0
Research Papers: Operations, Applications and Components

# Effect of Nozzle Junction and Equipment Stiffness on Absorption of Pipe Thermal Loads

[+] Author and Article Information
Kedar A. Damle

Thyssenkrupp Industrial Solutions India Private Limited
2nd Floor, Duggal Plaza, PremNagar,
Pune 411037, India
e-mail: Kedar.Damle@thyssenkrupp.com

Pratik S. Gharat

Thyssenkrupp Industrial Solutions India Private Limited
2nd Floor, Duggal Plaza, PremNagar,
Pune 411037, India
e-mail: pratik.gharat@thyssenkrupp.com

Rudolf Neufeld, Wilhelm Peters

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Fachhochschule Sudwestfalen
(University of Applied Science),
Meschede 59872, Germany

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received August 27, 2014; final manuscript received September 15, 2015; published online November 19, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Allen C. Smith.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 138(2), 021601 (Nov 19, 2015) (14 pages) Paper No: PVT-14-1137; doi: 10.1115/1.4031719 History: Received August 27, 2014; Revised September 15, 2015

## Abstract

As an industry norm, the nozzle local loads are considered to be local and are not considered in foundation design. Presently, this norm is under debate. One opinion is some percent of these loads are to be considered to be transferred to the foundation. The horizontal forces on the foundation are more critical than vertical forces. Attempt has been made to understand the system and create a model which will represent the system to a good approximation. A mathematical model is developed to demonstrate the actual system. It is a stiffness system consisting of equipment, nozzle junction, and connected piping. The connected pipes are heated sequentially to generate nozzle loads in axial and out plane directions. Steady-state thermal loads are calculated for the given system stiffness. Governing parameters are identified and altered to note the effect. The governing parameters identified are equipment diameter (D), nozzle location on equipment (x), and nozzle diameter (d). The effect is studied for pressure range (20–120 bar) and temperature (100–400 °C). The results of percentage loads transferred with respect to the governing parameters are plotted. It is observed that nozzle loads in axial directions are transferred to the foundation almost 100%, whereas out plane loads are absorbed by the system to a greater extent. Further study is required to investigate combined effects of all such nozzle loads for single equipment. The results may be refined for different materials and effect of nozzle reinforcement.

<>

## References

PRG, 2007, “ nozzle pro Program Manual,” Paulin Research Group, Houston, TX.
PRG, 2011, “ FE107: If You Can Run a WRC Analysis, You Can Run This FEA Analysis,” Paulin Research Group, Houston, TX,
Wichman, K. R. , Hopper, A. G. , and Mershon, J. L. , 1979, “ WRC 107: Local Stresses in Spherical and Cylindrical Shells Due to External Loadings on Nozzles,” Welding Research Council, New York.
Mershon, J. L. , Mokhtarian, K. , Ranjan, G. V. , and Rodabaugh, E. C. , 1987, “ Revised Bulletin 297: Local Stresses in Cylindrical Shells Due to External Loadings on Nozzles—Supplement to WRC No. 107,” Welding Research Council, New York.
Integraph, 2012, “ caeser II Users Guide,” Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Stephen, P. , and Timoshenko, S. W.-K. , 1959, Theory of Plates and Shells, McGraw-Hill, Singapore.

## Figures

Fig. 6

Schematic representation

Fig. 5

Mathematical model

Fig. 4

Force directions

Fig. 3

Forces and moments on nozzles

Fig. 2

Pipe model in caeser II

Fig. 1

Vessel–pipe system

Fig. 7

Deflection cantilever beam

Fig. 8

Pipe deflection axial

Fig. 9

Schematic representation of the thermal deflection of the pipe

Fig. 12

Pipe deflection out plane

Fig. 14

Percentage of loads transferred to the foundation for varied design temperature (axial case)

Fig. 15

Percentage of loads transferred to the foundation for varied vessel diameters (axial case)

Fig. 10

Schematic representation of the axial deflection

Fig. 11

Schematic representation of the thermal deflection with springs

Fig. 16

Percentage of loads transferred to the foundation for varied nozzle positions (axial case)

Fig. 17

Percentage of loads transferred to the foundation for varied nozzle diameters (axial case)

Fig. 13

Out plane deflection

Fig. 18

Percentage of loads transferred to the foundation for varied design temperature (out plane case)

Fig. 20

Percentage of loads transferred to the foundation for varied nozzle positions (out plane case)

Fig. 21

Percentage of loads transferred to the foundation for varied nozzle diameters (out plane case)

Fig. 23

Percentage of loads due to D/d

Fig. 24

Final diagram for temperatures up to 300 °C—out plane

Fig. 25

Final diagram for temperatures above 300 °C—Out plane

Fig. 19

Percentage of loads transferred to the foundation for varied vessel diameters (out plane case)

Fig. 22

## Errata

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 Proceedings Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections