See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/342889389

Pressure Vessel Design using PV-ELITE Software with Manual Calculations

and Validation by FEM

Article in Journal of Engineering Technology · January 2019

CITATIONS READS

37 9,577

6 authors, including:

Venkatesh .R T. Sathish
Saveetha University Saveetha School of Engineering, SIMATS
73 PUBLICATIONS 596 CITATIONS 191 PUBLICATIONS 5,614 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

s. Dinesh Manickam Ravichandran

K.Ramakrishnan College of Technology K.Ramakrishnan College of Engineering, Samayapuram, Trichy – 621112
47 PUBLICATIONS 1,147 CITATIONS 401 PUBLICATIONS 5,423 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by s. Dinesh on 13 July 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Engineering Technology (ISSN. 0747-9964)
Volume 8, Issue 1, Jan. 2019, PP.425-433

Pressure Vessel Design using PV-ELITE Software with Manual

Calculations and Validation by FEM

M. Vivekanandan 1, R.Venkatesh2, T.Sathish3, S.Dinesh4, M.Ravichandran5,V.Vijayan6

1
Adjunct Faculty, Kongunadu College of Engineering and Technology, Tamil Nadu, India
2
Professor, Mechanical Engineering Department, Kongunadu College of Engineering and Technology,
Tamil Nadu, India.
3
Dean R&D, Vesta Research Institute, Aranthangi, Tamil Nadu, India
4
Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering Department, K.Ramakrishnan College of Technology,
Tamil Nadu, India.
5
Associate Professor, Mechanical Engineering Department, K.Ramakrishnan College of Engineering, India.
6
Professor, Mechanical Engineering Department, K.Ramakrishnan College of Technology, Tamil Nadu, India.

Abstract: A Pressure vessel is a device designed as a closed container that holds gases or liquids at a
pressure considerably different from the ambient pressure. Due to differential operating conditions of
pressure vessels, they are potentially dangerous and accident involving can be deadly and poses lethal
dangers. The main aim of this work is to design and analyze a pressurized lube oil tank for working
under varying operating conditions and to identify the most contributing parameter that controls the
efficient working of the oil tank. Generally pressure will be developed inside the oil tank and also it
has to withstand several forces developed due to both internal as well as external pressure acting on it,
making the design critical. Hence for safety purpose, the pressure vessel was designed as per ASME
standards. Further validation of PV-ELITE software was made by comparing its results with that of
manually calculated design values. Efforts are made to understand the various stresses developed in
pressure vessel. Generating a 3D model and analyzing it using a suitable FEM solver. Comparison of
the result is made with PV-ELITE software results and found to be with agreeable range. The error
percentage is 4.99% which is well within the permissible range showing 95 % accuracy.
Keywords: FEM, Pressure Vessel design, PV-ELITE software, Stress Analysis.
1 Introduction
A Pressure Vessel is a container which contains either external or internal pressure, by the
heat applied from direct, indirect or combination of sources. Design of pressure vessel is based on
standard technical specification [ASME Code, Section VIII] along with numerous requirements that
lay hidden from market. Apurva R.Pendhaje et al [1] reported that following these standards leaves
the designer free from designing the components. This aspect of design greatly reduces development
time for a new pressure vessel. Adithya.M and Patnaik.M. [2] carried out FEM analysis and reported
that design by analysis is most desirable to evaluate and predict the behavior of different configuration
of PV supported on saddle with/without stiffener rings. It was reported that the optimized distance at
which the saddle could be placed is less than the one fourth of vessel length.
Vishal V. Saidpatil and Arun S. Thakare [3] studied design and analysis of PV used in boiler
for optimum thickness, temperature distribution and dynamic behavior using FEM. It involves design
of cylindrical PV to sustain 5 bar pressure & required wall thickness determined to limit maximum
shear stress. Farhad Nabhani et al [4] conducted the work on Reduction of stress in cylindrical

