33 mendukung00 menolak

168 tayangan52 halamanAPI 12F

Jul 16, 2016

© © All Rights Reserved

PPT, PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd

API 12F

© All Rights Reserved

168 tayangan

33 mendukung00 menolak

API 12F

© All Rights Reserved

Anda di halaman 1dari 52

Performed by Kieran Claffey

Baker Consulting Group

Background

Kieran Claffey

Bsc Mechanical Engineering

Vacuum Chamber Design for

Semiconductor Industry,

Chemical Vapor Deposition Reactor

Design,

Damage Mechanics, Fatigue, Impact

Analysis, R&D

Stress Analysis and FE for Above Ground

Storage Tanks

2

Objective of Analysis

Validate the current API 12F standard

requirements for recommended sizes

and pressure and vacuum limits.

2. Determine if the pressure rating of API

12F shop welded tanks can be

increased.

1.

Summary

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

Results for vapor space pressure of 10 psi, 4.5 psi, 2 psi, 1 psi and

0.5 with a full tank of water.

Results of hard vacuum analysis.

Results with 0.5 oz/in^2 vacuum in vapor space.

Results for double fillet corner weld model.

Results for hybrid joint comprising of fillet on inside corner weld and

bevel on outside.

Points of interest - stress concentration at flush clean-out, bottom to

shell joint, shell to roof joint, dome/nozzle to roof joint, etc.

Buckling instability under vacuum conditions.

Tank Deflection

Validation of model.

Recommendations from FE study.

Summarize results

4

for API Stress Analysis

The American Petroleum Institute recommends the use of Von

Mises and/or Tresca (Stress Intensity) stress to the tank

engineer/stress analyst when analyzing above ground storage

tanks.

Solid Works Simulation software allows the stress analyst to view

the effective stress experienced at a point in a material, independent

of the type of loading or failure mechanism whether it be pure

compression, pure tension, pure shear, torsion, bending or buckling.

This effective stress can be calculated within the finite element

software in the form of Tresca stress (stress intensity P1-P3).

Tresca criterion calculates principal stress in 3D space, (1, 2, 3);

thus providing an assessment of stress through out the thickness of

the steel plate. Tresca analysis tends to highlight stress

concentrations better than equivalent Von Mises Stress.

Model Parameters

series of events where there is pressure differential between the

inside and outside of tank.

No fixed boundary conditions were close to the shell to bottom weld

or close to the shell to roof weld. This was done in order to allow full

motion of these joints as would occur in reality as most 12F tanks sit

on soils or sand foundations that are allowed to move and bend with

the foundation.

The natural frequency and mass was used to calculate the rigiditystiffness of the bottom and roof plate.

The modulus of sub-grade reaction for medium density sand was

used to calculate the rigidity-stiffness of the sand underneath tank.

These stiffness values were added to the model in order to simulate

how the materials deflect in real world situations.

Model Description

Three shell courses (8ft high ea), flat bottom tank.

Gravity effects are taken into consideration in all of the

FE models.

All material in the tank was modeled as A 283 Grade C

steel which is the lowest strength material in API 12F.

(Yield Strength = 30,000 psi)

Minimum thickness shell plate (courses 1 through 3)

per API 12F.

Minimum thickness flat bottom plate per API 12F.

Sloped deck (1:12 gradient per API 12F).

7

Constraints

foundation.

Bottom of 1m thick sand is given a fixed

constraint.

Top of sand surface assigned a stiffness

value.

Tank bottom assigned a stiffness value.

Roof assigned a stiffness value.

8

Configurations Studied

Hybrid bevel/fillet weld at shell to bottom

joint.

Shell to roof joint fillet welded.

Top nozzle/dome - ANSI 20 nozzle at top

of deck/dome.

Flush Clean Out (36 high x 24 wide)

with rectangular corners as per API 12F.

Horizontal and vertical weld joints.

9

Conditions Analyzed

pressure in vapor space above water level. A sudden build up

of pressure in the vapor space is added to the liquid pressure

which varies with the height of the tank. When the tank is full

of liquid there is an uneven pressure distribution, with the

maximum pressure at the bottom of tank and the minimum

pressure in the vapor space. 10 psi is considered extreme

positive pressure condition.

