A PROPOSED EXTENSION OF THE TEMA TUBESHEET DESIGN METHOD TO DETERMINE TUBESHEET RIM THICKNESS K.P. Singh President and CEO Holtec International Marlton, New Jersey P. Marks: Graham Manufacturing Company, Inc. Batavia, New York ABSTRACT A ethod to compute the thickness of tubesheet extension (rims) used to serve as a flange fs propos The method treats both fixed/floating hesd stationary tubeshest and Untube tutesheets. Numerical examples Ulustrate NOMENCLATURE Ar Tubeshest 0.0. dot Tube 0.9. Fi Edge condition multiplier as defined by Teas (1). G: TEMA effective gasket dlaneter Hs Generic ter of edge sonent. Ps Generle ter for pressure Py: Shellelde design pressure Pe: Tubeside design pressure Layout pitch Ratio of A to Stress In the tubesheet elm onaole stress for the tubesheet at design tecperature Tubecheet gerforated Interior thickness Thickness of the tubesheet elm Ria width Dw =°(A-6)/2] YY: Total pressure load at dtaneter G (W ts equal to 7G//4 te Tubesheet solidity factor (deflection efficiency) 1. BuracoucTion The current edition of TEMA [1] does not give a procedure to compute the ainimun required Thickness of the portion of the tubesheet extended te serve as a flange. The contribution of the Tange extension in reducing (occasionally Increasing) the maxioun tubeshest stress in the perforated interior 1s Incorporated in the current TOA forwla for fixed tubeshests, but not for tubesheets in U-bundle construction. Our objective herein Ls to (1) Develop a conservative approach to define a alnimum outer ring’ thickness for U-tube, fixed tuoe, and flosting tubesheet heat exchangers, consistent with the TEM design philosophy. (1) Provide for a consistent method to Snelude the con’ ribution of ‘the outer ring to the thickness calculation of the tubesheet proper for U-bundle tubesheets. Theee conditions of geometry cover all. possible edge support. conditions forthe stationary tubesheets of heat exchangers.(4) Tubeside gasketed, sheliside integral (11) Shellside gasketed, tubeside integral (411) Both sides gasketed Since a heat exchanger tubesheet 1s subject to both shellside and tubeside pressures, the computations suggested by the following evelopment should be carried out independently for both tubeside and shellside pressures, unless 2 "differential pressure only" design 1s, specified. We assune that the reader has a working level aequaintance with the TEMA Standards, and 1s generally faniliar with the tubeshect design Rethods. Readers in need of such a background nay consult refs. [1,2]. In the next section, working formas to determine the tubesheet’ rim thickness are presented along with worked aut sunerical examples. The derivations of these formilas is given in subsequent sections for completeness of presentation. The formilas are presented with reference to the tubesheet bending equation reformatted by the TEMA tusesheet technical subcommittee for possible adoption in the seventh edition of the TEMA Standards. Since the TEMA tubesheet desian formula predates the plate theory solutions which treat tthe tubesheet problems ina consistent manner [2, Chapters 8-11], our effort herein is directed towards developing tubesheet rim design formlas within the spirit of TEMA methodology. This has rneant recourse to sent-empirical deductions which Go not have a rigorous basis, The method oes have the support’ of early works of Gardner, Miller, ané others. 2. CALCULATION PROCEDURE The calculation procedure for fixed and floating head exchangers is different from that for U-tube exchangers. 