6/3/2013

Presentation Title:
ASME ST LLC 07-02
Recommended Changes to Appendix D
Presentation Summary -

Appendix D of the B31 codes offers stress intensification factors (SIFs) for
common fittings in piping systems.
It has been known since 1987 that a number of these SIFs are incorrect
and give incomplete guidance.
The omission of k-factors for branch connections in Appendix D is also a
known source of potential error in piping system analysis.
ASME ST LLC 07-02 provides more applicable data to address these
issues.

Presentation Contents:
1-Introduction of B31.3 Appendix D
2-Identification of parts of Appendix D where SIFs and k-factors might be affected
3-Schneider and initiation of WRC 329 in mid 1980s
4-WRC 329 corrections for Appendix D SIFs and k-factors for branch connections
5-References and work after WRC 329
6-Introduction of ST-LLC 07-02
7-Examples in ST-LLC 07-02
8-Additional Examples

6/3/2013

B31.3 Appendix D

6/3/2013

6/3/2013

Piping Code Limitations:

D/T > 100 (not a limit for FEA)

0.5 < d/D < 1.0 may be non-conservative. (not a problem for FEA)

Some additional notes in the 2010 version of B31.3 that contrast

a little with whats in ASME ST-LLC 07-02.

6/3/2013

There were concerns in the 1980s from R.W. Schneider

that Code SIFs for branch connections were not
conservative when 0.5 > d/D < 1.0.

WRC 329 was intended to address this problem, but E.C.

Rodabaugh found a number of issues with the present
Codes. Most of those issues have been addressed with
the technology of the time for ASME III NC/ND, but
have not been addressed in the B31 Codes.

WRC 329

6/3/2013

6/3/2013

p.22

6/3/2013

Silly Overestimate of the Stress:

ST-LLC 07-02

8.9767/1.0439 = 8.599 Times TOO Big

ASME Section III

8.9767 / 2.1 = 4.27 Times TOO Big

FEA SIF

8.9767 / 1.0 = 8.9767 Times TOO Big

6/3/2013

6/3/2013

10

6/3/2013

WRC 436
iir(test) = 1.050

22

11

6/3/2013

Basically dont use the effective section modulus with the

new rules. It is easier for the rules to provide a more
appropriate i-factor..
AND Fix Weldon Fittings (Olets)

12

6/3/2013

Excerpt from Table 1, p.4.

WRC 329 pp.31,32.

Reformatted WRC 329 Table 13 for Mob Evaluation (10 thru 17 Olets)

13

6/3/2013

WRC 329 Fig. 16

Mob comparison of test, B31.3 and STLLC 07-02 for UFTs, EXTs, and Olets.

14

6/3/2013

After WRC 329 (after 1987)

Since WRC 329 in 1987 there have been a number of

papers published that can affect Appendix D guidance:
2003

1999

2001

2007

1998

15

6/3/2013

2005

2006
1993

2002
1998

2004

1998

2001

1998

1997

2008

16

6/3/2013

2002

1989

1994

2006

1994

Khans tests were run in Oklahoma

on the WFI/PRG Markl Test
machine that is presently in PRGs
offices in Houston Texas.
These tests were run to supplement
Markls test so that some voids in
the test parameter ranges were
addressed.

17

6/3/2013

Markl Fatigue Test Machine Setup for k-factor Test

Blair tests run

below 40Hz.

18

6/3/2013

Blair k-factor Test Summary (Avg Values)

Blair SIF Test Summary (Avg Values)

Item

Test

Wais

Item

UFT
in-plane

4.422

5.89

4.196

UFT
in-plane

3.74

2.57

2.89

Pad
in-plane

2.062

2.183

4.034

Pad
in-plane

2.91

1.85

2.08

ST-LLC WRC 497

07-02
6.86

Markl
Test

Hinnant ST-LLC
Test
07-02

Piping Fatigue Tests from 1935 to 2013

First recorded fatigue tests for piping recorded

by Markl. Dynamic shaker tests conducted by
Blaire between 1935 to 1945.

PRG k-factor, i-factor and I-factor tests

conducted in 2013 Houston Tx.

19

6/3/2013

What do the newer tests and

documents indicate?

20

6/3/2013

What are the errors why didnt I see them in all my years working in pipe stress?

42

21

6/3/2013

pp. 36 & 37.

44

22

6/3/2013

PRG regression matches Wais/Rodabaugh

surface from EPRI 110997 while PRG FEA data
matches Widera from WRC 497.

23

6/3/2013

Some Possible New SIF

Equation Forms

24

6/3/2013

Relationship between UFT and

WLT in ASME III NC/ND:

Nothing should be weaker than a fabricated tee (with equal dimensions),

or more flexible than a fabricated tee (with equal dimensions),
No other contoured fitting can be stronger than a welding tee.
i(ir) i(or) and i(ob) i(ib)

49

The t/T Problem

25

6/3/2013

26

6/3/2013

t/T=0.3

t/T=1

t/T=2
53

Welding Tees

27

6/3/2013

56

28

6/3/2013

WPW-Welded
WPS-Seamless

57

58

29

6/3/2013

59

How can welding tees be updated?

1-Look at existing Code.
2-Recognize that welding tees always have a lower SIF than UFTs
3-Look at UFT variation.
4-Ignore 0.5 < d/D < 1.0 problem
5-Run FEA models with smooth contours and local thicknesses
6-Recognize that i-factors and k-factors increase and decrease together but not
proportinnally. Follow guidance for reasonableness. Tees arent as thick as they
used to be 1.5-to-3.0 times more than nominal wall. Generally now its 1.1 to 1.5
times with no crotch thickening.