Tank full of water, with 4.5, 2.0, 1.0 and 0.5 psi pressure in

vapor space above water level.

Tank full of water with 0.5 oz/in2 vacuum in vapor space.

Extreme negative pressure; Tank empty of product, under

full/hard vacuum (400 inches of water), considered extreme

negative pressure condition.

10

Configurations

inside and bevel weld on outside of tank.

11

which was modeled as 1m thick.

12

Results

Tank Deflection

Fig.4 Maximum deflection at tank dome when there is 1 psi in

vapor space and tank is full. Result = 0.096 at top nozzle.

13

Fig. 5 Displacement of clean out with 1 psi in vapor space and tank full.

Result =0.032 (approx. 1/32).

14

Vacuum Analysis

Fig. 6 Negative pressure can be created in tank due to wind from

outside AND/OR from process conditions within tank.

15

deflect before shell to roof joint fails.

the extreme condition of

hard vacuum 400 of

water. This was

performed in order to see

where the tank is weakest

under extreme and

improbable conditions in

order to find the weakest

point in the design for

vacuum conditions.

16

Fig. 8 400 inches of water vacuum stress plot Result 155,000 psi at

deck to shell weld. Plastic non-linear analysis was not conducted

however the stresses are so far beyond the yield point of steel that it

can be said that plastic instability is likely to occur at this joint under

hard vacuum.

17

From

joint is the deck to shell weld which

experiences very high stresses (>155 ksi).

that point under hard vacuum conditions.

18

means plastic instability will occur at roof joint under worst case full

vacuum (unlikely event). The shell tends to hold its shape as it has a

more rigid shape, however an initiator (initial weakness) in shell plate

could cause collapse in shell under full vacuum conditions.

19

What is the buckling safety factor for

current standard?

API 12F allows for 0.5 oz/in2 vacuum for

this tank.

Result Buckling safety factor = 7.7

No elastic instability at 0.5 oz/in2

Good News

20

Fig. 10 Half oz/in2 of vacuum in vapor space with tank almost full;

Buckling safety factor = 7.7 Note: elastic deformation of shell is highly

exaggerated.

21

Results cntd

tank fitness for service evaluation recommends

an in-service buckling safety factor of 3;

Which means 0.5 oz/in2 is within safe

parameters.

Elastic deformation is likely to occur in the shell

at this low vacuum level but elastic instability is

unlikely; i.e. the shape of the structure is unlikely

to be altered as a result of insufficient stiffness.

No stiffeners are required at the top of tank if

the pressure differential between inside and

outside of tank is kept below 0.5 oz/in2.

22

tank at atmospheric pressure

Fig. 11 The compressive stress at the bottom of tank shell Result = 1800 psi

when tank is empty. Compressive stress is caused by the weight of the tank on

itself.

23

stress in the weld due to the weight of the tank (compressive in the first 3

inches on shell). The transition in shape from circular shell to flat bottom also

induces a tensile bending moment at the tank bottom when the tank is filled.

Another factor which is considered is the tanks ability to squash into the sand

foundation causing bending stress in the corner weld joint.

24

Vapor Space

(Extreme positive pressure)

Fig. 13 Maximum Stress = 9,137 psi in fillet weld cross section with 10 psi

in vapor space and bottom allowed to deform into sand foundation.

25

Fig. 14 Maximum Stress = 4,753 psi in hybrid weld cross section with 10 psi in

vapor space and bottom allowed to deform into sand foundation. There is a

reduction of 96% in stress intensity by changing from fillet weld to hybrid fillet/bevel

weld. The hybrid fillet/bevel weld is a much stronger joint than traditional fillet weld.

26

Space (Extreme Condition)

Fig. 15 Maximum stress with 10 psi in vapor space and with corner fillet weld.

27

Results cntd

Stress at the flush cleanout corner joint =

107,261 psi

The nozzle joint stress at the dome =

44,652 psi.

