PIPING ENGINEERING CELL

NOZZLE REINFORCEMENT CALCULATIONS

Prof. A. S. MOHARIR
IIT Bombay
Theoretical Basis

Consider an infinite, flat, uniformly thick plate of a metal subjected to tensile load
along one direction. The load is such that it develops tensile stresses σ y all along its skin
as shown

σy σy σy σy

σy σy σy σy

Consider now an infinitesimally small, circular cross-section hole punctured in

this plate. The radius of the hole is ‘a’.

Things change drastically because of this ‘opening’ made into a plate. A easy
visualization of this is offered by considering the induced stresses as pathways for
transmission of load across the plate. These pathways are disrupted due to the cutting of a
hole into the whole.

Nozzle Reinforcement Calculations 1

PIPING ENGINEERING CELL

One thus expects a uniform stress pattern to be disrupted and a stress

“intensification” along the edges of the hole aligned to the stress direction and also a
stress “rarification” in the vicinity of the hole in the transverse direction.

Theory provides a quantitative feel of the phenomenon. A formula to calculate

stress levels at a point defined by polar coordinates ( r ,θ ) as shown in the figure is as
follows.

σt
r

σ⎛ a 2 ⎞ σ ⎛ 3a 4 ⎞
σt = ⎜⎜1 + 2 ⎟⎟ − ⎜⎜1 + 4 ⎟⎟ cos 2θ
2⎝ r ⎠ 2⎝ r ⎠

Substitution of various values of r a and θ in the formula gives a quantitative

feel of the stress intensification around the opening.

Important positions are the 12 O’clock and 6 O’clock positions as well as 3

O’clock and 9 O’clock positions. From symmetry considerations, one can home in on 12
O’clock ( θ = 0 o ) and 3 O’clock ( θ = 90 o ) positions for further study. Let us see what is
the situation on the edge of the hole ( r a = 1 ) along these directions and also as one
moves away from the edge, one radius at a time (i.e. at r a = 2,3,4,........etc. ).

5
4
3
2
1

1 2 3 4 5

The calculations and the stress profiles offer important insights into the implications of
making an opening.

Nozzle Reinforcement Calculations 2

PIPING ENGINEERING CELL

As we travel along the 3 O’clock position, we see that stresses at the edge have
intensified to 3 times their value before making an opening. Stress increases to 3 σ y .
This intensification attenuates very fast and the stress is 1.21 σ y even as one moves a
radius away from the edge of the hole. It reduces further and there is no intensification of
any consequence beyond r a = 5 .

The situation along the 12 O’clock axis is even more interesting. The tangential
position along this axis is transverse to the original stress lines. There were no stresses
along this direction initially. Cutting of a hole, however, induced a compressive stress σ y
at the edge of the opening. The compressive stress reverses within one radius, becomes
tensile and then dies down fast.

Allowable stress for pressure vessel design is often derived by reducing the yield
stress of the MoC at design temperature by a factor of safety. Most commonly
recommended factor of safety is 1.5

Sy
Sa =
1.5

This, when coupled with the observed stress intensification around the opening,
indicates the engineering unacceptability of stress intensification. For example, let the
plate be stretched initially such that the tensile stresses reach the allowable level for the
MoC. When the hole is punctured, a stress intensification factor of 3 would mean that the
stresses would reach a level of 3 Sa or 2 Sy. The plate would thus yield plastically and
deform around the opening. This may not be acceptable. Something therefore needs to be
done around the opening to keep the intensified stresses within the allowable as much as
possible.

One of the possibilities is to opt for a thicker plate (preferably thrice as thick as
the requirement to keep stresses within allowable prior to cutting an opening). This would
be uneconomical. Keeping in mind that the stress intensification attenuates with a circle
of double the radius of the opening and fall below engineering safely margins, one
therefore considers the need to provide a ‘collar’ or reinforcing pad to strengthen the
stress carrying cross-section of the plate locally.

We thus carry from the theory two points.

1) Something needs to be done because the stress intensification might take the
stresses beyond engineering safety margins.
2) This ‘something’ needs to be done only within a circle of double the diameter
of the opening.

Nozzle Reinforcement Calculations 3

PIPING ENGINEERING CELL

What about the assumptions ?

Let us now revisit some of the assumptions behind the theory giving us the
formula that led to above conclusions.

One of the assumptions was regarding the plate being flat. Pressure vessels and
their closures are essentially not so. However the dimensions of the shape on which an
opening for the nozzle is made is much larger as compared to the nozzle diameter. The
nozzle thus sees a reasonably flat surface around it, if not a perfectly flat one. We
therefore presume that the assumption is not that restrictive as to make the theory
inapplicable in practical situations.

Another assumption was regarding the infinite expanse of the plate. Our vessels
are of finite dimensions. However, as the stress intensification attenuates within few
radiuses from the hole, whether the plate exits beyond that or not is not of much concern.
This assumption is, therefore, not considered to be very restrictive.