2.1 Fixed or Floating Head Exchanger: ‘The thickness of the portion of the tubesheet extended as a flange, tr, is given by wet 143.72 me)! pti at Sac) 0.0 + 804 0.98 ay where Mis the seating condition or operating Condition moment, whichever is greater, A and @ fare tubesheet 0.0., and effective gasket diameter, respectively, and $ 1s the Code allovable stress at the pertinent design temperature. The quantity Fis simply the ratio of A to Cj L.e., real (2.2) The quantity G has different values for different types of construction. For example, G 1s the shell 1.0, for fixed tubesheet units.” G is the ne shell gasket mean dianeter for floating head units when shellside pressure 1s considered, but channel T.D. for welded channel/tubesheet construction wien the tubeside pressure is considered. The User should refer to the TEMA Standards for the appropriate definition of G. Other teras are defined in the nomenclature. It should be noted that the stationary tubesheet in a floating head exchanger may be gasketed on both sides. In such a case, M is given by N= Greater of [ Abs (H,, - Moq)s 23) Abs (Mog = Meg) ] where M indicates moment and the subseripte have ‘the following meanings. First subserip st sheliside et channel. side Second subseript: st seating condition ©: operating condition Horever, if a differential pressure only design 1s required, then (2.4) Me Abs (gg ~ Mog) 2.2 UsTube Exchangers: The proposed TEMA tubesheet bending formula to determine the required thickness of the perforated region is [3] ) (2.5) “3 P s Where P is shell or tubeside design pressure, and Gis the corresponding effective gasket diameter. nis a term which accounts for the tubesheet solidity. 4. 0:785__ (for square or rotated ae square pitch) oD (pid, 2.6) pe 1 = 2907 (for trlangular or ——z rotated telangular (4) (pid) piten)Tt ds herein proposed to modify the definition of P in Equation (2.4) by adding to the design pressure a term Pp due to edge moment, Lc. PsP +Pi or Py + Py @7 here Ph As defined as follows: 6.24" - (2.8) Fe = MG - 39009 (0) To? eet tye aT where P is efther Py or Py. Like F and G, edge moment Is defined differently depending on wether shelleide or tubeside pressure 1s being considered. When shellside pressure 1s considered: We Msg = Mos when tubeside pressure 1s considered: Wem, Mog If a Joint ts integral (welded connection) then tthe corresponding edge moment 1s zero. Finally, for differential pressure designs, M is. the operating condition edge moment for the controlling pressure side less the operating condition moment for the other. side. The stress In the tubesheet rim due to flange action 1s! ° aye T2130 (MSM s PCy | (2.10) 0) 5 where P 1s elther Py or Pe. For each pressure loading, the calculation procedure 1s'a5 follow (2) Compute H* from Eq. (2.9) assuming Tr = T (cim and interior thickness equal) (41) Compute Ph from Eq. (2.8) and P from Eq. (2.7) (111) Compute the required tubesheot thickness T” from” Eq. (2.5) and Fequired rim thickness from Eq. (2.10). If T > Try and both are set equal “to the computed T, then the calculation may be terminated at this point. 113 (iv) If Tr exceeds T, or if it te desired to reduce the rim thickness below Ty 2 new value of Tr may be selected, ‘and Used to compute ‘a new HY in Eq. (2.9). Next, the calculation returns to step (iL) ‘above. The numerical example Illustrates the procedure. In the next section Subscripts Subsoripts on M have the following meanings: eee enna TTTSTTETTED First subscript Shellside Channel side —— Second Seating —____ Operating subscript condition condition reece rene neneR cresseria 3. DERIVATION OF THE WORKING EQUATIONS 3.1 Fixed or Floating Head Exchanger: The role of the tube bundle in providing ‘support to the tubesheet in the manner of an elastic foundation is well-known and extensively documented in the Literature. The presence of elastic foundation reduces tubesheet. deflection and slope in stayed tubesheets to a fraction of hat would develop in a U-bundle tubesheet under identical lateral loadings. Therefore, for. the Purpose of ‘evolving the tubesheet rim’ thickness Tormila, the tubesheet_ may be assumed to” be clamped’ at the shell Inside diameter, G. ‘The flange action moment M can be replaced by @ uniformly distributed lateral load W slong. the outer circumference of the tubesheet, such that Wao) 2 on The solution for a circular plate, clanped at Gioneter G, and subject to a uniformly distributed lateral load W at the outer circumference is available in standard texts [4]. This leads to the expression Ho MM (3 mere*-1) Gay WTS) 10 186 where the Poisson's ratio is assumed to be 0.3.