425
Journal of Engineering Technology (ISSN. 0747-9964)
Volume 8, Issue 1, Jan. 2019, PP.425-433

pressure vessels using FEA and the main factors that contribute to development of stress in Pressure
Vessel are thickness, nozzle positions and the joints of the enclosure head. Variations of these factors
were further experimented.
Shaik Abdul Lathuef and K. Chandrasekhar [5] reported that there is scope of changing the
code values by taking minimum governing shell thickness of pressure vessel to the desired
requirements and also to relocate the nozzle for minimizing the stresses in the shell. A low value of
the factor of safety resulted in economy of material and would result in thinner, flexible and more
economical vessels. Zick L.P. [6] studied the circumferential, longitudinal and tangential stresses in
horizontal large pressure vessels supported on two saddles. Ravindrababu.M [10] designed UPFC and
checked its stability in Hydro-Thermal interconnected Multi Machine System. Sohaib Aslam [11]
calculated the computational efficiency of MPC using conventional method and compared it with
laguerree method. Pradeep Mohan Kumar .K et al [12] and Avudaiappan . T et al [13] carried CFD
analysis on spiral plate heat exchanger using FEM and flow analysis using Lagrangian interpolation
meshless method. From literature review, it is observed that comparison of analysis of a Pressure
vessel by Finite Element Method has not been compared with that by PV-ELITE software. Hence in
this research article, analysis and comparison of the results from manual design calculations, PV-
ELITE software and FEM has been done.
2 Pressure vessel design with manual calculation and with PV-Elite software

Figure 1 shows the 3D model of a lube oil tank pressure vessel, an industrial diagram on lube oil
tank pressure vessel. The dimensions are: Inner diameter of the cylindrical shell is 1200 mm of 10
mm thickness, and 3700 mm long, and an overall length of 4809 mm including the ellipsoidal heads
of 7 mm thickness on either side. Design values were estimated manually as per ASME standards.
Then an excel sheet was created for the manual calculations, so that it becomes easy for any further
design modification to recalculate the design parameters.

Figure. 1. 3D Model of the Pressure Vessel designed

426
Journal of Engineering Technology (ISSN. 0747-9964)
Volume 8, Issue 1, Jan. 2019, PP.425-433

Figure. 2.Comparison of thickness, MAWP and MAP calculated manually and with PV-Elite
Software

Figure. 3. Comparison of thickness, MAWP and MAP calculated manually and with PV-Elite
Software

Figure. 4. Comparison of thickness, MAWP and MAP calculated manually and with PV-Elite
Software

Figure.s 2, 3 and 4 compare the thickness, Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAWP) and
Maximum Allowable Pressure (MAP) calculated manually and with PV-ELITE software for the shell,

427
Journal of Engineering Technology (ISSN. 0747-9964)
Volume 8, Issue 1, Jan. 2019, PP.425-433

ellipsoidal head and the straight flange respectively. The variations in the results are well within the
permissible range.
Figure. 2 shows the comparisons for the shell. Percentage variation between manual calculation
and that with PV-ELITE are for a) the thickness is 7.7% more, b) MAWP is 6.6% less and c) MAP is
11% less. Figure. 3 shows for the comparisons for the Ellipsoidal head. Percentage variation between
manual calculation and that with PV-ELITE are for a) the thickness is 7.7% more, b) MAWP is
11.2% less and c) MAP is 10% less. Figure. 4 shows for the comparisons for the straight flange.
Percentage variation between manual calculation and that with PV-ELITE are for a) thickness is 7.7%
more b) MAWP is 12.6% less and c) MAP is 0.6% more. In a nutshell, the thickness is 7.7% more
with manual calculation and working pressure calculations are about 10% less than those calculated
by PV-ELITE software.

3 Analysis of pressure vessel by finite element method

Since the validation of PV-Elite results on saddle area remains disguise, we have opted out for
FEM in evaluating our saddle part induced stresses. While comparing saddle part’s manual calculation
with that of PV-Elite, the comparison seems inadequate. Unlike other parts, which tends to follow
ASME design standards, saddle part evaluation by PV-Elite keeps following multiple methods which
makes the validation complex? But the PV-Elite methodology could be justified by evaluating through
FEM.

