×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Contact US

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!

*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

ABSA CRN Approval using Compress's FEA module

ABSA CRN Approval using Compress's FEA module

ABSA CRN Approval using Compress's FEA module

(OP)
Anyone having trouble submitting Compress's FEA analysis for nozzle loads to Alberta for a CRN? We had a FEA analysis of a offset nozzle rejected using Compress's FEA option. Alberta then set us a specification "AB-520 document, Finite Element Analysis (FEA) Requirements" to follow that was really ridiculus.  

RE: ABSA CRN Approval using Compress's FEA module

Explain why you think that AB-520 is "ridiculous"?

RE: ABSA CRN Approval using Compress's FEA module

Well I have two questions concerning AB-520.

1. The statement "The turn angle of each element used on inside fillet radii must be indicated"
What does this statement mean?

2. The statement "This section of the report must include a proposed method to verify that the model results reflect the real response of the physical pressure equipmnt"
How could you verify this statement other than to say the deflection and stresses look resonable?
 

RE: ABSA CRN Approval using Compress's FEA module

Bobfromoh - Here's my take on that.

1.  What is the total angle of your inside fillet radius?  Take 90° as an example.  How many elements do you have around that fillet radius?  Take, for example, 6.  Therefore, the turn angle of each element is 15°.

2.  Define "look reasonable".  If you have checked the far-field hoop stress, and it exactly matches the PR/t stress, and the far-field longitudinal stress exactly matches PR/2t, then you're probably pretty close to achieving this requirement.  You can also discuss deflection (or strain) measurements that could be made in-service that would validate your FE model.

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! Already a Member? Login


Resources

Low-Volume Rapid Injection Molding With 3D Printed Molds
Learn methods and guidelines for using stereolithography (SLA) 3D printed molds in the injection molding process to lower costs and lead time. Discover how this hybrid manufacturing process enables on-demand mold fabrication to quickly produce small batches of thermoplastic parts. Download Now
Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM)
Examine how the principles of DfAM upend many of the long-standing rules around manufacturability - allowing engineers and designers to place a part’s function at the center of their design considerations. Download Now
Taking Control of Engineering Documents
This ebook covers tips for creating and managing workflows, security best practices and protection of intellectual property, Cloud vs. on-premise software solutions, CAD file management, compliance, and more. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close