0
SPECIAL SECTION PAPERS: Materials and Fabrication

Effect of Reverse Yielding on the Residual Contact Pressure in Tube-to-Tubesheet Joints

[+] Author and Article Information
Abdel-Hakim Bouzid

Professor
Fellow ASME
Ecole de Technologie Superieure,
1100 Notre-Dame Ouest,
Montreal, QC H3C 1K3, Canada
email: hakim.bouzid@etsmtl.ca

Mehdi Kazeminia

Ecole de Technologie Superieure,
1100 Notre-Dame Ouest,
Montreal, QC H3C 1K3, Canada
email: kazeminia.mehdi@gmail.com

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received April 11, 2015; final manuscript received June 10, 2016; published online July 22, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Allen C. Smith.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 138(6), 061402 (Jul 22, 2016) (9 pages) Paper No: PVT-15-1061; doi: 10.1115/1.4033934 History: Received April 11, 2015; Revised June 10, 2016

The analytical prediction of the contact stress in tube-to-tubesheet joints subjected to hydraulic expansion is conducted without any consideration to reverse yielding that can occur inside the tube. Most existing models consider the tube and tubesheet to unload elastically when the expansion pressure is released. These models are therefore less conservative as they overestimate the contact pressure. An analytical model that considers strain-hardening material behavior of the tube and tubesheet and accounts for reverse yielding has been developed. The model is based on Henckey deformation theory and the Von Mises yield criteria. The paper shows that reverse yielding that is present in tubes during hydraulic expansion unloading makes the joint less rigid and causes a decrease in the contact pressure depending on the gap clearance and the materials used. A good correlation between the analytical and finite elements results is obtained on different treated cases which gives confidence on the developed model.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

TEMA, 2007, “TEMA Standards,” 9th ed., Tubular Exchanger Manufacturers Association, Tarrytown, New York.
Sang, Z. F. , Zhu, Y. Z. , and Widera, G. E. O. , 1996, “ Reliability Factors and Tightness of Tube-to-Tubesheet Joints,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 118(2), pp. 137–141. [CrossRef]
ASME, 2013, “ Section VIII Divison 1,” Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York.
Goodier, J. N. , and Schoessow, G. J. , 1943, “ The Holding Power and Hydraulic Tightness of Expanded Tube Joints: Analysis of the Stress and Deformation,” Trans. ASME, 65(5), pp. 489–496.
Krips, H. , and Podhorsky, M. , 1976, “ Hydraulic Expansion—A New Procedure for Fastening Tubes,” VGB Kraftwerkstechnik, 56(7), pp. 456–464.
Yokell, S. , 1992, “ Expanded, and Welded-and-Expanded Tube-to-Tubesheet Joints,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 114(2), pp. 157–165. [CrossRef]
Kohlpaintner, W. R. , 1995, “ Calculation of Hydraulically Expanded Tube-to-Tubesheet Joints,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 117(1), pp. 24–30. [CrossRef]
Allam, M. , Chaaban, A. , and Bazergui , 1998, “ Estimation of Residual Stresses in Hydraulically Expanded Tube-to-Tubesheet Joints,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 120(2), pp. 129–137. [CrossRef]
Jawad, M. H. , Clarkin, E. J. , and Schuessler, R. E. , 1987, “ Evaluation of Tube-to-Tubesheet Junctions,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 109(1), pp. 19–26. [CrossRef]
Williams, D. K. , 2007, “ Comparison of Residual Stresses in the Mechanical Roll Expansion of HX Tubes Into TEMA Grooves,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 129(2), pp. 234–241. [CrossRef]
Updike, D. , Kalnins, A. , and Caldwell, S. , 1992, “ Elastic Plastic Analysis of Tube Expansion in Tubesheets,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 114(2), pp. 149–156. [CrossRef]
Laghzale, N. , and Bouzid, A. , 2009, “ Analytical Modelling of Hydraulically Expanded Tube-To-Tubesheet Joints,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 131(1), p. 011208. [CrossRef]
Allam, M. , Bazergui, A. , and Chaaban, A. , 1998, “ The Effect of Tube Strain Hardening Level on the Residual Contact Pressure and Residual Stresses of Hydraulically Expanded Tube-to-Tubesheet Joint,” ASME/JSME Pressure Vessels & Piping Conference, San Diego, CA, July 26–30, Vol. 373, pp. 447–455.
Laghzale, N. , and Bouzid, A. , 2009, “ Theoretical Analysis of Hydraulically Expanded Tube-to-Tubesheet Joints With Linear Strain Hardening Material Behavior,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 131(6), p. 061202. [CrossRef]
Laghzale, N. , and Bouzid, A. , 2010, “ Effect of Creep on the Residual Stresses in Tube-to-tubesheet Joints,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 132(6), p. 061210. [CrossRef]
Huang, X. , and Xie, T. , 2011, “ Modeling Hydraulically Expanded Tube-to-Tubesheet Joint Based on General Stress-Strain Curves of Tube and Tubesheet Materials,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 133(3), p. 031205. [CrossRef]
Chen, P. C. T. , 1986, “ Bauschinger and Hardening Effects on Residual Stresses in Autofrettaged Thick-Walled Cylinders,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 108(1), pp. 108–112. [CrossRef]
Parker, A. P. , and Underwood, J. H. , 1999, “ Influence of Bauschinger Effect on Residual Stresses and Fatigue Lifetimes in Autofrettaged Thick-Walled Cylinders,” Fatigue and Fracture Mechanics, Vol. 29, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, pp. 565–583.
Livieri, P. , and Lazzarin, P. , 2002, “ Autofrettaged Cylindrical Vessels and Bauschinger Effect: An Analytical Frame for Evaluating Residual Stress Distributions,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 124(1), pp. 38–46. [CrossRef]
Allam, M. , and Bazergui, A. , 2002, “ Axial Strength of Tube-to-Tubesheet Joints: Finite Element and Experimental Evaluations,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 124(1), pp. 22–31. [CrossRef]
Chaaban, A. , Ma, H. , and Bazergui, A. , 1992, “ Tube-Tubesheet Joint: A Proposed Equation for the Equivalent Sleeve Diameter Used in the Single Tube Model,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 114(1), pp. 19–22. [CrossRef]
Gao, X. , 1992, “ An Exact Elasto-Plastic Solution for an Open-Ended Thick-Walled Cylinder of a Strain-Hardening Material,” Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping, 52(1), pp. 129–144. [CrossRef]
ANSYS, 2004, “ ANSYS Structural Analysis Guide,” Vol. 9, Ansys Inc., Canonsburg, PA.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Material model behavior

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Expansion pressure sequence

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Tube-to-tubesheet geometry

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Plane strain FE model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Variation of stresses at the tube inner diameter during expansion: case 1 with pe = 260 MPa (37.7 ksi)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Variation of stresses at the tube outer diameter during expansion: case 1 with pe = 260 MPa (37.7 ksi)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Variation of stresses at the tubesheet inner diameter during expansion: case 1 with pe = 260 MPa (37.7 ksi)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Residual contact pressure variation and plastic zone as a function of expansion pressure case 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Residual contact pressure variation and plastic zone as a function of expansion pressure case 2

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