Finite Element Method is a numerical procedure used to find approximate solutions to boundary
value problems with partial differential equations. FEM subdivides large problem into smaller and
simpler parts called finite elements. The simple equations of finite elements model are then combined
into a larger system of equations to model the entire problem. FEM then uses variational methods
from the calculus of variations to approximate a solution by minimizing an associated error function.

3.1 Finite Element Modeling

For simulation studies, SOLIDWORKS software uses the displacement formulation of the
finite element method for calculating component displacements, strains, and stresses under internal
and external loads. The geometry under analysis is discretized using tetrahedral (3D), triangular (2D),
and beam elements, and solved by either a direct sparse or iterative solver. It also gives the 2D
simplification assumption for plane stress, plane strain, extruded, or axisymmetric options. Since
simulation in SOLIDWORKS software is integrated with 3D CAD, it knows the exact geometry
during the meshing process. Accuracy of the analysis improves with the accuracy with which the
meshes match.

428
Journal of Engineering Technology (ISSN. 0747-9964)
Volume 8, Issue 1, Jan. 2019, PP.425-433

3.2 Mesh Definition

For Simulation studies, SOLIDWORKS software is capable of meshing the CAD geometry in
tetrahedral (1st and 2nd order), triangular (1st and 2nd order), beam, and truss elements. The mesh
can consist of one or multiple types of elements for mixed mesh. Solid elements are naturally suitable
for bulky models. Shell elements are appropriate to model thin parts like sheet metals naturally, while
trusses and beams are appropriate to model structural members. As SOLIDWORKS Simulation is
strongly integrated inside SOLIDWORKS 3D CAD, the topology of the geometry is used for mesh
type:
 Shell mesh is generated for surface bodies and sheet metals automatically.
 Beam elements are automatically defined for structural members. Hence their properties are
seamlessly leveraged for FEA.

Figure. 5. Circumferential stress at the horn of the saddle

Figure. 6. Longitudinal stress at top of the saddle

429
Journal of Engineering Technology (ISSN. 0747-9964)
Volume 8, Issue 1, Jan. 2019, PP.425-433

Figure. 7. longitudinal stress at bottom of the saddle

Figure. 8. Longitudinal stress at top of midspan

430
Journal of Engineering Technology (ISSN. 0747-9964)
Volume 8, Issue 1, Jan. 2019, PP.425-433

Figure. 9. Longitudinal stress at bottom of midspan

Figure. 10. Tangential shear stress in the shell

431
Journal of Engineering Technology (ISSN. 0747-9964)
Volume 8, Issue 1, Jan. 2019, PP.425-433

Figure. 11. Comparison of PV-ELITE and FEA analysis on saddle stresses

Figure.s 7 to 10 show that the tangential stress is the least, circumferential stress is moderate and the
longitudinal stress is the most on the saddle support of the Pressure vessel. From the outputs of FEM
analysis, we can have clear picture that PV-Elite results seems agreeable and that is probable range of
acceptance. Figure. 11 shows graphical depiction of comparison in stresses calculated using PV-
ELITE and FEA. For the betterment of readability, major stresses were evaluated and compared along
with the error estimation and is show is shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Comparison of stress analysis with PV-ELITE AND FEM

Stress (Mpa)
Description Error%
PV-Elite FEM
Circumferential Stress at the
6.98 7.184 -2.92
horn of saddle
Longitudinal Stress
18.02 16.836 6.57
at top of saddle
Longitudinal Stress
13.69 13.966 -2.02
at bottom of saddle
Longitudinal Stress
15.04 17.364 -15.45
at top of mid span
Longitudinal Stress
15.43 16.853 -9.22
at bottom of mid-span
Tangential shear in shell 2 2.139 -6.95

Table 1 show that stresses developed in the horn of the saddle at different portions. When
compared to the FEM results with PV- Elite, the circumferential stress at the horn, longitudinal stress
at bottom, top and bottom of the mid span and tangential shear at shell are low except for longitudinal
stress at the top of the saddle. From the outputs of FEM analysis and PV-ELITE, we can have clear
picture that PV-Elite results seems agreeable and that is probable range of acceptance. Error
occurrence is also with in permissible range.