Yet another assumption was regarding the infinitesimal dimension of the hole.
The assumption was necessary to ensure that the hole remained circular inspite of stress
intensification. Practically sized holes would actual deform and attain an over shape. This
deformation actually helps redistribution and alleviation of stresses. Stress levels in the
case of finite sized openings are thus likely to be more benign than what the theory
predicts. Theory thus offers more alarming estimates. Use of the theory for practically
sized nozzles is therefore acceptable.

The important limitation was regarding the uni-directional force inducing uni-
directional stresses in the plate. In practical situation, we have a 2-D scenario. For
example, a cylinder pressurized from inside or outside experiences stresses in
circumferential direction (Hoope’s stresses) as well as axial direction. A sphere, and other
shapes as well, have stresses in 2 orthogonal directions.

Stress intensification can be quantified using superposition. Effect of stresses in

one direction is superimposed on the same calculated for stresses in the other direction.

Calculations show that stress intensification is actually less in the case of

cylinders and spheres. The order of severity of stress intensification is
flat plate cylinder sphere

(High Low)

Area Compensation Method

The need for the provision of a reinforcing pad around an opening is ascertained
and the pad thickness is arrived at using the area compensation method stipulated by the
codes. It is applicable to a cylindrical nozzle provided on any shape of a vessel or a
closure.

Nozzle Reinforcement Calculations 4

PIPING ENGINEERING CELL

The premise on which the area compensation method is based is very simple. It
identifies the load bearing metal cross-sectional area which is lost due to the act of
making an opening. It attempts to compensate this area loss by providing extra thickness
in the affected vicinity of the hole.

It is important to get a correct picture of the area that is purported to be lost due to
an opening. Consider the flat plate again. Let it be stretched in one direction such that the
stresses are just equal to the allowable stress. Let the plate thickness be ‘t’ everywhere.
We now contemplate to remove a circular area of diameter ‘d’ in a lane of width ‘d’ as
shown below.

The load bearing metal cross-section that would be lost because of removing a
disc of diameter ‘d’ is clearly not the area of the circle. Instead it is a rectangle of width
‘d’ and thickness ‘t’.

t
t d

Nozzle Reinforcement Calculations 5

PIPING ENGINEERING CELL

This area can be returned back to the plate by welding a disc of thickness ‘t’ of
outer diameter ‘2d’ and inner diameter ‘d’. This would provide an extra area of d t / 2 on
either side of the lost area ‘d t’ as shown.

2d

d t

This in essence in the concept of area compensation. The actual calculations are
somewhat more elaborate and incorporate the decision steps leading to the wall thickness
calculations wherein the regulation thickness gets corrected for corrosion/erosion
allowance and mill tolerance on plate thickness before the next available commercial
thickness is recommended.

Let us consider a cylindrical vessel/pipe of outer diameter DO subjected to an

internal design pressure of P . Let the corrosion allowance be ∈ and mill tolerance
± M % . Let the recommended plate thickness be T .

Let a nozzle (or branch connection) of OD d o , ID d i and nominal thickness t

( = (OD − ID ) 2 ) be required to be provided on this vessel/pipe (header). Let the mill
tolerance be m% . Corrosion allowance and design pressure would be ∈ and P as for
header. This is so because the vessel and nozzle face identical service conditions.

It helps to consider the steps that go in recommending the header and branch
thickness. Regulation thickness is calculated, corrosion allowance is added, mill tolerance
is provided and the next higher commercial thickness is recommended. There is often an
extra thickness available in the header design. This amounts to an extra area available in
the affected zone to handle stress intensification. Compensation area can take advantage
of this discount. Often, this extra area available is more than the area lost. No extra area
by way of reinforcing pad is required in this case. The nozzle is then said to be ‘self
compensating’.

The nozzle thickness calculations go through a similar sequence. There is thus

some extra thickness (and hence area) available in the nozzle itself. It is believed that this
extra thickness available in the nozzle up to a height of H 1 above the header OD can be
accounted for in the area available.

If the nozzle is protruding inside the header, its portion up to a depth of H 2 is

also considered as providing extra area to handle stress intensification.

Nozzle Reinforcement Calculations 6

PIPING ENGINEERING CELL

A reinforcing pad is provided only if the area ‘lost’ due to cutting an opening is
more than the area ‘available’ (due to over design) in the header portion, nozzle portion
above the header and the nozzle portion inside the header. This area accounting has
several nuances further to try and avoid provision of a reinforcing pad.

Consider the area that is lost. As seen earlier, it is a rectangle of width equal to the
diameter of the hole and height equal to the ‘thickness’. Each term requires to be
qualified further.

We would like our design to be functional right through the service life. Corrosion
would have caused increase of the nozzle ID (which is the size of the opening also) to
d i + 2 ∈ over this period. This is therefore considered as the design basis for the diameter
of the opening to be used in reinforcement calculations. As a consequence, the affected
area on the header extends to a circle of diameter 2(d i + 2 ∈) . Reinforcing pad, if at all
provided, will have this as its OD.

The ‘thickness’ to be used in calculating area lost is also important. What is

indeed lost is the regulation thickness. The rest which comprised of the allowances,
tolerances and extra is not consequence here. Regulation thickness would have helped
keep the stresses at allowable level. This thickness is what is ‘missed’ as an opening is
made.

