×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
• Talk With Other Members
• Be Notified Of Responses
• Keyword Search
Favorite Forums
• Automated Signatures
• 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.

accounting for thermal expansion in this shape2

accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

(OP)
There's decent formulas and rules of the thumb about for using 90° bends to absorb thermal expansion in pipelines.

How to account for this shape:

The pipeline follows the parapet on the top of a series of vessels.

the pipe is stainless steel, DN 250, to the left it's ~7m to a fixed point (pipe runs through hole in ground) to the right it's ~16m to the next semicircle like the one in the picture. there are four more similar arches long the pipeline

I need to account for 1mm/m of thermal expansion.

I want to avoid expansion joints.

Surely at these obtuse angels these arches are not as good at absorbing expansion as a 90° bend with a long enough leg would be.

My first idea is to fix the middle of the arches and middle of the long segments, using 2D gliding supports in between (stainless steel supports on PTFE). what would be the peak stress in the pipeline due to thermal expansion?

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

Shouldn't be all that much of a problem. That's why you don't shoot arrows from a squared bow.

Try just guiding the straight pipe. Let the center of the bow slide laterally.

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

(OP)
This could work too, probably better than my idea. What worries me is the bending in/near the 45° elbow.

the way I see it the distance that's approx. 13.41m in the drawing will be up to 15 mm shorter, while the circular part will be ~15mm longer. Now your comparison to the bow really makes sense!!!
Not sure how much stress this deformation would mean in my pipe and how to calculate.

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

The bending should be be low, because the axial force at the bow centerline will be small. You are "absorbing movement" in the 7m offset in the bow. That is roughly the same as an expansion loop without the elbows.

The only problem I see is fabricating the unusual curved shape of the pipe. Miter joints are usually not allowed on high pressure pipe. Better to hot bend, but expensive. So is making all those miter joints.

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

Marty,

What is your code of Record ? ASME B31.1 or B31.3 ? Something else ???

All have rules governing design and use of mitered piping bends. Not every all mitered configuration is acceptable ....

The piping codes will tell you that properly designed mitered bends often require increased wall thickness for pressure reinforcement

What is your wall thickness, design pressure, temperature and specific MOC ? More details equals better answers ...

Hopefully, the piping is at least Schedule 10S .... you are not designing with that Schedule 5S shit are you ?

I believe that your lateral expansion may be much greater than you believe, you may be surprised ...

Of course, your thermal expansion will "bow" outward from the center of the semicircle. Competently engineered pipe supports should be designed for this expansion in that particular direction

You want to use "rules of thumb" offered by strangers but this could be very accurately and completely evaluated using CAESAR-II in an afternoon.

You do not want to use expansion joints and I don't want to visit the dentist .....

Good Luck

MJCronin
Sr. Process Engineer

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

If these are sch10 there is no reason not to cold bend them.
Even for 250 this isn't that tight of a bend to worry about.
I would be tempted to think about the fixed points as midway along each straight section.
This lets the radius section move inward/outward also.
Shouldn't be too difficult for good software to solve.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, consulting work welcomed

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

(OP)
Code is EN 13480 (which I don't have available)
to my best knowledge, miter joints at least up to 22.5° are allowed.

Wall thickness 5mm, design pressure 10 bar (testing pressure), temperature 40°C

I calculated axial expansion from -20°C to 40°C at 0.96 mm/m

The comment re. CAESAR-II is noted and probably correct. Just nothing I can do about right now. I'm not wiling to discuss office politics or our relationship to our client and likely contractors here.

ETA: I measured the radius bending of the arch, 7m

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

I was thinking it was half the 13.41m, but rightm it could be 10m. Even so that could be borderline for a cold bend.

MJC don't get excited. He just wants a bit of configuration advice.
Isn't it past time for the little white one?

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

Not a pipe guy, but I would not fix it near the ends of the semi-circle and would allow it to expand radially.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

Quote (MartinLe Code is EN 13480 (which I don't have available) to my best knowledge, miter joints at least up to 22.5° are allowed.)

Dear Martin,

- Suggest you make available the subject code EN 13480 Part 3: Design and calculation..

- the code allows single miter joints less than 22.5° and more than 22.5° also.. but the allowable internal pressure formula changes..

If the single mitre bend with an angle θ not greater than 22,5 ° , the maximum allowable internal pressure, pa, is calculated in accordance with 6.3.4.

If the single mitre bend with an angle θ is greater than 22,5 ° , the maximum allowable internal pressure, pa, shall
be calculated from equation (6.3.5-1),( which is more stringent )..

I am not sure for that i got the full picture but i would prefer fixed supports at middle of the arches, sliding supports at the mid of the straight portions , and sliding supports at both directions at 75 degr. bends..

You may post the full piping sketch together with more data , to get better responds..

Good luck..