Clearly 10 psi is too great a pressure in

the vapor space in addition to the

hydrostatic pressure from full tank of water

28

Reduce Pressure

Double Fillet Configuration 4.5 psi in Vapor

Space

Fig. 16 Maximum stress with 4.5 psi in vapor space with fillet weld.

29

Results cntd

stress = 77,382 psi

The next largest stress occurs at the nozzle =

19,887 psi.

4.5 psi is too high a vapor pressure due to the

stress at the flush cleanout.

It is worth noting that the stresses in the shell to

bottom joint and shell to roof joint are less than

those seen in the top nozzle at 4.5 psi in vapor

space.

30

Double Fillet Weld Configuration 2 psi in

Vapor Space

Fig. 17 Maximum stress with 2 psi in vapor space with fillet weld.

31

Results cntd

The 90 corner at flush cleanout has the

2.0 psi is too high a vapor pressure due to

the stress at the flush cleanout.

Note: If the flush clean-out were given a

stress reducing radius it may be possible

to increase the pressure to 2 psi in vapor

space for this size tank (with carefully

made design changes in welds etc.).

32

Double Fillet Weld Configuration 1 psi in

Vapor Space

Fig. 18 Tank stress with 1 psi in vapor space and double fillet weld at tank bottom.

33

Results cntd

11,432 psi exists in vicinity of cleanout with

concentrated maximum stress at 90 corner of

33,356 psi.

Yield strength of A283-Gr C is 30,000 psi which

means an increase in pressure rating of API 12F

tanks should not occur without applying stress

reducing radius to top corners of flush cleanout.

Increasing the height of API 12F will also

increase the pressure further and should not be

considered without applying stress reducing

radius to top corners of flush cleanout.

34

Space

35

Maximum

cleanout = 1.029 x 10-3.

The allowable Hookean strain for A283-Gr

C is 1.024 x 10-3, which means that area of

the tank is over-strained with 1 psi in

vapor space.

BCG does not recommend an increase in

pressure without applying stress reducing

radius to top corners of flush cleanout.

36

Double Fillet Weld Configuration 0.5 psi in

Vapor Space (Current API 12F spec.)

Fig. 20 Stress concentration at corner joint in flush cleanout with 0.5 psi in

37

vapor space. Result = 28,619 psi.

Results cntd

The current API 12F standard allows for 8 oz/in2 (0.5 psi).

The yield strength of A283-Gr C is 30,000 psi which means the yield

safety factor = 1.048 (which is too close to unity).

The API 650 allowable hydrostatic stress for A283-Gr C is 22,500 psi

which means the stress in this corner joint (28,619 psi) exceeds the

API allowable stress for that material by 27%.

Serious consideration should be made to providing a stress reducing

radius at these 2 corners.

Brittle fracture is unlikely because the plate thicknesses are less than

0.5 but leaks are likely to occur at this joint, especially if corroded.

This is the weakest point in the design of API 12F shop welded

tanks.

38

Fatigue

continuous cycling due to minimal pressure differentials

and that fatigue is generally not an issue for these tanks.

However, it is worth noting that fatigue starts to become

an issue when the stress is greater than the fatigue

strength of lowest grade steel Se = 27,550 psi.

The stress of 28,600 psi at corner joint in flush cleanout

is susceptible to fatigue failure in older tanks that have

experienced more than 10,000 cycles (filling, emptying

causing pressure change at cleanout).

Leaks initiated by fatigue are likely to occur in older

tanks with this type of 90 joint.

39

joint can be complicated.

An analysis of the fillet weld configuration is

given here for the three Cartesian directions; X,

Y, Z normal stress in order to explain the stress

regime at this critical joint in ASTs.

The final figure shows the stress intensity

(Tresca results) for the combined loading

situation which takes X,Y, and Z normal stresses

and combines them into a useful engineering

stress.

40

psi in Vapor Space

Fig. 21 Double fillet weld X normal stress with 1 psi in vapor space - bending in

toe of internal fillet due to movement downwards on tank bottom pressing into 41

sand is the dominant stress in the X-X direction.

Fig. 22 Double fillet weld Y normal stress with 1 psi in vapor space.

Bending stress in the head of internal fillet weld and the fluid

longitudinal stress are dominant in this stress direction (Y-Y direction).