= es T ( MN Tr f w* we f PRESSURE, P 6———__+ FG, 3.1 TURESHEET FREE CODY Renciting Eq. (3.2) wlth Tp on the left hand a : bide gives Ee (2.1) fio ee for U-bundle units: Fa 16 T 8 3.2 Tebeshests for U-bundle untt ‘ oe Fig. 3.1 shons the free body of the ree tubesheet. ihe rim Ie shown subjected to an edge este), monet He "the perforated. interior of the "7 tubesheet is modelled by an equivalent solid plate of modified Young's Modulus E* and Polsson ratio YF (2, Chapters 8 or 5]. Requiring continuity of slope at the interface between the perforated region and the Tim yields epg? aortas vy 6.3) cHew TPS ey weer Eee were Df 2 ET oa wav) In the above equation, the rotation of the rim is written using narrow Ting theory. The term c Tepresents the rotational restraint applied on the tubesheet due to Its attachment to shell om channel (f such an integral attachment exists) where: on Tt remains now to express f in terns of the solidity factor n and'c in terms of the edge restraint factor F. We note that the deflection of a laterally loaded circular plate of Young's Modulus Ey Poisson's ratio v, O.D. A, and thickness T Ler oe2VU-9Gs9A aD OhTET here W* 1s the uniformly distributed latecal load. Since n 1s, in essence deflection efficiency, the deflection ‘of ‘the perforated plate is én. Tals must equal the deflection of ‘the Identical plate ratio ve Sciving for the interface moments Wy We have with "Young's modulus E* and Poisson rET cP? TPG (AG) wr 2 16.0" Gav) 16 ey aW- 9 Gs A WO) A c+ 2EL @vET n ohne T ote 4) 4flue) e (Q-) b+ TEMA tubesheet formas are known to correlate well with v¥ = 0.435 which leads to (for 0.3) 0.827 9 Hence 0.9) Finally, the expression for the non-simple support edge modifier is derived by noting that the edge restraint effect 1s bullt into the F factor in the TEMA formula. The F-factor 1s 1.25 for gasketed (simply supported edge condition) and Linearly goes to 1-3 for integral tubeshect (pressure part connection. Thus, in effect, the TEMA tubesheet formula replaces the tubesheet dlaneter term by FG (B_y 125 which reduces to G for gasketed construction, and to a value less than or equal to © for integral construction. Since edge slope of a sinply-supported laterally loaded plate varies as the third poner of diameter, it is concluded that the factor cin Eq. 3.3 should be given by ne) (Ay 125 orc = 0.512 f° (3.10) Substituting for f (Eq. 3.9), and ¢ (Eq. 3.10) into the equation for M" (Eq. 3.6) gives. the Final form for design work (Eq. 2.9). APPLICATION OF THE CALCULATION METHOD Let us consider a tubesheet bolted to a channel flange. The following data defines the tubesheet design problems Channel design pressure = 200 psig Ghannel design temperature = 300°F Tubesheet and mating flange 0.0., A = 35.625" Bolt circle dianetor = 34. Gasket effective dianeter, G (as defined by the ASME Code) = 32,012" Shell [.D. = 30.625" Tube hole layout 1s rotated square. Both the tubesheet and flange materials have Code allowable stress § = 17500 pst at onblent and design temperatures, There are 32 body bolts, 3/4" non. dlaneter, made of SA193-67 material (5 = 25000 psi) The mating flange (weld neck type) Is. designed by computer code” FLANGE (2, Chapter 3]. The output which Lists all. pertinent Geometric data. for the flange assembly is presented in Table I. ‘The seating condition and operating condition Mange moments are given in Table 1 to be Moo = 0.29 x 10° 1b-tnen Mes = 