×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

(OP)
Hi,
According to table 5.5 of ASME VIII-2 we can see two different load factor for Local Criteria (in brief):
1.7*P
2.3*P (in Hydrostatic test)

I want to know since we have Hydrostatic test with 2.3*P and calculating "εL:limiting triaxial strain" in that load case, does it have a meaning to rerun the analysis with 1.7*P ?!

Is it true that 1.7*P will be the basis of design whenever we don't have a Hydrostatic test?

The other question is why we shouldn't calculate εL in the load case of 2.4*P (Global Criteria) although we have a lots of discontinuity and concentrations such as fillets in our equipment.

Best Regards

RE: Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

The only Design Load Case Combination required for demonstrating Protection Against Local Failure is shown in Table 5.5 as 1.7*(P+Ps+D). That's it. That's all.

The writers of the Code determined:
1) That a design margin of 1.7 was appropriate for this failure mode. This design margin is different from the design margin for Protection Against Plastic Collapse. That's fine - different design margins are used for different failure modes throughout the Code.
2) That this was the sole Design Load Case Combination necessity to be evaluated for this failure mode.

The other Design Load Case Combination that you mention regarding the hydrostatic test condition is a further extension of the Design Load Case Combinations that are necessary to be checked in order to demonstrate Protection Against Plastic Collapse. You will note that this Design Load Case Combination does not actually referenced the chosen/selected/actual hydrostatic test pressure in the current rules. Although this will remain so when the 2015 Edition is released, that will change in the 2017 Edition (hopefully).

RE: Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

(OP)
That's right,
But if in Local criteria just there is one design load case 1.7*(P+Ps+D), why in table 5.5 under Hydrostatic test conditions, it wrote "Global and Local criteria" ? It could be only "Global criteria"! I've searched in ASME-VIII-2 and couldn't find any word like "Local criteria" except in 5.3.
Thanks

RE: Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

That was not the intent. I will include fixing that error when we fix the hydrostatic test condition load combinations that will reference the actual test pressure.

RE: Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

(OP)
Could you please explain more?

RE: Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

Your interpretation of the word in Table 5.5 (and similar words in Table 5.4) and not entirely unreasonable. However, test interpretation is incorrect and not (in my opinion) consistent with the intent of the Code.

I am member of WG-DBA (VIII) and the project manager for a code item to fix the description of the hydrostatic test condition load cases in Tables 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5. Since you have pointed out a potential interpretation issue with the words in the tables, I will include in my proposal to fix that.

Clear?

RE: Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

(OP)
Right. I got it.
According to your Statement, the procedure of E-P analysis will be so (in brief):

1-Global Criteria; Perform E-P analysis with 2.4*(P+Ps+D) to achieve convergence
2-Hydrostatic test; Perform E-P analysis with max[2.3,2(St/S)]*(P+Ps+D)+Wpt to achieve convergence (so if we don't have Wpt and St=S, this calculation will be omitted)
3-Local Criteria; Perform E-P analysis with 1.7*(P+Ps+D) and calculate εL

If this procedure is correct, so i am satisfied.smile

Kind Regards

RE: Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

You got it. Of course for step 1, you should be doing ALL of the Design Load Case Combinations listed in Table 5.5.

RE: Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

(OP)
Roger. Thanks.

As you mentioned, We have to consider all of the design load case combinations, but my project is a Kind of Blind Flange (which attached to the vessel) so i think i shouldn't consider the effect of Wind load, Earthquake load and Snow load to that Flange although those Forces were considered in design of Main part(Vessel) in PVElite according to VIII-1.

Am i Right? If not, does it have a meaning and how i can consider for example Earthquake load for a Flange? Instead of those load and for more safety, i have increased my thicknesses so they can tolerate up to 2.8*(P+Ps+D)!

Regards.

RE: Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

My preference is to leave the engineering judgement of what loads are appropriate to the design engineer (and the jurisdiction, as applicable).

RE: Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

(OP)
I respect your preference. smile
But i want you as a consultant to help me as a design engineer: how should i consider Earthquake load for a Flange in FEA? I decide to consider all load combinations but if applicable. what is your opinion about my last post?

RE: Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

Unfortunately, in this type of forum, this is about all of the assistance that I can provide. Perhaps off-line more assistance could be rendered.

RE: Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

One more question please.

Is the pressure in global criteria of design condition of table 5.5 equal the pressure of hydrostatic conditions???
I always think that hydrostatic pressure greater.

so
"1-Global Criteria; Perform E-P analysis with 2.4*(P+Ps+D) to achieve convergence
2-Hydrostatic test; Perform E-P analysis with max[2.3,2(St/S)]*(P+Ps+D)+Wpt to achieve convergence (so if we don't have Wpt and St=S, this calculation will be omitted)"

if Wpt=0 and we got factor 2.3 then we should check this "max[2.3,2(St/S)]*(P+Ps+D)+Wpt" anyway.

Am I right?

Thanks!

RE: Load factors of local criteria in Elastic-Plastic analysis

The hydrostatic test condition is, as noted above, poorly written. It should be fixed for 2017 Edition...

Your interpretation of the rules, as written, is, in my opinion, not unreasonable.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources