_10 (V0) x 2 For the curve with T/t = 10 and d/t = 100, ey 70408. (600) 10 Below these \ values, the curves from this Bulletin should not be compared to the WRC Bulletin 107 Comparison for Applied Moments Figures C-1-C-8 show portions of this Bulletin’s re- sults and the comparable curves derived from WRC Bulletin 107 for moment loadings on a nozzle in @ ey- lindrical shell For an applied longitudinal or circumferential mo- ment, the maximum shell radial (relative to nozzle) bending moments calculated by this Bulletin generally ‘occur fora rigid nozzle. Figs. C-I and C-4 show M,d/(Mt, (or M,) values for the rigid nozzle (T/t = 0) together with the corresponding WRC Bulletin 107 results, For this very important loadings case, this Bulletin’s results and the WRC Bulletin 107 results are reasonably close, with this Bulletin’s results being somewhat more conserva- tive. For discrete nozzle thickness, this Bulletin’s results do not deviate significantly from the rigid nozzle case up to T/t values of 2. For T/t = 2, this Bulletin’s results are very close to the WRC Bulletin 107 values, and for ‘T/t greater than 2, the WRC Bulletin 107 results for M,d/(My, or M.) are generally conservative as demon- strated by the T/t = 10, d/t = 100 curves plotted in Figs. C-land C-4, Values of circumferential (relative to nozzle) shell bending moments (M,) for large, thin nozzles calculated from this Bulletin can be greater than the WRC Bulletin 107 values for applied moments in the radial or cie- cumferential direction. Figures C-2 and C-3 show this Bulletin’s results for ‘T/t = 10 and d/t = 100 and the results for the rigid nozzle, along with the WRC Bulletin 107 values. For thicker nozzle necks, T/t = 3 and less, the Mud/M, values are generally less than the WRC Bulletin 107 values. The thicker neck causes the radial shell hending moment, M,, to increase with a corre- sponding decrease in Me, Membrane stress resultants for applied moments are shown in Figs. C-5-C-8. For \ values less than ap- proximately 0.7, the shell membrane stress resultants calculated by this Bulletin are generally greater than the WRC Bulletin 107 values for discrete values of T/t, For large nozzles with thin necks, the circumferential membrane forces (N») calculated using this Bulletin are generally larger than the WRC Bulletin 107 values; re- sults are shown for T/t = 10. For the larger nozzles, the WRC Bulletin 107 membrane stress resultant values are conservative for ‘T/t equal to approximately 2 ot less, ‘The membrane stress resultants are more important as design parameters for larger nozzles, and limits on ee | nozzle neck thickness are especially important for achieving efficient designs of eylinder intersections for the larger nozzles. Shell bending stresses are teiativeiy more important for the smaller nozzles, (A > 0.7). Comparisons for Applied Radial Loads Comparisons for shell bending stress resultant are shown in Figs. C-9 and C-10, and for membrane stress resultants in Figs. C-11 and C-12. It should be noted here that stress resultants due to radial loads were cal. ‘calated by Professor Steele on the circumferential plane of symmetry only, but are conservatively used in this Bulletin on the longitudinal plane of symmetry also, ‘The WRC Bulletin 107 results and this Bulletin’s results follow a consistent trend, with this Bulletin’s results being somewhat greater for the shell radial (relative to nozzle) bending moments for thick nozzle necks and for shell circumferential (relative to nozzle) bending moments for nozzles with thin necks. A similar trend holds true for the membrane stress resultants. ‘Again, it is desirable to avoid a thin nozale neck con- figuration for nozzles with a large d/t ratio in order to get an efficient design. For the heavier nozzle necks, the load can be carried at the intersection by a combination of radial and circumferential bending and the WRC Bulletin 107 values are approximately equivalent to the average of the two moments given by this Bulletin’s results. ‘Summary of Comparisons Because the calculated stress resultants at a nozzle to cylinder junction are largely determined by force and moment equilibrium considerations, WRC Bulletin 107 results and this Bulletin’s results compare reasonably well in most areas. However, in some areas, there are nificant differences because of different analysis assumptions. Designs based on either set of calculated results should account for the reinforcing details used. The WRC Bulletin 107 values were calculated for an un- penetrated shell whereas this Bulletin’s results are subject to the limitations outlined in Sect. 3.2 of this Bulletin. ‘Also, precautions should be taken in using the WRC Bulletin 107 results for larger nozales with thin necks, AZ Land Th > 2. Acknowledgements Many individuals and organizations have contributed to the preparation of this document. In particular, the financial support of the American Iron and Steel In- stitute, which made this work possible, is greatly ap- preciated; similarly, the input and technical guidance provided by the Subcommittee on Reinforced Openings and External Loadings of the Pressure Vessel Research Committee is acknowledged. 7% Revised WRC Bulletin 297