Partial
11

Includes Flange & Bolt Creep
Included Effects of Temperature Partial
12
Partial
12

Includes External Moments & Forces Yes Yes Yes
Maximum Allowable Gasket Stress Yes Yes
Maximum Spacing Between Bolts Yes Yes
Effect of bolt holes on flange rigidity Yes
Operational Flange Rotation Limits
Adjusts for Assembly Accuracy Yes Yes
Nubbins Prohibited Yes
Table of standard bolt stress areas Yes

1
Based on the revision 7 of the document (current as of 1
st
January, 2006)
2
Based on the draft document dated February 15, 2006. Updates based on Dec 2009 document are detailed in red.
3
This is also the basis of EN13445-3 Appendix G and some listed aspects (flange stress limits for example) are taken from
this appendix, as they are not specified in EN-1591.
4
It can be argued that the factor “m” accounts for the effects of mechanical interaction (ref. Brown [6]).
5
The stress check in EN1591 includes only a check of the circumferential stresses and flange is allowed to have plastic
deformation (ref. EN1591, 1.3.4 b). The other methods include radial and tangential stress checks and use an elastic stress
check.
6
The exact stress limits for BFJ are still a point of discussion
7
Note that due to experience with problems at the higher allowable stresses in large diameter joints, the allowable is
reduced by a factor of 0.75 for ≥ 2000mm (78in.) diameter flanges. For diameters between 1000mm and 2000mm (39in.
and 78in.) this reduction factor is taken to linearly vary from 0.75 to 1.0.
8
The basis for allowing higher allowable stresses for austenitic stainless is that the flange rotation limits should eliminate
concerns regarding overly flexible flanges when designed to higher allowable.
9
Actually, the ASME II, Part D tables list allowable stresses for common materials that are closer to S
T
/5.
10
Note that the yield value for austenitic bolts is taken at an elongation of 1.0%, rather than 0.2%.
11
The effects of short term relaxation only are included in the present revision of EN13555.
12
Includes only axial expansion and does not detail how to determine temperature.
67
Ref er ences
[1] Brown W., Ryan S., McKenzie, W., 2007, “Obtaining Leak-Free Bolted Joint Operation By
Returning to Basics” National Petroleum Refiners Association Conference, Houston, Texas
[2] Wesstrom, D.B., Bergh, S.E., 1951, “Effect of Internal Pressure on Stresses and Strains in
Bolted-Flange Connections”, Transactions of ASME, 73, n.5, pp 508-568, ASME, NY, USA
[3] ASME PCC-1 “Guidelines for Pressure Boundary Bolted Joint Assembly”, 2010, ASME NY, USA
[4] Waters, E.O., Rossheim, D.B., Wesstrom, D.B., Williams, F.S.G., 1949, “Development of
General Formulas For Bolted Flanges”, Taylor-Forge & Pipe Works, Southfield, Michigan, Reprinted
by the PVRC in 1979.
[5] Brown, W., Reeves, D., 2006, “Considerations for Selecting the Optimum Bolt Assembly Stress
For Piping Flanges”, Proceedings of the ASME PVP 2006, ASME, Vancouver, Canada, PVP2006-
ICPVT11-93094
[6] Brown, W., Reeves, D.., 2007, “An Update on Selecting the Optimum Bolt Assembly Stress For
Piping Flanges”, Proceedings of the ASME PVP 2007, ASME, San Antonio, Texas, PVP2007-26649
[7] Brown, W., 2008, “Selecting the Optimum Bolt Assembly Stress: Influence of Flange Material
on Flange Load Limit”, ASME PVP Conference, Chicago, IL, PVP2008-61709
[8] Brown, W., 2006, “Analysis of the Effects of Temperature on Bolted Joints”, Welding Research
Council Bulletin 510
[9] Brown, W., 2010, “High Temperature Flange Design”, ASME-LLC, Project #3036, ASME, NY
[10] Koves, W.J., 2007, “Flange Joint Bolt Spacing Requirements”, Proceedings of the ASME PVP
2007, ASME, San Antonio, Texas, PVP2007-26089
[11] Brown, W., 2008, “Selecting the Optimum Bolt Assembly Stress – Flange Limitations: Flange
Type”, Proceedings of the ASME PVP 2008, ASME, Chicago, Illinois, PVP2008-61708

68








Ov er v i ew of
Dev el opment s i n EN
1591
Manfred Schaaf, AMTEC Services GmbH






















© Manf r ed Schaaf
69

70
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
Manfred Schaaf
Overview of Developments
in EN 1591
Messtechnischer Service GmbH
Hoher Steg 13
74348 Lauffen
Germany
Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices
16-17 March 2010, Newcastle upon Tyne
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
CEN TC 74 – Flanges and their joints
EN 1591 – Part 1 to 5
• Status quo
• Latest developments
• Future work items
Content
71
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
CEN TC 74 – Flanges and their joints
Scope:
Standardization of flanges and their joints in pipelines
and piping systems for all applications excluding hydraulic
and pneumatic load transmission.
- General: Definition of "nominal pressure" and "nominal size";
- Flanges: Definition of dimensions and tolerances, selection of
materials, technical conditions of delivery, P/T ratings;
- Bolts, screws and nuts: Selection of required bolts, screws
and nuts, dimensions, technical conditions of delivery, materials;
- Gaskets: Definition of dimensions and tolerances, materials,
technical conditions of delivery;
- Calculation methods for flanges design;
- Determination of P/T ratings.
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
CEN TC 74 – Working Groups
G. Taylor Calculation Methods CEN/TC 74/WG 10
J. Hoyes Gaskets CEN/TC 74/WG 8
A. Percebois Cast iron flanges CEN/TC 74/WG 3
H.-D. Engelhardt Steel flanges CEN/TC 74/WG 2
H. Kockelmann Flanges and their joints CEN TC 74
72
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
EN 1591 Rules
EN 1591
Flanges and their joints - Design rules
for gasketed circular flange connections
CEN/TS 1591-3
Calculation method
"Metal-to-metal contact"
EN 1591-1
Calculation method
prCEN/TR 1591-5
Calculation method
"Full face gaskets"
CEN/TS 1591-4
Qualification of
personnel competency
EN 1591-2
Gasket parameters
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
EN 1591-1: Status quo
EN 1591-1 released as an European Standard in 2001
Amendment A1 of EN 1591-1 released as an
European Standard in 2009
• leak tightness and strength criteria are satisfied
• behaviour of complete flanges-bolts-gasket system
is considered
Calculation method for gasketed circular flange connections
with gaskets inside the bolt circle and without metal-to-metal
contact of the flange faces
73
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
EN 1591-1: Treated parameters
gasket characteristics
medium pressure
strength value of flange and bolt materials
thermal loads
external axial forces and bending moments
possible scatter due to bolting-up procedure
nominal bolt load
changes in gasket force due to deformation of all components
influence of connected shell or pipe
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
EN 1591-1: Specifics
flange rotation and effective compressed gasket area
elastic deformation balance
iterative determination of the required bolt force in assembly
to fulfill tightness demands
force balance
(interaction between all components)
virtual flange resistance of the flanges
limit load theory
(admissibility of plastic deformation)
74
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
DIN 28090-1 EN13555 Gasket Characteristic Testing Equipment
σ
VU/L
Q
MIN(L)
Minimum gasket stress
in assembly for tightness class L
σ
BU/L
Q
SMIN(L)
Minimum gasket stress
in service for tightness class L
σ
VO
Q
SMAX
(RT)
Maximum allowable gasket stress
in assembly
σ
BO
Q
SMAX
Maximum allowable gasket stress
in service
E
D
E
G modulus of elasticity
Δh
D
P
QR Creep-relaxation factor
TEMES
fl.ai1
TEMES
fl.relax
gasket characteristics
(prEN 13555 - draft 2001)
E
0
, K
I
g
C
Amendment
EN 1591-1: Amendment A1
pr
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
DIN 28090-1 EN13555 Gasket Characteristic Testing Equipment
σ
VU/L
Q
MIN(L)
Minimum gasket stress
in assembly for tightness class L
σ
BU/L
Q
SMIN(L)
Minimum gasket stress
in service for tightness class L
σ
VO
Q
SMAX
(RT)
Maximum allowable gasket stress
in assembly
σ
BO
Q
SMAX
Maximum allowable gasket stress
in service
E
D
E
G modulus of elasticity
Δh
D
P
QR Creep-relaxation factor
TEMES
fl.ai1
TEMES
fl.relax
gasket characteristics
(EN 13555 – 2004)
Amendment
EN 1591-1: Amendment A1
75
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
EN 1591-1: Future work items
CEN/TC74 Resolution 275/2009
Allocation of Joint Working Group
CEN/TC 54/TC 69/TC 74/TC 267/TC 269/JWG "Harmonized
standard solution for flange connections"
CEN/TC74 Resolution 282/2009
Corrigendum to EN 1591-1:2001+A1:2009-03
CEN/TC74 Resolution 2/2008
Preliminary Work Item
"Sample calculation and guidance on interpretation of
calculations presented in EN 1591-1"
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
EN 1591-1: JWG
EN 1591-1
or EN 13445-3
Chapter 10 EN 12516-2 CEN/TC 69
Industrial valves
"…in accordance to
European Standards."
Chapter 9.3 EN 12953-3 CEN/TC 269
Shell and water-tube boilers
EN 1591-1
+ tables with gasket parameters
Annex P
Taylor Forge Annex D EN 13480-3 CEN/TC 267
Industrial piping and pipelines
new equations derived
from EN 1591-1:2001
Annex GA
Taylor Forge Chapter 11 EN 13445-3 CEN/TC 54
Unfired pressure vessles
new Amendment released - EN 1591-1+A1 CEN/TC 74
Flanges and their joints
Remarks Chapter / Annex EN TC
76
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
EN 1591-2: Status quo
EN 1591-2 released as an European Standard in 2008
supersedes ENV 1591-2:2001
• results of research project
(PERL – Pressure Equipment, Reduction of Leak rate)
• gasket characteristics are listed for types of gasket materials
• the values are no minimum required values, but typical values
("generic data")
The standads details gasket parameters for use in EN 1591-1
during prelimenary calculations
characteristics are only informative
(gasket characteristics must be supplied by manufacturer;
alternative source: www.gasketdata.org)
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
EN 1591-2: Types of gasket materials
• Modified PTFE sheet
• Proprietary PTFE / Graphite gasket with metal eyelet
• Metal jacketed with graphite filler
• Graphite Covered Metal Jacketed with graphite filler & outer ring
• Serrated metal core [kammprofile] with graphite facing
• Proprietary type of graphite faced kammprofile with secondary
metal to metal seal
• Corrugated metal core with graphite facing
• Graphite sheet with tanged stainless steel core
• Graphite sheet with multiple thin metal insertions
• Non-asbestos, fibre based sheet
• PTFE filled spiral wound gasket with both outer and inner rings
• Low stress graphite filled spiral wound gasket with outer and
inner rings
• Graphite filled spiral wound gasket with outer ring
• Graphite filled spiral wound gasket with outer and inner rings
77
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
EN 1591-2: Example 1
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
EN 1591-2: Example 2
78
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
CEN/TS 1591-3: Status quo
CEN/TS 1591-3 released as an Technical Specification
in 2007
• leak tightness and strength criteria are satisfied
• behaviour of complete flanges-bolts-gasket system
is considered
Calculation method for metal-to-metal contact type flanged
joints based on EN 1591-1
rejected as EN, released as TS
(no experience with the modified calculation algorithm)
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
CEN/TS 1591-3: Specifics
Calculation in 4 steps:
• determination of the bolt tightening to reach the MMC
• determination of the bolt tightening to maintain the MMC in
all the calculation situations
• check of the admissibility of the leak-rate
• check of the admissibility of the load ratio
79
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
CEN/TS 1591-3: Future work item
CEN/TC74 Resolution 285/20009
Review of CEN/TS 1591-5:2007:
Extension of the life of CEN/TS 1591-5:2007 for another
3 years
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
CEN/TS 1591-4: Status quo
CEN/TS 1591-4 released as an Technical Specification
in 2007
• design codes increasingly require controlled bolt tightening
• ensure personnel are competent to assemble and tighten
bolted joints for a leak-free status throughout its´ service life
• training, experience and assessment of knowledge are
required to achieve competency
Process for training and compentency assessment of
personnel in the assembly of bolted flanged joints fitted to
equipment subject to PED
80
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
CEN/TS 1591-4: Specifics
• procedural framework must be included within operator´s
quality management system
• route for achieving comeptency in the skills
- classroom training and workshop practice
- written test
- period of monitored work site experience
- assessment by a qualified assessor
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
CEN/TS 1591-4: General knowledge
• the principles of bolt elongation (strain), bolt load and stress;
• importance of applied and residual bolt loads;
• bolt load loss and the implications;
• effect of coefficient of friction on bolt load when using torque;
• bolt tightening methods and their relative accuracies;
• joint assembly methods and tightening procedures;
• the requirements to meet a specific class of tightness;
• flange, bolt and gasket types and their limitations;
• functionality of gasket and seal;
• factors affecting the degradation of bolted assemblies,
e.g. corrosion;
• common causes of joint failure and leakage;
• specific health or safety requirements associated with joint
components;
• maintenance requirements of bolt tightening systems;
• importance of certification and records.
81
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
CEN/TS 1591-4: Specific knowledge
• general health and safety precautions;
• procedure for preparing a joint for closure;
• identification of correct joint components;
• seal face preparation;
• gasket handling, preparation and installation;
• functionality of clamp or engineered joints;
• importance of alignment and gap uniformity;
• importance of using the specified lubricant;
• manual and hydraulic torque joint tightening;
• joint tightening using hydraulic bolt tensioners;
• techniques for measuring bolt strain;
• confirming joint can return to service;
• identifying defects or faults;
• variance or irregularity reporting;
• safe joint disassembly;
• safety requirements when selecting and operating bolt
tightening tooling;
• calibration of bolt tightening tooling;
• recording bolted joint activity and maintenance of records.
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
CEN/TS 1591-4: Future work item
CEN/TC74 Resolution 280/20009
New work item proposal:
Conversion of CEN/TS 1591-4:2007-08 into an EN
82
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
prCEN/TS 1591-5: Status quo
prCEN/TS 1591-3 under preparation in WG10
PWI 00074056
• particular approach for full face gasketed joints
• leak tightness and strength criteria are satisfied
• behaviour of complete flanges-bolts-gasket system
is considered
Calculation method for full face gasketed joints based on
EN 1591-1
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
prCEN/TS 1591-5: Future work item
CEN/TC74 Resolution 280/20009
Activation of a new work item:
preliminary work on project EN 1591-5 has reached a certain
stage that a WI can be activated now.
83
I
M
e
c
h
E


B
o
l
t
e
d

F
l
a
n
g
e
d

J
o
i
n
t
s
:

N
e
w

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

a
n
d

P
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
1
6
-
1
7

M
a
r
c
h

2
0
1
0
,

N
e
w
c
a
s
t
l
e

u
p
o
n

T
y
n
e
Contact Data
For more detailed information, please contact us:
Messtechnischer Service GmbH
Hoher Steg 13
74348 Lauffen
Germany
www.amtec.de
Tel. +49 7133 9502-0
E-Mail: ms@amtec.de
84








Fai l ur e Mechani sms of
Bol t ed Joi nt s
- Bol t i ng Aspect s
Bill Eccles, Bolt Science Limited






















© Bol t Sci ence Li mi t ed
85

86


Figure 1 Transverse joint movement
Fai l ur e Mechani sms of Bol t ed Joi nt s – Bol t i ng Aspect s


By Bill Eccles CEng BSc MIMechE, Bolt Science Limited


SYNOPSI S
The reliability of a flanged joint depends, in part, on the threaded fasteners that hold it
together. Although threaded fasteners are generally considered a mature technology,
significant problems exist with their use. The presentation briefly covers several failure modes
of threaded fasteners including the problems arising from insufficient preload, self-loosening,
tensile overload, fatigue and thread stripping. The presentation discusses some major
accidents that have occurred as a direct consequence of particular failure modes.

1. I NTRODUCTI ON
It is known in principle how to design bolted joints in which bolting failures do not occur but in
practice bolted related failures are not uncommon. Uncertainties about the applied forces, the
magnitude of the preload achieved by the tightening process, inappropriate materials being
specified and most notably, human error, in practice results in joint problems. On occasion
such failures can have disastrous consequences.


2. I NSUFFI CI ENT PRELOAD
2. 1 Lack of Pr el oad
Flanged joints rely upon the preload, generated by the tightening of the bolts, to pre-stress the
gasket so that a leak free seal is achieved and to resist the hydrostatic pressure tending to
separate the flanges. The gasket relies upon the preload provided by the bolts to perform its
sealing function effectively. Many leaks, which are frequently attributed to a gasket failure, are
often as a result of insufficient clamp force provided by the bolts. This can be due to incorrect
tightening or subsequent loosening following tightening.

2. 2 Pr el oad l oss f r om gask et cr eep, bol t st r ess r el ax at i on and sel f - l ooseni ng
Bolts can lose preload without rotating. The loss of preload can be temporary; such as can
occur as a result of differential thermal expansion, or permanent, for example from creep.
There are several causes of non-rotational loosening, all of which involve either the bolt
additionally elongating or the joint additionally compressing following installation. On flanged
joints the issues commonly encountered are creep of the gasket material and stress relaxation
of the bolts. Modern gasket material attempt to minimise creep. Stress relaxation can be
mitigated by the appropriate choice of bolt material.

87


Figure 2 A 'hard' joint


Figure 3 A 'soft' joint
Self-loosening is when the fastener rotates under the action of external loading. Flanged joints
are largely exposed to axial loading. Although research indicates that some degree of slight
loosening can result from axial loading, self-loosening of fasteners is usually as a result of
transverse joint movement, illustrated in figure 1.

Such transverse movement is undesirable for a flanged joint for several reasons. In the
presentation a failure involving the self-loosening of nuts of a flanged joint on a pressure
vessel containing an agitator assembly is discussed.

3. TENSI LE OVERLOAD
On conventional flanged joints the load increase experienced by the bolts can be significant.
On a solid joint typical, the joint is relatively 'hard'. That is, the stiffness of the bolt is usually
significantly lower than the joint stiffness. Figure 2 shows a joint diagram illustrating this
condition. The proportion of the force that is applied to the joint which the bolt sustains
depends upon the relative stiffness of the bolt to the clamped material. With a 'hard' joint, the
bolt stiffness is low when compared with the stiffness of the joint. In such circumstances the
increase in the bolt loading when an external force is applied to the joint is relatively small.

Conventional flanged joints have a relatively low stiffness due to the deflection of the flanges
and compression of the gasket. This results in what can be termed a 'soft' joint which is
illustrated in figure 3. In such a joint when an external force is applied, such as from
hydrostatic pressure, the bolt can sustain a significant proportion of it.























88


Figure 4 S/N Diagram

One consequence of this is that the bolt cannot be tightened near to yield since there is the
risk that the bolt would be overloaded when the external load is applied. Typical target tensile
prestress values for bolts used in flanged joints is 50% of the minimum yield strength. With a
solid ('hard') joint, the target tensile prestress is more typically around 75% of the minimum
yield strength. One consequence of this is that if the wrong bolt material is used on flanged
joints it may only be revealed either during a pressure test or in service. On a solid joint, pre-
stressed to a higher value, defective bolt material is more likely to fail at the time of assembly
and hence more easily detectable. Mentioned in the presentation are details of an accident due
to the bolts being overloaded during a pressure test on a flange.

4. FATI GUE FAI LURE
Fatigue is often quoted as the commonest reason for bolts to fail in service. It is well known
that a part subjected to a varying load will fail at a significantly lower loading than one that
has been statically loaded. Fatigue is a progressive cracking of a part under the action of
alternating forces. Fatigue failure can take from thousands to millions of load cycles to occur,
dependent upon the stress level in the part.

It is well known that as the alternating stress increases, the number of cycles to failure
decreases. This is represented by an S/N diagram as shown in figure 4. The S stands for stress
and the N for the number of cycles. Most materials exhibit a knee in the S/N diagram. Beyond
this knee failure will not occur no matter how great the number of cycles. The strength
corresponding to this point is known as the endurance limit.

Possibly the most devastating engineering failure of 2009 occurred as a result of bolt fatigue at
the Sayano–Shushenskaya hydroelectric power station in central Russia on the 17 August. The
securing bolts on one of the turbine rotors failed resulting in water pressure lifting the 1650
tonne rotor into the turbine hall. This caused flooding of the turbine and engine rooms and a
transformer explosion leading to the deaths of 75 people. A report released on the 21
December 2009 by a Russian parliamentary commission found that the failure was due to
fatigue cracking in the 80 mm diameter bolts. Of the 80 bolts securing the turbine cover, at
least 6 bolts had missing nuts and 41 had fatigue cracks.


5. THREAD STRI PPI NG
Nut thickness standards have been drawn up on the basis that the bolt will always sustain
tensile fracture before the nut will strip. If the bolt breaks on tightening, it is obvious that a
replacement is required. Thread stripping tends to be gradual in nature. If the thread stripping
mode can occur, assemblies may enter into service which are partially failed, this may have
disastrous consequences. Hence, the potential of thread stripping of both the internal and
external threads must be avoided if a reliable design is to be achieved. When specifying nuts
and bolts it must always be ensured that the appropriate grade of nut is matched to the bolt
grade.

89

Figure 5 Thread stripping and bolt tensile fracture

In order to satisfy the above requirement when applied to tapped holes, the length of thread
engagement required depends upon the relative strength of the threads. Rule of thumb is that
when both male and female threads are of similar strength then a length of engagement equal
to the diameter of the thread is usually required. For tapped holes in weaker materials longer
lengths of engagements are needed - depending exactly of the relative strengths.

One of the issues with thread stripping is that it is not obvious that it has occurred. Figure 5
illustrates what happen to the preload when thread stripping occurs. The nut stops in place but
retains only a minimal preload.


To illustrate the possible consequences of thread stripping, mention in the presentation will be
made of an accident that occurred on the USS Iwo Jima in the early 1990's. On October 30,
1990, the USS Iwo Jima experienced a catastrophic boiler accident whilst leaving Manama
harbour in Bahrain. A valve failed resulting in large amounts of steam from both the ship's
boilers being dumped into the boiler room. The valve controlled steam at a pressure of 40 bar
and 450 C. All ten people that were in the room at the time of the accident were killed. The
cause of the accident was attributed to the fitment of incorrect nuts.


90








Seal f ai l ur e f r om a gask et s
per spect i v e
Dene Halkyard, Flexitallic

























© Fl ex i t al l i c
91

92
Seal f ai l ur e f r om a gask et s per spect i v e

Dene Hal k yar d, Seni or Appl i cat i ons Engi neer , Fl ex i t al l i c Lt d


Seals fail not just gaskets is a wise and widely used adage in the industrial
sealing industry. Seal failure is a phenomenon often attributable to a number of
factors, of which the gasket is but one.

From the gaskets perspective, creating and maintaining an adequate compressive
force throughout the expected lifetime of the seal is paramount if containment
losses are to be kept to an acceptable level. Most common failure modes can be
characterised by insufficient, excessive or changes in gasket compressive force.

Visual inspection of failed gaskets can reveal useful information about the failure
mode and assist in preventing future leakage. Gasket failure attributable to
insufficient and excessive compressive forces tends to occur during installation;
whereas failure due to transient forces tends to occur under operational
conditions.

Correct gasket selection and adherence to established ‘best practice’ installation
techniques play a major role in minimising emissions from bolted flanged
connections.

93

94








Eur opean Emi ssi ons
Legi sl at i on
Dr Brian Ellis, European Sealing Association

























© Dr Br i an S. El l i s
95

96
European European
Emission Legislation Emission Legislation
Dr Brian S Ellis
Acronyms! Acronyms!
• • ESA ESA … ….. ..
• • IPPC IPPC … …. .
• • BAT BAT … ….. ..
• • BREF BREF … …
• • IPPC IEF IPPC IEF
• • PED PED
E European uropean S Sealing ealing A Association ssociation
I Integrated ntegrated P Pollution ollution P Prevention revention
and and C Control Directive ontrol Directive
B Best est A Available vailable T Techniques echniques
B BAT AT R Reference notes eference notes
IPPC IPPC I Information nformation E Exchange xchange
F Forum orum
P Pressure ressure E Equipment quipment D Directive irective
97
Contents Contents
• • Development of European environmental legislation Development of European environmental legislation
- - types of EU legislation types of EU legislation
• • Key elements of European legislation Key elements of European legislation
- - Community Community- -wide wide
- - national national
• • IPPC IPPC
- - Directive basics Directive basics
- - BAT BAT
- - BREF notes BREF notes
• • Current legislation developments Current legislation developments
• • ESA contribution ESA contribution
- - IPPC IEF IPPC IEF
- - Sealing Technology BAT guidance note Sealing Technology BAT guidance note
- - revision of PED? revision of PED?
• • Conclusions Conclusions
• • European Sealing Association European Sealing Association
• • Fugitive emissions Fugitive emissions
Development of European Development of European
environmental legislation environmental legislation
Over 1000 pieces of environmental legislation have been
adopted since 1967
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
6
7
6
8
7
1
7
3
7
5
7
7
7
9
8
1
8
3
8
5
8
7
8
9
9
1
9
3
9
5
9
7
9
9 1 3 5 7
Items adopted
98
Development of European Development of European
environmental legislation environmental legislation - - 2 2
European European Council of Council of European European
Commission Commission Ministers Ministers Parliament Parliament
Member Member
States States
Legislation
proposed
Refinements
proposed
Opinion
sought
Refinements
proposed
Types of EU legislation Types of EU legislation
• • Regulation Regulation
• • Directive Directive
• • Decision Decision
• • Recommendation Recommendation
• • Opinion Opinion
increasing control from the EU increasing control from the EU
Directives Directives the preferred tool for environmental policies; the preferred tool for environmental policies;
- - overall objectives + strategies defined by EU overall objectives + strategies defined by EU
- - allows Member States flexibility to transpose into national leg allows Member States flexibility to transpose into national legislation islation
- - binding and applicable directly binding and applicable directly
- - binding, but flexible through transposition binding, but flexible through transposition
- - binding on those to whom it is addressed binding on those to whom it is addressed
- - non non- -binding binding
- - non non- -binding binding
99
Key legislation Key legislation
• • Emissions from industrial plants Emissions from industrial plants
• • Solvent (VOC) emissions Solvent (VOC) emissions
• • National emission ceilings National emission ceilings
• • Large combustion plants Large combustion plants
• • Waste incineration Waste incineration
• • TA TA- -Luft Luft (D) (D)
• • Integrated Pollution Control (UK) Integrated Pollution Control (UK)
• • VDI VDI – – various (D) various (D) – – “ “guidelines guidelines” ”
• • Integrated pollution prevention and control Integrated pollution prevention and control
EU and National legislation EU and National legislation - - 1 1
EU legislation EU legislation
(Regulations, Directives etc) (Regulations, Directives etc)
UK D F E I etc ..
Directives are Directives are “ “transposed transposed” ” into national legislation into national legislation
European
Commission
/ Parliament
/ Council of
Ministers
EU Member
States
100
EU and National legislation EU and National legislation - - 2 2
IPPC Directive IPPC Directive
UK
IPC
D
TA-Luft
VDI
guidelines
F E I etc ..
IPPC IPPC - - 1 1
• • I Integrated ntegrated P Pollution ollution P Prevention and revention and C Control ( ontrol (IPPC IPPC) )
Directive 96/61 Directive 96/61 adopted in 1996 adopted in 1996
• • compliance for compliance for new new plants required by end October 1999 plants required by end October 1999
• • compliance for compliance for existing existing plants by end October 2007 plants by end October 2007
• • framework framework measure measure - - provides for common EU emission provides for common EU emission
limits to be adopted subsequently limits to be adopted subsequently
• • integrated approach for a potential pollutant across all media integrated approach for a potential pollutant across all media
which might be affected which might be affected
101
IPPC IPPC - - 2 2
• • applies to 6 categories of industry: applies to 6 categories of industry:
- - chemicals chemicals
- - energy energy
- - production and processing of metals production and processing of metals
- - minerals minerals
- - waste management waste management
- - ‘ ‘other other’ ’
• • specific obligations on operators specific obligations on operators
- - take all appropriate preventative measures against pollution take all appropriate preventative measures against pollution
- - ensure no significant pollution is caused ensure no significant pollution is caused
- - avoid waste production avoid waste production
- - recover waste produced or dispose of safely recover waste produced or dispose of safely
- - use energy efficiently use energy efficiently
- - take necessary measures to prevent accidents take necessary measures to prevent accidents
- - protect and clean up site upon cessation of industrial activity protect and clean up site upon cessation of industrial activity
IPPC IPPC - - 3 3
• • identifies certain priority polluting substances, including: identifies certain priority polluting substances, including:
- - arsenic and its compounds arsenic and its compounds
- - asbestos asbestos
- - carbon monoxide carbon monoxide
- - chlorine, fluorine and their compounds chlorine, fluorine and their compounds
- - cyanides cyanides
- - metals and their compounds metals and their compounds
- - nitrogen oxides and other nitrogen compounds nitrogen oxides and other nitrogen compounds
- - organo organo- -halogen compounds halogen compounds
- - organo organo- -phosphorus compounds phosphorus compounds
- - organo organo- -tin compounds tin compounds
- - substances and preparations which are carcinogenic, mutagenic substances and preparations which are carcinogenic, mutagenic
or which may affect reproduction or which may affect reproduction
- - sulphur dioxide and other sulphur compounds sulphur dioxide and other sulphur compounds
- - volatile organic compounds ( volatile organic compounds (VOC VOC’ ’s s) )
102
IPPC IPPC - - 4 4
• • each facility is subject to authorisation through permitting each facility is subject to authorisation through permitting
• • emission limit and permits based upon emission limit and permits based upon Best Available Best Available
Techniques Techniques ( (BAT BAT) )
• • BAT must consider: BAT must consider:
- - economic and technical viability economic and technical viability
- - use of low use of low- -waste technology waste technology
- - use of less hazardous substances use of less hazardous substances
- - improvements in recovery and recycling improvements in recovery and recycling
- - consumption of raw materials and water consumption of raw materials and water
- - energy efficiency energy efficiency
- - technical characteristics of the installation technical characteristics of the installation
- - geographical location geographical location
- - local environmental conditions local environmental conditions
IPPC IPPC - - 5 5
• • BAT interpretation will result in differences across EU BAT interpretation will result in differences across EU
• • hence, requirement for exchange of information on national hence, requirement for exchange of information on national
assessments of BAT and emission limits assessments of BAT and emission limits
• • provides the basis for the publication of provides the basis for the publication of BAT Reference BAT Reference
( (BREF BREF) notes ) notes
• • European IPPC Bureau established to publish BREF notes European IPPC Bureau established to publish BREF notes
• • IPPC IPPC I Information nformation E Exchange xchange F Forum ( orum (IEF IEF) established to ) established to
develop and review BREF notes develop and review BREF notes
103
BAT reference (BREF) notes BAT reference (BREF) notes - - 1 1
• • for all industry sectors covered within IPPC for all industry sectors covered within IPPC
• • usually industry usually industry- -specific ( specific (“ “vertical vertical” ” BREF BREF
notes) notes)
• • some cover more than one industry sector some cover more than one industry sector
( (“ “horizontal horizontal” ” BREF notes) BREF notes)
BAT reference (BREF) notes BAT reference (BREF) notes - - 2 2
L
a
r
g
e

