Research Papers: Design and Analysis

Ratcheting Assessment of a Fixed Tube Sheet Heat Exchanger Subject to In Phase Pressure and Temperature Cycles

[+] Author and Article Information
Khosrow Behseta

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G11XQ, UKkhosrow.behseta@strath.ac.uk

Donald Mackenzie

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G11XQ, UKd.mackenzie@strath.ac.uk

Robert Hamilton

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G11XQ, UKr.hamilton@strath.ac.uk

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 133(4), 041201 (May 09, 2011) (5 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4003623 History: Received October 01, 2010; Revised February 08, 2011; Published May 09, 2011; Online May 09, 2011

An investigation of the cyclic elastic-plastic response of an Olefin plant heat exchanger subject to cyclic thermal and pressure loading is presented. Design by analysis procedures for assessment of shakedown and ratcheting are considered, based on elastic and inelastic analysis methods. The heat exchanger tube sheet thickness is nonstandard as it is considerably less than that required by conventional design by formula rules. Ratcheting assessment performed using elastic stress analysis and stress linearization indicates that shakedown occurs under the specified loading when the nonlinear component of the through thickness stress is categorized as peak stress. In practice, the presence of the peak stress will cause local reverse plasticity or plastic shakedown in the component. In nonlinear analysis with an elastic–perfectly plastic material model the vessel exhibits incremental plastic strain accumulation for 10 full load cycles, with no indication that the configuration will adapt to steady state elastic or plastic action, i.e., elastic shakedown or plastic shakedown. However, the strain increments are small and would not lead to the development of a global plastic collapse or gross plastic deformation during the specified life of the vessel. Cyclic analysis based on a strain hardening material model indicates that the vessel will adapt to plastic shakedown after 6 load cycles. This indicates that the stress categorization and linearization assumptions made in the elastic analysis are valid for this configuration.

Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Tube sheet configuration (dimensions (mm), not to scale)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

((a) and (b)) Tube sheet finite element model

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Actual and linearized equivalent stress distribution along the stress classification line: (a) P=7.8 MPa and (b) P=8.53 MPa

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Small deformation theory elastic–perfectly plastic response under applied temperature distribution, and (a) P=7.8 MPa and (b) P=8.53 MPa

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Small deformation theory strain hardening response under applied temperature distribution and P=7.8 MPa

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Deformation of high stress point at intersection between tube sheet and channel side shell: (a) elastic–perfectly plastic and (b) strain hardening




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In