0.22 x 10° Ib-Lnch We will now compute the required tubesheet rim thickness, If the tubesheet is part of a fixed or floating ‘tubesheet unit and if it is of U-tube unit. (1) Tubesheet for fixed of floating exchanger: Referring to Eq. (2.1): A 35,625", 6 30.625", ence and r= 1,163" Therefore, Beats. me 0.916 9 264 1.0 + 1.86 27 3.518 Hence, Eq. (2.1) ytelds 12 29 x 105 x 0.261} (97300) (5-0) or Ty = 0.91". The required rim thickness of 0.91" contrasts favorably with the required mating welding neck flange thickness of 1,64" (see Table 1). (1) Tubesheet for U-tube exchanger: Assuming that the tubeshest is integrally welded to the shell, and Its dimensions are Given by the preceding data for the fixed tubesheet example, we conpute the required preliminary perforated region thickness by Eq. (2.5) * ‘According to TEMA [1] GC 1s shell Inside lameter in Fixed tubesheet design exchangers.TABLE 1 eeepRogean FLAN! DESIGN PRESSUMECPSI)= AMBIENT 17500 25000 FLANGE ROLTING INNER OTA ERFECTIVE GASKET OTA= a x GASKET DATA MIDTH (INCH) = DESIGN SEATING STHESS(PST GASKET FACTOR: FLANGE IS A WELD NECK RIB_AND INNER RING SEATIN GASKET SEATING FURCE = BOLTING DATA NUMBER=: NOM DIACINCH)= 32. +750 THE WECFSSARY TOTAL ckOSS THE ACTUAL TOTAL CROSS SEI OPERATING LOADS 197921.97 SEATING LOAD==2 98537,02 OPERATING MODE MOMENTS SEATING MODE MOMENT: INTEGRAL FLANGE FACTORS ouanriry F v Fs eH. MIN.THK.OF MURBED FLANGES conort10Ns sua OPERATING 26250.07 SEATING 20016289 \GF REVISION 1, APRIL 16,19R4449% 200,00 ALLOW -STRESSES(PST) TEMP .OF DESTGN TEMPOF +00 17500,00 too 25000,00 FLANGE GEOMETRY DATACINCH) 9.1250 OUTER DIAnn-==-=-= 35,6250 220120 BOLT CIHCLE DiA--= 34,U000, 13750 MAX HUB THICKMESS= 17500, 115000, +750 d= 3200, = 3,08 G FORCES o 99537. SECTIONAL AREA = 7,9169 CTIONAL AKEASsson 916640 1296408 l22F+06 FIGCAPPENOIXA1) vauuE 3240-2 183785 3240-3 124328 3240-6 1241385 - Taasza 1.6376 STRESSES RADIAL TANGENL AVERAGE 6013.63 6457.02 16358,54 4585167 4931.40 (12874215 116t (2) 7s Assuming pd = 1.25 gives n= 0.497, For gusketed Condition, TERA gives F= 1.25, 0= Sttective gosket Glaneter = 32,012", we hve 1 = 0.183 (7) / wy Setting M = 0.29 x 108 theineh, F = 1.25, n SHOT, P 2 200 pat, AG = 35.625 ~ 32.018 = 3.813" in Eq. (2.3) lves the simiified Giprecsion for M" “for this example problem. 3.218 « 98 ( 2) ~ 13,90 x 10% . (0.2) 32,012 + 4.972 (2) T Similarly, the expression for Pp becones 43) 267.4 We can now perform the calculations in the manner of the steps lald out in Section 2 of ‘this paper. Step 1 Assuming T = Tey we obtain W = = 0.289 x 10° which gives Step II Ph = 38.95 pat Step ITE Hence P = 200 + 34.95 234.95 pst Therefore, froa Eq. (4.1) T = 0.103 (238,95) /° = 2.192" T The current edition (sixth) of TEMA, ina slight anamoly with the Code, defines G'as the average gasket diameter. "We use the Code definition of G in the example problen. "W (411) Tubesheet for U-tube exchanger: Step 1V Required rim thickness Tp 1s given by a -289%10° 40x3.613(92.012) (G.615)(17500) Tet 38 LO22810 or Tr = 2.119" T > Tp} therefore, both the tubesheet should be made fron a 2.192" ‘minimum thickness plate. Let us assume that the designer wishes to examine whether a 2.5" thick tubesheet plate, and a2" thick rim will be adequate for "this application. We have Fr «2 208 Tr 2. From Eq. (4.2), Mt = -.355 x 10 Ib-inch which yields, Pp = 82.87 psi. Hence P = 200 + 42.87 = 242.87’ psi and yp T (requtred) = 0.183 (262.87) /* = 2,209" o 6, 6 Tplrequtred)=t.38 (0222108255310. 