Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations TugboatEng on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Branch on RFWN neck
- Thread starter anolan23
- Start date
It's a good question.
IMO, it can be acceptable if one can provide an engineering proof with FEA, for example, the connection on the flange neck is a sound design mechanically.
But, why to do it like that? There are many "established" ways, quick and simple, for the branch connection design.
IMO, it can be acceptable if one can provide an engineering proof with FEA, for example, the connection on the flange neck is a sound design mechanically.
But, why to do it like that? There are many "established" ways, quick and simple, for the branch connection design.
You could consider an orifice flange for, ASME B16.36.
Neverthless, Ive never seen a sound and simple approach to tacklingthis problem for B16.5 flanges, while it's done every now and then.
One way of showing compliancewith hand calcs would be to assume that the drilled hole creates an equivalent external pressure on the bolt hole, and needs to be sufficient strong acc code rules (e.g. acc. B31.3 304.1.3). However, with simple hand calcs, Im not sure if youd get all the calculations correct, as e.g. the drilled hole itself also needs to be sufficiently strong from an internal pressure point of view. FEA would then be a good resort to get all requirements in 1 calculation.
Neverthless, Ive never seen a sound and simple approach to tacklingthis problem for B16.5 flanges, while it's done every now and then.
One way of showing compliancewith hand calcs would be to assume that the drilled hole creates an equivalent external pressure on the bolt hole, and needs to be sufficient strong acc code rules (e.g. acc. B31.3 304.1.3). However, with simple hand calcs, Im not sure if youd get all the calculations correct, as e.g. the drilled hole itself also needs to be sufficiently strong from an internal pressure point of view. FEA would then be a good resort to get all requirements in 1 calculation.
LittleInch
Petroleum
Is it acceptable? - Well it might be, but my guess is you would need to get an FEA done on the entire flange. This means it wouldn't be a B16.5 flange anymore and will likely fail if exposed to a full flange pressure - as you probably now need to use ASME VIII acceptance limits. Most B16.5 flanges fail when assessed against this code at their design pressure and temperature.
What you have is essentially now a lump of metal like any other lump of metal, just not a flange to B 16.5.
codes are not in the habit of listing things which aren't allowed, but list ways to do things, but always rely on good engineering practice and the application of design principles.
I struggle to see why you would want to do this - there must be an alternative.
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
What you have is essentially now a lump of metal like any other lump of metal, just not a flange to B 16.5.
codes are not in the habit of listing things which aren't allowed, but list ways to do things, but always rely on good engineering practice and the application of design principles.
I struggle to see why you would want to do this - there must be an alternative.
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question