V
o
l
u
m
e

O
r
g
a
n
i
c

C
h
e
m
i
c
a
l

I
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
M
i
n
e
r
a
l

o
i
l

a
n
d

g
a
s

r
e
f
i
n
e
r
i
e
s
L
a
r
g
e

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
n
o
r
g
a
n
i
c

C
h
e
m
i
c
a
l

I
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
P
u
l
p

a
n
d

P
a
p
e
r

I
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
“Vertical” BREF notes
Emission monitoring
Energy efficiency
“Horizontal” BREF notes
104
ESA contribution ESA contribution
L
a
r
g
e

V
o
l
u
m
e

O
r
g
a
n
i
c

C
h
e
m
i
c
a
l

I
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
M
i
n
e
r
a
l

o
i
l

a
n
d

g
a
s

r
e
f
i
n
e
r
i
e
s
L
a
r
g
e

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
n
o
r
g
a
n
i
c

C
h
e
m
i
c
a
l

I
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
P
u
l
p

a
n
d

P
a
p
e
r

I
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
Emission monitoring
Energy efficiency
Sealing Technology
• • ESA participates in IPPC IEF ESA participates in IPPC IEF
• • In deference to European Commission, ESA document entitled, In deference to European Commission, ESA document entitled, “ “ESA ESA
Sealing Technology BAT guidance note Sealing Technology BAT guidance note” ”
ESA Sealing Technology BAT ESA Sealing Technology BAT
guidance note guidance note
• • ESA participating in IPPC IEF ESA participating in IPPC IEF
• • sealing technology involved in most industries covered sealing technology involved in most industries covered
by IPPC by IPPC
• • ESA developed own, horizontal ESA developed own, horizontal “ “BREF BREF” ” voluntarily voluntarily
• • Sections covering BAT for sealing: Sections covering BAT for sealing:
• • bolted flange connections bolted flange connections
• • rotodynamic rotodynamic equipment equipment
• • reciprocating shafts reciprocating shafts
• • valves valves
105
Current legislation developments Current legislation developments
New New Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) Industrial Emissions Directive (IED)
IPPC Solvent
(VOC)
emissions
Emissions
from
industrial
plants
Waste
incineration
Large
combustion
plants
etc …
Intention for original Directives to be superseded by new IED; Intention for original Directives to be superseded by new IED;
- - original Directive will be withdrawn if ALL areas covered original Directive will be withdrawn if ALL areas covered
- - parts of original Directive will remain if NOT covered by IED parts of original Directive will remain if NOT covered by IED
ESA contribution ESA contribution - - 2 2
Specifically of relevance to Specifically of relevance to bolted flange bolted flange
connections connections: :
• • ESA developing programme to revise PED ESA developing programme to revise PED
• • aim to have bolted flange connections considered an aim to have bolted flange connections considered an
“ “essential feature essential feature” ”
• • relevant CEN standards would be relevant CEN standards would be “ “harmonised harmonised” ”
• • would encourage fitters / installers to be suitably would encourage fitters / installers to be suitably
qualified (similar to requirement for welders) qualified (similar to requirement for welders)
106
Conclusions Conclusions
• • Development of European emission legislation Development of European emission legislation
• • Types of European legislation Types of European legislation
• • Relationship between Community Relationship between Community- -wide and national legislation wide and national legislation
• • Key elements of European emission legislation Key elements of European emission legislation
• • IPPC Directive IPPC Directive
• • Current developments in European emission legislation Current developments in European emission legislation
• • ESA Sealing Technology BAT guidance note ESA Sealing Technology BAT guidance note
- - available for download from available for download from www.europeansealing.com www.europeansealing.com
• • ESA developing programme to revise PED ESA developing programme to revise PED
www.europeansealing.com
107
European Sealing Association European Sealing Association - - 1 1
• • pan pan- -European trade organisation European trade organisation
• • established 1992 established 1992
• • non non- -profit profit- -making trade association making trade association
• • 40+ Member Companies 40+ Member Companies
• • representing a strong majority of the fluid representing a strong majority of the fluid
sealing industry in Europe sealing industry in Europe
• • organised as series of product organised as series of product- -focussed focussed
Divisions Divisions
• • Working Groups for common activities Working Groups for common activities
Elastomeric
& Polymeric
Seals
Division
European Sealing Association European Sealing Association - - 2 2
Packings
Division
Flange
Gaskets
Division
ESA Members
Executive Committee
Mechanical
Seals
Division
Expansion
Joints
Division
Industrial Materials Working Group
Industrial Materials Working Group
Safety, Environment and Efficiency Working Group
Safety, Environment and Efficiency Working Group
108
Sustainable development Sustainable development
Industry must reduce its overall emissions Industry must reduce its overall emissions
A large proportion of A large proportion of
emissions are those emissions are those
anticipated anticipated from industrial from industrial
processes processes
Fugitive emissions Fugitive emissions
Some emissions occur Some emissions occur
through unanticipated leaks through unanticipated leaks
in process systems in process systems … …. .
….usually referred to as
“fugitive emissions”
Sealing technology is playing a major role in helping
industry to reduce fugitive emissions
109
Definition of Definition of “ “fugitive emission fugitive emission” ”
Any chemical, or mixture of chemicals Any chemical, or mixture of chemicals … …
…in any physical form …
…which represents an unanticipated or spurious leak …
…from anywhere on an industrial site
Fugitive emissions Fugitive emissions
- - the cost the cost “ “Iceberg Iceberg” ”
• • Lost material Lost material Visible costs
Invisible costs
z Labour to repair leaks
z Material to repair leaks
z Wasted energy
z Process inefficiency
z Environmental clean up
z Environmental fines
z Claims for personal injury
z Lost sales due to poor image
Companies which invest to reduce their fugitive emissions
can achieve a fast pay-back
110








Tensi on Cont r ol , t he k ey t o
Bol t ed Fl ange Rel i abi l i t y
Rod Corbett, James Walker Rotabolt

























© Rod Cor bet t
111

112
Tensi on Cont r ol , t he k ey t o Bol t ed Fl ange Rel i abi l i t y

Rod Cor bet t , Managi ng Di r ect or , JamesWal k er Rot abol t

There are three basic factors that ensure bolted flange joint reliability:-

Joint Design
Bolt/Component quality
Achieving design bolt tension/joint compression/gasket seating stress on
installation

Measure and control all three and flange reliability is assured.

The investment in managing design and quality assurance over the last twenty
years has been substantial. The investment however in measuring and
controlling installed bolt tension has been negligible despite the technical fact that
the sole objective of any bolt used in tension is to deliver a known level of clamp
force on the joint.

The vast majority of flanged bolted joints are tightened in an uncontrolled
manner i.e. the residual, installed bolt tension is unknown. This is remarkable
when you consider that 90% of all bolted joint failures can be attributed to
incorrect bolt tension. This is against a back drop of industry demanding greater
levels of safety and reliability from its plant, equipment and structures. Millions
are spent on controlling and measuring process parameters such as temperature,
pressure, flow rates, speeds etc but it is reluctant to measure the parameter that
holds all the pressure containment together – bolt tension. Maybe this is due to a
lack of understanding as to the limitations of traditionally controlling tightening
through tightening power or effort from torque or hydraulic tensioning. This is
probably the case because most of the time the concluding reason as to why the
joint has failed lies elsewhere from the installation – maybe with the gasket, the
flange surface or the severe process thermal swing.

Whatever the reason, design bolt tension objectives can be measured and
controlled reliably and cost effectively. Operators who embrace this technology
driven bolting route are inevitably rewarded with assured reliability – leak free
performance on hydro test, start up and in service. This also results in lowest
maintenance cost.

The science is such that the Oil and Gas industry, upstream and downstream can
realistically expect to eliminate all future bolted flange leaks by taking the
technology driven route.

The paper describes commercially available tension control systems along with
their relative merits. Factors that effect the variations in these systems such as
operating environment, temperature, operator skill, system datum face integrity
and the crucial physical calibration of bolt extension versus bolt tension are
discussed in detail.

One state of the art, market leading system is described along with an
explanation of the calibration methodology employed. Results of the systems
independent test and accreditation programme outlines the systems overall
integrity for industrial usage.
113

114








Management of I nt egr i t y of
Bol t ed Joi nt s f or
Pr essur i sed Sy st ems
Robert Noble, Hydratight























© Rober t Nobl e
115

116
MANAGEMENT OF INTEGRITY OF BOLTED
JOINTS FOR PRESSURISED SYSTEMS.
Robert Noble
Technical Services
Leader Hydratight
Comparison with the Welded Joint?
Welded Joint
Coded
Welder
Material
Control
Documented
Procedure
NDT
Verification
Hydro-
tested
Competent
Personnel
Documented
Procedure
Hydro-
tested
Material
Control
Integrity
tested
Bolted Joint
In Service Inspection
Records
Records
Permanent joint Subject to Breakout
117
My Arms
are
calibrated!
Just Nuts
and Bolts!
This will
seal it
TYPICAL
RESULT
Flanged Joints – Are easy?
Gasket not on
compression
stop
Gasket on
compression
stop
Flanges rotating
due to over
tightening
Green Tag
Leak Test
Passed!
Would you be confident in the Would you be confident in the
performance of this joint? performance of this joint?
Lubrication
?
Applying Integrity Management - new build
%Reduction in leaks 75% 75%
(Note: Total leak number includes all vendor leaks)
Phase 1
No System
Total Joints - 8,691
Total Leaks - 518
Leak Rate - 5.9%
Phase 2
JDMS Used
Total Joints - 5,413
Total Leaks - 84
Leak Rate - 1.5%
Phase 3
JDMS Used
Total Joints - 15,640
Total Leaks - 234
Leak Rate - 1.49%
118
Applying Integrity Management – Operational Major Operator Multiple
Asset
% Leaks Year to Year
2.85%
0.52%
1.55%
0.70%
4.80%
4.30%
2.65%
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
% Leaks 2002 % Leaks 2003 % Leaks 2004 % Leaks 2005 % Leaks 2006 % Leaks 2007 % Leaks 2008
YTD
Management of Bolted Joints Evolution
HSE SAFETY NOTICE 2/2000
GUIDELINES FOR THE
MANAGEMENT OF
INTEGRITY OF BOLTED PIPE
JOINTS
2000 2002
GUIDELINES FOR THE
MANAGEMENT OF
INTEGRITY OF BOLTED
JOINTS FOR PRESSURISED
SYSTEMS
2007
119
Management of Bolted Joints: Evolution
Ownership
“There should be an identified
owner of the management
system, responsible not only
for its implementation and
ongoing maintenance, but
also for communicating its
aims and objectives
throughout the organisation.
The owner should state the
expectations for the system
and monitor its
effectiveness.”
Appoint a Champion
Support them with expertise
120
Technology and Practice
• “Good practice with
regard to selection and
control of assembly,
tightening and
assurance of bolted
joints should be
applied. Understanding
of the theory and
practice of bolted joints
and development of
appropriate procedures
should be encouraged
throughout the
organisation.”
Establish Standards
Ensure they are applied
Criticality Assessment
“The range of services,
pressures and conditions
which bolted joints
experience varies
considerably. Each joint
should undergo a criticality
assessment which will
determine the levels of
inspection, assembly
control, tightening
technique, testing,
assurance and in-service
inspection relevant to the
joint.”
Leak Potential Leak Potential
Service Fluid Service Fluid
Loss Potential Loss Potential
Local factors Local factors
Criticality Rating Criticality Rating
Low Low Med Med High High
Competence Competence Method Method
Witness Witness Verify Verify
Integrity Test Integrity Test Inspect Inspect
Assess
Determine
Control
121
Training and Competence
“Everyone with an influence
on joint integrity in the
organisation should be
aware of the management
system, its objectives,
expectations and effects
on project planning and
day-to-day working. Good
awareness needs to be
maintained. Any staff
working on bolted joints
should be appropriately
trained and competent.”
Records, Data Management and Tagging
“The certainty of achieving
joint integrity increases if
historical data exists on the
activities carried out in the
past, ideally from original
construction of the joint,
linked to the design
specification of the joint.
Providing and recording
traceable data encourages
best practice at the time of
the activity, and will provide
useful planning data for the
next time the joint is
disturbed.”
122
In-service Inspection
In-service inspection of
bolted joints is an integral
activity to ensure the
continued integrity of the
joints and as such should be
built in to all relevant
inspection programmes.
This section looks at the
possible damage that can
occur, the inspection
methods available for
detection of defects and
mitigation measures that
can be put in place to
minimise such degradation.
Management of Leaks
• “The objective of a
correctly designed and
installed bolted joint is to
provide a long-term tight
seal and prevent ingress
or egress of fluids
through the joint.
However, leaks can
occur and managing the
investigation and repair
of the leak is essential to
avoid recurrence. It can
also provide useful data
for prevention on other
projects.”
123
Analysis, Learning and Improvement
• Analysis of leakage and inspection data
coupled with formal reviews of the
management system should occur at
agreed intervals by the owner and users.
The results obtained from commissioning,
incident analysis and in-service
inspections should be used to generate
ideas for continuous improvement.
• Easily monitored but meaningful
performance standards should be put in
place at launch to quantify the
contribution being made by the
management system and evaluate user
satisfaction. Feedback on good practice
in integrity issues and causes and
solutions to incidents should be provided
both internally and to industry to
contribute to continuous improvement.
Collect Data
Analyse
Improve
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
Bolt Stress Relaxation from BS4882:1973 - Fig 9
100%
0
σ.res.B7
σ.res.B16
σ.res.B8
σ.res.B8M
800 0 temp.B7 temp.B16 , temp.B8 , temp.B8M ,
Summary
• •A Management system is critical A Management system is critical
• •Cover all of the elements Cover all of the elements
• •Appoint a champion Appoint a champion
• •Apply Standards and Procedures Apply Standards and Procedures
• •Assess criticality Assess criticality
• •Trained and competent people are key Trained and competent people are key
• •Maintain a record and tagging system Maintain a record and tagging system
• •Inspect joints and manage leaks Inspect joints and manage leaks
• •Analyse and Improve. Analyse and Improve.
Copies of EI Guidelines available at Copies of EI Guidelines available at
www.energypublishing.org www.energypublishing.org
124








ASME PCC- 1 Updat es
Warren Brown, The Equity Engineering Group



























© War r en Br ow n
125

126
ASME PCC- 1 Updat es


Warren Brown, Ph.D., P.Eng.
Principal Engineer, The Equity Engineering Group
Shaker Heights, Ohio, USA
Email: iwbrown@equityeng.com


I nt r oduct i on

The ASME Post-Construction Committee released the first version of ASME PCC-1 “Guidelines
for Pressure Boundary Bolted Joint Assembly” in 2000. At the time, the document was unique in
addressing the issues with the assembly of bolted joints from a standards perspective. Since the
initial version, there have been advances in gasket technology, bolting assembly procedures and
calculation methods that enabled the improvement of both the integrity and efficiency associated
with bolted joint assembly. In order to capture these advances, the ASME PCC-1 sub-committee
was tasked to update the document beginning in 2006. The updates planned were extensive and
have resulted in an increase in the length of the document from 33 pages to more than 80 pages.
As evident from the almost three-fold increase in content, the updates are significant and are
primarily in the form of additional new information, rather than modifications to the original
information from the first version. This paper is intended to briefly summarize the major
modifications to the document and, in the interests of length, will leave out many of the minor
improvements also made. Please also keep in mind when reading both this paper and PCC-1 that
PCC-1 is a guideline only. It represents what is considered to be best practice for the majority of
joints in industry. However, it is not possible to cover all possible joint configurations within such a
document, therefore the status as a guideline (only) is appropriate in that it leaves the possibility
of modification based on specific need or experience up to the end user.

Changes t o t he Mai n Body of t he Document

The most significant changes made to the main body of the document are outlined following:
In Section 4.0 “Cleaning and Examination of Flange and Fastener Contact Surfaces”, three
changes were included, based on industry experience with best-practice and also from experience
with joint failure. The wording was modified to allow graphite material to remain in the flange
surface finish grooves after cleaning of the joint for inspection when using graphite faced gaskets.
This modification was made in the interests of efficiency and based on extensive field experience
indicating that graphite that remains in the facing grooves is time-consuming to remove and, if left
in place, simply melds with the graphite facing on the new gasket to form a cohesive sealing
element without degradation of the joint integrity. During the document public review phase,
concern from several gasket manufacturers was expressed that it would be difficult to judge the
amount of graphite remaining on the face and that excessive graphite may cover flange facing
imperfections and/or affect the gasket sealing characteristics. However, the key to understanding
why this will not occur is in the wording of the guideline; the only graphite allowed to remain is in
the grooves of the surface finish and therefore sufficient quantity must be removed so as to allow
flange facing inspection and the small amount left will not affect gasket performance.



127
The second change made to this section was the inclusion of a requirement to remove any
flange paint or coating from the nut seating surfaces when the paint or coating thickness exceeds
0.13mm (0.005 inches). This requirement was based on industry experience with joint leakage in
an offshore platform environment where the paint on standard flanges was excessively thick, led to
additional bolt load relaxation and contributed to joint leakage. The thickness limit guidance was
chosen to be an indication that a relatively thin layer of paint does not seem to affect joint
performance (as most standard flanges are supplied with some form of protective coating), but
that more than a thin layer is likely to lead to leakage and should be removed prior to joint
assembly. The third change is guidance that the machining of large diameter bolts for
reconditioning the threads is the preferred method. However, this will involve material removal
and, therefore, a finite life for the bolt. Periodic replacement of the bolts should be planned if
multiple reconditioning procedures are required on the same bolt.
In section 6.0 “Installation of Gasket”, commentary has been added to recommend that gaskets
are not re-used. This inclusion was made based on field experience with joint leakage or flange
facing damage where gaskets, in particular RTJ gaskets, are reused. Most gaskets are designed to
plastically deform in order to obtain a seal. This results in a reused gasket being harder than a new
gasket, which means that higher assembly bolt loads are required to obtain a seal, the gasket will
not seal as effectively, and damage to the flange facing may occur during assembly. An exception
to this recommendation is mentioned and that is the re-use of the metal core in grooved metal
gaskets with soft facing (kamprofile gaskets). For these gaskets, it has been shown that it is
possible to recondition them with a new facing layer and successfully reuse them in the same joint.
Table 1M and Table 1 were included in the first version of the document to be used as the basis
for establishing the required assembly torque value by multiplying the listed torque value with the
desired assembly bolt stress divided by the table reference bolt stress (345 MPa, 50ksi). However,
it was common practice within industry to quote these tables as PCC-1 recommending 50ksi as an
appropriate assembly bolt stress level. In fact, this was never the intent and so steps were taken in
the revised document to clarify this. The steps included changes to the table titles to include the
words “Reference Values for Calculating…”, some updates to the wording on how to apply the
tables and also the inclusion of a new appendix, which outlines methods for determining the
required assembly bolt stress.
Section 7.0 “Lubrication of Working Surfaces” was updated to include a recommendation that
bolts be checked for free-running nuts during the bolt lubrication stage of assembly. This
requirement was introduced based on field and laboratory experience which indicated that
relatively small imperfections on the bolt or nut thread can have a significant impact on the
obtained bolt load when tightening the joint using torque or tension techniques.
In section 13.0 “Joint Pressure and Tightness Testing”, a caution has been added with regard to
the use of temporary gaskets during pressure and tightness testing (gaskets for which the joint
was not designed). This caution is based on industry experience where temporary gaskets have
blown out during pressure and tightness testing and caused personnel injury and fatality.

Appendi x A: Tr ai ni ng, Qual i f i cat i on and Cer t i f i cat i on of Joi nt Assembl y Per sonnel

The lack of standardized qualifications for bolted joint assemblers has been identified as an
issue by many in industry and is a leading cause of joint leakage due to poor assembly practices.
In an effort to improve the status-quo, a significant revision to the existing PCC-1 Appendix A was
drafted. The new appendix outlines the requirements for a certification entity to create and
administer a training and assessment program for bolted joint assemblers that provides
certification of the assembler.
128
The appendix contains requirements for the minimum course content that must be taught in the
theoretical portion, requirements for a series of practical demonstrations, a practical assembly
exam that must be administered, requirements for maintenance of the certification and the
requirements for the certification entity to establish and maintain their ASME accreditation in order
to supply the certified assessment program. The appendix has three levels of assembler
qualification: Certified Bolting Specialist, Certified Senior Bolting Specialist and Certified Bolting
Specialist Instructor. Initial review of the available draft of PrEN/TS 1591-4 was conducted at the
start of preparation of PCC-1 Appendix A and alignment was sought in overall format and context
for the general requirements. In this way, it is hoped that the two certification requirements will be
compatible in such a manner that it will be possible to have one training and assessment system
that achieves both qualifications. One of the main differences between the two documents is that
the training curriculum and practical demonstrations are outlined in greater detail in PCC-1
Appendix A.
The new version of Appendix A will not be issued with the main document when it is published
in March 2010. This is due to the need approve and create the body within ASME that will
administer the program once published. The appendix will be on hold until this has been done and
will be released as an update via web page link to users of PCC-1 once everything is in place.

Appendi x D: Gui del i nes f or Al l ow abl e Gask et Cont act Sur f ace Fl at ness and Def ect Dept h

Previous industry guidelines for flange face flatness were based on manufacturing tolerances
and often did not reflect what was practical to achieve in the field. The guidelines also did not
address acceptable levels of minor local imperfection in the flange facing (pits, gouges and
scratches). In addition, the acceptable imperfections in the flange facing are dependent on the type
of gasket being employed. In terms of the flange flatness, which defines the amount of variation
that will be seen in gasket compression, the new limits in PCC-1 were set based on the amount of
compression that the gasket is subject to during assembly. Typical soft gaskets will compress in
excess of 1mm (0.04 inches) and therefore are much more tolerant of flange face flatness variation
than harder gasket types that compress much less than this amount. The amount of gasket
compression stress lost due to flange flatness out-of-tolerance will be proportional to the variation
divided by the gasket assembly deflection, so the tolerances specified in the appendix are varied
depending on whether a hard or soft gasket is employed. The caution is also made that a soft
gasket material (PTFE for example) may not exhibit soft behavior when applied as a thin gasket.
The flatness tolerances are related to separate radial and circumferential acceptance limits and
when these are combined the acceptable level of variation can be two to three times that of
existing flange fabrication flatness guidelines.
A note is also made regarding the acceptability of complementary distortion of mating flanges,
such as often occurs in shell and tube exchanger joints. For those, or similar joints, the orientation
of the flanges is fixed by pass partitions or nozzle locations and it is possible to have thermally
induced distortion on one flange that follows the other flange and does not therefore reduce the
joint integrity. In those cases, it is acceptable to apply the flatness tolerances to the gap between
the flanges, rather than for each flange independently. In addition, there is now a tolerance noted
for the acceptable height difference for pass partitions on exchanger flanges to ensure both that it
is not under or over compressing the gasket at that location. This requirement is based on
experience where neglecting to specify this value leads to machining only of the periphery of the
gasket, leaving the pass partition proud of the main seating surface, which often results in joint
leakage.

129
A second set of guidance is listed in the appendix for acceptable levels of local flange facing
imperfections (pits, gouges, scratches,…). Once again, the acceptable levels are outlined relative to
the gasket material. Harder facing materials (steel, for example) will not conform to the
imperfection and will, therefore, be more sensitive to imperfections than gaskets that have a softer
facing material. The limits include assessment of closely-spaced imperfections and have acceptable
depth tolerances that are dependent on the type of gasket employed and the distance the
imperfection extends radially across the flange seating surface. The intent is that these limits can
be employed by an inspector to assess the flange facing condition as part of the standard
equipment inspection process and only if the noted damage falls outside of the listed limitations will
the joint be flagged for engineering inspection.

Appendi x E: Fl ange Joi nt Al i gnment Gui del i nes

Previous flanged joint alignment guidelines were primarily obtained from fabrication
specifications (ASME B31.3, for example) and did not address the fact that the initial alignment
was not as critical as the inter-relationship between the initial alignment and the force required to
bring the joint into perfect alignment (system stiffness). The alignment guidelines for PCC-1 were
completely re-written to focus on geometry limits for alignment coupled with applied alignment
force limits. The new limits address the maximum acceptable load to bring the joint into alignment
in terms of the specified assembly bolt load. The acceptable load to bring the flanges parallel
(angular misalignment) is listed as a maximum of 10% of the specified bolt load for any bolt. The
maximum load to close an excessive axial gap between flanges is also a total of 10% of the
specified bolt load, with a maximum individual load of 20% for any given bolt allowed for the
combined limit. Simple figures illustrating the different types of misalignment have been added to
clarify the listed tolerances. Additional considerations, such as the importance of joint alignment
load on rotating equipment to avoid affecting shaft alignment and limits for when the assembler
must seek engineering guidance if alignment forces are excessive are also included.

Appendi x F: Al t er nat i v e Fl ange Bol t Assembl y Pat t er ns

The original version of PCC-1 contained a bolt assembly pattern and procedure that involved
tightening in a pattern pass at three different levels of assembly bolt load, completing a final
circular pass and then an optional additional circular pass four hours afterwards. This method has
been retained in the document for continuity and is referred to as the Legacy method. However,
since the initial release of PCC-1, considerable effort in research has gone into proving that faster
methods of assembly can be used that will achieve equal or better joint integrity. The theory
behind these improvements is based on using an appropriate pattern for the gasket being
employed and by increasing the bolt load at a much more rapid rate than the Legacy method.
Increasing the bolt load more rapidly is applicable to all gasket types. It reduces the number of
pattern passes required before proceeding to circular passes and generally results in a higher
average gasket stress being achieved prior to commencing the circular passes. If the gasket stress
is higher when the circular passes are commenced, the final compression on the gasket will be
more uniform. The relationship between the gasket type and the assembly pattern is determined
by how stiff the gasket is (how much compression occurs during assembly). For gaskets with
relatively little compression (kamprofile gaskets for example) it has been proven that a pattern
pass is not required and all that must be done is to tighten four opposing bolts in sequence to
ensure that the joint has initial alignment prior to proceeding to tighten the remaining bolts in a
circular fashion.

130
In addition, pattern passes using multiple tools have been included in the appendix in order to
reflect this common industry practice. All of the new pattern passes do not include the optional
final pass after a 4 hour wait and all include the additional instruction to continue tightening the
bolts until they no longer turn for the final pass. There are three new patterns introduced for single
tool application and two patterns for multi-tool. The single tool patterns include:
• Modified Legacy Pattern: Similar to the Legacy pattern, but with bolt load increased to
the next level after every 4 bolts tightened, rather than after a full pattern pass. The
pattern includes one or two pattern passes (second optional, depending on gasket type)
and then a final circular pass until no nut turns.
• Quadrant Pattern: Similar in configuration to the Modified Legacy, except the bolts do
not require numbering as, instead of using a cross-pattern for tightening the bolts, the
joint is divided into quadrants and the next bolt in each quadrant is tightened in order.
Bolt numbering is not required, as the next loose bolt in the next quadrant is always the
bolt that must be tightened. Two patterns are presented, one for flanges with ≤ 16 bolts,
where opposite quadrants are tightened successively and one for joints with > 16 bolts
where the next quadrant in a circular order is tightened.
• Four-Bolt pattern: similar to the modified Legacy, except only four opposing bolts are
tightened in sequence and then a circular pattern is commenced.
The multi-tool patterns are similar to the Modified Legacy pattern and the Four-Bolt pattern. In
addition, the appendix contains guidelines for suitable measures for assessing the efficacy of other
alternative tightening patterns/procedures that are not included in PCC-1.

Appendi x M: Har dened Washer Usage Gui del i ne and Pur chase Speci f i cat i on

The existing specification often referenced for through-hardened washers is ASTM F436, which
is actually a structural washer specification. That specification did not include higher alloy materials
and the washer outer diameters were in excess of common flange spot-face diameters used at the
nut contact surface. This resulted in the washer bridging the spot face, creating an undesirable
bending of the washer during assembly. The new PCC-1 Appendix M was written with the intent to
rectify these two issues and also to provide guidance on the service limits for the different
materials listed for washer manufacture. The service limits are based on single use (where
softening during operation will be acceptable, since they will not be reused) and multiple use
(where softening is not desirable). The service temperature limits outlined in the appendix are
based on metallurgical behavior for multiple usage and service experience for the single use limits.
The four materials listed in the appendix are intended to match commonly applied bolt materials
and significant effort was made to ensure that the washer thickness and material specification
resulted in washers that could be easily manufactured. The intent is for this appendix to eventually
be replaced by an ASTM specification, which is an effort that is already underway.

Appendi x N: Reuse of Bol t s

In many common joint sizes, it is practical to replace the bolting at every assembly in order to
maximize the chances of joint integrity. However, there is often a cost barrier that prevents this
from occurring. Appendix N has been written to ensure that more than cursory consideration of the
bolt material cost is assessed when making the decision. The cost of the new bolting material is
offset by the cost of reconditioning the old bolts and also the benefit to accuracy in achieved bolt
preload with new bolts. Guidelines are given as to when to re-use and when to replace bolts. In
addition, there is commentary on the appropriate methods for reconditioning bolts.

131
Appendi x O: Assembl y Bol t Load Sel ect i on

This appendix outlines two methods of determining the appropriate assembly bolt load for a
given joint. The first method is the use of a standard assembly bolt stress across all joints. It is
recognized that the simplicity of that method may assist in its adoption and success on some sites.
However, that method may also result in insufficient or excessive gasket stress or damage to the
flange due to excessive bolt load in some cases. Therefore, the second method of determining
assembly bolt load involves the calculation of the maximum limits for each component and the
determination of the minimum required gasket stress to both seat the gasket during assembly and
to seal the gasket during operation. Once gasket relaxation and hydrostatic end force have been
allowed for in the calculation, there is a band within which the assembly bolt load may be selected
that will ensure that no joint components will be damaged and that sufficient gasket stress is
present during all phases of operation such that no leakage will occur. Using this comprehensive
approach allows the end user to be more aware of the reasons as to why the selected bolt load is
being applied and therefore to explore opportunities to improve the joint integrity based on the
limiting factors for the joint, as determined by calculation. The appendix contains tabulated values
of maximum allowable assembly bolt stress to avoid damage to the flange for standard B16.5 and
B16.47 “Series A” flanges in sizes from DN 50mm (NPS 2) to DN 1200mm (NPS 48). A worked
example for determining the assembly bolt load for a DN 75mm (NPS 3), cl. 300, flange and an
example assembly bolt torque table is also provided.

Appendi x P: Gui dance on Tr oubl eshoot i ng Fl anged Joi nt Leak age I nci dent s

One of the most important activities that can be undertaken in any leak free bolted joint
program is a diagnosis of the cause of any leaks that occur. This includes an assessment of what
the original joint configuration was, assembly history, operating conditions and condition of the
joint and gasket subsequent to joint disassembly. The new Appendix P in PCC-1 provides guidance
and a series of checklists designed to guide the user through an investigation of joint leakage. It
contains a sample “Flanged Joint Leak Report” and additional lists of considerations for common
flange design issues and some potential resolutions for those issues. It also lists some best practice
guidance for basic flanged joint design problems. The diagnostic troubleshooting checklists are
written to key from when leakage occurred and to narrow in on conditions and clues as to why the
leakage occurred.

















132

Concl usi ons

The ASME PCC-1:2010 version represents a step change in the level of detail provided for
guidance on bolted joint assembly and will represent a significant body of work for the international
improvement of bolted flanged joint integrity.
The undertaking and commitment by the committee members (listed following) was significant;
however it is believed that the benefit to industry from this revision will be commensurate.
Chair:
Mr. Clyde Neely (Becht Engineering Co., Inc.)
Members:
Mr. Joseph Barron (Northrup Grumman Newport News)
Dr. Warren Brown (Equity Engineering Group)
Mr. Edward Hayman (Superior Plant Services)
Mr. David Lay (Hytorc)
Mr. Gary Milne (Hydratight)
Mr. James Payne (JPAC, Inc.)
Mr. Clay Rodery (BP North American Products, Inc.)
Mr. Jerry Waterland (Virginia Sealing Products, Inc.)

133

134








Qual i f i cat i on of Per sonnel
Compet ency –
DD CEN/ TS 1591- 4
John Hoyes, Flexitallic Ltd






















© J. R. Hoy es of Fl ex i t al l i c
135

136
The Evolution of a Pan-European
Norm on Competency Assurance
of Flange Assembly Technicians
John Hoyes
Flexitallic
Sections of Presentation
Background Considerations
CEN Standardisation
Harmonisation with PED
137
Background Considerations
Joints Fail – Not Just Gaskets
Installation critically important
138
Objective
To Raise the Status, in the
context of the PED , of a Joint
Assembly Technician to that of a
Welder responsible for the welds
of the flanges being sealed
Loss of Time Served
Maintenance Personnel
Progression Towards
Contractors
Previous Knowledge &
Experience Base Lost
139
HSE Concerns Over Safety
Record In North Sea
Attendance at a Training Course
Does Not Demonstrate
Subsequent Competency
140
Competency Assessment
Systems Added to Training
Courses for North Sea
Technicians
Outcome was a Significant
Reduction in Incident Rate
CEN Standardisation
141
TC 74 “Flanges and their Joints”
set up to Implement the
Requirements of the Pressure
Equipment Directive
Chairman : Hans Kocklemann of
MPA , Stuttgart
TC 74 WG 10 “Calculation
Methods”
Convenor, Robert Noble, Hydratight
TC 74 WG 8 “Gaskets”
Convenor, John Hoyes, Flexitallic
142
Competency Document Drafted
by Hydratight Member of WG 8
based upon the North Sea
Experience
TS 1591 Part 4 : 2007
“Qualification of Personnel
Competency in the Assembly of
Bolted Joints Fitted to
Equipment Subject to the
Pressure Equipment Directive”
TS --- Technical Specification
143
A TS Has A Lower Status Than
an EN [European Standard]
A TS is Intended to be a Pre-
Standard that Leads Within Three
to Five Years to a full EN
Before Approval an EN is Subject
to Public Enquiry, twice, and a
Weighted Formal Vote
Adoption of a published EN is
not Mandatory
144
TS 1591 Part 4
Intended to be an Umbrella
Document Augmenting Current
Training Schemes by Adding
Competency Assessment
TS 1591 Part 4 : 2007
For the sections on General and Specific
Knowledge Curriculum Requirements of a
Training Course only the suggested subjects
to be covered are listed
There is a Requirement for Work Site
Experience with Guidance by Certified
Competent Person and Log Keeping
A Competency Assessment has to be carried
out once candidate has had Sufficient Work
Site Experience
145
Guidance for Work Site
Experience before Competency
Assessment
12 Months Sporadic
6 Months Infrequent but with
Intense Periods
3 Months Frequent & Intense
Earliest Assessment Work Site Experience
Method of Competency
Assessment
Theoretical Question Paper
Practical Assessment during typical
Simulated on site assembly
Documented Work Place Evidence
146
Refresher Training Guidance
12 Months Sporadic
2 Years Infrequent but with
Intense Periods
3 Years Frequent and Intense
Period After Achieving
Competency
Work Site Experience
Decision Taken by TC 74 to
Upgrade TS 1591 Part 4 to be a
Full EN Standard
This follows both the natural intended
path for a TS and the German chemical
industry view that a full EN is more likely
to be adopted
147
Harmonisation with PED
Bolted Connections are not
recognised as an “Essential
Feature” of the PED
This should be changed
Then EN 1591 Part 4 would have to
be Harmonised with the
Requirements of the PED & thus
create further encouragement for its
adoption
148
Perhaps Operators would be
able to achieve insurance cost
reductions by specifying only
competent, as defined by 1591
Part 4, technicians were used
on site
THANK YOU
149

150








A r egul at or y per spect i v e on
bol t ed j oi nt s at hi gh hazar d
si t es
Iain Paterson, HSE Offshore Division























© Heal t h & Saf et y Ex ecut i ve
151

152
A Regul at or y Per spect i v e on Bol t ed Joi nt s at Hi gh
Hazar d Si t es

I ai n Pat er son, Team Leader Mechani cal Engi neer i ng, HSE Of f shor e Di vi si on


The presentation addresses:
• the relevant safety legislation aimed at ensuring the integrity of pressure systems
both offshore and onshore,
• a few photographs showing what we find in the ‘real world’,
• a few statistics showing the equipment where hydrocarbon releases occur
offshore, and
• Some of the benchmarks that HSE uses to help judge compliance.

We need safety legislation to prevent catastrophic events such as the Piper Alpha
disaster in 1988 where 167 lives were lost. Lord Cullen’s enquiry into the disaster led to
many wide ranging recommendations including changes in the offshore safety
legislation. The principles embedded in the Cullen report have stood the test of time but
we still need to be vigilant. In 2005, a major accident incident occurred at the Bombay
High complex in which 350 of the 367 persons on board the platform survived. That’s a
testament to Lord Cullen’s recommendations and the developments in major hazard
accident prevention and mitigation since Piper Alpha.

One of the principle recommendations arising from Lord Cullen’s enquiry is the Offshore
Installations (Safety Case) Regulations. Regulation 12 specifies the central theme. All
major accident hazards must be identified, and all major accident risks must be
evaluated and controlled. Major accidents include fire and explosion, and major damage
to the structure that affects its stability. The essence of this regulation is that duty
holders must have a robust safety management system and an effective auditing regime
to ensure, amongst other things, that the integrity management of the hydrocarbon
containment envelope is maintained.

Onshore, the Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations (COMAH) applies to sites
such as refineries and chemical works etc where significant inventories of hazardous
material are used. Regulation 4 requires the operator to take all measures necessary to
prevent major accidents and to limit their consequence on the local population and
environment. The effect is the same as for offshore, the duty holder needs to put in
place a robust safety management system and an effective audit function. The COMAH
regulations define major accidents as major emissions, fires and explosions that could
lead to serious danger to human health or the environment.

Regulation 5 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations (MHSWR)
applies at all work places and requires employers to implement an effective safety
management system commensurate with the risks that they create.





153
The Pressure Equipment Regulations 1999 address the design and initial integrity of new
plant both onshore and on fixed offshore installations. Examples are given in the
presentation showing poor practice on new equipment including;
• missing flange bolts,
• tack welded vibration supports
• Unsuitable material used on a pipe support pad.

The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) address in-service
integrity and apply both onshore and offshore. Regulation 6 is relevant in that it address
the inspection of piping and flanged joints etc. It requires that deterioration such as
corrosion is detected in good time so as to allow remedial action before a dangerous
situation occurs. In practice, this means an inspection scheme where someone
competent has considered the anticipated deterioration modes. It means adopting
suitable inspection techniques where you have confidence in detecting deterioration. In
other words an inspection regime that considers the scope, the nature and the frequency
of inspections. COMAH and the Offshore Installations (Safety Case) regulations both
require a safety management system to ensure that this actually takes place together
with periodic review and audit to confirm or otherwise, that the inspection regime
remains valid. Examples are given in the presentation showing in-service deterioration
including;

• a perforated gas pipe suffering from corrosion under insulation,
• rapid erosion of a vessel by a sand wash nozzle,
• instrument tubing susceptible to vibration induced fatigue failure,
• a flanged joint fretting against another pipe
• Galvanic corrosion due to dissimilar metals on bolts and flange.

In the offshore sector, industry and HSE are working to reduce the number of
hydrocarbon leaks. Duty holders formally report all of their leaks to HSE and these are
stored in a database. HSE research report RR672 summarises the statistics from HSE’s
offshore hydrocarbon release database. Over the eight year period 2001 to 2008, there
were a total of 579 ‘major’ and ‘significant’ hydrocarbon releases, decreasing from 110
such releases in 2001 to 60 in 2008. RR672 indicates that major and significant leaks
occur most often at: piping (21%), instruments (18%), and flanged joints (10%).
However, it’s difficult to pin point exactly what proportion of hydrocarbon leaks occur at
flanges.

A study looking at gas leaks greater than 25 kg (a substantial release that would have
serious implications if ignited) revealed that instruments, piping, flanges and valves are
the priority areas where industry and the regulator need to focus our attention. HSE
uses evidence such as this to inform our inspection priorities.

Typically, HSE interventions to inspect the integrity of the hydrocarbon containment
plant are based on our loss of containment manual that is publically available on our web
site. It addresses several key risk areas including bolted joints, leaks from small bore
fittings, and vibration induced fatigue failure of small bore piping connections. For
bolted joints, we use the Energy Institute guidelines as a model of good practice.

Bolted joints can be safety critical parts of the high hazard process plant and that their
integrity must be effectively managed throughout their life time.
154

155

156
Health and Safety
Executive
A regulatory perspective
on bolted joints at high
hazard sites
Iain Paterson CEng MIMechE
Team Leader, Mechanical Engineering
HSE, Offshore Division
Why do we need safety legislation?
To provide adequate integrity management of high
hazard plant
Piper Alpha – 6
th
July 1988 – 167 lives lost
157
Why do we need safety legislation?
Relevant legislation includes …
Offshore Installations (Safety Case) Reg’s 2005
Regulation 12: Management of health and safety and control
of major accident hazards
(1) ……..include in the safety case sufficient particulars to
demonstrate that …..
(c) all hazards with the potential to cause a major accident
have been identified; and
(d) all major accident risks have been evaluated and
measures have been, or will be, taken to control those risks
to ensure that the relevant statutory provisions will be
complied with.
This means put in place a robust safety management
system and effective audit
158
Relevant legislation includes …
Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 1999
Regulation 4 General duty
Every operator shall take all measures necessary to prevent
major accidents and limit their consequences to persons
and the environment.
This means put in place a robust safety management
system and effective audit
Relevant legislation includes …
Management of Health & Safety at Work Reg’s 1999
Regulation 5
Every employer shall make and give effect to such
arrangements as are appropriate, having regard to the
nature of his activities and the size of his undertaking, for
the effective planning, organisation, control, monitoring
and review of the preventive and protective measures.
This means put in place a robust safety management
system and effective audit
159
Initial integrity …
Pressure Equipment Regulations 1999
(applies to new equipment onshore and offshore)
Missing bolts
Initial integrity …?
160
In-service integrity …
Provision and Use of Work Equipment Reg’s 1998
Regulation 6: Inspection
(2) Every employer shall ensure that work equipment
exposed to conditions causing deterioration which is liable
to result in dangerous situations is inspected -
(a) at suitable intervals; and
(b) each time that exceptional circumstances which are
liable to jeopardise the safety of the work equipment have
occurred,
to ensure that health and safety conditions are maintained
and that any deterioration can be detected and remedied in
good time.
In-service integrity …?
161
Bolted flanged joint integrity …?
Bolted flanged joint integrity …?
162
Offshore hydrocarbon releases
595 major and significant leaks in 8 year period
The 3 most common types of equipment
where offshore hydrocarbon leaks occur:
Piping 126/595 21%
Instruments 107/595 18%
Flanges 59/595 10%
163
Major & Significant Gas HCRs > 25kg by Equipment Type
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
C
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
o
r
s
D
r
a
i
n
F
i
l
t
e
r
s
F
l
a
n
g
e
H
e
a
t

E
x
c
h
a
n
g
e
r
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
M
u
d

/

S
h
a
l
e

/

t
a
n
k
s
P
i
g

L
a
u
n
c
h
e
r
s
P
i
p
i
n
g
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

V
e
s
s
e
l
P
u
m
p
S
t
o
r
a
g
e

T
a
n
k
s

R
i
s
e
r
s
T
u
r
b
i
n
e
V
a
l
v
e

A
c
t
u
a
t
e
d

-

B
l
o
c
k
V
a
l
v
e

A
c
t
u
a
t
e
d

-

C
o
n
t
r
o
l

/
V
a
l
v
e

A
c
t
u
a
t
e
d

-

E
S
D
V
V
a
l
v
e

A
c
t
u
a
t
e
d

-

R
e
l
i
e
f
V
a
l
v
e

M
a
n
u
a
l

-

B
l
o
c
k

/

B
l
e
e
d
V
a
l
v
e

M
a
n
u
a
l

-

C
h
o
k
e
W
e
l
l
h
e
a
d

/

X
m
a
s

T
r
e
e
s
N
o
t

s
p
e
c
i
f
i
e
d
2008-9
2007-8
2006-7
2005-6
2004-5
2003-4
2002-3
2001-2
Flanges
www.hse.gov.uk/research/rr672
HSE Loss of containment manual
www.hse.gov.uk/offshore/lossofcontainmen.pdf
UKOOA Hydrocarbon release reduction toolkit
www.stepchangeinsafety.net/ResourceFiles/toolkit%20final%20version.pdf
Energy Institute Guidelines for the management of the integrity of bolted
joints for pressurised systems
Energy Institute document Guidelines for corrosion management in oil
and gas production and processing
HSE Offshore external corrosion guide
www.hse.gov.uk/offshore/corrosion.pdf
Benchmarks:
164
Offshore Installations (Safety Case) Regulations 2005
www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l30.pdf
COMAH 1999
www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l111.pdf
Management of Health & Safety at Work Regulations 1999
www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l21.pdf
PUWER 1998
www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/puwer.pdf
Pressure Equipment Regulations 1999
www.berr.gov.uk/files/file11284.pdf
Legislation downloads:
165

166








Leak Management
Ed Versluis, James Walker Rotabolt


























© James Wal k er
167

168
BoIted loint
lntegrity
BoIted loint
lntegrity
Achieving:
Ed Versluis
Sales Manager
James Walker Benelux
Maximum
bolt force
Maximum
bolt force
Leak nanagenent
17 March 2010
Leak nanagenent
17 March 2010
OHDNVFRVWHYHU\RQH
OHDNVFRVWHYHU\RQH
OHDNVFRVWHYHU\RQH
169
Q8 - HDS unit:- Friday 13
th
February, 2009
Some are very costly…
Costs of
Steam Quenching...
170
How effective is
leak sealing?
%
X
G
J
H
W
H
G

I
R
U
"

%
X
G
J
H
W
H
G

I
R
U
"

171
85%
of flange leaks
are caused by
incorrect bolt
loads
Why
Why


does everyone
blame the
gasket?... ?...
172
Gaskets don’t fail !...
E
R
OW
H
G

M
R
LQ
W

D
V
V
H
P
E
OLH
V

G
R
E
R
OW
H
G

M
R
LQ
W

D
V
V
H
P
E
OLH
V

G
R« «
3 Keys
to Reliable Bolted Joints
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
J
o
i
n
t
D
e
s
i
g
n
Bolt
Tension
% %% %
173
Bolt Force
Hydrostatic
Force
Operating
Gasket Stress
Possible
flange
bending or
"rotation"
174
7\SLFDO Leak Testing Graph
CNAF Gasket 1.5 mm thick, 20 bar
0.01
0.1
1
10
0.000 10.000 20.000 30.000 40.000 50.000 60.000
Operating Stress MPa
L
e
a
k

R
a
t
e

m
g
/
s
e
c
/
m
Leak Rate
Torque Tightening
Friction Estimate
175
Tightening Case History:
H.P. Heat Exchanger
•Studs: 36 x M52 x 360mm long, on 1720mm PCD
•Grade: ASTM A193 B7
•Duty: 30bar, 350ºC
• Calculated bolt load: 412 kN / 42 Tonnes
• Calculated torque (ȝ = 0.2): 4368 Nm
• Min. torque: 2259 Nm (- 48.3%)
• Max. torque: 5874 Nm (+ 34.5%)
(Thread and nut surface – lubricated)
Tightening Case History:
H.P. Heat Exchanger
176
Torque Scatter
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35
Bolt No.
T
o
r
q
u
e

(
N
m
)
Bolt #
Torque [Nm]
Calculated torque
Theoretical vs. Actual Torque
-48%
+34%
Hydraulic Tensioning
177
Hydraulic Tensioning
Load-Transfer Relaxation
1. Loading 2. Localised deformation 3. Distribution 4. Load losses
Step 2 Step 1 Step 3
Step 4
Limited access
3 Bolts tightened
by “ flogging ”
178
© James Walker 2006
Traditional bolting
Minimum
Bolt force
0
kN
F [kN]
Required bolt force
Traditional bolting (without tension control)
Bolt force
+/- 40%
F min F max
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
T
e
m
p
.
Flanges Bolts
Destruction
Zone
Leakage
Zone
Maximum
bolt force
© James Walker 2006
Traditional bolting
Minimum
Bolt force
0
kN
F [kN]
Required bolt force
Traditional bolting (Thermal cycling)
Bolt force
+/- 40%
F min F max
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
T
e
m
p
.
Flanges Bolts
Proces upset
Destruction
Zone
Leakage
Zone
Maximum
bolt force
179
UHOLDELOLW\
UHOLDELOLW\
\RX \RX H[SHFW H[SHFW
© James Walker 2006
JW RotaBolt Tension control & JW gasket science
Minimum
Bolt force
0
kN
F [kN]
Ideal
Bolt force
+/- 5%
Destruction
Zone
Leakage
Zone
Bolt tension
Maximum
bolt force
180
© James Walker 2006
Minimum
Bolt force
0
kN
F [kN]
Maximum
bolt force
Bolt tension
+/- 5%
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
Destruction
Zone
Leakage
Zone
T
e
m
p
.
Flanges Bolts
JW RotaBolt Tension control & JW gasket science
© James Walker 2006
Minimum
Bolt force
0
kN
F [kN]
Maximum
gasket,
flange- or
bolt force
+/- 5%
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
Safety Margin
T
e
m
p
.
Flanges Bolts
No leaks
guaranteed
Proces upset
Destruction
Zone
Leakage
Zone
JW RotaBolt Tension control & JW gasket science
Bolt tension
181
Refinery
EXAMPLES 2
3 Case Histories:
a) Valves in Catalytic Reforming
b) Cat. Reforming Heat Exchanger
182
Powerformer
Powerformer naphtha
From Storage
183
Unit had a track record of leaks at RCV’s since 1958
RCV flanges
184
Naptha 550°C / 37 bar
Thermal cycling
12” & 16” Class 600
Silver Faced
Kammprofiles
20 RotaBolts
Steam quench on 40+
RCV flanges in 2002
All flanges
7 years leak free
Good
Engineering
Practice
Good
Engineering
Practice
185
© James Walker 2006
Heat exchanger leaks (how to avoid?)
Tubesheet
255 255° ° C C 425 425° ° C C
¨ ¨T over tubesheet = 170 T over tubesheet = 170° ° C C
186
ƒ 1.7/8” bolts
(B16 grade)
ƒ approx 20”
clamp length
ƒ 10.6:1 ratio
ƒ 30.3 tonnes
target load
2YHUORDG)DFWRULQUHODWLRQWR%ROW'LPHQVLRQV
1
1.0S
1.1
1.1S
1.2
1.2S
1.3
1.3S
1.+
1.+S
1 2 3 + S 6 / 8 9 10 11 12 13
/HQJWK'LDPHWHU5DWLR
2
Y
H
U
O
R
D
G

)
D
F
W
R
U
Actually
took
around
6
0
to
n
n
e
s
p
e
r
b
o
lt
to
set the
tension…
187
© James Walker 2006
© James Walker 2010
188

© 2010 The Institution of Mechanical Engineers, unless otherwise stated.
The copyright in these papers is the property of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers unless otherwise indicated. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patent Act 1988, no part may be reproduced in any form or by any means without permission. Enquiries should be addressed to: Director of Publication and Information Services, The Institution of Mechanical Engineers, 1 Birdcage Walk, London SW1H 9JJ, telephone: 020 7222 7899. The Institution is not responsible for any statement contained in these papers. Data, discussion and conclusions developed by the authors are for information only and are not intended for use without independent substantiating investigation on the part of potential users. Opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers.