1485108 (3.613) (17500) yz = 1.581" Therefore, the proposed 2.5" thick interfor and 2" thick outer rim are quite adequate. In this example the tubesheet plate thickness is controlled by. the required ‘thickness of the perforated region. Woxever, the rim transmits rmonent’ to the Interior which increases the Netfective pressure” onthe perforated Anterior. In the next exagple, we will consider ‘the case where the rim monent helps reduce the required thlekness of the perforated region. This exangle Lllustrates ‘the ‘soneition where. the ‘edge moment redvees the Interior thickness. Consider TEMA type AEU nit here the tubesheet 2 extended aa a Flange and bolted to a flanged shell. Both shellside “and tubestde design Gondtitons ate identical as follows: Design pressure 75 pala, deslan temperature 300°F nsige Glameter 42" inch, shell/cnannel thickness O15 nchs "The alionable_ stress of the_tobeshest Sa flange material ts 17500 pol et both eablont dd Heston ‘emporature. Flange details areas Showin Table af, Assume 2 2 1.25 which gives n en 0.497Tab Ten ~ SHELL/CHANH: INTERNA L Tore Desian Pressure 75. Gezian tears 90, ailouance 0.009 7 MATERTAL ALLOW. ATH) ALLOW, STRESS(DE FLANGE: “30-105 17590. An193-27 25000, GASKET ND BOLTINO CAL 0.5000 s1taez. be 0.2500 1000040 3.0000 conprTr0N tos x = moment teavoe. x 1.5090 wns 155962. OPERATING x 414250 nos 17296. x 15000 sts 11332 Tora MOMENT HO = 184490. GASKET SEAT HO=Y= 422900, % AGE 4.1250 = ne = 47s SHAPE CONSTANTS 22 0.5000 ho 4.é meno Ovsd t 1813 31017500 Rss givgo 1150 slchs 11346 h 1.5000 Ties Fo 0187 bets toast nox 4392.62 z Fie ¥ 0136 ° pee 11325,0 Yass f to? ° 6 43.5000 Uisles @ 019 Tones 0. pit. tacts1+000000 355.0 stresses OPERATING SEATING Allowable Actual Allowable Actual = 1.0000 su "38350. Looa2 23280, asael R 111250 sk 17500. 2543, 17500) seat st 17500. iis. 17800. te37 sav 17500, 23: 17500; ass6. she 0.D.~ 43.0000 Gecket Motorist —§/S SFRL UND Shell Thickness-- 0.5000 Gasket 0.0 44,0000 Flande Thickness~ 118125 Gesket T.Di---- 43,0900 Flange 0.0. 4717500 Gasket thickness "0.1750 Flange 1:D, 43.0000 Flange (BG,)---- 45,7500 Flange Boltina=--«" 36)0.780 Dia Bo 84 -0.476x10° Ib.tn. HsocHco=0,188x10 ® Ib.in. M H = (0.188 - 0.676)10% = -0.292 x 10° Ib.tn. For gasketed condition G = 43.5" and F = 1.25". Then A-G = 6.25" and w = 2.125" Substituting in Eq. (2.9) gives, upon simplification Y, 3.557 x 10° [£] + 7.586 x 108 T ream Eq. (2.8) 0, 2 SM ence vy = A Assuming T= T, gives H” = 0.226 x 108 then Py = 10.85 pst Merce P 1510.9 « 6.1 psig Therefore, from Eq. (2.5); T ye ye 125435 (ot 3 0-897 x 17500 Hence T = 1.556" From Eq. (2.10), Tp 18 calculated to be 1.15". In the case of this example, the result of the Interface ponent reduces the term P below the design pressure resulting in a reduced interior tubesheet thickness. The Interlor thickness governs and the minisun tubesheet thickness, Reglecting any additional allowances for pass partition groove and corrosion allowance, 15, 1556". 119 cLosune A TEMA-consistent method for computing tubesheet rim thickness 1s proposed. The procedure 18 based on the thin plate/ring theory, but uses TEMA'S concept of deflection and stress efficiencies. The interaction of the rim thickness and tubesheet Interior thickness in unstayed tubesheet is clearly brought out In the Gesign equations, Numerical examples illustrate application of the method. This procedure outlined herein is currently under consideration by the TEMA Technical Committee for possible inclusion in ‘the upcoming 7th edition of the TEMA Standards. Comparison with the stress analysis codes [2] shows reasonable agreement In the practical rang? fof geonetric paraneters and pressure loadings. REFERENCES: [1] Standards of Tubular Exchanger Manufac~ turer's Association, éth Edition, TEMA, Ine., Tarrytown, NY” (1978) [2] Singh, K.P. and Soler, A.I., "Mechanteal Design of Heat Exchangers and Pressure Vessel Components", Arcturus Publishers, Inc. Cherry HELL, 'X3, 1984. [3] Personal communication, Apeil 16, 1981, T. Lodes, Missouri Boller and Tank Company, St. Louls (1955). [4] Roark, R.J., "Formas for Stress and Strain", Fourth Edition, p. 223, McGraw HILL (1958) ASME Boller and Pressure Vessel Code, b) Section VIII, Div. 2, A-8000 (1983).