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

2
Why put fixed supports at the place that is the hardest to anchor and the best to allow flex? It is already the most flexible point. One does not often put guides and anchors in the middle of an expansion loop. Anchors and fixed supports are better placed in the middle of straight runs to force growth towards loops. Every time one places a guide or restraint of any kind, a pipe stress fairy loses her wings and stresses increase. The idea is generally to use the minimum number possible.

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

1503-44
It is 13.4m across, but that isn't a semi-circle. I estimated the size of the actual radius.
And thanks for saying that about anchors clearer than I did.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, consulting work welcomed

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

(OP)
Peng & Peng give this formula for the required elbow length (for steel): L = 66*sqrt(D*delta) with Elbow length (that absorbs the elongation by bending) L, Pipe diameter D and elongation delta. All this assumes a 90° bend.

The offset between the outermost part of the arch and the straight run is 4,86 m

If I put fixed supports in the middle of the straight run, 9 mm elongation => 3.2m
At some places situations I'm forced to put the fixed support at the end of straight run (because of branching pipes) => 18 mm elongation => 4.6 m

The formula I use above doesn't really apply, because of the different angles. But it seems to indicate that at least the long elongation cannot be absorbed by the arches => compensators are required.

Is my thinking logical?

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

What do you mean by 9 mm elongation => 3.2m
18 mm elongation => 4.6 m

I do not understand.

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

Often small angle bends create bigger stresses than larger ones.

This one is a bit tricky as you have the 45 degree followed by the multiple 10-15 degree mitres or elbows?.

i generally agree with mr 44 - guide the straight bits and bend the bendy bit a bit more.

But working out stresses without ceasar or something similar??

Far from easy.

The bending on those flanges either side of the bow will also be problematic.

what's your neutral temp of installation? You only need to think about min and max temp from that neutral point. you seem to be taking 60 degrees of expansion - though I might be mistaken.

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

(OP)
@1503-44 I mean the length of a 90° elbow required to absorb the elongation

@littleInch
10-15° elbows

Good point re. temperature - I'm thinking -20 (coldest winter plus failure of trace heating) to +40°C (operating temp.), installation will happen at 10-20°C or so.

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

Elbows don't absorb anything.

A "--> U <--" bend or "expansion loop" absorbs elongation by flexing as the loose ends, as the elbows, are pushed together. Elbows are relatively rigid when compared to pipe. It is the pipe that bends, not the elbows, hence stress at elbows are increased. Basically you assume that the elbows do not bend at all and all displacement is being accommodated by a pipe's ends moving relative to each other, bending the pipe, to meet the new elbow positions. A 90°Elbow remains at 90°.

That's why LittleInch says a small angle elbow makes things worse. All you do is misaligned the pipe, create eccentric axial load that get concentrated at the most rigid component. It's the entire loop with all its offsets and pipe lengths that adds flexibility and accepts movement by trading axial stress for bending stress. Axial stiffness of pipe is large, hence large axial stresses.
Bending stiffness of pipe is small = large displacements and little stress.

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

(OP)
I was imprecise with my use of the term elbow.

Should have used this sketch:

As for the rest I understand and agree.

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

OK. That's the idea.

If you are operating and the trace heating fails, will it cause a shut down? If you remain operating, your pipe temperature will probably not drop to -20. If your pipe drops to -20, you will probably not be operating for long, so I think that operating pressure at -20 is not a valid design concern. Check operating pressure with thermal from +20 to 40 and again for non-operating 0 pressure from +20 to -20.

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

The other thing to think about here is whether you need to anchor the pipes somewhere between each run or prevent axial movement from the mid point, but allow horizontal movement.

If you have four of these in a row as you state then they might end up finding the weakest link and concentrating all the expansion into one location.

But for sure I would only be looking at 30 degrees of expansion or contraction, not 60.

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

If there are 4 then each should be anchored individually to ensure uniform distribution of displacements.

RE: accounting for thermal expansion in this shape

(OP)
There are five in a row, in all except the first the left corner of the arch is somewhat fixed (because of branching pipes entering drilled holes in the building)

The pipe is redundant, 90+% of the time it will just sit and be filled with water. In addition to the control of the trace heating, each segment of pipe gets it's own temperature guard TA L.

My thinking right now is to
- only consider +20 to +40° in elongation,
- +20 to 0 as contraction
- make clear to the client that there is a risk of damage to the pipe if the trace heating fails in severe winter while the pipe is not in operation

As for the pipe supports, 1 fixed between to tanks arches (in the middle if possible, near where I'm constrained if not), other supports as gliders.

Thanks for the many helpful pointers!

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.

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
Examine how the principles of DfAM upend many of the long-standing rules around manufacturability - allowing engineers and designers to place a partâ€™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:

• Talk To Other Members
• Notification Of Responses To Questions
• Favorite Forums One Click Access
• Keyword Search Of All Posts, And More...

Register now while it's still free!