Registered Charity Number 206882

6. 1 . 4.CONTENTS 1. 7. Ellis 2. European Emissions Legislation Dr Brian Ellis.Bolting Aspects Bill Eccles. AMTEC Services GmbH © Manfred Schaaf Failure Mechanisms of Bolted Joints . Flexitallic © Flexitallic Ltd 8. The Equity Engineering Group © Warren Brown Overview of Developments in EN 1591 Manfred Schaaf. 5. Setting the Scene Robert Noble. Novus Sealing Limited Material Selection for Industrial Fasteners Rod Corbett. University of Strathclyde Simon Earland. Earland Engineering © Dr David Nash & Simon Earland Gasket Selection Dr Gavin Smith. Bolt Science Limited © Bolt Science Limited Seal failure from a gaskets perspective Dene Halkyard. European Sealing Association © Dr Brian S. Hydratight © Robert Noble Flange Selection Dr David Nash. James Walker Rotabolt © Rod Corbett Traditional Flange Design Methods Warren Brown. 3. Novus Sealing Limited © Dr Gavin Smith.

2 .

Management of the Integrity of Bolted Joints for Pressurised Systems Robert Noble. 12. the key to Bolted Flange Reliability Rod Corbett. 13. Tension Control. 15. James Walker Rotabolt © James Walker Case studies No content in proceedings 11. Hydratight © Robert Noble ASME PCC-1 Updates Warren Brown. James Walker Rotabolt © Rod Corbett Tightening Techniques for Bolted Flanged Joints Tony Scrivens. 14. R.9. Hoyes of Flexitallic A regulatory perspective on bolted joints at high hazard sites Iain Paterson. Hydratight No content in proceedings 10. HSE Offshore Division © Health & Safety Executive Leak Management Ed Versluis. The Equity Engineering Group © Warren Brown Qualification of Personnel Competency – DD CEN/TS 1591-4 John Hoyes. Flexitallic Ltd © J. 3 .

4

Setting the Scene
Robert Noble, Hydratight

© Robert Noble

5

6

Setting the Scene Robert Noble Technical Services Leader Hydratight The World is beginning to realise the bolted joint is just as critical as the Welded Joint? Welded Joint Material Control Coded Welder Documented Procedure NDT Verification Hydrotested Records Bolted Joint Material Control Competent Personnel Documented Procedure Hydrotested Integrity tested In Service Inspection Permanent joint Subject to Breakout Records 7 .

Consider this question:Is the bolted joint a permanent or temporary Joint? Consider this please:- The Bolted Joint and the PED:PED applies to permanent joining with permanent joints defined in Article 1 as: “2. 8 .8. 'Permanent joints` means joints which cannot be disconnected except by destructive methods” The Bolted Flanged joint being capable of disconnection therefore is viewed as temporary! This is an advantage – not a reason for reduced standards of management and control.

may be: — a notified body. Permanent joining • Permanent joints and adjacent zones must be free of any surface or internal defects detrimental to the safety of the equipment. operating procedures and personnel must be approved by a competent third party which. Standards and concern around Bolted Joints are becoming more prevalent EQMS no:5144-AC 9 . • For pressure equipment in categories II. • The properties of permanent joints must meet the minimum properties specified for the materials to be joined unless other relevant property values are specifically taken into account in the design calculations. — a third-party organization recognized by a Member State • To carry out these approvals the third party must perform examinations and tests as set out in the appropriate harmonized standards or equivalent examinations and tests or must have them performed. • For pressure equipment. permanent joining of components which contribute to the pressure resistance of equipment and components which are directly attached to them must be carried out by suitably qualified personnel according to suitable operating procedures.2.The Permanent Joint and the PED:3. at the manufacturer's discretion. III and IV.1.

• Improved Management of Bolted Joints 10 . • Inspection of Bolted Joints.Trends in industry and standards:• Improved Training and Competence • Improved Design Codes • Improve guidance on determining correct bolt load. • Focus on Gasket performance. • A trend towards increased bolt load.

Earland Engineering © Dr David Nash & Simon Earland 11 . University of Strathclyde & Simon Earland.Flange Selection Dr David Nash.

12 .

The same is true in other industries. valves. The European standard EN 1759 is based on the ANSI/ASME standard B16. but it is now published by ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers). Thereafter. The intention of this paper is to present an overview of bolted flange types. valves. and EN 1092 is based on DIN standard flanges. including piping. 2. other loadings and deflection or leakage requirements. Drilling and production equipment. For plants operated by European based companies PN designated flanges are often specified. Flanges are used for a variety of applications in pressure systems. DN for metric or NPS for inch sizes (also referred to as NB). fittings and accessories.5 are often referred to as “ANSI” flanges because the standard was originally published by ANSI (American National Standards Institute). flanges are specified on the basis of a pressure requirement. PN designated • EN 1759 – Flanges and their joints – Circular flanges for pipes. fittings and accessories. Flanges are selected according to their nominal size.Petroleum and natural gas industries. STANDARD FLANGES The most common type of flange used for pressure equipment is the standard piping flange. 13 . others will be custom designed for a specific application. valves. and girth flanges on vessels and heat exchangers.temperature rating. 3 and 4. or even welding. The main advantages of these standard flanges are: • Readily available from a range of manufacturers • Design calculations are not normally required • Pressure ratings recognised by the main piping and pressure vessel design codes • Standard dimensions • Wide range of gaskets available in standard sizes Disadvantages: • They tend to be overly large and heavy compared with modern designs • Some problems with high seating stress gaskets and low pressure rating flanges There are two main systems for flange rating. “off the shelf” items.5. These are supplied in accordance with various national and international standards such as: • EN 1092 – Flanges and their joints – Circular flanges for pipes. nozzles and access openings on vessels and other equipment. and the European system of PN designated flanges given in EN 1092 Parts 1. installation or access requirements may drive the rationale for flange selection.5 and EN 1759. Many of these flanges will be standard. gas and petro-chemical industries class designated flanges are generally specified.Flange Selection Simon Earland. Normally. and their pressure . Earland Engineering Ltd & David Nash. such as chemicals and pharmaceuticals where the plant is operated by an American based company. class designated • ASME B16.5 – Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings: NPS ½ through NPS 24 Metric/Inch Standard • ASME B16. the American system of class designated flanges given in ASME B16. In the oil. University of Strathclyde INTRODUCTION This paper covers the important features of the main types of flange and indicates some typical uses.47 – Large Diameter Steel Flanges: NPS 26 through NPS 60 Metric/Inch Standard • EN ISO 10423 (ANSI/API Specification 6A) . Wellhead and Christmas tree equipment Flanges to ASME B16. including both standard and specialist flange designs.

Class 600. such as wellhead and “Christmas tree” equipment used in the oil and gas industry. threaded. For example. This standard covers two series of flanges – Series A.0 (10000) 46 to 540 (1 /16 to 21 ¼) 103. 6BX and segmented flanges are given in Table 1. Part 3 covers copper alloy flanges and Part 4 covers aluminium alloy flanges. but is not essential for proper functioning of the flange.Class designated flanges ASME B16. Standard flange dimensions are also tabulated. Class 600 and Class 900. Class 900.5 (15000) 46 to 476 (1 13/16 to 18 ¾) 138.5 (5000) 52 to 279 (2 1/16 to 11) 346 to 540 (13 5/8 to 21 35 to 103 x 108 ¼) (1 3/8 to 4 1/16 x 4 ¼) 13 69. Class 300. In ASME B16. ASME B16. Three types of flange are covered (all ring joint type): • Type 6B flanges are available as weld neck.47 covers sizes from NPS 26 to NPS 60. Class 150.5 except for the addition of Class 75. 300 lb. which were previously know as API-605. Class 1500 and Class 2500. These flanges are often referred to as 150 lb (or 150#). and tables are provided for various groups of materials. • Segmented flanges have a recessed face. Table 1 – Rated working pressures and size ranges of flanges to EN ISO 10423 Rated working pressure MPa (psi) 13. typically 567°F (297°C) for class 150 and 860°F (460°C) for class 300 and above for carbon steel A105 material. The maximum working pressures are tabulated against temperature. The maximum rated working pressures and size ranges of type 6B. Class 400.5 tables are provided in both metric units (bars and mm) and US customary units (psig and inches). integral (long weld neck) or blind flanges and the bolting force reacts on the metallic ring gasket. In EN 1759 Part 1 covers steel flanges. This prevents damage to the flange or gasket from excessive bolt torque. and the rating of a Class 300 flange is 740 psi.7 (3000) 52 to 527 (2 1/16 to 20 680 to 762 (26 ¾ to 30) ¾) 34. but is not essential for proper functioning of the flange. Tables of pressure/ temperature ratings and standard dimensions are provided in US customary units only.0 (20000) 46 to 346 (1 13/16 to 13 5 /8) 14 . Class 400. and Series B. etc. and the bolting force can react on the surface outside the recessed face of the flange when the ring-joint gasket has been properly seated. The bolting force can react on the raised face of the flanges when the ring-joint gasket has been properly seated. and flanges are specified by the designations Class 75. The pressure ratings in psig at ambient temperature are much higher than the class designation.8 (2000) Flange size range mm (in) Type 6B Type 6BX Segmented 52 to 540 (2 1/16 to 21 680 to 762 (26 ¾ to 30) ¼) 20.5 covers a wide range of carbon and alloy steels. and flanges are specified by the designations Class 150. the pressure rating of a Class 150 flange in ASTM A-105 material at ambient temperature is 285 psi. ASME B16. The pressure – temperature rating tables are basically the same as those in ASME B16. integral (long weld neck) or blind flanges. The class designations of these flanges correspond to the pressure ratings in psig at elevated temperature. EN ISO 10423 is identical to ANSI/API Specification 6A and covers flanges for high pressure applications. This prevents damage to the flange or gasket from excessive bolt torque. Class 300.5 and EN 1759 cover sizes from NPS ½ to NPS 24. stainless steels and nickel alloys. • Type 6BX flanges are available as weld neck. which were previously known as MSS SP-44.

The maximum allowable pressures at other temperatures are obtained from the pressure temperature rating tables given in the appropriate part of EN 1092. Part 3 covers copper alloy flanges and Part 4 covers aluminium alloy flanges. Flange configurations Standard flanges are available in a variety of combinations of type of flange and facing. PN 16.5 flanges). PN 160. PN 250. The PN designation indicates the pressure rating of the flange in bars at ambient temperature. slip-on.this type of flange has a tapered hub at the back of the flange and is butt welded to the pipe or nozzle neck. but other facings such as tongue and groove and O-ring groove are also used. The types of flange include weld neck. and sizes from DN 10 up to DN 4000 (for PN 2. Standard flange dimensions are also tabulated. flat face and ring joint. threaded and blind.Long weld neck flange 15 . PN 320 and PN 400. but has not yet been issued as a BS EN ISO standard. The butt weld can be subjected to volumetric examination (radiography or ultrasonics) to ensure a high integrity joint.Weld neck flange Long weld neck . Part 2 covers cast iron flanges. socket welding. The upper size limit reduces for the higher pressure ratings.this type of flange is used for nozzles on equipment as an alternative to using thick walled pipe.Standard flange dimensions are tabulated in both metric units (mm) and US customary units (inches).5. Part 1 covers steel flanges. as shown if Figure 1. long weld neck. PN 40. PN 6. A new edition of EN ISO 10423 was published in December 2009. This type of flange is widely used in the oil. Figure 1 . lapped. gas. PN designated flanges EN 1092 covers the pressure designations PN 2. PN 63. PN 100. as shown in Figure 2. petro-chemical and power generation industries. The most commonly used facings are raised face. PN 10. Figure 2 . Information is given in the standard for evaluating the rated working pressure for elevated temperatures. Weld neck . The nozzle neck is replaced by an extended parallel hub at the back of the flange. PN 25.

Figure 4 shows a flange with a raised face for gasket seating. Figure 5 . The face of the flange has a groove for use with a metallic ring type joint. and is used in conjunction with a full face gasket which extends beyond the bolt circle. and has the advantage that the gaps between the flange faces at the inside and outside surfaces can be eliminated where cleanliness is important. as shown in Figure 5.Slip-on flange Raised face.Slip-on .Raised face flange Flat face. as shown in Figure 6. and a wide range of gaskets is available. Figure 6 .this type of flange fits over the outside of the pipe or nozzle neck and is attached with fillet welds at the back and the face of the flange. The face of the flange is flat. Figure 3 . This is the standard facing for use with gaskets which are located inside the bolt circle. Figure 4 .Ring joint flange 16 . This type of flange is not recommended for high temperature applications or cyclic service. The welds can only be checked by surface examination techniques. as shown in Figure 3. Relatively soft gasket materials are generally used.Flat face flange Ring joint. Ring joint facings are generally used in high pressure and/or high temperature applications. This type of facing is best suited to low pressure applications.

• Smaller bolt diameters making assembly and installation easier. • Can only be joined to another flange of the same type. the stressed length of the bolts and the seal ring. petro-chemical and power generation. Vector SPO. • Most designs require flanges to be separated to insert or remove seal. Tables of standard dimensions are provided for sizes in the range DN 16 (NPS ½) to DN 1200 (NPS 48). Axial forces are exerted on the taper of the metal seal ring and translated into a radial sealing force.COMPACT FLANGED CONNECTIONS (CFC) There are various proprietary flange designs on the market as an alternative to the standard flanges described above. Norsok L005 The only standard for compact flanges is the Norwegian Norsok L-005.Galperti SpA.N. When the flange is bolted up the back face of the flange is parallel to the flange face in order to prevent bending of the bolts in the assembled condition. The first is created by application of seal seating stress at the flange heel. Desflex and Verax. The assembly is made up by tightening the flange bolting which pulls the two connector halves together. Most of the bolt pre-load is transferred as compressive forces between the flange faces at the bore. adjacent to the bore and a small outer wedge around the outer diameter of the flange. The Norsok standard is based on common principles utilized by VERAX. As the bolt load is increased the bevel is closed and face to face contact is achieved at the outer wedge. however a committee draft of an ISO standard based on Norsok L-005 has recently been issued for comments. including Taper-Lok. There are many others. The seal ring force is provided by the elastic stored energy in the stressed seal ring. The heel contact will be maintained for pressure values up to 1. offshore and subsea applications). The flange face includes a slightly convex bevel with the highest point. Vector International AS and Off.8 times the flange rating at room temperature. The compact flange described below (and in clause 5 of the Norsok standard) is based on the SPO compact flange developed by Vector International AS. Flanges covered by a class of Clause 5 of Norsok L-005 will stand the maximum rating of the corresponding ASME B16. • Some designs have male and female flanges. 17 . The advantages include: • Many designs use a reusable seal. Compact flanges are used in a variety of industries. • Reduced weight gives substantial cost benefit with expensive materials. called the heel. Any leakage at the heel will give internal pressure acting on the seal ring thereby increasing the sealing action. • Compact design reduces space and weight (up to 70% lighter than the conventional flanges). • High quality of leak tightness. The design aims to prevent exposure to oxygen and other corrosive agents to prevent corrosion of the flange faces.5 class over the temperature range covered by the Norsok standard. The main seal is the IX seal ring. Disadvantages • Most piping and vessel codes do not give automatic exemption from design calculations. The flange design incorporates two independent seals. except for CL 2500 which has an upper limit of DN 600 (NPS 24). including oil and gas (onshore.

Standard Taper-Lok® connection sizes range from 1/2" to 83" with varying wall thicknesses. This is not the case with a gasketted joint. As there is full metal-to-metal contact. This gives more uniform bolt load around the circumference and better feel for the operator. The VCF must be handled with care and be assembled correctly. sits in between the flange components and acts as a “door stop” by creating a wedge. with comparable angles. The male nose is a 20° angle cone. swivel flanges and other applications. a female flange. this geometry is what gives all Taper-Lok® flanges a self-energizing and pressure-energizing seal. a seal ring. and risk of leakage is minimised with this approach. The VCF does not principally use seal rings or a gasket. Verax specify that the bolts should be tightened to 80% of the yield strength. 1500 and 2500. 600. heat exchanger closures. Variations of the basic weld neck design are available for blind flanges. The design is made up of two converging angles based on the wedge principle. the bolt loads remain steady and do not change over time when the pressure is applied.4 2250 155.2 3750 258. 18 .Table 2 – Pressure class designation and ASME rating ceiling values to ASME B16. and excessive bolt tightening cannot overstress the flange.000 psi. Taper-Lok® flanges require lower bolt loads than standard connections. Verax claim that the VCF reduces corrosion in the assembly as neither the flange faces nor the loaded part of the bolts are exposed to the internal media or external environment.5 Pressure class Class Class Class Class Class Class 150 300 600 900 1500 2500 Class abbreviation CL CL CL CL CL CL 150 300 600 900 1500 2500 Nominal pressure PN PN PN PN PN PN 20 50 110 150 260 420 ASME pressure rating ceiling values psig barg 290 20. and a complete set of studs and nuts. but takes more time. Desflex flanges are available as weld neck. long weld neck flanges. the assembly operates in a ‘static mode’. Annual monitoring of the VCF system is not required and VCF systems comply with the 4 year schedule in accordance with US-EPA legislation. The flange stresses during assembly are controlled by limiting the flange rotation via a small gap at the outer edge of the flange. interface corrosion is eliminated. The tapered seal ring geometry design ensures a significant length of the sealing surfaces as contact forces are generated between both the male and female components. Destec provide their own pressure rating tables that are based on the stress analysis methodology in ASME VIII Division 1. and the female contains a 10° pocket. Desflex The Desflex compact flange is manufactured by Destec Engineering Ltd and uses a ‘D’ type metal-to-metal seal which is flush with the bore of the flange. Verax The concept of the Verax compact flange (VCF) originated as far back as the early 1950s. Taper-Lok® is a registered trade mark of Taper-Lok Corporation. Appendix 2. so once assembled and tightened.7 1500 103. The flanges are more resistant to external bending. This means that normal installation and assembly of equipment can be easier as components should slip into place. Since there is no gasket present.0 Taper-Lok® The Taper-Lok® Weld Neck Assembly is a compact flange comprised of a male flange. although these can be added if required. Most VCF joints have a greater number of smaller bolts than standard flanges. The VCF system performs well on the failure mode evaluation analysis. Desflex flanges are available in sizes from 1” NPS up to 40” NPS.0 750 51.6 6250 431. and pressure rating classes 300. blind and swivel flanges. 900. The seal ring is generally made of the same material as the flange and is reusable. and temperatures ranging from -350º to 1600º F. The Taper-Lok® seal ring. sealing pressures up to 40.

including oil and gas (onshore.In addition. but utilises the tapered sealing ring as fitted to the Taper-Lok compact flange. The metal seal ring achieves a self-energised and pressure-energised bore seal that will hold vacuum or external pressures. Grayloc® The Grayloc connector has three basic components – the metal seal ring. Destec G-Range The Destec G-Range clamp connector is also similar to the Grayloc connector. but since this face is the primary seal. not the bolting.5 flanges generally have a fairly small number of large bolts. CUSTOM DESIGNED FLANGES Custom designed flanges are used when the diameter does not match that of a standard flange. making maintenance simpler and quicker. and a seal ring. The clamp carries all the internal pressure loads as well as axial and bending loads transmitted by the pipe. and as they are drawn together by the clamp assembly the seal ring lips deflect against the inner sealing surface of the hub. which in turn increase the bending moment in the flange and hence the flange thickness. and utilises a self-energised and pressure-energised metal seal ring at the bore of the flange. There are only four bolts to tighten. • Can only be joined to another flange of the same type. offshore and subsea applications). and utilises a selfenergised and pressure-energised metal seal ring at the bore of the flange. When expensive alloy materials are being used this will have significant cost implications. Taper-Lok. petro-chemical and power generation. Clamp connectors are used in a variety of industries. Compared to a standard flange. • No periodic retightening of the bolts is required when the connector is in service. PROPRIETARY CLAMP CONNECTORS Clamp connectors consist of a pair of hubs for that are welded to the ends of the pipe (similar to a flange). or when a better optimised design is required. No periodic retightening of the bolts is required when the connector is in service. the mating faces must be scratch free. For example. The advantages include: • Many designs use a reusable seal. Taper-Lok® The Taper-Lok Clamp Connector is similar to the Grayloc connector. including Grayloc. There are several designs available. The end result is a flange that is considerably heavier than an optimised design. forming a self-energising seal. good operator training and installation procedure must be adopted. Vector Techlok The Vector Techlok Clamp Connector is similar to the Grayloc connector. Some minor scratches are permitted. • High quality of leak tightness. making maintenance considerably simpler and quicker. • Some designs have male and female flanges. Vector Techlok and Destec. the two hubs and the clamp assembly. but the normal flange bolts are replaced by a clamp set. The two piece clamp assembly is the primary pressure retaining component. rather than a larger number of smaller bolts. Grayloc is a registered trade mark of Oceaneering International Inc. The hubs are welded to the ends of the pipe. standard ASME B16. This increases the bolt circle diameter and flange outside diameter. clamp connectors are significantly lighter and smaller. 19 . • Smaller and lighter than conventional flanges. Disadvantages • Most piping and vessel codes do not give automatic exemption from design calculations. • Only four bolts to tighten. which can be rotated around the hubs to suit the most practical position.

One option is to use a design similar to a traditional bolted flange. ASME VIII and PD 5500. The advantages of using a custom designed flange are: • Can be designed for the specific design conditions. vessels and other pressure equipment where there is a requirement for sections to be removable. Custom designed flanges are commonly used for the girth flanges in shell and tube heat exchangers. may be dismantled and reassembled on a regular basis. • Usually smaller and lighter than a standard flange. Figure 7 . and with fewer bolts. Pipeline Engineering and T D Williamson. Disadvantages: • Design calculations must be performed. Perry Equipment Corporation. If more rapid access is required there are several proprietary quick release openings on the market.Quick release clamp For access openings various types of quick release manways are available. bolting and gasket materials. Others. Alternative design methods are given in the EN 1591 series of standard. 20 . These design methods will be covered by other presentations at this seminar. All these openings still require the loosening of a number of bolts in order to gain access. These are not strictly bolted flanged connections. These are generally significantly lighter than a standard blind flange. • Total cost may be greater than a standard flange.Flange design methods are given in most pressure vessel design codes. such as EN 13445. • Designed for specific flange. • Longer delivery time compared with a standard “off the shelf” flange. including those offered by GD Engineering. but they serve the same purpose. These are usually in the form of a hinged door with some form of quick acting locking mechanism instead of bolts. Various safety features are incorporated to ensure that the door cannot be opened while the equipment is pressurised. Most of these are based on what is generally known as the “Taylor Forge Method”. QUICK RELEASE OPENINGS Many bolted flanged joints stay in service for long periods (several years) without being dismantled. but with swing bolts or quick release clamps instead of conventional through bolting. such as access openings. and this will affect the type of flange selected.

deflection. weight and cost remain. and users must be fully aware of the design basis and operational limits of each system. leakage. due to increasingly more demanding operational requirements. improved and even redesigned the bolted flange over time. However. The main issues of strength. 21 .Typical quick opening closure applications include: • Pipeline pig traps • Filters • Coalescers • Strainers • Separators • Meter skid systems • Hydrocyclones The main advantages are: • Rapid access • Reusable seal • Safety interlocks Disadvantages • High cost compared to a standard flange CONCLUSIONS The standard flange has served the pressures systems industry reasonably well for over 80 years. various manufacturers and industries have adjusted.

22 .

Novus Sealing Limited 23 .Gasket Selection Dr Gavin Smith. Novus Sealing Limited © Dr Gavin Smith.

24 .

Gasket Selection Dr Gavin Smith. Technical Director Novus Sealing Limited To ensure safe operation of a bolted  flange connection the gasket must be: •Correctly SELECTED •Of the right QUALITY •Properly ASSEMBLED 25 .

 despite all this knowledge  problems do occur •A good (or bad) example are the  numerous failures of nitrile  elastomer seals that occurred on the  change from Diesel to Bio‐Diesel 26 .Fluid Temperature Pressure •The gasket should be suitable for the  design or operating conditions: •The process fluid at the operating  temperature  •The operating temperature •The operating pressure •There is a wealth of data from both  gasket manufacturers and plant  history on the compatibility of  gasket materials with process fluids •However.

 the oxygen  concentration and the quality 27 .Failure of Nitrile  Gaskets in Bio‐Diesel •Gaskets may seal well initially  but can fail over time at  temperature • Creep and Stress Relaxation •A gasket may seal well  initially but over time will lose  load which may result in  flange leakage  •Oxidation  •Graphite will oxidise at  elevated temperature at a  rate determined by the  temperature.

  28 .  •Gasket Stress is the key  parameter: Defined as the as  the total applied bolt load  divided by the compressed area  of the gasket •Gasket stress defines the load  bearing characteristics of the  gasket and is used to calculate  the torque applied to the bolts  during assembly.Oxidation of Graphite in a Spiral Wound Gasket •The resistance of a gasket  material to the internal  pressure is related to its ability  to withstand the load applied.

Every gasket has a minimum and maximum stress Max Gasket  Stress Min 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Stud Number Non‐metallic gaskets have a low minimum and low  maximum stress Gasket  Stress Max Min 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Stud Number 29 .

Metallic gaskets have a high minimum  and high maximum stress Max Gasket  Stress Min 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Stud Number 2” Flange Size by Pressure Class 30 .

Setting the target stress Max Gasket  Stress Target  Stress Min 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Stud Number Temperature effects will reduce the stress on the  gasket significantly (all gasket relax!) Max Gasket  Stress Target  Stress Relaxation Service  Stress 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Stud Number 31 .

Solution is to set stud loads high and select a  gasket with high resistance to relaxation Max Gasket  Stress Target  Stress Relaxation Service  Stress Min 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Stud Number Gasket Selection for Heat Exchangers The two main reasons flange  connections on heat exchangers  leak are:  • Gasket Load Loss from  Relaxation Inability to Tolerate Relative  Movement Between the  Flanges • 32 .

005 Second Restart of Exchanger -0. Over 21 Days 0.002 Channel Flange 0.008 Normal Operation For This Exchanger -0.001 Differential Growth.004 Exchanger Channel Side Flow Stalls -0. in Inches Shell Flange 0 2:08 7:08 2:38 7:38 3:08 8:08 3:38 8:38 4:08 9:08 4:38 9:38 0:08 21:08 11:38 16:38 21:38 12:08 17:08 22:08 12:38 17:38 22:38 13:08 18:08 23:08 13:38 18:38 23:38 14:08 19:08 14:38 5:08 19:38 10:08 -0.001 -0.009 -0.002 -0.003 -0. Relative to the Tubesheet Diameter. Relative To The Tubesheet.Differential Expansion in a Heat Exchanger Differential Radial Expansion Of Channel and Shell Flanges.01 "X" Axis Shows Time With Data Taken Every 30 Minutes Effect of Differential Expansion •Differential Expansion leads to  differential movement between  the mating flanges •Flange movement results in  shearing of the gasket or leads to  slippage at the gasket / flange  interface •Double Jacketed gaskets are  unable to tolerate this movement  between the flanges.007 Startup Following A Plant Shutdown -0.006 -0.  33 .

Failure of a Double Jacketed Gasket Graphite faced gaskets are the best  solution for heat exchanger applications •Corrugated Metal Gasket •Camprofile Gasket •Spiral Wound Gasket 34 .

The sealing integrity of a Camprofile relies  upon precise standards of machining 35 .Quality •Once the gasket has been correctly selected  it must be manufactured to the highest  quality •Unfortunately. lets have a look at the  Camprofile…. failures do to poor quality  gaskets remain a problem •As an example.

There are three methods of manufacture • Bend and weld pre‐profiled strip • Bend and weld strip and profile • Laser cut rings and lathe profile Failure due to poor quality weld 36 .

 Poor! 37 .Failure due to poor quality weld Bend and Weld construction.

Bend and Weld Construction Really Poor!! Welds must be machined down to the  same height as the metal core Failure Point – thinner material  and no serrations 38 .

 4 hours Low Quality Graphite High Quality Graphite 39 . but looks  can be deceiving!!! Basic oxidation test at 600°C.The best solution is no welds All graphite looks the same.