30

6/3/2013

Olets

For fittings with larger d/D ratios the bevel below the parting line in the circumferential plane may reduce the fitting
thickness available for pressure containment in the circumferential plane and in some cases may reduce it such that it
is equal to or smaller than the wall thickness of the attached matching pipe. This is not likely the intent of the
manufacturer however. These dimensions are not controlled, and a number of the fittings are produced by copying
those of another manufacturer, which may result in angles from one fitting being applied incorrectly to another.
The amount of reduction is a function of the dimensions selected by the manufacturer. These dimensions are not
controlled by any standard. Welded outlet fittings are manufactured to typically MSS-SP-97 and in some part to
B16.9.
As the d/D ratio gets smaller the thickness reduction also gets smaller and the bevel shown below the parting line in
the figure above vanishes. In the smaller d/D case, below the parting line, the welded on fitting profile is similar, if
not identical to that of a typical thickened straight nozzle body. The dimension (di) is equal to the inside diameter of
the matching pipe, and the outside diameter, (while not controlled by any standard), is often approximately the
dimension X in Table 14 of B16.5, or given by the relation included in Note 12 of the 07-02 project.
For welded outlet fittings, it is expected that the i-factors and k-factors converge to those for Sketch 2.3 with a
thickened, straight barrel length as described in Appendix B Fig. 5 as d/D < 0.5.

31

6/3/2013

63

64

32

6/3/2013

Modeling Branch
Connections

33

6/3/2013

67

34

6/3/2013

69

70

35

6/3/2013

Testing

72

36

6/3/2013

73

74

37

6/3/2013

38

6/3/2013

77

Analysis

39

6/3/2013

The NB3686 model with a rigid element from the center to

the surface of the pipe is used for all d/D ratios?

79

How its Tested

How its Used

40

6/3/2013

Reporting

Comparison to Test Data

Comparison to current Codes and Methods

82

41

6/3/2013

83

As part of the project all i-factors and k-factors through 2007 were collected.
84

42

6/3/2013

85

86

43

6/3/2013

WRC 166 McClure

(Similar to Blair Tests?)

87

88

44

6/3/2013

72 of these comparisons are provided. For each branch connection sketch

there are plots for: iib, iob, itb, iir, ior, itr, kib, kob, ktb, kir, kor, ktr

89

45

6/3/2013

46

6/3/2013

47

6/3/2013

Major Features of Aligned Equations

1) Flexibility Factors Added for all Branch Connection Components
a) k-factor for 90 deg. elbow adjusted per N-219 and Fig. 19 in
ORNL/Sub-2913/7.
b) Run and Branch Flexibilities Provided and Examples Presented
c) Branch Connection Flexibilities Modified for Attached Flanges
2) SIF Updates
a) Out-of-plane d/D Inflection Included
b) t/T Inflection Included
c) Reduction of SIFs for Run where Appropriate
d) Weld-on Fitting SIF Correction
e) In-plane, Out-plane and Torsional SIFs Provided
f) Locally Thickened Branch Rules Clarified
g) EPRI Rodabaugh/Wais Results for Concentric and Eccentric
Reducers Added
h) Branch Connection Figure Clarification
3) Corrections, Note Changes, etc. Recommended in WRC 329
Implemented
95

ST-LLC 07-02 is three documents:

Replacement for Appendix D

Example Problems illustrating application with discussion

Detailed calculation example

48

6/3/2013

Replacement for Appendix D:

Note that for contoured fittings (B16.9 tees, extruded tees, etc.) the k- and ifactors are proportional to d/D raised to a constant.

49

6/3/2013

Note that for fabricated fittings, e.g. pads, UFTs, olets, i- and k-factors are a cubic
function of d/D. These d/D functions produce a hump when 0.5 > d/D < 1.

50

6/3/2013

WRC 329 Para 4.2.4, A puzzling aspect fo the Table 6 [extruded tee] results is that
the [i-factors] are higher than would be predicted by Code equations for UFTs.

(See next slide for geometry discussion.)

51

6/3/2013

Difference between the middle Sketch 2.3 and the first Sketch 2.5

103

52

6/3/2013

From Note 15.

53

6/3/2013

54

6/3/2013

55

6/3/2013

111

56

6/3/2013

Reference for Note 10 Guidance for Laterals

114

57

6/3/2013

58

6/3/2013

59

6/3/2013

60

6/3/2013

61

6/3/2013

62

6/3/2013

Without considering the branch connection flexibility of

the 12x30 fabricated tee at point 15 the out-of-plane (Z)
bending moment at point 15 is 372,000 in.lb. Including
the branch connection flexibility reduces the bending
moment to 41,832 in.lb., a reduction of 8.8.

63

6/3/2013

Example No. 5 Heater Piping

128

64

6/3/2013

Fails without k-factors,

passes easily with k-factors.
Studying the system, there
are 6 welding tees in line
with very little straight pipe.
The welding tees control the
planar stiffness of the model.
(With k-factors stress is
reduced by 70%.)

Moment increase by
more than two times
at vessel nozzle when
flexibilities are
included.

The unbalanced load in a typical

variable support spring design,
causes more cold load movement.

65