External nozzle loads on standard flanges.

Query (1):

As per ASME interpretation BPV VIII-1-16-85, when superimposed static or dynamic reactions is
applied, the calculation for super imposed loads shall be performed on ASME Standard products
also.

But for the old versions of PVELITE (2017 and older), the external nozzle loads (by WRC anaylsis)
where performed only nozzle to shell junction and nozzle standard flanges were not analyzed.
But in newer versions of PVELITE, it was noticed that the external nozzle loads are applied on
standard flanges also.

Can you specify how PVELITE 2018 is performing this analysis?

Reply (1):

In PVELITE 2018 there is a new option specified as “De-rate flange MAWP if Externally loaded”.

What is De-rate Flange MAWP if Externally Loaded?

This option is to allow a particular nozzle ANSI flange to have its MAWP de-rated if external
loads are present. Use of the flange de-rating is up to the discretion and experience of the
designer. Select the ANSI Flange Pressure Reduction Options method in the Load Cases tab
under the Nozzle Design Options.

1
ANSI Flange Pressure Reduction Options

Select a method for ANSI flange pressure reduction. Several methods are available to de-rate
the flange MAWP based on external loads. If flanges are externally loaded they have the
potential to leak. To keep this from occurring, it might be necessary to choose a heavier class of
flange than one that is good for the design pressure per the B16.5/47 standard.

At the time of this writing (November 2017), the ASME Code has no rules on a particular
method to use. They do however state (in a Code Case) that the external loadings must
considered.

Kellogg Method - The Kellogg method is well known and conservative. The axial load and
moment are used to compute an equivalent pressure that is then deducted from the flange
rating from the B16/47 table.

PVP Method - The PVP Method is based on the paper PVP 2013-97814 with some modification.
PV Elite uses the Sustained load category with a factor of 32 on Me instead of 16 that is based
on operating loads. Subsequent unpublished work based on this method uses the value of 32.
Sustained forces and moments must be entered for those results to be meaningful. Otherwise,
the computed flange rating is zero.

50% Stress Method - If the computed stress/allowable stress is< 0.5 on the pipe wall, then the
allowable pressure is the full rating from the ANSI/ASME standard. If the stress ratio is >= 0.5,
then the full equivalent pressure based on the Kellogg method is subtracted from the flange
rating.

DNV Method - The DNV method is considered to be a bit unconservative. It is essentially 1.3
times the flange rating minus the equivalent pressure based on the Kellogg method. The idea is
that because the flanges will be hydro test at an elevated pressure and because there will
loading applied (flanges in the piping system), then their rating can be elevated using the above
equation. Most piping is tested to 1.5 times the design pressure, but we use a factor of 1.3 for
conservatism and because 1.3 is the factor used in Division 1 for hydro testing pressure vessels.

“As per my observation only Kellogg method and DNV method only are affecting the nozzle
flange rating. Still we didn’t go through these methods in detail.”

Query (2):

Based on your above explanation, it is clear that the nozzle loads can be either reduced or use
full loads by selecting “None”.

During my vendor document review for an exchange (M/s TEMA India), it was observed that the
manufacturer is considering external nozzle loads for nozzle flanges and derating method

2
“none” was selected.

Now while performing the calculation, how PVelite will generate the report??

Also what pressure PVelite will take while designing flange? Is it MAWP or Design Pressure?