Couple of other points are also very important. The opening for the nozzle is
unlikely to be located on an existing weld joint of the header or its vicinity. A weld or an
opening is a weakness in the structure and fabrication wisdom would dictate that these
should not occur simultaneously. If this is so, then the regulation thickness for the header
should be calculated using Weld Joint Efficiency value as 1 in the appropriate regulation
thickness formula for the header shape. The regulation thickness thus may not be
imported directly from previous calculations done at the time of header design. Note that
this consideration reduces the value of regulation thickness, thereby lowering the estimate
of area lost.

Another point is regarding the choice of the formula to be used for the regulation
thickness itself. It should be the code formula for a shape ‘seen’ by the nozzle. It may not
make difference if the nozzle is placed on a sphere, hemisphere, cylinder, flat plate or an
ellipsoidal closure. For a dished (torispherical) closure or a cone housing a nozzle, it does
make a difference.

If the nozzle is on the ‘crown’ of a dished closure, the shape around it is actually a
sphere with diameter double that of the vessel. While designing the closure, formula
pertaining to the dished closure would have been used. While calculating regulation
thickness to be used in calculating area lost, one should use formula for a sphere instead.
Note that this consideration also reduces the value of regulation thickness, thereby
lowering the estimate of area lost.

Nozzle Reinforcement Calculations 7

PIPING ENGINEERING CELL

Similar is the case for nozzle on a cone. The thickness of the cone is arrived at
using the base diameter of the cone. As one moves towards the tip of the cone, the
regulation thickness requirement decreases and extra thickness increases. To avail of this
extra thickness in reinforcement calculation, one should calculate the regulation thickness
afresh using cone diameter at a level corresponding to the center of the opening. Note that
this consideration also reduces the value of regulation thickness, thereby lowering the
estimate of area lost. In fact, a properly located nozzle on a cone can often be made ‘self
compensating’.

Let us now put together the balance sheet of the load bearing metal area affected
due to an opening.

Area Lost

AL = (d i + 2 ∈)TR

Where TR is the regulation thickness recalculated with above discussed consideration.

Area Available

From Header:

A1A = (d i + 2 ∈)(T − TR − ∈ − M T )

M T is the thickness that may not be available as per mill tolerance. If M% is the
mill tolerance for header, then

M
MT = T
100

From Nozzle portion outside the header:

AA2 = 2 H 1 (t − t R − ∈ − mT )

m
( mT = t )
100

From nozzle portion protruding inside the header:

AA3 = 2 H 2 (t − 2 ∈ − mT )

Nozzle Reinforcement Calculations 8

PIPING ENGINEERING CELL
The last expression needs some clarification. The protruding portion of the nozzle
is subject to same pressure on either side of its wall. The differential pressure on this wall

is thus zero. There is thus no regulation thickness requirement. At the same time,
corrosion is eating into this wall from inside as well as outside. Corrosion over the
expected service life is thus twice the corrosion allowance.

The participating heights of the nozzle, H 1 and H 2 , (participating in sharing the

extra stresses) are given as follows.

H 1 = (d i + 2ε )(t − ε )

H 2 = (d i + 2ε )(t − 2ε )

Note that for a non-protruding nozzle, H 2 = 0 . The regulation thickness of the

nozzle, t R , is imported directly from its previous calculations done for deciding nozzle
thickness. No correction for weld joint efficiency is required in this calculation as the
entire nozzle with its seam welding (if any) is in the affected area.

The balance sheet attempts to hammer down the estimate of area lost. The area
available is estimated by looking for as much area available in the vicinity as possible. In
fact, even ‘weldment’ area in the affected rectangle is accounted for in area available if
such estimates are available.

AA4 = weldment area

A reinforcement pad is provided if area deficit AD is greater than zero.

(
AD = AL − A1A + AA2 + AA3 + AA4 )
The deficit area is provided in the affected zone welding a reinforcing pad of thickness t P
given as

AD
tP =
(d i + 2 ∈)

The formula is self explanatory in view of the discussions above and the figure.

Although not explicitly stated, it is pressumed that the reinforcing pad is of the
same material as that of the header/nozzle. This would normally be the case, as welding
together dissimilar metal could lead to galvanic corrosion. However, considering the fact
that the pad is not exposed to the corrosive process fluid, if a dissimilar material is chosen

Nozzle Reinforcement Calculations 9

PIPING ENGINEERING CELL
for the pad for economic considerations, an appropriate correction to the pad thickness is
called for.

Codes recommend on upward revision of the thickness if pad material allowable

stress ( S apad ) is lower than that of the header/nozzle (Sa). Logically, the revision is as
follows.

AD Sa
tP =
d i + 2 ∈ S apad

Codes however do not allow a downward revision for a stronger pad material. The
calculation formula should thus be

⎧ AD AD Sa ⎫
t P = max ⎨ , pad ⎬
⎩ di + 2 ∈ di + 2 ∈ Sa ⎭

For Fabrication consideration, a pad thickness of less than 5mm is not

recommended.

Nozzle Reinforcement Calculations 10