But ash content does not guarantee  oxidation rate Ash Content 0.8 Weight Loss 5 4.5 W eight Loss % A sh content % 3.6 0.5 0.5 2 0.3 1.1 0.7 0.2 1 0.4 2.5 4 0.5 0 0 Sample A Sample B Sample C Sample D Sample E Sample A Sample B Sample C Sample D Sample E The reliability of the flanged joint depends on  competent control of the joint making process Well lubricated  studs and nuts Controlled  Tightening Trained  technicians 40 .5 3 0.

Contact Details Dr Gavin Smith Technical Director Novus Sealing Limited Tel: 07785247202 email: gsmith@novussealing. They have a wealth of data and  experience that can ensure a leak free.Conclusions • A gasket is a relatively low cost item but it is critical to the safe operation of any plant.com 41 .  •To ensure safe operation a gasket must be: •Correctly Selected •Of the right quality •Properly Assembled •Use your gasket provider. safe plant.

42 .

Material Selection for Industrial Fasteners Rod Corbett. James Walker Rotabolt © Rod Corbett 43 .

44 .

The main selection categories are :Tensile and fatigue strength Elevated and cryogenic temperatures Corrosion resistance One or more of these categories has to be analysed for a particular application before the fastener material is selected. tensile strength is the most important consideration in fastener selection.9 grade is widely used for high performance structural usage e.9 and 14. Their main effect on carbon steel is to increasing hardenability. This level of tension when achieved delivers assured joint reliability – no leaks from pressure containment. Higher strength grades such as 12.9 have decreasing ductility and increased susceptibility to brittle failure so 10.1 Hardenability ISO 898 10. For strength of 1040 MPa minimum. This strength level combines high strength with good ductility. the higher the hardness. within a safe elastic strength margin. 2. Assured joint reliability Increased fatigue life Service load carrying capability in tensile and shear. The bolt has one objective – to deliver a known level of bolt tension and subsequent equal and opposite compression in the flanged joint. The higher the carbon content. Nickel and Molybdenum enhance the mechanical properties of the steel.9 is an optimum choice in difficult environments. JamesWalker Rotabolt 1 Introduction Material selection for fasteners depends on the service environment. fasteners can be manufactured from low alloy steels. This must no be confused with hardness which is dependant mainly on carbon content. Reduced equipment build costs – fewer. 45 . Other alloying elements that are normally present in steel also affect hardenability. Managing Director. and no structural slip.Material Selection for Industrial Fasteners Rod Corbett. potentially. smaller bolts for the same service.g. 2 Tensile and Fatigue strength The main considerations for bolt strength selection in any environment are:Achievement of design bolt tension/joint compression/gasket seating stress. no fatigue failure. The main alloying elements Chromium. no self loosening. Generally. the load carrying requirement and the cost of a joint for an expected service life. cranes.

2. It is advisable to control carbon contents. and subsequently satisfies. A threaded fastener is really a component containing a series of notches. Their effect on hardenability is demonstrated in the presentation slides covering tensile strength. However. 46 . and high performance applications such as large diameter slew ring bolting. particularly in lower carbon steels. high strength. steels with greater alloy content are needed. Finally. especially molybdenum also increases resistance. The material must have sufficient ductility at high strength levels and minimum 7% elongation is indicative of this. Although stress levels have a big say in susceptibility. Hardenability through a 2 inch diameter enables the manufacture of fasteners throughout a size range. excessive carbon decreases forge-ability. 826M40 or SAE 4340 should be selected. The criterion for high notch strength is that the material’s notched tensile strength (at kt = 6) must be equal or greater than the materials smooth bar tensile strength. high performance fasteners could be: The tempering temperature of at least 480C allows the material to be used in fasteners that will satisfy several different markets.The list of hardenability agents are as follows: Carbon Carbon is a strong aid to hardenability. The use of plain carbon boron steels are not recommended for use in large diameter. Note that for larger diameters.2 Ideal material for high strength Ideal pre-requisites for candidate materials to be used in the manufacture of high strength. their fatigue properties can be different. For strength levels greater than 1220 MPa. Boron should only be used to boost hardenability of low alloy steels maybe for larger diameter fasteners however it is important to consider the operating environment especially with respect to stress corrosion cracking and elevated temperatures. Be hot and cold forgeable Materials are resistant to environmental embrittlement. You will note that boron is the most powerful agent. However. it reduces forgeability. although different materials have the same tensile strength. increasing alloy content. Manganese Strongly increases hardenability. Chromium Molybdenum Boron } Most effective hardenability agents When present in a small amounts (0.001%) it has a pronounced effect. causes embrittlement problems in heat treatment as well as room temperature/low temperature applications.

The following schematic shows typical stress strain curves for alloy steels and non-ferrous alloys.3. less tightening cycles). Alloy steel bolting is relatively low cost but has a limited service life. Whilst alloy steels and super alloys are capable of developing much higher strength levels.1 True Strength of bolting Medium carbon low alloy steels are used for high strength bolting that is used in a wide range of environmental conditions ranging from the benign to the hostile.3 Application of high strength bolting We have mentioned that increased tensile strength enables the use of fewer and smaller diameter fasteners. Many of the new alloy developments are produced with similar UTS and 0.2% proof stress is a traditional bench mark for a bolt’s yield strength. 2. 2. One design pre-requisite for the candidate alloy is that it has similar mechanical strength and properties to the alloy steel. The effective strength reduction can be as much as 30-35% below the 0. 47 . This design concept as also been used in the design of latest technology wellhead equipment where traditional 8 or 12 bolt flanges have been reduced to four or six bolts of the same diameter.2% proof stress values to their steel counterparts. reduced diameters.2% proof stress values but their true elastic limit is significantly different. This is of prime importance in the aerospace industry but is important in other industries as reduced weight means reduced cost (smaller bolt quantities. smaller number of bolt holes. This advantage along with its excellent corrosion resistance would seem attractive to the offshore industry but as yet hasn’t been used extensively. They may have similar 0. their strength to weight ratio is not as good as titanium.2% proof stress value compared with a nominal 12-15% with alloy steels. The increasing demand in most industries for longer service life with reduced maintenance costs has led to the assessment and use of non-ferrous alloys which have inherently superior environmental resistance. resulting in weight reduction. Indeed the British Steel Advisory centre has recommended that engineers use elastic strength assessments based on 60% of the specified 0. With many alloys designed for use in hostile environment it is a fact that their elastic strength capacity is significantly less than their medium carbon low alloy steel counterparts.2% proof stress for austenitic stainless alloys.Good thread fatigue resistance as the most common form of bolt failure is fatigue. 0.

48 .

EN26 and larger diameter B7 are showing between 25-40% deficiencies compared to their certified proof street values. With most of the non-ferrous bolting alloys having up to 30% lower effective elastic strength compared to the specification bench mark the prospect of yielding or even breaking bolts on installation is significant. Alloy N/mm2 Monel k500 Ferralium 225 Marinel 21A Titanium Beta C Titanium 6AL-4V ELI Austenitic Stainless condition GR MA 18 fully heat treat ------------solution treated solution treated Work hardened 0..2% proof Stress N/mm2 655 649 720 834 830 600 true elastic limit 475 441 487 679 593 360 These substantial reductions in effective fastener strength are very significant in energy industries. EN25. such as EN24’V’. recent findings suggest that larger diameter bolting can have much lower elastic strength than that suggested by its certified 0. carried out on M22 all thread and double ended studs manufactured from the relevant alloys. is produced for the manufacture of any metallic component. rather than heat treating the finished fastener to the specific fastener mechanical properties. This is illustrated in the following schematic. 49 . This is especially so for stud bolting that is made simply by thread forming bar stock that is already supplied in a heat treated condition that matches the required finished fastener mechanical properties. Bolting made from alloys such as EN24. revealed the following true elastic limits for various materials.Incremental load extensions tests. quite often the properties are at the bottom of the tensile range. Initial fastener diameter selection will be based on the latter and the materials specified 0. especially when you consider how most of these fasteners are installed.2% proof stress. Because of the need to compensate for load transfer relaxation the studs have to be hydraulically overloaded appreciably in excess of the design tension target. Also the manufacturing process leaves residual stresses in the bolt and when further process deformation occurs. Bar stock. 2. say during bar straightening etc. the effect is to lower a bolts yield or flow stress. There are a number of reasons that could explain this low elastic strength.2% proof stress.3. Hydraulic tensioning is the most common tightening method for larger diameter studs. not just bolts.2 Causes of low elastic strength in alloy steels Whilst the above schematic indicates a relatively high elastic limit for alloy steels.

Both situations are potentially detrimental to the performance of the bolted joint. If it does occur.There are consequences for in-service performance. the following results:Reduced joint clamp loads Bolt is highly stressed. This maybe significant in terms of resistance to environmental embrittlement. 50 . with likely increased hardness. It is difficult to know if a bolt has been yielded on tightening.

The material is used predominantly in acid handling applications. 3. Nickel and Nickel equivalent elements. Ordinary alloy steel fasteners may be perfectly satisfactory in certain applications and environments where merely protected by a surface coating.1. Chromium and chromium equivalent elements such as molybdenum. 3.3 Corrosion resistance Selection here not only depends on required strength but on the service environment too. This heat treatment can develop strength levels as high as 1500 MPa with alloys such as PH13-8Mo and A286. As the name implies.g. promote austenite. In the offshore industry the derivative for A286 is B17 or A453 660 grade primarily used for sour gas applications or where higher strength is needed compared to austenitic stainless steel.1 The most common group of materials is stainless steels.g. Strength levels similar to low alloy steels can be achieved up to 1200 MPa subject to section size. However. As indicated previously. let us concentrate on severe conditions where the fastener must have a long life in a hostile environment. These are the four basic types:3. The superior corrosion resistance is brought about by the addition of chromium. promote martensite and ferrite type stainless steels. They can be more cost effective than corrosion resistance materials.1. 3. they cannot be heat treated and tend to be very notch sensitive and have very poor creep strength. 3. However.1. the alloy contents in the composition matrix determine whether the stainless steel is austenitic or martensitic etc.3 Precipitation hardening Precipitation hardening is a heat treatment process similar to hardening and tempering with low alloy steels.1. 51 . such as manganese.2% Proof Stress. The nominal compositions for stainless steels seem similar. these steels are more resistant to rusting and staining than plain carbon and lower alloy steels.2 Martensitic These steels are hardenable by heat treatment in the same way as carbon alloy steels. Any strength this stainless steel has comes from cold work or deformation during its production cycle e.4 Ferritic stainless steels There is no demand for fasteners made from this material. It is worth noting however that these steels are also prone to lower than expected elastic limits compared to the specification stated 0.1 Austenitic stainless E. their true elastic limit is significantly lower than the specification stated 0. during raw material bar rolling or cold forging and thread rolling.2 % Proof stress value. 18% chromium -12% nickel This type of material cannot be strengthened by heat treatment.

2 Cupro Nickels and High Nickel alloys One family of corrosion resistant materials used in the offshore industry are Cupro Nickels.3 Environmental Embrittlement A very common environmental failure mechanism is stress corrosion cracking (SCC).g. once the environment severity increases even further. The amount of corrosion involved can be very small but its effect can be catastrophic. Multiphase. 2. The effect is cumulative and.9 strength grade. available in two compositions. and embrittles the lattice structure. However. Whilst generally there is no corrosion in this type of failure. the use of dry cleaning methods such as aluminium blasting instead of an acid pickle. 52 . sour gas environments at the bottom of the oceanic oil wells. susceptibility and a corrosive environment causes stress corrosion cracking. materials such as Inco 718 and Hastelloy have to be used. Many applications can be accommodated with fasteners made from aforementioned materials.9 grade the maximum specification alloy hardness exceeds the threshold for many medium carbon low alloy steels so they become susceptible. As the name suggests the main elements in the alloys are Copper and Nickel.3. Initial pitting of the metal surface takes place and leads to a stress concentration. proprietary alloys called Multiphase will provide a fastener with the optimum solution. Using alternative cleaning methods e. surface coat alloy steels. it can lead to very sudden failure. Possible sources for this hydrogen are: 1. Protect the fastener from corrosion e.2% Proof Stress stated in relevant specifications. and has ultra high strength 1800 MPa and fatigue resistance. This alloy is a nickel cobalt quaternary. extreme cases e. SCC can be avoided through material selection based on the following factors:Keep the material stress below a critical threshold level for that alloy. Both trans and intergranular attack of the metal takes place in SCC but the failure is generally characterised by a brittle intergranular fracture.g. At 12.g. ensure compatibility of joint materials. 3. Inco 718. in a highly stressed joint. Marinel and more recently Nibron have all been used but as with the stainless steels their true strength is significantly below that suggested by the 0. Ensure post plating baking procedures are carried out to drive out any hydrogen that has diffused into the fastener during plating. the failure mode is virtually identical to SCC. Use a stress corrosion cracking free alloy e. thereby lowering the threshold stress level for brittle failure. Hydrogen diffuses into small voids near to the surface of the metal. Monel K 500. The same stress threshold concept exists for other embrittlement failures such as hydrogen embrittlement (HE). 3.g. A combination of stress. At the joint design stage. It is also immune to stress corrosion cracking and hydrogen embrittlement. For the most severe. A typical application of SCC prevention is on offshore pedestal cranes where most slew ring bolting/boom bolting is now 10.

Chromium has a negative effect on heat resistance. Materials selected for these applications therefore. Waspaloy and Inco 718 are used where operating temperatures range from 650C to 850C. Molybdenum greatly increases creep and rupture strength. Alloy steels (up to 10% alloy content) Austenitic stainless steels Precipitation hardening stainless steels. All these are iron based materials and are generally used from 350C to 550C.g. Alloys with the body centre cubic structures lose ductility at lower temperatures and tend to have a threshold temperature below which they go brittle. are used at temperatures up to 650C. The following groups of materials are used for elevated temperature applications. Chromium and Molybdenum. creep.4 Elevated temperature applications. The creep and rupture strength of steel can be greatly improved by the addition of alloying elements. Alloys based on Iron. refractory materials based on tantalum have to be used. but one needs chromium present for oxidation resistance. oxidation and hot strength are major problems. Tungsten and vanadium have a similar effect. Materials selected for cryogenic applications tend to have faced centred cubic structures. for example B17/660 grade. For extreme temperatures greater than 1000C. Nimonic. we will go from the extreme of very high temperature to the opposite of low temperature or cryogenic application. 5 Cryogenic Applications Selection for cryogenic applications is dependant mainly on the crystallographic structure of the candidate material. 53 . molybdenum and cobalt. are very important in selecting materials for elevated temperature fasteners. Nickel based alloys e. Nickel. contain sufficient quantities of Nickel. With temperatures in this region. These elements therefore. For the final environment we will cover on material selection. Cobalt increases the hot tensile strength and temper resistance.

Nickel based alloys include Inco 718 and Nimonic 80. Austenitic stainless B8. A286. (FCC structure) A453 660/B17. alloys such as B8/B17 are used for high and low temperature service.Typical selection use for low temperature applications range from :Iron based – A320 L7(BCC structure). PH13–8MO. 54 . Many materials have a limited temperature range usage but the above illustrates that selection for elevated temperatures features the same alloys for cryogenic applications. and retain tensile strength at their maximum utilisation temperature. Inco 718. In offshore and energy sectors. They all show excellent strength and ductility at low temperatures. Wasploy and B17 have the advantage of a wide temperature range.

6. Once again where there is a requirement for the larger diameters to have the highest specification strength.g. The ultimate tensile strength of B7 is regarded as high in energy industry and is a bench mark for all other types of environmental alloy bolting such as duplex stainless and cupro-nickel. where the highest entry level B& strength is required on larger diameters. B7 strength is significantly lower however the lower hardness tends to be below threshold levels for environmental embrittlement such as SCC and hydrogen. This means for larger diameter bolts. 8. designers often call for A540 B24. It is capable of much higher strengths than B7 and its chromium. larger diameters have lower tensile strength because of hardenability constraints. Both specifications are typified using a constant composition over the full bolt diameter range. BS 4882 stretches out the use of B7 to approx 450 C and then by adding Vanadium to create B16. The B7 designation is mirrored by L7 for low temperature usage. The A193 and BS 4882 specs extend to an elevated temperature capability because of the alloy composition. The DIN Euronorm specification tends to be different and categorises by material with the material strength grade being determined by the bar stock or bolt diameter in that material.1 Structural Bolting Most of the high performance structural bolting in industry is specified to a strength level and is manufactured from medium carbon low alloy steels. Comparative table B& versus 8.1 Strength. In the main.8 versus 10. The same can be said for SAE J429. specifications such as ISO 898 10. the V resists tempering effects pushing its allowable design usage to 525C. A traditional imperial material specification is BS1768 which also categorises by strength grade. specifications such as 1SO 898. Mechanically and composition wise they are identical. The all embracing standard is covered by the B7 designation. the only difference being L7 has a low temperature charpy test requirement. As with B7.9 etc. This qualifies it to be used at temperatures of the order of minus 100C. L43 (4340) alloy must be used. The material alloy is a medium carbon low alloy steel containing nominally 1% Chromium and 0. the B7 alloy has insufficient hardenability to provide constant tensile strength across this range – Table . 55 .1.25% Molybdenum. Compared to structural steels. One could argue this is the material’s absolute limit so great care on service longevity and replacement strategy has to be taken along with assured control on installed design bolt tension objectives if it is to provide a cost effective bolted joint at these maximum temperatures. he is supposed to have the experience and knowledge to make the selection and thereby guarantee the mechanical property specification e.6 Material Specifications 6. molybdenum and high nickel content of 2% creates deep hardenability enabling high strength and ductility at the largest bolt diameters. BS3692 allow the bolt manufacturer to make the material selection for the strength grade required unless otherwise stated by the customer.9 B7 is covered by A193 and the similar BS 4882.8 or 10.9 grade. The alloy here is more commonly known as SAE 4340. Provided he meets some basic minimum alloying element requirement.

is in the carbide solution treated condition and has a constant low tensile strength across the full size range. Austenitic stainless steels are designated B8.1. A320 also has some other strange material options including a plain carbon steel with added Boron for hardenability. 56 . the use of austenitic and precipitation hardening steel alloys must be used for resistance to heat . As with larger diameter carbon steel bolts having through hardening constraints for a certain alloy composition. A193 and BS4882 designate the lower strength B7M as the selection grade for such an environment. creep and oxidisation and maintain installed bolt tension/joint compression. the other low strength A193 B8 class I or BS4882 B8 not ‘X’ categorised. small diameter bolting on a process site. hostile environments are such that the strength level has to be reduced to an even lower threshold. the author can only summise. Because austenitic stainless steels cannot be heat treated to increase strength. Operating environments with high sulphur/hydrogen sulphide present are such an example. 6.3 Elevated / High temperature/ cryogenic applications. it is an economy option for high volume.2 Environmental selection .2% proof stress strength of B8X on bolt diameters in excess of 19mm diameter. Reducing proof stress and true elastic limit potentially 30% below these tabulated values makes strength selection of B8 crucial. In terms of hydrogen embrittlement and general stress corrosion cracking the standard B7 strength hardness of the chromium molybdenum alloy is low enough to ensure these types of failure will not occur. higher strength requirements must come from the cold working and subsequent deformation induced during fastener manufacture. BS 4882 illustrates clearly the rapid drop off in tensile strength. Where operating temperatures exceed the absolute maximums for medium carbon low alloy steels. However certain. The situation becomes even more complex if hydraulic tensioner tightening is being considered for installation. This is especially significant for flange bolting where metallic/semi metallic gaskets are used. particularly the 0. There are two versions.The increased toughness at through hardened strength from the higher nickel is especially effective at lower temperatures found in LNG operations for example. Immunity can be achieved by reducing the strength/hardness of the fastener below a threshold value below which the mechanism will not initiate. 6. the failure mechanism in these environments is sulphide stress cracking. Having no experience of such a requirement. The hydraulic overload that has to be applied to compensate for relaxation losses reduces the safety margin on usable elastic strength or even disqualifies this methodology as bolt yield could be exceeded.Lower Bolt Strength. Where medium carbon low alloy steel fasteners are required to operate in corrosion environments they need to be resistant to embrittlement mechanisms such as stress corrosion and hydrogen. On larger diameters the effect of higher strength surface layers diminishes in terms of overall tensile strength of the total bolt cross section. These gaskets require generally higher seating stresses and subsequent design bolt stress to seal. one high strength A193 B8 class 2 or BS4882 B8X. the effect of the cold work/deforming forces go from maximum at bolt surface layers and steadily reduce the closer you get to the bolt cross section core.1. The lower strength B8.

is B80. precipitation hardening steels such as BS4882 B17 need to be considered. It’s all down to cost and subsequent in service risk. The BS4882 categorisation for Nimonic bolting. Often one ends up with coated alloy steel bolts being used. These materials also have a higher temperature capability up to 650/675. This alloy can boost its strength thru’ heat treatment so is a natural selection option for higher performance gasketted flanged joints. 57 . Generally lower cost alloy steels can be used in the more hostile environments but planned maintenance / change out times will be shorter and more frequent. against a 25 year life expectancy in the splash zone.Where gasket seating stress and true elastic limit is an issue. For cryogenic applications beyond the capability of medium carbon alloy steels material selection mirrors that for high temperatures. For even higher bolt temperatures. Similar lack of realism occurs on petrochemical bolting exposed to high service temperatures and extended periods between planned outages. operating environment and service life is straightforward. The Offshore industry is notorious for stating extended service life but then being totally unrealistic in the money it is prepared to spend on the fastener selected to achieve the requirement. Service temperatures down to minus 200 – 250C are within these materials’ ranges for good strength and ductility/toughness. The similar ASTM designation is A450 660 grade. 7 Summary Material selection for any bolted application in terms of mechanical properties. rather than an inherent corrosion resistant bolt. Often medium carbon low alloy steel is the final selection when precipitation hardening stainless bolts should have been used. The complications start when budgeted cost does not correlate with technical/service specification. high nickel super alloys such as Nimonic 80 and Inco 718 provide high strength with creep and oxidisation resistance in these severe environments. Alloy selection is the same and the same limiting strength factors apply in terms of providing the required level of elastic strength enabling the bolt to deliver the design bolt tension that assures bolted joint reliability/zero leak performance.

58 .

The Equity Engineering Group © Warren Brown 59 .Traditional Flange Design Methods Warren Brown.

60 .

61 . in fact. such as mechanical interaction. The table outlines some of the key differences and similarities in the methods. can be relatively easily added to the ASME design method. The design method has remained largely unchanged since that time. the traditional ASME method still holds significant advantage over newer methods and. Ohio. there continues to be a number of failures associated with poor design. The method has given very good service across a wide variety of applications. such as the inclusion of mechanical interaction. Other international methods of design have been introduced recently. and the ASME method. and the fact that it has remained largely unchanged is testimony to its effectiveness. this approximation means that some of the advanced methods that can now be applied to flange design. In the engineering field. In addition. the method can be modified to ensure an extremely high integrity joint design. thermal effects and determining flange strength limits will not be as accurate or even possible to perform with the current EN1591 method. However.. For the most common flange design. which is the treatment of hub to flange and shell to hub interaction. Ph. more traditional methods obsolete. the ASME method is based on the calculation of the shell.Eng.com Introduction Early research in design and analysis of bolted joints was conducted in the 1920’s to 1940’s in Germany. while flange design issues represent a relatively small portion of the leakage that occurs in practice. have shown that the inclusion of the effects of the hub and shell (both in terms of rigidity and stress locations) is essential. the Australian Pressure Vessel Code. The findings of this early work led to flanged joint design rules being introduced by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) in the 1940’s. such as BS 55000 or AS1210. hub and flange ring as connected series.Traditional Flange Design Methods Warren Brown. with minor alterations and improvements. the method is not without issue and. most notably the CEN EN-1591 method. However. to avoid damage to the flange. are largely based on one of the listed methods) was performed for Welding Research Council bulletin 514 “Flange Design: Status of Present Rules”. One of the most common comparisons is between the EN1591 method. one often expects the latest methods to be the best and. the UK and the USA. however the ASME method remains the most widely accepted and most popular method of flange joint design. USA Email: iwbrown@equityeng.D. in the case of flange design. However. weld neck flanges. While this method is undoubtedly an acceptable and proven flange design method. In fact. The Equity Engineering Group Shaker Heights. whereas the EN1591 method does not account for the shell restraint and approximates the effect of the hub with an equivalent increase of the flange ring moment of inertia. the comparisons generally neglect one of the other key differences between the methods. that they will eventually render the older. Such comparisons usually highlighting the lack of a mechanical interaction calculation in the ASME method and the advantages that calculation offers when performed using the EN1591 method. based on the TGL 32903/13. many of the advantages of the EN1591 method. Principal Engineer. Traditional ASME Method versus Other Codes A comparison of current code design methods (noting that other additional international codes. recent work into determining the acceptable limits for assembly bolt load. P.

