×
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

Schedule 10S & 5S Piping

Schedule 10S & 5S Piping

Schedule 10S & 5S Piping

(OP)
Is CAESAR-II an appropriate tool for use on large diameter, stainless steel, schedule 5S and 10S piping systems ?

The ASME code calculated stress intensification factors are very high, and probably not realistic.

I believe that B31.1, B31.3 and CAESAR should, in some way, address the issue of limitations in a "beam-type" stress analysis. At what point (i.e. a D/T ratio) do the local effects of bending take over and make a CAESAR-II analysis invalid ?

I feel that this issue has been addressed before and industry references exist.

I would appreciate any comments, discussions, informal company "analysis guidleines, rules-of-thumb etc.

Thanks in advance !!!............................MJC

RE: Schedule 10S & 5S Piping

Hi MJCronin,
I have previously used CII for the flexibility analysis only for large bore thin walled piping(D/t>100). I have calculated the SIF's from FE pipe along with the stiffness and inputted the data into CII at the fabricated intersections and bends. The wall thickness requirements have been calculated to a pressure vessel code, ie BS 5500 or ASME VIII. I hope this helps.

RE: Schedule 10S & 5S Piping

(OP)
To all,


Is there anyone out there with experience on CAESAR-II modelling of thin walled systems ?


MJC

RE: Schedule 10S & 5S Piping

Spend some time reading the B31.3 code... There are some very specific D/t ratios mentioned as being limiting considerations when it comes to SIF's if your D/t ratio exceeds or comes close to those limits NO BEAM ELEMENT PROGRAM is appropriate.

Higher ratios require 3d analysis... check the notes in the SIF appendix.

Regards,
XHPIPE

RE: Schedule 10S & 5S Piping

(OP)
XHPIPE,

Spend some time reading my question......

I am asking about the limitations of CAESAR-II not about the validity of the computer program nor am I asking about the validity of the notes within the appendicies to B31.3.

I am fully aware of the code's D/t< 100 limitation.

Some mechanics of materials texts state that, for thin walled cylinders, with D/t of about 90, the effects of localized instabilities take over. The piping materials, temperature, modulus etc all have an effect.

Again, my question is: "At what point (i.e. a D/T ratio) do the local effects of bending take over and make a CAESAR-II analysis invalid ?"

Additionally, a reasonable person would ask, why doesn't CAESAR-II prohibit the running of an analysis when the D/t makes the model unstable/invalid....???????


MJC

  

RE: Schedule 10S & 5S Piping

CAESAR II as well as all other beam element programs, is based on the B31 codes, which have simplified rules for analysis. The D/t ratio listed in the codes is not a pass fail limit. In other words some people taking precautions in what and how they do things can work above those D/t ratios using good engineering judgement (as well as some FEA help). Others get in trouble below that limit. The code and CAESAR II are not simple design cookbooks or tools, both require an in-depth feel and understanding of whats being evaluated.

Your desire for a simple answer to this complex issue i.e, "above this value X don't proceed," is reminiscent of how complex problems are viewed by management.

Regards,
XHPIPE

RE: Schedule 10S & 5S Piping

Also note that for a given D/t ratio (above 100), the local/stability issue is sensitive to the overall system geometry.  For a given ratio, you may have stability issues in a "tight" system, while in a geometrically loose system dominated by bending you won't.  "3D beam" elements are great in bending, but poor in other modes.  Also important to remember is the fact that the "3D beam" element is completely oblivious to buckling.

Richard Ay
COADE, Inc.

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



News


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