• , " %
ii
,,.
%, 4""...< J"t
\oy.
'
_'¢"_t
"_'g'c<" WSRC-MS-,-90-358-Rev. 1
DE92 009974
by
H. E. Flanders, Jr.
This paper was prepared in connection with work done under Contract No. DE-AC09-89SR18035
with the U.S. Department of Energy. By acceptance of this paper, the publisher and/or recipient
acknowledges the U.S. Government's right to retain a nonexclusive, royalty-free license in and to
any copyright coveting this paper, along with the tight to reproduce and to authorize others to
reproduce ali or part of the copyrighted paper.
DISCLAIMER
This rel_rt was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States
Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their
employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsi-
bility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or
WSRC-MS-90-358, Rev. 1
by
H.E. Flanders
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
For the seismic upgrade of existing equipment in older facilities (i.e., pre-1974
facilities) the use of more advanced analytical techniques are often employed to evaluate the
maximum allowable load capacity of structural supports. Due to the degree of redundancy
of the three bolt pipe clamp, the application of the limit analysis method has the potential to
provide increased allowable load capacity with r_-spect to the manufacturer's rated load.
The limit analysis of the clamp, conducted on the basis of lower bound collapse
load for faulted loading in accordance with Subsection NF of the ASME Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Code [1], is presented. The allowable limit load capacity is compared with
the manufacturer's rated load, and the conclusions are summarized.
Since the bolts are tightened to the point that the curved portion of the clamp,
between points 4 and 5 of Figure 2, is in contact with the pipe, this section of the clamp
will be. treated as rigid for any additional l,aading which produces bending. The bending
moment is developed by the transverse component of the normal force, as shown in Figure
3. The boundary conditions are a simple support at point 7 due to the bolt constraint, and a
fixed support at point 2 due to the bolts at points 1 and 2. The elastic bending moment on
the clamp, Figure 4, represents a frictionless condition where the load transfer between the
pipe and clamp is the normal load through point 5 of Figures 2 and 3. This moment
diagram shows that the maximum bending moment is at point 5. Thus, during the loading,
point 5 is the first point to develop a plastic hinge. However, due to the structural
redundancy, point 2 must reach the full plastic hinge state before the clamp structure
reaches the mechanistic state required to produce the collapse load limit.
The plastic hinge moment capacity is based upon the cross section of the clamp and
material collapse load yield stress as defined by ASME Boiler & Pressure Code, Section
III, F-1334.6 (a).[2] The expression for the plastic moment is given by:
Mo - fS'yI
c (1)
The transverse component of the pipe to clamp normal force will be applied to the
clamp, Figure 5, to obtain the lower-bound collapse load using a statically admissible
field.[3] To develop the mechanistic behavior required for the collapse loads, the clamp
must form two plastic hinges at points "A" and "B", in addition to the hinge at point ,r,,,
I., uv
Figure 5. The collapse load capacity will be obtained by summing moments about point
"B" in the free body diagram, Figure 6, and about point "A" in Figure 5 as follows:
Ma - FcL2 = 0 (2)
The relationship between the clamp axial and transverse loads as shown in Figure 3
is;
Pc- 2PT
TanO (5)
The faulted allowable limit load defined by [2] paragraph F-1334.6 (a) is;
Faulted allowable loads from the limit analysis method and the manufacturer's rated
loads are summarized for various size pipe clamps in Table 1. The clamp material is ASTM
A-36, and the material properties are at a temperature of 650°F. The limit analysis loads are
based upon the faulted allowables of the ASME Boiler & Pressure Code, Section m, NF-
3340,[ 1] and ASME Boiler & Pressure Code, Section II1, Appendix F-1334.6.[2]
The results in Table 1 illustrate that the limit analysis loads are larger than the rated
loads.
CONCLUSIONS
The comparison of limit analysis results for faulted loading and manufacturer's rated loads
indicate that the manufacturer's conservative rated loads could be significantly increased for
faulted loading conditions.
REFERENCES
1. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Subsection NF, 1989.
2. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Division 1, Appendix F,
1989.
MANUFACTURER IS RATING
_ • .
,, I
!T M91janO05.01
i
MA "A"
1_.4
I_-" L1 =,_ L2.)..I
u I
M91janO05.02