The research effort commenced with the realization that there was no reliable standard method of determining the values of “m” and “y” for new gasket types that are not presently listed in Appendix 2. other than to meet the current expected norms of pressure vessel design for material stress limits. there is risk that the current ASME method will provide a joint design that is prone to leakage. this can be directly traced back to disconnect between the bolt load used for flange design and the bolt load that must be applied in practice to achieve a leak free joint (typically in excess of double the design load). whether there is a plan for inclusion of them in the ASME code eventually and what can be done in the interim to improve the existing method. Unfortunately. the simple ASME code method using the “m” value will result in a conservative treatment of the effects of mechanical interaction in reducing the bolt load as pressure is applied. Joints with a larger diameter and stiffer gaskets will typically see a reduction in bolt load once pressure is applied and this means that the total gasket load lost is the sum of the hydrostatic end force and the bolt load loss. For those joints. the present “m” value used in the code accounts for the required gasket sealing stress during operation and part of the reduction in gasket load caused by pressure (which is why it is higher for stiffer gaskets). There is no reason why the bolt load used for flange design must be so low. so it is advisable to step outside the standard design and analysis practices in order to improve on the traditional ASME design method. The following sections will outline the major areas of improvement that are required. in terms of research. This invariably provides an excellent training lesson for the engineer in question when practically every joint leaks on start-up. Required Improvements to the Current ASME Design Method Inadequate Gasket Design Basis One of the most significant areas of improvement that has received the bulk of the focus. over the past 20 years is the need to better determine operating limits for the gasket and apply that to flange design. 62 . These bounds include such aspects as the maximum permissible gasket stress (versus temperature) and the maximum permissible flange rotation (also versus temperature). in flange design it would also be a significant advantage to know the bounds of application that are acceptable for a given gasket. However. there is presently no standard ASME or ASTM test methods that can be adopted for improving the ASME code and many of the current international test methods that have already been adopted do not adequately address the requirement or have inherent problems that make their application questionable. the simple method currently employed does not adequately cover the effects of mechanical interaction in reducing the gasket load over and above the amount of the hydrostatic end force. and in particular for large diameter joints with stiffer gaskets. In many cases. in spite of the level of research into these topics. Many well meaning engineers have fallen into the trap of thinking that. Disconnect Between Design and Operation One of leading causes of joint leakage in the field is an inadequate initial assembly bolt load. the assembly bolt load should be limited to the code design bolt load. In most cases. because “code limits should never be exceeded”. any such improvements to the ASME method are not likely to be included in the code updates in the near future.Unfortunately. In addition to the need to determine the minimum stress required to seal the joint and the minimum seating stress for a given gasket. In addition to the above mentioned improvements. in some cases.

on top of that. In addition. one of the issues is that these fall into the category where the simple treatment of elastic interaction in the code is non-conservative and. This means that. refinery flanges with ≤19mm  (≤¾ inch) diameter bolts and higher pressure flanges with larger bolts (≥75mm. due to the shell forcing flange ring rotation. requiring an extremely thick backing ring to make any appreciable difference. then it is possible to select an assembly bolt stress level that will ensure sufficient long-term gasket stress exists during operation and thereby avoid joint leakage. The bolt load can increase or decrease during operation due to variations in process conditions and such changes can cause joint leakage if sufficiently high. One successful fix has been to strengthen the flange with additional backing-rings applied between the nuts and existing flanges. when compared to identifying the issue and making the integral flange ring thicker at the design stage prior to fabrication. Once again however. However. The larger diameter bolt flanges have the opposite problem. there may be inadequate bolt load remaining to seal the joint for the expected life of the joint. there is most often insufficient bolt area available to provide adequate gasket stress for seating and/or operational considerations (resulting in the need to assemble the joints to in excess of 70% of bolt yield to achieve adequate gasket assembly stress levels). larger diameter flanges is the effect of thermal transients during operation. 63 . Similarly. In addition to the transient effects of temperature on bolt load. Inadequate Joint Design at Temperature A common cause of joint leakage for high temperature. they often have inadequate bolting and flange strength to deliver sufficient gasket seating stress. low pressure joints.Inadequate Joint Design for Integrity Even though the majority of joints designed to the ASME code operate without incident. There is also a class of flanges that is more difficult to define. relaxation of stress levels in materials occurs at temperatures much lower than normally expected for creep (above only 200°C (400°F) in carbon steel. increase the gasket width to obtain a lower initial assembly stress. for example). ≥3 inches). The effects of temperature can be accounted for. Alternatively. there are categories of joints that have repeatedly proven to be susceptible to leakage due to design issues. resulting in deformation of the flange. if the expected amount of component relaxation is known. there is also long term relaxation of the joint components. but these rings are relatively a poor solution. In the case of low pressure joints. The fix in this case is relatively simple. Due to micro-plasticity. over-compression of the gasket. the expected relaxation stress and the loss in bolt load due to pressure and temperature. it is necessary to determine the transient temperatures of the joint components and apply those temperatures to a mechanical interaction analysis to establish the associated change in bolt stress. it is possible to adjust the flange and/or bolt geometry and materials at the design stage to reduce the expected amount of creep/relaxation that will occur. Unfortunately there is little that can be done for a flange that will yield prior to sufficient bolt load being applied to the gasket. they have so much bolt area available that the gasket stress often exceeds twice the yield of the flange material. flanges that are relatively thin compared to the shell that they are attached to (flange thickness less than five times the shell thickness) are likely to lose a significant amount of bolt load during the initial stages of any high temperature process start-up. if not accounted for. inadequate elastic rebound and subsequent leakage. to allow for this at the design stage. in the case of ≤¾ inch bolted flanges. both at the design stage and later in the operation stage when selecting the appropriate assembly bolt load. where the current design practices (including the now mandatory flange rotation limit) result in a flange that meets code design but will plastically deform and take on permanent flange rotation set at relatively low bolt loads (often at a load corresponding to 50% of bolt yield or less). These include large diameter. by increasing the assembly bolt load over and above the stress required to seal the gasket.

which may lead to leakage. but at least the intent is there to make the improvements. The work is still at an early stage in many cases and requires some clarification and improvement prior to implementation. for example). Individuals have had much success with the implementation of relatively simple gasket stress limits (a required seating stress. For lower pressure joints. but at present it is possible to design a flange that meets the ASME VIII code. and especially those with very thin gaskets. Non-Code Improvements to the ASME Design Method Inadequate Gasket Design Basis Unfortunately. the latest version of Appendix BFJ (the intended update to ASME VIII. to include the appendix as an optional non-mandatory requirement to the code. there is no procedure outlined to address the effects of external bending moments or external forces during operation on the integrity of the joint. Appendix 2 design method. which undoubtedly points to significant underlying problems. like a weld neck flange) or loose (shell is not connected to the hub). Proposed ASME Code Revisions As can be seen in the updated Table 1. 64 . the first item off the list is one where there really is no good standardized solution to the problem. designers and end-users will need to look to some of the following non-code methods outlined in order to improve ASME code joint integrity at the design stage. the flange rotation (and therefore mechanical interaction if calculated) will not be accurate due to the poor representation of the hub and/or the connection of the hub to the shell. if this operational loading is quantified at the design stage. the fact that the basis for Appendix BFJ is leakage based design. which would only be performed as a secondary check to the existing Appendix 2 design. Obviously the real case is neither of these and. there is a clause that allows them to be assessed as either integral (shell restrains the hub and the hub is assumed to taper over the hub height. such as ASME III and TEMA. means that there is little likelihood that it will be approved for publication in the near future and therefore the other improvements are being held from publication as a consequence. For slip-on flanges that are designed to the ASME code. Once again. and therefore warrant inclusion in this section. while the other has been around for almost twenty years and has yet to gain any measurable acceptance within industry. one was rapidly installed and has remained relatively unchanged for over sixty years. Therefore. Even the currently proposed path forward. Additionally. Div. using either of the methods can result in much higher stress levels at the shell to hub junction than for similarly designed weld neck flanges. it is possible to strengthen the flange and select an appropriate assembly bolt load to ensure that leakage will not occur. The reasons for the lack of acceptance of the method are numerous. a minimum stress required during operation and a maximum permissible gasket stress & rotation). there is presently no limit in the Appendix 2 design method for flange bolt hole spacing. but has bolt spacing that will result in regions of insufficient gasket stress between bolts. Industry experience with the leakage based method present in Appendix BFJ is the converse of experience with the existing ASME code flange design method. There are limits in other codes. but unfortunately there has been little progress in addressing the issues.Miscellaneous Improvements While the following items cause fewer leakage issues. in the near term. 1. There is a significant amount of trepidation regarding the use of leakage based flange design among the ASME code community. in fact. However the method of establishing these stress limits is non-standard and is usually a combination of both laboratory test results and field experience (as in Brown [1]. is still unlikely to meet with success. In the present ASME VIII. they are relatively easily addressed at the design stage. 1 Appendix 2) includes most of the additional design improvements listed above in one form or another. Unfortunately. Div.

it is generally necessary to either adjust the acceptable code bolt load and limits or perform a separate assessment after the code design assessment to account for component limits based on actual bolt load. Inadequate Joint Design for Integrity The issues with large diameter low pressure joints are partially resolved by performing the aforementioned mechanical interaction analysis. In addition to controlling the relative bolt and gasket area ratios. rather than design stress levels. Equations to include the effects of mechanical interaction on bolt load have been available since just after the release of the present code method (Wesstrom. Disconnect Between Design and Operation The issue of a design bolt load that is significantly less than the bolt load required to seal the joint is being addressed by post construction documents such as ASME PCC-1 Appendix O “Assembly Bolt Load Selection” [3]. This ensures that it will not be possible to damage the flange during assembly by applying excessive bolt load and it also enables the full range of bolt stress to be used to seal the joint if it is required. et. For example. et. resulting in an assembly gasket stress of between 170 MPa and 240 MPa (25 ksi and 35 ksi) for an assembly bolt stress of 345 MPa (50 ksi). However. when gasket stress limits are established by test. For example. this stress is always smaller than the other regions (Waters. 65 . it is good practice to ensure that the flange is not the weak component in the joint. Using the equations and limits outlined in the papers. then these must be compared to actual expected bolt stress levels. which can be used as a limit during design for the ensuring the flange is capable of taking.0 and 1. >80% of bolt yield. The method can also be used as a post-construction calculation for the upper limit on assembly bolt load for flanges designed without this minimum strength requirement. it is possible to accurately determine the effect of applied pressure on bolt load and. however the limits used in the papers changed with time as the method developed and so an overall summary of the development is also planned to be published as Welding Research Council Bulletin 528. The remainder of the issues for those joints and also for the excessively small and excessively large diameter bolt size joints are resolved by specifying an acceptable ratio of bolt to gasket area that must be met for flange design. then this stress can be significant and is one of the indicators of an inadequate flange design. however it is good practice to think in terms of the actual assembly load when designing the joint. al.2. al. In addition. [5] to Brown [7]). By incorporating the equations outlined in that paper. it is possible to determine both the flange strength and the location of the flange weakness.The Pressure Vessel Research Council – Sealing Reliability Council is presently attempting to bring together current laboratory methods and end-user experience to establish suitable standard procedures for determining these values. if the flanges are analyzed at normal assembly bolt load levels. because at the design bolt loads typically used. on residual gasket stress during operation. [2]). kamprofile and corrugated) is a gasket area divided by bolt area ratio of between 2. [4]). which formed the basis of ASME PCC-1 Appendix O. The gasket area should be based on full width for the perimeter portion and half width for the pass partition portion. a suitable area ratio range for common graphite based gaskets used in refining (spiral wound with inner & outer rings. The work is summarized in a series of ASME PVP conference papers (Brown et. Therefore. Recent work in determining the maximum acceptable load that a flange will take. therefore. however as of present none exist. say. the original ASME code method did not include assessment of the tangential stress at the hub to shell junction. has established elastic assessment limits that give an indication of when the flange ring will undergo gross plastic deformation (have permanent rotational deformation). al. or one of the many subsequent papers written by others using this method.

at the least. for example). say. however only a small portion of it can be applied in practice. The paper provides alternate flange factors that may be used in the standard ASME code flange design method to accurately determine stress levels and flange rotation. There are a number of existing codes and references that offer guidance on maximum acceptable bolt spacing. individuals are finding success with using simple percentage relaxation values determined from laboratory tests and field experience that serve to. this is generally only necessary where the temperature exceeds 200°C (400°F) for flanges ≤1500 mm (≤60 inches) in diameter and where the temperature exceeds 150°C (300°F) for larger diameter flanges. For example. Once again. based on a comprehensive assessment of the joint behavior that creates an excellent platform from which to improve in order to obtain leak free joint design. 1 flanges. or retightening the bolts during operation. A recent ASME-LLC project (Brown [9]) examined the long term characteristics of high temperature flange design. Conclusions It is the opinion of the author that the Traditional ASME design method remains the best option for designing and analyzing flanges. Additionally.Inadequate Joint Design at Temperature The transient joint component temperatures and associated severity of mechanical effects of temperature can be assessed. There has been significant research into the extent of gasket relaxation that may be expected. These methods and a simple analytical equation for determining a design limit are outlined in Koves [10]. shell or bolts. An extension of the original Waters [4] design method to include integral flanges with straight hubs (slip-on flanges that are welded to the shell) is outlined in Brown [11]. where appropriate. at least for common materials. However. account for the majority of the effect of relaxation (Brown [1]). It is a sound foundation. 2 to account for the effect of bending moments on flange operation. What is required prior to the inclusion of these effects is that. Div. there is sufficient data available that the techniques outlined in the project report can be applied in a limited fashion. assessment should be performed where significant difference in thermal expansion properties exist between the flange. using the methods outlined in Brown [8]. However. The existing standard tests do not provide long term relaxation results and so are not suitable for determining the amount of relaxation for a significant portion of the gasket types being employed in practice (graphite based gaskets. or different magnitudes of bending moments on the joint is possible. higher initial bolt loads. an “order of magnitude” assessment of the effect on joint life to leakage of. however the material properties presently available for doing so are generally inadequate for wholesale inclusion of the method into the design process. Miscellaneous Improvements The Koves method was recently introduced into the 2007 version of ASME VIII. 66 . the relaxation characteristics of flange and bolt materials are established by extensive testing in a controlled environment. The conclusions of the project were that it was relatively simple to incorporate the effects of material creep/relaxation into the ASME code design process. and these equations can also be used when analyzing Div.

Sy/1. and 78in. Sy/1.2%. Table 1) ASME VIII. Sy/1. For diameters between 1000mm and 2000mm (39in. rather than 0.0.5 Simplified Yes ST/2. 67 . 12 Includes only axial expansion and does not detail how to determine temperature. 6 The exact stress limits for BFJ are still a point of discussion 7 Note that due to experience with problems at the higher allowable stresses in large diameter joints. 4 It can be argued that the factor “m” accounts for the effects of mechanical interaction (ref. 10 Note that the yield value for austenitic bolts is taken at an elongation of 1. Sy/1. the allowable is reduced by a factor of 0. 11 TaylorForge Partial 4 Yes EN1591:2 001 3 Aspect of Flanged Joint Design Flange Design Basis Includes effect of joint mechanical interaction Flange Stress Check Flange Rotation Check Check on Lap Joint Stub Shear Stress Check on Lap Joint Stub Bearing Stress Check on Lap Joint Stub Bending Stress Design of Seal Welded Joints Gasket Loads based on “m” & “y” Gasket Loads based on leakage Flange Allowable Stress Basis Austenitic Allowable Stress Increase Allowed Bolt Allowable Stress Basis Gasket Effective Width Basis Includes Gasket Creep/Relaxation Includes Flange & Bolt Creep Included Effects of Temperature Includes External Moments & Forces Maximum Allowable Gasket Stress Maximum Spacing Between Bolts Effect of bolt holes on flange rigidity Operational Flange Rotation Limits Adjusts for Assembly Accuracy Nubbins Prohibited Table of standard bolt stress areas 1 2 TGL 32903/13 Yes Partial 5 Yes Yes ST/3. 11 The effects of short term relaxation only are included in the present revision of EN13555. 9 Actually. Sy/3 10 Simplified Yes Yes ST/2.5 Yes (?) ST/2.4.4.Table 1 – Comparison of Flange Design Methods (updated WRC Bulletin 514. Part D tables list allowable stresses for common materials that are closer to ST/5. 1.5 Simplified Yes TBD6 TBD6 TBD6 Simplified Partial Partial12 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes ST/2. EN1591. BFJ 2 TaylorForge Yes Yes Yes Yes EN1344 53:2002.5. 1.5 No 9 ST/4. the ASME II. as they are not specified in EN-1591. div. The other methods include radial and tangential stress checks and use an elastic stress check. App 2 TaylorForge Partial 4 Yes Yes Yes ASME VIII. Sy/1. 2.75 to 1.) this reduction factor is taken to linearly vary from 0.) diameter flanges.4 b). 8 The basis for allowing higher allowable stresses for austenitic stainless is that the flange rotation limits should eliminate concerns regarding overly flexible flanges when designed to higher allowable. New Rules 1 TaylorForge Partial 4 Yes Yes Yes ASME Append. Sect.5 Calculate Partial 11 Partial Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 12 Yes Yes Yes Yes Based on the revision 7 of the document (current as of 1st January. 2006.5 Yes 8 ST/4.4.3.5 No ST/4. Updates based on Dec 2009 document are detailed in red. Sy/1. 3 This is also the basis of EN13445-3 Appendix G and some listed aspects (flange stress limits for example) are taken from this appendix. div.4. 5 The stress check in EN1591 includes only a check of the circumferential stresses and flange is allowed to have plastic deformation (ref. Brown [6]).75 for ≥ 2000mm (78in. 7 Sy/1. 2006) Based on the draft document dated February 15.0%.

ASME.. D. Welding Research Council Bulletin 510 [9] Brown. 2007.G. ASME. 1949. Chicago... ASME NY.B. Vancouver. ASME. “Considerations for Selecting the Optimum Bolt Assembly Stress For Piping Flanges”.. NY [10] Koves. 2007.. 2006. D. PVP2008-61709 [8] Brown. San Antonio. D. ASME. Texas [2] Wesstrom. Southfield.O... USA [4] Waters... “Flange Joint Bolt Spacing Requirements”. “Development of General Formulas For Bolted Flanges”. 2010.S. “An Update on Selecting the Optimum Bolt Assembly Stress For Piping Flanges”.B. W.References [1] Brown W. McKenzie.. ASME. PVP2007-26649 [7] Brown..B. W.. F. “Effect of Internal Pressure on Stresses and Strains in Bolted-Flange Connections”.5.. Proceedings of the ASME PVP 2007. n. Chicago. Canada. ASME-LLC. Texas. “Analysis of the Effects of Temperature on Bolted Joints”. D. 73.. Proceedings of the ASME PVP 2008. E. Reprinted by the PVRC in 1979.. Houston... W. Rossheim. Reeves. Ryan S.. USA [3] ASME PCC-1 “Guidelines for Pressure Boundary Bolted Joint Assembly”. Taylor-Forge & Pipe Works. PVP2008-61708 68 . ASME PVP Conference. PVP2006ICPVT11-93094 [6] Brown. San Antonio. 2007. Illinois. Texas. “High Temperature Flange Design”.. Proceedings of the ASME PVP 2007. Wesstrom. IL. PVP2007-26089 [11] Brown. D. 2010. “Selecting the Optimum Bolt Assembly Stress – Flange Limitations: Flange Type”. S. NY. 2008. Reeves. [5] Brown. Michigan. W. pp 508-568. “Selecting the Optimum Bolt Assembly Stress: Influence of Flange Material on Flange Load Limit”. W. ASME. Bergh. Proceedings of the ASME PVP 2006. W. 1951. W. Williams. “Obtaining Leak-Free Bolted Joint Operation By Returning to Basics” National Petroleum Refiners Association Conference. Transactions of ASME. W. 2008. Project #3036. 2006.J.E.

AMTEC Services GmbH © Manfred Schaaf 69 .Overview of Developments in EN 1591 Manfred Schaaf.

70 .

IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010, Newcastle upon Tyne

Overview of Developments in EN 1591

Manfred Schaaf

Messtechnischer Service GmbH Hoher Steg 13 74348 Lauffen Germany

Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010, Newcastle upon Tyne

IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010, Newcastle upon Tyne

Content CEN TC 74 – Flanges and their joints EN 1591 – Part 1 to 5 • Status quo • Latest developments • Future work items

71

IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010, Newcastle upon Tyne

CEN TC 74 – Flanges and their joints Scope: Standardization of flanges and their joints in pipelines and piping systems for all applications excluding hydraulic and pneumatic load transmission.
- General: Definition of "nominal pressure" and "nominal size"; - Flanges: Definition of dimensions and tolerances, selection of materials, technical conditions of delivery, P/T ratings; - Bolts, screws and nuts: Selection of required bolts, screws and nuts, dimensions, technical conditions of delivery, materials; - Gaskets: Definition of dimensions and tolerances, materials, technical conditions of delivery; - Calculation methods for flanges design; - Determination of P/T ratings.

IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010, Newcastle upon Tyne

CEN TC 74 – Working Groups

CEN TC 74 CEN/TC 74/WG 2 CEN/TC 74/WG 3 CEN/TC 74/WG 8 CEN/TC 74/WG 10

Flanges and their joints Steel flanges Cast iron flanges Gaskets Calculation Methods

H. Kockelmann H.-D. Engelhardt A. Percebois J. Hoyes G. Taylor

72

IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010, Newcastle upon Tyne

EN 1591 Rules
EN 1591 Flanges and their joints - Design rules for gasketed circular flange connections

EN 1591-1
Calculation method

CEN/TS 1591-3
Calculation method "Metal-to-metal contact"

prCEN/TR 1591-5
Calculation method "Full face gaskets"

EN 1591-2
Gasket parameters

CEN/TS 1591-4
Qualification of personnel competency

IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010, Newcastle upon Tyne

EN 1591-1: Status quo
EN 1591-1 released as an European Standard in 2001 Amendment A1 of EN 1591-1 released as an European Standard in 2009

Calculation method for gasketed circular flange connections with gaskets inside the bolt circle and without metal-to-metal contact of the flange faces • leak tightness and strength criteria are satisfied • behaviour of complete flanges-bolts-gasket system is considered

73

Newcastle upon Tyne EN 1591-1: Treated parameters strength value of flange and bolt materials gasket characteristics thermal loads medium pressure external axial forces and bending moments nominal bolt load possible scatter due to bolting-up procedure changes in gasket force due to deformation of all components influence of connected shell or pipe IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010.IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. Newcastle upon Tyne EN 1591-1: Specifics elastic deformation balance flange rotation and effective compressed gasket area iterative determination of the required bolt force in assembly to fulfill tightness demands force balance (interaction between all components) virtual flange resistance of the flanges limit load theory (admissibility of plastic deformation) 74 .

draft 2001) Amendment IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010.relax gasket characteristics (prEN 13555 .ai1 E0.IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010.ai1 TEMES fl.relax gasket characteristics (EN 13555 – 2004) Amendment 75 . Newcastle upon Tyne EN 1591-1: Amendment A1 DIN 28090-1 pr EN13555 Gasket Characteristic Testing Equipment σVU/L σBU/L σVO σBO ED ΔhD QMIN(L) QSMIN(L) QSMAX(RT) QSMAX Minimum gasket stress in assembly for tightness class L Minimum gasket stress in service for tightness class L Maximum allowable gasket stress in assembly Maximum allowable gasket stress in service modulus of elasticity Creep-relaxation factor TEMES fl. Newcastle upon Tyne EN 1591-1: Amendment A1 DIN 28090-1 EN13555 Gasket Characteristic Testing Equipment σVU/L σBU/L σVO σBO ED ΔhD QMIN(L) QSMIN(L) QSMAX(RT) QSMAX EG PQR Minimum gasket stress in assembly for tightness class L Minimum gasket stress in service for tightness class L Maximum allowable gasket stress in assembly Maximum allowable gasket stress in service modulus of elasticity Creep-relaxation factor TEMES fl. G I EK gC PQR TEMES fl.

" EN 1591-1 or EN 13445-3 CEN/TC 267 Industrial piping and pipelines EN 13480-3 Annex D Annex P CEN/TC 269 Shell and water-tube boilers CEN/TC 69 Industrial valves EN 12953-3 EN 12516-2 Chapter 9.IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. Newcastle upon Tyne EN 1591-1: Future work items CEN/TC74 Resolution 282/2009 Corrigendum to EN 1591-1:2001+A1:2009-03 CEN/TC74 Resolution 275/2009 Allocation of Joint Working Group CEN/TC 54/TC 69/TC 74/TC 267/TC 269/JWG "Harmonized standard solution for flange connections" CEN/TC74 Resolution 2/2008 Preliminary Work Item "Sample calculation and guidance on interpretation of calculations presented in EN 1591-1" IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. Newcastle upon Tyne EN 1591-1: JWG TC CEN/TC 74 Flanges and their joints CEN/TC 54 Unfired pressure vessles EN EN 1591-1+A1 EN 13445-3 Chapter / Annex Chapter 11 Annex GA Remarks new Amendment released Taylor Forge new equations derived from EN 1591-1:2001 Taylor Forge EN 1591-1 + tables with gasket parameters "…in accordance to European Standards.3 Chapter 10 76 .

gasketdata. fibre based sheet PTFE filled spiral wound gasket with both outer and inner rings Low stress graphite filled spiral wound gasket with outer and inner rings Graphite filled spiral wound gasket with outer ring Graphite filled spiral wound gasket with outer and inner rings 77 . but typical values ("generic data") characteristics are only informative (gasket characteristics must be supplied by manufacturer. Reduction of Leak rate) • gasket characteristics are listed for types of gasket materials • the values are no minimum required values. Newcastle upon Tyne EN 1591-2: Types of gasket materials • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Modified PTFE sheet Proprietary PTFE / Graphite gasket with metal eyelet Metal jacketed with graphite filler Graphite Covered Metal Jacketed with graphite filler & outer ring Serrated metal core [kammprofile] with graphite facing Proprietary type of graphite faced kammprofile with secondary metal to metal seal Corrugated metal core with graphite facing Graphite sheet with tanged stainless steel core Graphite sheet with multiple thin metal insertions Non-asbestos.IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010.org) IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. Newcastle upon Tyne EN 1591-2: Status quo EN 1591-2 released as an European Standard in 2008 supersedes ENV 1591-2:2001 The standads details gasket parameters for use in EN 1591-1 during prelimenary calculations • results of research project (PERL – Pressure Equipment. alternative source: www.

Newcastle upon Tyne IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010.IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. Newcastle upon Tyne EN 1591-2: Example 2 EN 1591-2: Example 1 78 .

released as TS (no experience with the modified calculation algorithm) IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. Newcastle upon Tyne CEN/TS 1591-3: Status quo CEN/TS 1591-3 released as an Technical Specification in 2007 Calculation method for metal-to-metal contact type flanged joints based on EN 1591-1 • leak tightness and strength criteria are satisfied • behaviour of complete flanges-bolts-gasket system is considered rejected as EN.IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. Newcastle upon Tyne CEN/TS 1591-3: Specifics Calculation in 4 steps: • determination of the bolt tightening to reach the MMC • determination of the bolt tightening to maintain the MMC in all the calculation situations • check of the admissibility of the leak-rate • check of the admissibility of the load ratio 79 .

experience and assessment of knowledge are required to achieve competency 80 .IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. Newcastle upon Tyne CEN/TS 1591-3: Future work item CEN/TC74 Resolution 285/20009 Review of CEN/TS 1591-5:2007: Extension of the life of CEN/TS 1591-5:2007 for another 3 years IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. Newcastle upon Tyne CEN/TS 1591-4: Status quo CEN/TS 1591-4 released as an Technical Specification in 2007 Process for training and compentency assessment of personnel in the assembly of bolted flanged joints fitted to equipment subject to PED • design codes increasingly require controlled bolt tightening • ensure personnel are competent to assemble and tighten bolted joints for a leak-free status throughout its´ service life • training.

importance of certification and records. bolt tightening methods and their relative accuracies. importance of applied and residual bolt loads. bolt load loss and the implications. common causes of joint failure and leakage. bolt load and stress. factors affecting the degradation of bolted assemblies. functionality of gasket and seal. Newcastle upon Tyne CEN/TS 1591-4: Specifics • procedural framework must be included within operator´s quality management system • route for achieving comeptency in the skills classroom training and workshop practice written test period of monitored work site experience assessment by a qualified assessor IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. flange. the requirements to meet a specific class of tightness.g.IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. e. bolt and gasket types and their limitations. effect of coefficient of friction on bolt load when using torque. 81 . specific health or safety requirements associated with joint components. Newcastle upon Tyne CEN/TS 1591-4: General knowledge • • • • • • • • • • • • • • the principles of bolt elongation (strain). corrosion. maintenance requirements of bolt tightening systems. joint assembly methods and tightening procedures.

procedure for preparing a joint for closure. preparation and installation. techniques for measuring bolt strain. identifying defects or faults. gasket handling. variance or irregularity reporting. • calibration of bolt tightening tooling. Newcastle upon Tyne CEN/TS 1591-4: Specific knowledge • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • general health and safety precautions. manual and hydraulic torque joint tightening. importance of alignment and gap uniformity. safe joint disassembly. functionality of clamp or engineered joints.IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. confirming joint can return to service. safety requirements when selecting and operating bolt tightening tooling. identification of correct joint components. IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. seal face preparation. • recording bolted joint activity and maintenance of records. importance of using the specified lubricant. joint tightening using hydraulic bolt tensioners. Newcastle upon Tyne CEN/TS 1591-4: Future work item CEN/TC74 Resolution 280/20009 New work item proposal: Conversion of CEN/TS 1591-4:2007-08 into an EN 82 .

Newcastle upon Tyne prCEN/TS 1591-5: Status quo prCEN/TS 1591-3 under preparation in WG10 PWI 00074056 Calculation method for full face gasketed joints based on EN 1591-1 • particular approach for full face gasketed joints • leak tightness and strength criteria are satisfied • behaviour of complete flanges-bolts-gasket system is considered IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. Newcastle upon Tyne prCEN/TS 1591-5: Future work item CEN/TC74 Resolution 280/20009 Activation of a new work item: preliminary work on project EN 1591-5 has reached a certain stage that a WI can be activated now.IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010. 83 .

Newcastle upon Tyne Contact Data For more detailed information. +49 7133 9502-0 E-Mail: ms@amtec.de Tel. please contact us: Messtechnischer Service GmbH Hoher Steg 13 74348 Lauffen Germany www.IMechE – Bolted Flanged Joints: New Methods and Practices 16-17 March 2010.de 84 .amtec.

Bolting Aspects Bill Eccles. Bolt Science Limited © Bolt Science Limited 85 .Failure Mechanisms of Bolted Joints .

