0
Design and Analysis

Safety Evaluation of Branch Pipe in Hydropower Station Using Elastic Modulus Reduction Method

[+] Author and Article Information
LuFeng Yang

Key Laboratory of Disaster Prevention and Structural Safety of China Ministry of Education,  School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Guangxi University, Nanning, Guangxi 530004, Chinalfyang@gxu.edu.cn

Wei Zhang1

Key Laboratory of Disaster Prevention and Structural Safety of China Ministry of Education,  School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Guangxi University, Nanning, Guangxi 530004, Chinazh.ei@163.com

Bo Yu

Key Laboratory of Disaster Prevention and Structural Safety of China Ministry of Education,  School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Guangxi University, Nanning, Guangxi 530004, Chinagxuyubo@gxu.edu.cn

LiWen Liu

Key Laboratory of Disaster Prevention and Structural Safety of China Ministry of Education,  School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Guangxi University, Nanning, Guangxi 530004, Chinaliuliwen030@163.com

1

Corresponding author.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 134(4), 041202 (Jul 09, 2012) (7 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4005872 History: Received January 26, 2011; Revised December 27, 2011; Online July 09, 2012; Published July 26, 2012

The high pressure branch pipe in hydropower station (BPHS) is usually composed by different materials in different parts and has complicated geometric configurations. The accurate and efficient methods for safety evaluation of the BPHS are still desirable. By introducing the element bearing ratio (EBR), generalized yield criterion as well as the reference volume concept, the elastic modulus reduction method (EMRM) is improved and applied to determine both the upper and lower bounds on limit loads of the BPHS. The global safety factor (GSF) is defined as the ratio of limit load to design load. The safety performance of the BPHS is assessed by comparing the GSF resulted from the EMRM with its allowable value specified in code. The efficiency and precision of the proposed method for safety evaluation of the BPHS are demonstrated through numerical examples in this paper. The results show that the proposed method is more suitable for safety evaluation and design optimization of the BPHS, compared with the elastic stress analysis method (ESAM) based on stress categorization which might underestimate the safety performance of the BPHS.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Shell element and section internal forces

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Geometry details of the cylindrical shell with stiffened rib

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Finite element mesh of cylindrical shell with stiffening rib

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Calculated EBR contour of the model T = 10 mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Geometry details of the hemisphere shell with a nozzle

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Finite element mesh of the hemisphere shell with a nozzle

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Calculated EBR contour of the model T = 10 mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Geometry details of the BPHS

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Finite element mesh

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Iteration process of the GSF

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Failure modes of the BPHS obtained by: (a) the EPAM, (b) the EMRM

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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