432
 Journal of Engineering Technology (ISSN. 0747-9964)
Volume 8, Issue 1, Jan. 2019, PP.425-433

4 Conclusion
Thus for the obtained industrial diagram on lube oil tank pressure vessel, as per ASME
standards, manually design values were estimated. Design values were also calculated using PV-Elite
and the results were compared. Manual calculation of thickness is about 7% more while working
pressure calculation is about 10% less when compared with PV-ELITE software output. But the
effort was taken in validating PV-Elite result by the aide of FEM. Hence by the utility of FEM solver,
stress distribution was analyzed. The results of PV-Elite software were validated with that of FEM
analysis. The error percentage is 4.99% which is well within the permissible range showing 95 %
accuracy.

References

[1] Apurva Pendbhaje, Mahesh Gaikwad, Nitin Deshmukh and Rajkumar Patil, “Design and
Analysis of Pressure Vessel”, International journal of innovative research in Science and
Technology, 2(3): 28-34, 2014.
[2] Adithya M and Patnayak M.M.M. “Finite Element Analysis of Horizontal reactor Pressure
Vessel supported on saddles”, International journal of innovative research in Science and
Technology, 2(7): 3213-3220, 2013.
[3] Vishal V. Saidpatil and Arun S. Thakare. “Design & weight optimization of Pressure Vessel
due to thickness using finite element analysis.” International Journal of Emerging Engineering,
Research and Technology, 2(3): 1-8, 2014.
[4] Farhad Nabhani, Temilade Ladokun and Vahid Askari. “Reduction of Stresses in Cylindrical Pressure
Vessels Using Finite Element Analysis.” Finite Element Analysis - From Biomedical Applications to
Industrial Developments, 2012 edited by Dr. David Moratal (Ed.), 379-90. InTech,
[5] Shaik Abdul Lathuef and K. Chandrasekhar. “Design and structural analysis of pressure vessel
due to change of nozzle location and shell thickness.” International Journal of Advanced
Engineering Research and studies 1(II): 218-221, 2012.
[6] Zick L.P. “Stresses in large horizontal cylindrical Pressure vessel on two saddle supports.” The
welding journal research supplement 950-970. Accessed September 1959.
[7] Lloyd E. Brownell and Edwin H. Young. 1959. Process Equipment Design, New York, John
Wiley and Sons Inc.
[8] Robert D. Cook. 1995. Finite Element Modelling for stress analysis, John Wiley and Sons Inc.
[9] Carl T.F. Ross. 2011. Pressure Vessels External Pressure Technology, Woodhead Publishing
Inc.
[10] Ravindrababu.M, Saraswathi.G and SudhaK.R. “ Design of UPFC and Firefly PSS to Enhance
the Stability of Hydro-Thermal Interconnected Multi Machine System”, Journal of
Engineering Technology 7 : 159-174, Special Issue (Internet of Things), 2018.
[11] Sohaib Aslam et al. “Computational Efficiency-based Comparison between Conventional
MPC and Laguerre based MPC”, Journal of Engineering Technology 7 : 273-291, Special
Issue (Internet of Things), 2018.
[12] Pradeep Mohan Kumar.K et al. “Computational Analysis and Optimization of Spiral Plate
Heat Exchanger.” Journal of Applied Fluid Mechanics 11: 121-128, Special Issue, 2018.
[13] Avudaiappan. T et al. “Potential Flow Simulation through Lagrangian Interpolation Meshless
Method Coding.” Journal of Applied Fluid Mechanics 11: 129-134, Special Issue, 2018.

433

View publication stats