86 .

such as can occur as a result of differential thermal expansion. Many leaks. bolt stress relaxation and self-loosening Bolts can lose preload without rotating. INTRODUCTION It is known in principle how to design bolted joints in which bolting failures do not occur but in practice bolted related failures are not uncommon. fatigue and thread stripping. significant problems exist with their use. INSUFFICIENT PRELOAD 2. generated by the tightening of the bolts. On flanged joints the issues commonly encountered are creep of the gasket material and stress relaxation of the bolts. in practice results in joint problems. on the threaded fasteners that hold it together.1 Lack of Preload Flanged joints rely upon the preload. in part. Bolt Science Limited SYNOPSIS The reliability of a flanged joint depends. Figure 1 Transverse joint movement 87 . There are several causes of non-rotational loosening. all of which involve either the bolt additionally elongating or the joint additionally compressing following installation. The gasket relies upon the preload provided by the bolts to perform its sealing function effectively. tensile overload.2 Preload loss from gasket creep. are often as a result of insufficient clamp force provided by the bolts. 2. inappropriate materials being specified and most notably. The loss of preload can be temporary. which are frequently attributed to a gasket failure. 2. or permanent. 1. Although threaded fasteners are generally considered a mature technology. the magnitude of the preload achieved by the tightening process. This can be due to incorrect tightening or subsequent loosening following tightening. human error. to pre-stress the gasket so that a leak free seal is achieved and to resist the hydrostatic pressure tending to separate the flanges. Uncertainties about the applied forces. for example from creep. On occasion such failures can have disastrous consequences. self-loosening. Stress relaxation can be mitigated by the appropriate choice of bolt material. Modern gasket material attempt to minimise creep. The presentation briefly covers several failure modes of threaded fasteners including the problems arising from insufficient preload.Failure Mechanisms of Bolted Joints – Bolting Aspects By Bill Eccles CEng BSc MIMechE. The presentation discusses some major accidents that have occurred as a direct consequence of particular failure modes.

That is. With a 'hard' joint. Although research indicates that some degree of slight loosening can result from axial loading. the stiffness of the bolt is usually significantly lower than the joint stiffness. The proportion of the force that is applied to the joint which the bolt sustains depends upon the relative stiffness of the bolt to the clamped material. Figure 2 A 'hard' joint Conventional flanged joints have a relatively low stiffness due to the deflection of the flanges and compression of the gasket. such as from hydrostatic pressure. In the presentation a failure involving the self-loosening of nuts of a flanged joint on a pressure vessel containing an agitator assembly is discussed. the bolt stiffness is low when compared with the stiffness of the joint. TENSILE OVERLOAD On conventional flanged joints the load increase experienced by the bolts can be significant. Such transverse movement is undesirable for a flanged joint for several reasons. Flanged joints are largely exposed to axial loading. the joint is relatively 'hard'. illustrated in figure 1. This results in what can be termed a 'soft' joint which is illustrated in figure 3. the bolt can sustain a significant proportion of it. self-loosening of fasteners is usually as a result of transverse joint movement. 3.Self-loosening is when the fastener rotates under the action of external loading. Figure 2 shows a joint diagram illustrating this condition. In such circumstances the increase in the bolt loading when an external force is applied to the joint is relatively small. Figure 3 A 'soft' joint 88 . On a solid joint typical. In such a joint when an external force is applied.

defective bolt material is more likely to fail at the time of assembly and hence more easily detectable. prestressed to a higher value. Beyond this knee failure will not occur no matter how great the number of cycles. With a solid ('hard') joint. It is well known that a part subjected to a varying load will fail at a significantly lower loading than one that has been statically loaded. Typical target tensile prestress values for bolts used in flanged joints is 50% of the minimum yield strength. Thread stripping tends to be gradual in nature. A report released on the 21 December 2009 by a Russian parliamentary commission found that the failure was due to fatigue cracking in the 80 mm diameter bolts. 5. This is represented by an S/N diagram as shown in figure 4. The strength corresponding to this point is known as the endurance limit. On a solid joint. When specifying nuts and bolts it must always be ensured that the appropriate grade of nut is matched to the bolt grade. Most materials exhibit a knee in the S/N diagram. Figure 4 S/N Diagram Possibly the most devastating engineering failure of 2009 occurred as a result of bolt fatigue at the Sayano–Shushenskaya hydroelectric power station in central Russia on the 17 August.One consequence of this is that the bolt cannot be tightened near to yield since there is the risk that the bolt would be overloaded when the external load is applied. the number of cycles to failure decreases. This caused flooding of the turbine and engine rooms and a transformer explosion leading to the deaths of 75 people. Mentioned in the presentation are details of an accident due to the bolts being overloaded during a pressure test on a flange. Fatigue failure can take from thousands to millions of load cycles to occur. It is well known that as the alternating stress increases. at least 6 bolts had missing nuts and 41 had fatigue cracks. Of the 80 bolts securing the turbine cover. dependent upon the stress level in the part. THREAD STRIPPING Nut thickness standards have been drawn up on the basis that the bolt will always sustain tensile fracture before the nut will strip. If the thread stripping mode can occur. 4. One consequence of this is that if the wrong bolt material is used on flanged joints it may only be revealed either during a pressure test or in service. the target tensile prestress is more typically around 75% of the minimum yield strength. the potential of thread stripping of both the internal and external threads must be avoided if a reliable design is to be achieved. assemblies may enter into service which are partially failed. If the bolt breaks on tightening. this may have disastrous consequences. Fatigue is a progressive cracking of a part under the action of alternating forces. 89 . The securing bolts on one of the turbine rotors failed resulting in water pressure lifting the 1650 tonne rotor into the turbine hall. The S stands for stress and the N for the number of cycles. FATIGUE FAILURE Fatigue is often quoted as the commonest reason for bolts to fail in service. Hence. it is obvious that a replacement is required.

The nut stops in place but retains only a minimal preload. The cause of the accident was attributed to the fitment of incorrect nuts. The valve controlled steam at a pressure of 40 bar and 450 C. Figure 5 Thread stripping and bolt tensile fracture To illustrate the possible consequences of thread stripping. Rule of thumb is that when both male and female threads are of similar strength then a length of engagement equal to the diameter of the thread is usually required. For tapped holes in weaker materials longer lengths of engagements are needed . mention in the presentation will be made of an accident that occurred on the USS Iwo Jima in the early 1990's.In order to satisfy the above requirement when applied to tapped holes. the USS Iwo Jima experienced a catastrophic boiler accident whilst leaving Manama harbour in Bahrain. One of the issues with thread stripping is that it is not obvious that it has occurred. 90 . Figure 5 illustrates what happen to the preload when thread stripping occurs. A valve failed resulting in large amounts of steam from both the ship's boilers being dumped into the boiler room. 1990. On October 30. the length of thread engagement required depends upon the relative strength of the threads. All ten people that were in the room at the time of the accident were killed.depending exactly of the relative strengths.

Seal failure from a gaskets perspective Dene Halkyard. Flexitallic © Flexitallic 91 .

92 .

Gasket failure attributable to insufficient and excessive compressive forces tends to occur during installation. Visual inspection of failed gaskets can reveal useful information about the failure mode and assist in preventing future leakage. Correct gasket selection and adherence to established ‘best practice’ installation techniques play a major role in minimising emissions from bolted flanged connections. Senior Applications Engineer. excessive or changes in gasket compressive force. 93 .Seal failure from a gaskets perspective Dene Halkyard. Seal failure is a phenomenon often attributable to a number of factors. Flexitallic Ltd Seals fail not just gaskets is a wise and widely used adage in the industrial sealing industry. creating and maintaining an adequate compressive force throughout the expected lifetime of the seal is paramount if containment losses are to be kept to an acceptable level. of which the gasket is but one. whereas failure due to transient forces tends to occur under operational conditions. Most common failure modes can be characterised by insufficient. From the gaskets perspective.

94 .

Ellis 95 . European Sealing Association © Dr Brian S.European Emissions Legislation Dr Brian Ellis.

96 .

• IPPC …..European Emission Legislation Dr Brian S Ellis Acronyms! • ESA …. BREF … IPPC IEF European Sealing Association Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive Best Available Techniques BAT Reference notes IPPC Information Exchange Forum Pressure Equipment Directive • PED 97 . • • • BAT …..

Sealing Technology BAT guidance note .IPPC IEF .BAT .Contents • Development of European environmental legislation .Directive basics .types of EU legislation • Key elements of European legislation .Community-wide Community.revision of PED? • Conclusions • • European Sealing Association Fugitive emissions Development of European environmental legislation 140 120 Item s adopted 100 80 60 40 20 0 67 68 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 1 3 5 7 Over 1000 pieces of environmental legislation have been adopted since 1967 98 .BREF notes • Current legislation developments • ESA contribution .national • IPPC .

2 European Commission Legislation proposed Council of Ministers Opinion sought Refinements proposed European Parliament Refinements proposed Member States Types of EU legislation • • • • • Regulation Directive Decision Recommendation Opinion .non-binding non- increasing control from the EU Directives the preferred tool for environmental policies.Development of European environmental legislation .allows Member States flexibility to transpose into national legislation legislation 99 .non-binding non.binding.binding and applicable directly . .overall objectives + strategies defined by EU .binding on those to whom it is addressed . but flexible through transposition .

Directives etc) European Commission / Parliament / Council of Ministers UK D F E I etc . EU Member States Directives are “transposed” into national legislation transposed” 100 .1 EU legislation (Regulations..Key legislation • • • • • • Emissions from industrial plants Solvent (VOC) emissions National emission ceilings Large combustion plants Waste incineration Integrated pollution prevention and control • TA-Luft (D) • Integrated Pollution Control (UK) • VDI – various (D) – “guidelines” EU and National legislation .

1 • Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) (IPPC) Directive 96/61 adopted in 1996 • compliance for new plants required by end October 1999 • compliance for existing plants by end October 2007 • framework measure .2 IPPC Directive UK IPC D TA-Luft VDI guidelines F E I etc .provides for common EU emission limits to be adopted subsequently • integrated approach for a potential pollutant across all media which might be affected 101 .EU and National legislation . IPPC ..

production and processing of metals .organo-phosphorus compounds organo.protect and clean up site upon cessation of industrial activity IPPC .carbon monoxide .asbestos .volatile organic compounds (VOC’s) (VOC’ 102 . including: .ensure no significant pollution is caused .organo-halogen compounds organo.metals and their compounds .waste management .energy .2 • applies to 6 categories of industry: .IPPC .cyanides .avoid waste production .sulphur dioxide and other sulphur compounds .substances and preparations which are carcinogenic. fluorine and their compounds .chemicals .chlorine. mutagenic or which may affect reproduction .nitrogen oxides and other nitrogen compounds .recover waste produced or dispose of safely .3 • identifies certain priority polluting substances.use energy efficiently .take all appropriate preventative measures against pollution .arsenic and its compounds .take necessary measures to prevent accidents .‘other’ other’ • specific obligations on operators .minerals .organo-tin compounds organo.

use of less hazardous substances .technical characteristics of the installation .4 • each facility is subject to authorisation through permitting • emission limit and permits based upon Best Available Techniques (BAT) BAT) • BAT must consider: .local environmental conditions IPPC .use of low-waste technology low.geographical location .energy efficiency .IPPC .economic and technical viability .improvements in recovery and recycling .5 • BAT interpretation will result in differences across EU • hence.consumption of raw materials and water . requirement for exchange of information on national assessments of BAT and emission limits • provides the basis for the publication of BAT Reference (BREF) notes BREF) • European IPPC Bureau established to publish BREF notes • IPPC Information Exchange Forum (IEF) established to (IEF) develop and review BREF notes 103 .

2 Emission monitoring Large Volume Inorganic Chemical Industry Large Volume Organic Chemical Industry “Vertical” BREF notes Mineral oil and gas refineries Energy efficiency Pulp and Paper Industry “Horizontal” BREF notes 104 .BAT reference (BREF) notes .1 • for all industry sectors covered within IPPC • usually industry-specific (“vertical” BREF notes) • some cover more than one industry sector (“horizontal” BREF notes) BAT reference (BREF) notes .

horizontal “BREF” voluntarily BREF” • Sections covering BAT for sealing: • • • • bolted flange connections rotodynamic equipment reciprocating shafts valves 105 . “ESA Sealing Technology BAT guidance note” note” ESA Sealing Technology BAT guidance note • ESA participating in IPPC IEF • sealing technology involved in most industries covered by IPPC • ESA developed own. ESA document entitled.ESA contribution Emission monitoring Large Volume Inorganic Chemical Industry Large Volume Organic Chemical Industry Mineral oil and gas refineries Energy efficiency Pulp and Paper Industry Sealing Technology • • ESA participates in IPPC IEF In deference to European Commission.

parts of original Directive will remain if NOT covered by IED ESA contribution .2 Specifically of relevance to bolted flange connections: • ESA developing programme to revise PED • aim to have bolted flange connections considered an “essential feature” feature” • relevant CEN standards would be “harmonised” harmonised” • would encourage fitters / installers to be suitably qualified (similar to requirement for welders) 106 .Current legislation developments New Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) IPPC Solvent (VOC) emissions Emissions from industrial plants Large combustion plants Waste etc … incineration Intention for original Directives to be superseded by new IED.original Directive will be withdrawn if ALL areas covered . .

com 107 .europeansealing.com • ESA developing programme to revise PED www.Conclusions • Development of European emission legislation • Types of European legislation • Relationship between Community-wide and national legislation Community• Key elements of European emission legislation • IPPC Directive • Current developments in European emission legislation • ESA Sealing Technology BAT guidance note .available for download from www.europeansealing.

1 pan-European trade organisation established 1992 non-profit-making trade association 40+ Member Companies representing a strong majority of the fluid sealing industry in Europe • organised as series of product-focussed Divisions • Working Groups for common activities • • • • • European Sealing Association . Environment and Efficiency Working Group Industrial Materials Working Group Industrial Materials Working Group 108 .2 ESA Members Executive Committee Elastomeric & Polymeric Seals Division Expansion Joints Division Flange Gaskets Division Mechanical Seals Division Packings Division Safety. Environment and Efficiency Working Group Safety.European Sealing Association .

….usually referred to as “fugitive emissions” Sealing technology is playing a major role in helping industry to reduce fugitive emissions 109 .Sustainable development Industry must reduce its overall emissions A large proportion of emissions are those anticipated from industrial processes Fugitive emissions Some emissions occur through unanticipated leaks in process systems ….

Definition of “fugitive emission” Any chemical. or mixture of chemicals … … in any physical form … … which represents an unanticipated or spurious leak … … from anywhere on an industrial site Fugitive emissions .the cost “Iceberg” Visible costs Invisible costs • Lost material Labour to repair leaks Material to repair leaks Wasted energy Process inefficiency Environmental clean up Environmental fines Claims for personal injury Lost sales due to poor image Companies which invest to reduce their fugitive emissions can achieve a fast pay-back 110 .

Tension Control. James Walker Rotabolt © Rod Corbett 111 . the key to Bolted Flange Reliability Rod Corbett.

112 .

installed bolt tension is unknown. equipment and structures. upstream and downstream can realistically expect to eliminate all future bolted flange leaks by taking the technology driven route. pressure. the key to Bolted Flange Reliability Rod Corbett. start up and in service. Whatever the reason. Operators who embrace this technology driven bolting route are inevitably rewarded with assured reliability – leak free performance on hydro test. temperature. the flange surface or the severe process thermal swing. design bolt tension objectives can be measured and controlled reliably and cost effectively. One state of the art. The investment in managing design and quality assurance over the last twenty years has been substantial. JamesWalker Rotabolt There are three basic factors that ensure bolted flange joint reliability:Joint Design Bolt/Component quality Achieving design bolt tension/joint compression/gasket seating stress on installation Measure and control all three and flange reliability is assured.Tension Control. 113 . system datum face integrity and the crucial physical calibration of bolt extension versus bolt tension are discussed in detail. the residual. The paper describes commercially available tension control systems along with their relative merits. Millions are spent on controlling and measuring process parameters such as temperature. Managing Director. Factors that effect the variations in these systems such as operating environment. The science is such that the Oil and Gas industry. The investment however in measuring and controlling installed bolt tension has been negligible despite the technical fact that the sole objective of any bolt used in tension is to deliver a known level of clamp force on the joint. This is remarkable when you consider that 90% of all bolted joint failures can be attributed to incorrect bolt tension. market leading system is described along with an explanation of the calibration methodology employed. Maybe this is due to a lack of understanding as to the limitations of traditionally controlling tightening through tightening power or effort from torque or hydraulic tensioning. The vast majority of flanged bolted joints are tightened in an uncontrolled manner i. This also results in lowest maintenance cost. flow rates. This is probably the case because most of the time the concluding reason as to why the joint has failed lies elsewhere from the installation – maybe with the gasket. This is against a back drop of industry demanding greater levels of safety and reliability from its plant. speeds etc but it is reluctant to measure the parameter that holds all the pressure containment together – bolt tension. operator skill.e. Results of the systems independent test and accreditation programme outlines the systems overall integrity for industrial usage.

114 .

Hydratight © Robert Noble 115 .Management of Integrity of Bolted Joints for Pressurised Systems Robert Noble.

116 .

MANAGEMENT OF INTEGRITY OF BOLTED JOINTS FOR PRESSURISED SYSTEMS. Robert Noble Technical Services Leader Hydratight Comparison with the Welded Joint? Welded Joint Material Control Coded Welder Documented Procedure NDT Verification Hydrotested Records In Service Inspection Permanent joint Subject to Breakout Bolted Joint Material Control Competent Personnel Documented Procedure Hydrotested Integrity tested Records 117 .

691 Total Leaks .5.640 Total Leaks .5% Phase 3 JDMS Used Total Joints .413 Total Leaks .15.5.Flanged Joints – Are easy? This will seal it Just Nuts and Bolts! My Arms are calibrated! Gasket not on compression stop Gasket on compression stop Would you be confident in the performance of this joint? TYPICAL RESULT Lubrication ? Flanges rotating due to over tightening Green Tag Leak Test Passed! Applying Integrity Management .1.234 Leak Rate .1.518 Leak Rate .9% Phase 2 JDMS Used Total Joints .new build Phase 1 No System Total Joints .84 Leak Rate .49% %Reduction in leaks 75% 75% (Note: Total leak number includes all vendor leaks) 118 .8.

80% 4.70% 1% 0.Applying Integrity Management – Operational Major Operator Multiple Asset % Leaks Year to Year 6% 5% 4.52% 0% % Leaks 2002 % Leaks 2003 % Leaks 2004 % Leaks 2005 % Leaks 2006 % Leaks 2007 % Leaks 2008 YTD Management of Bolted Joints Evolution 2000 HSE SAFETY NOTICE 2/2000 2002 GUIDELINES FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF INTEGRITY OF BOLTED PIPE JOINTS 2007 GUIDELINES FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF INTEGRITY OF BOLTED JOINTS FOR PRESSURISED SYSTEMS 119 .65% 2% 1.85% 2.55% 0.30% 4% 3% 2.

but also for communicating its aims and objectives throughout the organisation.” Support them with expertise 120 . The owner should state the expectations for the system and monitor its effectiveness. responsible not only for its implementation and ongoing maintenance.Management of Bolted Joints: Evolution Ownership Appoint a Champion “There should be an identified owner of the management system.

testing.Technology and Practice • “Good practice with regard to selection and control of assembly. pressures and conditions which bolted joints experience varies considerably. Understanding of the theory and practice of bolted joints and development of appropriate procedures should be encouraged throughout the organisation. assembly control. tightening and assurance of bolted joints should be applied.” Assess Leak Potential Service Fluid Loss Potential Local factors Determine Criticality Rating Low Med High Control Competence Witness Integrity Test Method Verify Inspect 121 . tightening technique.” Establish Standards Ensure they are applied Criticality Assessment “The range of services. assurance and in-service inspection relevant to the joint. Each joint should undergo a criticality assessment which will determine the levels of inspection.

ideally from original construction of the joint. Good awareness needs to be maintained. linked to the design specification of the joint. Any staff working on bolted joints should be appropriately trained and competent. Providing and recording traceable data encourages best practice at the time of the activity.Training and Competence “Everyone with an influence on joint integrity in the organisation should be aware of the management system.” Records. and will provide useful planning data for the next time the joint is disturbed. its objectives. expectations and effects on project planning and day-to-day working. Data Management and Tagging “The certainty of achieving joint integrity increases if historical data exists on the activities carried out in the past.” 122 .

Management of Leaks • “The objective of a correctly designed and installed bolted joint is to provide a long-term tight seal and prevent ingress or egress of fluids through the joint. the inspection methods available for detection of defects and mitigation measures that can be put in place to minimise such degradation. leaks can occur and managing the investigation and repair of the leak is essential to avoid recurrence.” 123 . However. It can also provide useful data for prevention on other projects. This section looks at the possible damage that can occur.In-service Inspection In-service inspection of bolted joints is an integral activity to ensure the continued integrity of the joints and as such should be built in to all relevant inspection programmes.

Easily monitored but meaningful performance standards should be put in place at launch to quantify the contribution being made by the management system and evaluate user satisfaction. Analyse Bolt Stress Relaxation from BS4882:1973 .B7 σ.25 0. The results obtained from commissioning.energypublishing.B8 σ.Fig 9 1 100% σ. incident analysis and in-service inspections should be used to generate ideas for continuous improvement. Feedback on good practice in integrity issues and causes and solutions to incidents should be provided both internally and to industry to contribute to continuous improvement. temp .75 0 • 0 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 800 temp .res.B8 .B16 .res. temp .5 0.Analysis. Copies of EI Guidelines available at www. Learning and Improvement Collect Data • Analysis of leakage and inspection data coupled with formal reviews of the management system should occur at agreed intervals by the owner and users.B16 σ.org 124 .B7 .B8M 0.B8M Improve Summary •A Management system is critical •Cover all of the elements •Appoint a champion •Apply Standards and Procedures •Assess criticality •Trained and competent people are key •Maintain a record and tagging system •Inspect joints and manage leaks •Analyse and Improve.res. temp .res.

ASME PCC-1 Updates
Warren Brown, The Equity Engineering Group

© Warren Brown

125

126

ASME PCC-1 Updates
Warren Brown, Ph.D., P.Eng. Principal Engineer, The Equity Engineering Group Shaker Heights, Ohio, USA Email: iwbrown@equityeng.com Introduction The ASME Post-Construction Committee released the first version of ASME PCC-1 “Guidelines for Pressure Boundary Bolted Joint Assembly” in 2000. At the time, the document was unique in addressing the issues with the assembly of bolted joints from a standards perspective. Since the initial version, there have been advances in gasket technology, bolting assembly procedures and calculation methods that enabled the improvement of both the integrity and efficiency associated with bolted joint assembly. In order to capture these advances, the ASME PCC-1 sub-committee was tasked to update the document beginning in 2006. The updates planned were extensive and have resulted in an increase in the length of the document from 33 pages to more than 80 pages. As evident from the almost three-fold increase in content, the updates are significant and are primarily in the form of additional new information, rather than modifications to the original information from the first version. This paper is intended to briefly summarize the major modifications to the document and, in the interests of length, will leave out many of the minor improvements also made. Please also keep in mind when reading both this paper and PCC-1 that PCC-1 is a guideline only. It represents what is considered to be best practice for the majority of joints in industry. However, it is not possible to cover all possible joint configurations within such a document, therefore the status as a guideline (only) is appropriate in that it leaves the possibility of modification based on specific need or experience up to the end user. Changes to the Main Body of the Document The most significant changes made to the main body of the document are outlined following: In Section 4.0 “Cleaning and Examination of Flange and Fastener Contact Surfaces”, three changes were included, based on industry experience with best-practice and also from experience with joint failure. The wording was modified to allow graphite material to remain in the flange surface finish grooves after cleaning of the joint for inspection when using graphite faced gaskets. This modification was made in the interests of efficiency and based on extensive field experience indicating that graphite that remains in the facing grooves is time-consuming to remove and, if left in place, simply melds with the graphite facing on the new gasket to form a cohesive sealing element without degradation of the joint integrity. During the document public review phase, concern from several gasket manufacturers was expressed that it would be difficult to judge the amount of graphite remaining on the face and that excessive graphite may cover flange facing imperfections and/or affect the gasket sealing characteristics. However, the key to understanding why this will not occur is in the wording of the guideline; the only graphite allowed to remain is in the grooves of the surface finish and therefore sufficient quantity must be removed so as to allow flange facing inspection and the small amount left will not affect gasket performance.

127

this was never the intent and so steps were taken in the revised document to clarify this. some updates to the wording on how to apply the tables and also the inclusion of a new appendix. The new appendix outlines the requirements for a certification entity to create and administer a training and assessment program for bolted joint assemblers that provides certification of the assembler.The second change made to this section was the inclusion of a requirement to remove any flange paint or coating from the nut seating surfaces when the paint or coating thickness exceeds 0. commentary has been added to recommend that gaskets are not re-used. a significant revision to the existing PCC-1 Appendix A was drafted.005 inches). In an effort to improve the status-quo. This caution is based on industry experience where temporary gaskets have blown out during pressure and tightness testing and caused personnel injury and fatality. The thickness limit guidance was chosen to be an indication that a relatively thin layer of paint does not seem to affect joint performance (as most standard flanges are supplied with some form of protective coating). Qualification and Certification of Joint Assembly Personnel The lack of standardized qualifications for bolted joint assemblers has been identified as an issue by many in industry and is a leading cause of joint leakage due to poor assembly practices. which means that higher assembly bolt loads are required to obtain a seal. Appendix A: Training. The steps included changes to the table titles to include the words “Reference Values for Calculating…”. this will involve material removal and. Periodic replacement of the bolts should be planned if multiple reconditioning procedures are required on the same bolt. which outlines methods for determining the required assembly bolt stress. Table 1M and Table 1 were included in the first version of the document to be used as the basis for establishing the required assembly torque value by multiplying the listed torque value with the desired assembly bolt stress divided by the table reference bolt stress (345 MPa. Section 7. This inclusion was made based on field experience with joint leakage or flange facing damage where gaskets. However. 50ksi). Most gaskets are designed to plastically deform in order to obtain a seal. In section 6. the gasket will not seal as effectively.0 “Installation of Gasket”. This requirement was introduced based on field and laboratory experience which indicated that relatively small imperfections on the bolt or nut thread can have a significant impact on the obtained bolt load when tightening the joint using torque or tension techniques. led to additional bolt load relaxation and contributed to joint leakage. it was common practice within industry to quote these tables as PCC-1 recommending 50ksi as an appropriate assembly bolt stress level. it has been shown that it is possible to recondition them with a new facing layer and successfully reuse them in the same joint. a caution has been added with regard to the use of temporary gaskets during pressure and tightness testing (gaskets for which the joint was not designed). This results in a reused gasket being harder than a new gasket. but that more than a thin layer is likely to lead to leakage and should be removed prior to joint assembly. For these gaskets.0 “Joint Pressure and Tightness Testing”. a finite life for the bolt. are reused. 128 . In section 13.13mm (0. in particular RTJ gaskets. therefore. An exception to this recommendation is mentioned and that is the re-use of the metal core in grooved metal gaskets with soft facing (kamprofile gaskets). and damage to the flange facing may occur during assembly. The third change is guidance that the machining of large diameter bolts for reconditioning the threads is the preferred method. In fact. This requirement was based on industry experience with joint leakage in an offshore platform environment where the paint on standard flanges was excessively thick.0 “Lubrication of Working Surfaces” was updated to include a recommendation that bolts be checked for free-running nuts during the bolt lubrication stage of assembly. However.