42

Fig. 23 Double fillet weld Z normal stress when 1 psi is in vapor space

the membrane stress from the inside of shell is dominant causing a

tensile stress in fillet weld; along with secondary bending stress from

the bottom pushing down into the sand are stress factors in the Z-Z

direction.

43

Fig. 24 Weld stress intensity at cross section with 1 psi in vapor space

double fillet weld; Result = 4,443 psi max stress occurs at center of

internal fillet (corner weld).

44

Fig. 25 Higher weld stresses due to rigid bottom compared with flexible

sand foundation. There is an approximate increase of 15% in the

maximum stress due to the increased rigidity (4,443 psi max stress on

flexible sand vs. 5,133psi on completely rigid foundation.

45

Fig. 26 Bending stress in roof plate at dome-nozzle junction with 1 psi in the

46

vapor space.

Results cntd

4,550 psi

There is a high bending stress approximately 2

away from the welded joint caused by the steel

at that point attempting to move upwards due to

internal tank pressure, yet being constrained by

the rigidity and weight of the nozzle.

Yield safety factor of 6.52 (Fy = 30,000 psi)

47

Fig. 28 Stress along height of tank when 1 psi exists in the vapor space.

48

Model Validation

calculation) of hoop stress = 5,658 psi

Correlates well with FE result of 5,620 psi at

tank bottom.

Stress concentrations exist at shell plate joints,

nozzle and flush cleanout joints.

Stress concentrations correlate with R.E.

Petersons book Stress Concentration Factors.

Hand calculations predict a stress concentration

of 28,158 psi at cleanout; FE predicts 28,619

psi.

49

50

Conclusions

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

From a vacuum perspective, the weakest area is the deck to shell weld.

From a positive pressure perspective, the weakest area is 2 away from the corner in

the flush cleanout.

Elastic instability is unlikely to occur with current allowable vacuum of 0.5 oz/in 2 i.e.

the shape of the structure is unlikely to buckle as a result of insufficient stiffness.

The hybrid fillet/bevel weld is a stronger joint than traditional fillet weld.

The API 650 allowable hydrostatic stress for A283-Gr C is 22,500 psi which means

the stress in the clean-out corner joint (28,619 psi) exceeds the API allowable stress

for that material by 27%.

The allowable Hookean strain for A283-Gr C is 1.024 x 10-3, which means the clean

out area of the tank is over-strained with 1 psi in vapor space.

Serious consideration should be made to providing a stress reducing radius at these

2 corners.

Leaks initiated by fatigue, could possibly occur in older tanks with 90 corner joint at

clean out (>10,000 cycles).

Brittle fracture is unlikely to occur at the flush cleanout as material is thinner than 0.5.

Failure mechanism is more likely ductile cleavage mechanism and not brittle

fracture.

51

Conclusions cntd

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

An increase in pressure rating of API 12F tanks should not occur without applying stress

reducing radius to top corners of flush cleanout.

Increasing the height of API 12F tanks will increase the pressure further and should not be

considered without applying stress reducing radius to top corners of flush cleanout.

The allowable pressure for this tank cannot be increased from 0.5 psi to 2 psi because there

is a large stress concentration at clean out which is greater than the tensile strength of the

shell plate.

If the allowable pressure were to be increased from 0.5 psi (8 oz/in 2), the 90 corner would

require rounding to reduce the stress concentration.

Double fillet welds are sufficiently strong when there is a full tank of water and 1 psi in vapor

space.

Bending stress at top nozzle was higher than expected.

If the flush clean-out were given a stress reducing radius it may be possible to increase the

pressure to 2 psi in vapor space for this size tank (with carefully made design changes in

welds etc.).

An increase in allowable vacuum above 0.5 oz/in 2 is possible. That limit value requires more

analysis to keep buckling safety factor above 3.

Current pressure and vacuum allowable limits should not be changed without accompanying

design changes.

52

## Lebih dari sekadar dokumen.

Temukan segala yang ditawarkan Scribd, termasuk buku dan buku audio dari penerbit-penerbit terkemuka.

Batalkan kapan saja.