04 inches) and therefore are much more tolerant of flange face flatness variation than harder gasket types that compress much less than this amount. it is acceptable to apply the flatness tolerances to the gap between the flanges.The appendix contains requirements for the minimum course content that must be taught in the theoretical portion. The guidelines also did not address acceptable levels of minor local imperfection in the flange facing (pits. The flatness tolerances are related to separate radial and circumferential acceptance limits and when these are combined the acceptable level of variation can be two to three times that of existing flange fabrication flatness guidelines. The appendix will be on hold until this has been done and will be released as an update via web page link to users of PCC-1 once everything is in place. such as often occurs in shell and tube exchanger joints. 129 . it is hoped that the two certification requirements will be compatible in such a manner that it will be possible to have one training and assessment system that achieves both qualifications. In addition. requirements for maintenance of the certification and the requirements for the certification entity to establish and maintain their ASME accreditation in order to supply the certified assessment program. the orientation of the flanges is fixed by pass partitions or nozzle locations and it is possible to have thermally induced distortion on one flange that follows the other flange and does not therefore reduce the joint integrity. In addition. A note is also made regarding the acceptability of complementary distortion of mating flanges. which often results in joint leakage. the new limits in PCC-1 were set based on the amount of compression that the gasket is subject to during assembly. gouges and scratches). Typical soft gaskets will compress in excess of 1mm (0. Certified Senior Bolting Specialist and Certified Bolting Specialist Instructor. requirements for a series of practical demonstrations. Initial review of the available draft of PrEN/TS 1591-4 was conducted at the start of preparation of PCC-1 Appendix A and alignment was sought in overall format and context for the general requirements. leaving the pass partition proud of the main seating surface. which defines the amount of variation that will be seen in gasket compression. This is due to the need approve and create the body within ASME that will administer the program once published. This requirement is based on experience where neglecting to specify this value leads to machining only of the periphery of the gasket. rather than for each flange independently. or similar joints. The amount of gasket compression stress lost due to flange flatness out-of-tolerance will be proportional to the variation divided by the gasket assembly deflection. The caution is also made that a soft gasket material (PTFE for example) may not exhibit soft behavior when applied as a thin gasket. so the tolerances specified in the appendix are varied depending on whether a hard or soft gasket is employed. For those. In those cases. One of the main differences between the two documents is that the training curriculum and practical demonstrations are outlined in greater detail in PCC-1 Appendix A. there is now a tolerance noted for the acceptable height difference for pass partitions on exchanger flanges to ensure both that it is not under or over compressing the gasket at that location. The appendix has three levels of assembler qualification: Certified Bolting Specialist. The new version of Appendix A will not be issued with the main document when it is published in March 2010. Appendix D: Guidelines for Allowable Gasket Contact Surface Flatness and Defect Depth Previous industry guidelines for flange face flatness were based on manufacturing tolerances and often did not reflect what was practical to achieve in the field. the acceptable imperfections in the flange facing are dependent on the type of gasket being employed. In terms of the flange flatness. In this way. a practical assembly exam that must be administered.

The relationship between the gasket type and the assembly pattern is determined by how stiff the gasket is (how much compression occurs during assembly). Simple figures illustrating the different types of misalignment have been added to clarify the listed tolerances. The new limits address the maximum acceptable load to bring the joint into alignment in terms of the specified assembly bolt load. This method has been retained in the document for continuity and is referred to as the Legacy method. If the gasket stress is higher when the circular passes are commenced. scratches. The acceptable load to bring the flanges parallel (angular misalignment) is listed as a maximum of 10% of the specified bolt load for any bolt. 130 . since the initial release of PCC-1. The intent is that these limits can be employed by an inspector to assess the flange facing condition as part of the standard equipment inspection process and only if the noted damage falls outside of the listed limitations will the joint be flagged for engineering inspection. Once again. The theory behind these improvements is based on using an appropriate pattern for the gasket being employed and by increasing the bolt load at a much more rapid rate than the Legacy method. completing a final circular pass and then an optional additional circular pass four hours afterwards. Increasing the bolt load more rapidly is applicable to all gasket types. therefore. For gaskets with relatively little compression (kamprofile gaskets for example) it has been proven that a pattern pass is not required and all that must be done is to tighten four opposing bolts in sequence to ensure that the joint has initial alignment prior to proceeding to tighten the remaining bolts in a circular fashion. considerable effort in research has gone into proving that faster methods of assembly can be used that will achieve equal or better joint integrity. Additional considerations. gouges. It reduces the number of pattern passes required before proceeding to circular passes and generally results in a higher average gasket stress being achieved prior to commencing the circular passes. for example) will not conform to the imperfection and will.3. The alignment guidelines for PCC-1 were completely re-written to focus on geometry limits for alignment coupled with applied alignment force limits. the acceptable levels are outlined relative to the gasket material. be more sensitive to imperfections than gaskets that have a softer facing material. Appendix E: Flange Joint Alignment Guidelines Previous flanged joint alignment guidelines were primarily obtained from fabrication specifications (ASME B31. for example) and did not address the fact that the initial alignment was not as critical as the inter-relationship between the initial alignment and the force required to bring the joint into perfect alignment (system stiffness).A second set of guidance is listed in the appendix for acceptable levels of local flange facing imperfections (pits. the final compression on the gasket will be more uniform. The maximum load to close an excessive axial gap between flanges is also a total of 10% of the specified bolt load. with a maximum individual load of 20% for any given bolt allowed for the combined limit. Appendix F: Alternative Flange Bolt Assembly Patterns The original version of PCC-1 contained a bolt assembly pattern and procedure that involved tightening in a pattern pass at three different levels of assembly bolt load. However. Harder facing materials (steel. The limits include assessment of closely-spaced imperfections and have acceptable depth tolerances that are dependent on the type of gasket employed and the distance the imperfection extends radially across the flange seating surface.…). such as the importance of joint alignment load on rotating equipment to avoid affecting shaft alignment and limits for when the assembler must seek engineering guidance if alignment forces are excessive are also included.

since they will not be reused) and multiple use (where softening is not desirable). Quadrant Pattern: Similar in configuration to the Modified Legacy. The four materials listed in the appendix are intended to match commonly applied bolt materials and significant effort was made to ensure that the washer thickness and material specification resulted in washers that could be easily manufactured. except only four opposing bolts are tightened in sequence and then a circular pattern is commenced. the joint is divided into quadrants and the next bolt in each quadrant is tightened in order. there is often a cost barrier that prevents this from occurring. The new PCC-1 Appendix M was written with the intent to rectify these two issues and also to provide guidance on the service limits for the different materials listed for washer manufacture. creating an undesirable bending of the washer during assembly. Guidelines are given as to when to re-use and when to replace bolts. Appendix N has been written to ensure that more than cursory consideration of the bolt material cost is assessed when making the decision.In addition. there is commentary on the appropriate methods for reconditioning bolts. In addition. The service temperature limits outlined in the appendix are based on metallurgical behavior for multiple usage and service experience for the single use limits. The intent is for this appendix to eventually be replaced by an ASTM specification. Appendix N: Reuse of Bolts In many common joint sizes. That specification did not include higher alloy materials and the washer outer diameters were in excess of common flange spot-face diameters used at the nut contact surface. which is an effort that is already underway. depending on gasket type) and then a final circular pass until no nut turns. Bolt numbering is not required. instead of using a cross-pattern for tightening the bolts. Two patterns are presented. one for flanges with ≤ 16 bolts. Four-Bolt pattern: similar to the modified Legacy. However. There are three new patterns introduced for single tool application and two patterns for multi-tool. All of the new pattern passes do not include the optional final pass after a 4 hour wait and all include the additional instruction to continue tightening the bolts until they no longer turn for the final pass. The service limits are based on single use (where softening during operation will be acceptable. rather than after a full pattern pass. as the next loose bolt in the next quadrant is always the bolt that must be tightened. The pattern includes one or two pattern passes (second optional. where opposite quadrants are tightened successively and one for joints with > 16 bolts where the next quadrant in a circular order is tightened. which is actually a structural washer specification. • • The multi-tool patterns are similar to the Modified Legacy pattern and the Four-Bolt pattern. it is practical to replace the bolting at every assembly in order to maximize the chances of joint integrity. Appendix M: Hardened Washer Usage Guideline and Purchase Specification The existing specification often referenced for through-hardened washers is ASTM F436. This resulted in the washer bridging the spot face. the appendix contains guidelines for suitable measures for assessing the efficacy of other alternative tightening patterns/procedures that are not included in PCC-1. except the bolts do not require numbering as. pattern passes using multiple tools have been included in the appendix in order to reflect this common industry practice. but with bolt load increased to the next level after every 4 bolts tightened. The cost of the new bolting material is offset by the cost of reconditioning the old bolts and also the benefit to accuracy in achieved bolt preload with new bolts. 131 . The single tool patterns include: • Modified Legacy Pattern: Similar to the Legacy pattern. In addition.

The new Appendix P in PCC-1 provides guidance and a series of checklists designed to guide the user through an investigation of joint leakage. Using this comprehensive approach allows the end user to be more aware of the reasons as to why the selected bolt load is being applied and therefore to explore opportunities to improve the joint integrity based on the limiting factors for the joint. the second method of determining assembly bolt load involves the calculation of the maximum limits for each component and the determination of the minimum required gasket stress to both seat the gasket during assembly and to seal the gasket during operation. It also lists some best practice guidance for basic flanged joint design problems.47 “Series A” flanges in sizes from DN 50mm (NPS 2) to DN 1200mm (NPS 48).Appendix O: Assembly Bolt Load Selection This appendix outlines two methods of determining the appropriate assembly bolt load for a given joint. Once gasket relaxation and hydrostatic end force have been allowed for in the calculation. cl. assembly history.5 and B16. operating conditions and condition of the joint and gasket subsequent to joint disassembly. as determined by calculation. The first method is the use of a standard assembly bolt stress across all joints. flange and an example assembly bolt torque table is also provided. This includes an assessment of what the original joint configuration was. However. The appendix contains tabulated values of maximum allowable assembly bolt stress to avoid damage to the flange for standard B16. A worked example for determining the assembly bolt load for a DN 75mm (NPS 3). that method may also result in insufficient or excessive gasket stress or damage to the flange due to excessive bolt load in some cases. Appendix P: Guidance on Troubleshooting Flanged Joint Leakage Incidents One of the most important activities that can be undertaken in any leak free bolted joint program is a diagnosis of the cause of any leaks that occur. 300. It contains a sample “Flanged Joint Leak Report” and additional lists of considerations for common flange design issues and some potential resolutions for those issues. 132 . The diagnostic troubleshooting checklists are written to key from when leakage occurred and to narrow in on conditions and clues as to why the leakage occurred. there is a band within which the assembly bolt load may be selected that will ensure that no joint components will be damaged and that sufficient gasket stress is present during all phases of operation such that no leakage will occur. Therefore. It is recognized that the simplicity of that method may assist in its adoption and success on some sites.

. The undertaking and commitment by the committee members (listed following) was significant.) 133 . Inc.) Members: Mr. Jerry Waterland (Virginia Sealing Products. James Payne (JPAC.Conclusions The ASME PCC-1:2010 version represents a step change in the level of detail provided for guidance on bolted joint assembly and will represent a significant body of work for the international improvement of bolted flanged joint integrity. Clay Rodery (BP North American Products. Clyde Neely (Becht Engineering Co. Gary Milne (Hydratight) Mr. Edward Hayman (Superior Plant Services) Mr. however it is believed that the benefit to industry from this revision will be commensurate. Joseph Barron (Northrup Grumman Newport News) Dr. Inc. Chair: Mr. Inc. Inc.) Mr. Warren Brown (Equity Engineering Group) Mr.) Mr. David Lay (Hytorc) Mr.

134 .

Flexitallic Ltd © J.Qualification of Personnel Competency – DD CEN/TS 1591-4 John Hoyes. Hoyes of Flexitallic 135 . R.

136 .

The Evolution of a Pan-European Norm on Competency Assurance of Flange Assembly Technicians John Hoyes Flexitallic Sections of Presentation Background Considerations CEN Standardisation Harmonisation with PED 137 .

Background Considerations Joints Fail – Not Just Gaskets Installation critically important 138 .

Objective To Raise the Status. of a Joint Assembly Technician to that of a Welder responsible for the welds of the flanges being sealed Loss of Time Served Maintenance Personnel Progression Towards Contractors Previous Knowledge & Experience Base Lost 139 . in the context of the PED .

HSE Concerns Over Safety Record In North Sea Attendance at a Training Course Does Not Demonstrate Subsequent Competency 140 .

Competency Assessment Systems Added to Training Courses for North Sea Technicians Outcome was a Significant Reduction in Incident Rate CEN Standardisation 141 .

TC 74 “Flanges and their Joints” set up to Implement the Requirements of the Pressure Equipment Directive Chairman : Hans Kocklemann of MPA . Robert Noble. John Hoyes. Stuttgart TC 74 WG 10 “Calculation Methods” Convenor. Flexitallic 142 . Hydratight TC 74 WG 8 “Gaskets” Convenor.

Technical Specification 143 .Competency Document Drafted by Hydratight Member of WG 8 based upon the North Sea Experience TS 1591 Part 4 : 2007 “Qualification of Personnel Competency in the Assembly of Bolted Joints Fitted to Equipment Subject to the Pressure Equipment Directive” TS --.

twice. and a Weighted Formal Vote Adoption of a published EN is not Mandatory 144 .A TS Has A Lower Status Than an EN [European Standard] A TS is Intended to be a PreStandard that Leads Within Three to Five Years to a full EN Before Approval an EN is Subject to Public Enquiry.

TS 1591 Part 4 Intended to be an Umbrella Document Augmenting Current Training Schemes by Adding Competency Assessment TS 1591 Part 4 : 2007 For the sections on General and Specific Knowledge Curriculum Requirements of a Training Course only the suggested subjects to be covered are listed There is a Requirement for Work Site Experience with Guidance by Certified Competent Person and Log Keeping A Competency Assessment has to be carried out once candidate has had Sufficient Work Site Experience 145 .

Guidance for Work Site Experience before Competency Assessment Work Site Experience Earliest Assessment Frequent & Intense Infrequent but with Intense Periods Sporadic 3 Months 6 Months 12 Months Method of Competency Assessment Theoretical Question Paper Practical Assessment during typical Simulated on site assembly Documented Work Place Evidence 146 .

Refresher Training Guidance Work Site Experience Frequent and Intense Infrequent but with Intense Periods Sporadic Period After Achieving Competency 3 Years 2 Years 12 Months Decision Taken by TC 74 to Upgrade TS 1591 Part 4 to be a Full EN Standard This follows both the natural intended path for a TS and the German chemical industry view that a full EN is more likely to be adopted 147 .

Harmonisation with PED Bolted Connections are not recognised as an “Essential Feature” of the PED This should be changed Then EN 1591 Part 4 would have to be Harmonised with the Requirements of the PED & thus create further encouragement for its adoption 148 .

technicians were used on site THANK YOU 149 . as defined by 1591 Part 4.Perhaps Operators would be able to achieve insurance cost reductions by specifying only competent.

150 .

A regulatory perspective on bolted joints at high hazard sites Iain Paterson. HSE Offshore Division © Health & Safety Executive 151 .

152 .

and • Some of the benchmarks that HSE uses to help judge compliance. The principles embedded in the Cullen report have stood the test of time but we still need to be vigilant. Onshore. The effect is the same as for offshore.A Regulatory Perspective on Bolted Joints at High Hazard Sites Iain Paterson. In 2005. • a few photographs showing what we find in the ‘real world’. The essence of this regulation is that duty holders must have a robust safety management system and an effective auditing regime to ensure. Regulation 4 requires the operator to take all measures necessary to prevent major accidents and to limit their consequence on the local population and environment. The COMAH regulations define major accidents as major emissions. Major accidents include fire and explosion. 153 . fires and explosions that could lead to serious danger to human health or the environment. • a few statistics showing the equipment where hydrocarbon releases occur offshore. and major damage to the structure that affects its stability. the duty holder needs to put in place a robust safety management system and an effective audit function. amongst other things. a major accident incident occurred at the Bombay High complex in which 350 of the 367 persons on board the platform survived. All major accident hazards must be identified. Regulation 12 specifies the central theme. Lord Cullen’s enquiry into the disaster led to many wide ranging recommendations including changes in the offshore safety legislation. We need safety legislation to prevent catastrophic events such as the Piper Alpha disaster in 1988 where 167 lives were lost. HSE Offshore Division The presentation addresses: • the relevant safety legislation aimed at ensuring the integrity of pressure systems both offshore and onshore. Regulation 5 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations (MHSWR) applies at all work places and requires employers to implement an effective safety management system commensurate with the risks that they create. That’s a testament to Lord Cullen’s recommendations and the developments in major hazard accident prevention and mitigation since Piper Alpha. that the integrity management of the hydrocarbon containment envelope is maintained. Team Leader Mechanical Engineering. the Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations (COMAH) applies to sites such as refineries and chemical works etc where significant inventories of hazardous material are used. and all major accident risks must be evaluated and controlled. One of the principle recommendations arising from Lord Cullen’s enquiry is the Offshore Installations (Safety Case) Regulations.

it’s difficult to pin point exactly what proportion of hydrocarbon leaks occur at flanges.The Pressure Equipment Regulations 1999 address the design and initial integrity of new plant both onshore and on fixed offshore installations. The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) address in-service integrity and apply both onshore and offshore. It means adopting suitable inspection techniques where you have confidence in detecting deterioration. HSE research report RR672 summarises the statistics from HSE’s offshore hydrocarbon release database. RR672 indicates that major and significant leaks occur most often at: piping (21%). COMAH and the Offshore Installations (Safety Case) regulations both require a safety management system to ensure that this actually takes place together with periodic review and audit to confirm or otherwise. rapid erosion of a vessel by a sand wash nozzle. However. 154 . decreasing from 110 such releases in 2001 to 60 in 2008. the nature and the frequency of inspections. that the inspection regime remains valid. Examples are given in the presentation showing in-service deterioration including. Examples are given in the presentation showing poor practice on new equipment including. • missing flange bolts. It requires that deterioration such as corrosion is detected in good time so as to allow remedial action before a dangerous situation occurs. It addresses several key risk areas including bolted joints. and vibration induced fatigue failure of small bore piping connections. For bolted joints. leaks from small bore fittings. instrument tubing susceptible to vibration induced fatigue failure. • tack welded vibration supports • Unsuitable material used on a pipe support pad. Typically. there were a total of 579 ‘major’ and ‘significant’ hydrocarbon releases. In other words an inspection regime that considers the scope. Duty holders formally report all of their leaks to HSE and these are stored in a database. Regulation 6 is relevant in that it address the inspection of piping and flanged joints etc. flanges and valves are the priority areas where industry and the regulator need to focus our attention. we use the Energy Institute guidelines as a model of good practice. this means an inspection scheme where someone competent has considered the anticipated deterioration modes. HSE interventions to inspect the integrity of the hydrocarbon containment plant are based on our loss of containment manual that is publically available on our web site. In the offshore sector. In practice. piping. a flanged joint fretting against another pipe Galvanic corrosion due to dissimilar metals on bolts and flange. Over the eight year period 2001 to 2008. Bolted joints can be safety critical parts of the high hazard process plant and that their integrity must be effectively managed throughout their life time. A study looking at gas leaks greater than 25 kg (a substantial release that would have serious implications if ignited) revealed that instruments. industry and HSE are working to reduce the number of hydrocarbon leaks. and flanged joints (10%). instruments (18%). HSE uses evidence such as this to inform our inspection priorities. • • • • • a perforated gas pipe suffering from corrosion under insulation.

155 .

156 .

Health and Safety Executive A regulatory perspective on bolted joints at high hazard sites Iain Paterson CEng MIMechE Team Leader. Mechanical Engineering HSE. Offshore Division Why do we need safety legislation? To provide adequate integrity management of high hazard plant Piper Alpha – 6th July 1988 – 167 lives lost 157 .

and (d) all major accident risks have been evaluated and measures have been. This means put in place a robust safety management system and effective audit 158 .include in the safety case sufficient particulars to demonstrate that ….. or will be. (c) all hazards with the potential to cause a major accident have been identified.Why do we need safety legislation? Relevant legislation includes … Offshore Installations (Safety Case) Reg’s 2005 Regulation 12: Management of health and safety and control of major accident hazards (1) ……. taken to control those risks to ensure that the relevant statutory provisions will be complied with..

monitoring and review of the preventive and protective measures.Relevant legislation includes … Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 1999 Regulation 4 General duty Every operator shall take all measures necessary to prevent major accidents and limit their consequences to persons and the environment. control. organisation. for the effective planning. having regard to the nature of his activities and the size of his undertaking. This means put in place a robust safety management system and effective audit 159 . This means put in place a robust safety management system and effective audit Relevant legislation includes … Management of Health & Safety at Work Reg’s 1999 Regulation 5 Every employer shall make and give effect to such arrangements as are appropriate.

Initial integrity … Pressure Equipment Regulations 1999 (applies to new equipment onshore and offshore) Missing bolts Initial integrity …? 160 .

and (b) each time that exceptional circumstances which are liable to jeopardise the safety of the work equipment have occurred. to ensure that health and safety conditions are maintained and that any deterioration can be detected and remedied in good time. In-service integrity …? 161 .In-service integrity … Provision and Use of Work Equipment Reg’s 1998 Regulation 6: Inspection (2) Every employer shall ensure that work equipment exposed to conditions causing deterioration which is liable to result in dangerous situations is inspected (a) at suitable intervals.

Bolted flanged joint integrity …? Bolted flanged joint integrity …? 162 .

Offshore hydrocarbon releases 595 major and significant leaks in 8 year period The 3 most common types of equipment where offshore hydrocarbon leaks occur: Piping 126/595 21% 18% 10% Instruments 107/595 Flanges 59/595 163 .

uk/offshore/lossofcontainmen.hse.pdf UKOOA Hydrocarbon release reduction toolkit www.Major & Significant Gas HCRs > 25kg by Equipment Type 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Flanges 2008-9 2007-8 2006-7 2005-6 2004-5 Valve Manual .gov.Block / Bleed Wellhead / Xmas Trees Pig Launchers Pressure Vessel Turbine Drain Flange Filters Piping Risers Valve Actuated .gov.Choke Heat Exchanger Mud / Shale / tanks Pump Storage Tanks Compressors Instruments Valve Manual .Control / Valve Actuated .net/ResourceFiles/toolkit%20final%20version.Relief Not specified 2003-4 2002-3 2001-2 www.hse.stepchangeinsafety.uk/research/rr672 Benchmarks: HSE Loss of containment manual www.pdf 164 .gov.uk/offshore/corrosion.ESDV Valve Actuated .hse.pdf Energy Institute Guidelines for the management of the integrity of bolted joints for pressurised systems Energy Institute document Guidelines for corrosion management in oil and gas production and processing HSE Offshore external corrosion guide www.Block Valve Actuated .

hse.hse.pdf Pressure Equipment Regulations 1999 www.gov.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l30.pdf Management of Health & Safety at Work Regulations 1999 www.gov.hse.uk/pubns/priced/l21.hse.uk/pubns/priced/puwer.gov.gov.uk/files/file11284.pdf PUWER 1998 www.uk/pubns/priced/l111.pdf 165 .berr.Legislation downloads: Offshore Installations (Safety Case) Regulations 2005 www.pdf COMAH 1999 www.

166 .

Leak Management Ed Versluis. James Walker Rotabolt © James Walker 167 .

168 .

QWHJULW\ Ed Versluis Sales Manager James Walker Benelux Achieving: Maximum Maximum bolt force bolt force OHDNV FRVW HYHU\RQH 169 ./HDN PDQDJHPHQW /HDN PDQDJHPHQW 0DUFK 0DUFK %ROWHG -RLQW .

Some are very costly… Q8 .Friday 13th February. 170 ... 2009 Costs of Steam Quenching.HDS unit:.

How effective is leak sealing? U" HG IR HW %XGJ 171 .

.85% of flange leaks are caused by incorrect bolt loads Why… does everyone blame the gasket?. 172 ..

Gaskets don’t fail !.. OLHV GR« PE LQW DVVH R EROWHG M 3 Keys to Reliable Bolted Joints t en on mp ity Co ual DeJoint sig n % Bolt Tension Q 173 ..

Bolt Force Operating Gasket Stress Possible flange bending or "rotation" Hydrostatic Force 174 .

000 30.000 50. 20 bar 10 Leak Rate mg/sec/m 1 Leak Rate 0.1 0.5 mm thick.000 Operating Stress MPa Torque Tightening Friction Estimate 175 .7\SLFDO /HDN 7HVWLQJ *UDSK CNAF Gasket 1.000 20.000 60.000 10.000 40.01 0.

on 1720mm PCD •Grade: ASTM A193 B7 •Duty: 30bar. torque: • Max. Heat Exchanger •Studs: 36 x M52 x 360mm long. torque: (Thread and nut surface – lubricated) 412 kN / 42 Tonnes 4368 Nm 2259 Nm (.2): • Min.P. Heat Exchanger Tightening Case History: H. 350ºC • Calculated bolt load: • Calculated torque ( = 0.Tightening Case History: H.P.3%) 5874 Nm (+ 34.5%) 176 .48.

Theoretical vs. Actual Torque Torque Scatter 7000 6000 Bolt # Torque [Nm] Calculated torque +34% Torque (Nm) 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 Bolt No. -48% Hydraulic Tensioning 177 .

Hydraulic Tensioning

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

Step 4

Load-Transfer Relaxation
1. Loading 2. Localised deformation 3. Distribution 4. Load losses

Limited access

3 Bolts tightened by “ flogging ”

178

Traditional bolting (without tension control)

Leakage Zone
F min

Required bolt force
F max

Destruction Zone

+/- 40%

0 kN

Minimum Bolt force

Bolt force

Maximum bolt force

F [kN]

Temperature

Pressure

Flanges

Bolts
© James Walker 2006

Traditional bolting (Thermal cycling)

Temp.

Proces upset
Leakage Zone
F min

Required bolt force
F max

Destruction Zone

+/- 40%

0 kN

Minimum Bolt force

Bolt force

Maximum bolt force

F [kN]

Temperature

Pressure

Flanges

Bolts
© James Walker 2006

Temp.

179

UHOLDELOLW\

\RX H[SHFW

JW RotaBolt Tension control & JW gasket science

Leakage Zone

Bolt tension

Destruction Zone
+/- 5%

0 kN

Minimum Bolt force Ideal Bolt force

Maximum bolt force

F [kN]

© James Walker 2006

180

Proces upset Leakage Zone Bolt tension Destruction Zone +/. flange.JW RotaBolt Tension control & JW gasket science Leakage Zone Bolt tension Destruction Zone +/. 181 .5% 0 kN Minimum Bolt force Maximum bolt force F [kN] Temperature Pressure Flanges Bolts © James Walker 2006 JW RotaBolt Tension control & JW gasket science Temp.or bolt force F [kN] Temperature Pressure Flanges Bolts © James Walker 2006 Temp.5% Safety Margin 0 kN Minimum Bolt force No leaks guaranteed Maximum gasket.

Reforming Heat Exchanger b) 182 .2EXAMPLES Refinery 3 Case Histories: a) Valves in Catalytic Reforming Cat.

Powerformer From Storage Powerformer naphtha 183 .

Unit had a track record of leaks at RCV’s since 1958 RCV flanges 184 .

Steam quench on 40+ RCV flanges in 2002 Naptha 550°C / 37 bar Thermal cycling 12” & 16” Class 600 Silver Faced Kammprofiles 20 RotaBolts All flanges 7 years leak free Good Engineering Practice 185 .

Heat exchanger leaks (how to avoid?) Tubesheet 255° C 425° C ¨T over tubesheet = 170° C © James Walker 2006 186 .

3 tonnes target load 2YHUORDG )DFWRU 2YHUORDG )DFWRU LQ UHODWLRQ WR %ROW 'LPHQVLRQV ƒ 10.7/8” bolts (B16 grade) ƒ approx 20” clamp length ƒ 30.6:1 ratio b lt nes per… o 60 ton the tension to set /HQJWK 'LDPHWHU 5DWLR ok around Actually to 187 .ƒ 1.

© James Walker 2006 © James Walker 2010 188 .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful