Power at the Nozzle

Regardless of the size or type of pump or the size of its drive motor, the real
measure of power output is the power at the water jet nozzle. This is a direct
function of the nozzle pressure and the volume flow rate through the nozzle,
which can be expressed by the following formula:

HP = 0.58PQ

Where:

1. HP equals the hydraulic power actually delivered through the nozzle in

units of horsepower

2. P is the water pressure at the nozzle in units of thousands of pounds

per square inch (for example, use 55 for 55,000 psi). This can usually be
closely approximated by the pump output pressure, but watch out for
systems that try to operate relatively large nozzle orifices (say greater that
0.014) using relatively long runs of ultra-high pressure tubing with many
fittings. The pressure drop between the pump and the nozzle for such
systems can be several thousand psi.

3. Q is the volume flow rate through the nozzle, in units of gallons per
minute

4. The constant of 0.58 accounts for the units of measure being used in
the equation.

This simple equation makes two things very clear:

1. The size of pump motor and the exact design and brand of pump are
not in the equation. All that really matters in determining true nozzle power
are the nozzle pressure and the volume flow rate
2. Both pressure and volume flow rate are in the equation and have equal
effect. Power at the nozzle can be increased by increasing pressure or
increasing volume flow rate or a combination of both.

So the next time you are trying to compare ultra-high pressure pumps ignore
the size of the drive motor shown on the manufacturers spec sheet. Go
further down the spec sheet and find the values of the recommended
continuous operating pressure and the corresponding output volume flow
rate. Then grab your calculator and determine for yourself the actual
effective output power.

The power from the wind turbine for a given wind speed is calculated using
the equation:

The maximum theoretical coefficient of performance or Betz limit is

defined as 16/27 or 0.59 although in practice this would not be achievable
and a lower value should be used. The coefficient of performance will
typically vary with wind speed. An efficient horizontal axis wind turbine might
achieve a value of 0.35. Some wind turbine efficiency and power output
graphs can be found on:

o NREL. Small Wind Turbine Independent Testing

o Better Generation. Wind turbine reviews. Over 100 wind turbine power
and efficiency curves covering a range of designs and sizes.

At 0C and 100KPa the air density is 1.2754 kg/m3 but this will vary
with altitude and temperature

The tip speed ratio is included in the calculation so the rotor and
alternator speed can be calculated.
Background:

Many existing carbon steel vessels built before modern code rules do not
meet current code requirements for low temperature service. The service
history on these vessels is good resulting in an attitude that the current code
rules are too restrictive. However, there is an alternate way to understand
these vessels: many are in service conditions like propane storage where the
pressure at lower temperatures can never get very high. Many of these
vessels can never experience situations of combined high pressure and low
temperature.

Propane Pressure Temperature Curve:

A propane storage vessel typically has a pressure rating of 250 psi. In

Canada it can also have -50F MDMT (Minimum Design Metal Temperature)
depending on the service location. What it does not experience is 250psi at
-50F. The pressure temperature curve for Propane is shown below. Some
data points have been highlighted on the propane P-T curve. At -50F, a
common design temperature for exposed locations in Canada, the pressure
in a propane storage vessel is a small vacuum of -2 psig the tank will not
be able to generate any useful pressure. At -20F, a common minimum
temperature for older design codes, the pressure is only 11 psi. At 250 psi, a
common propane design pressure, the temperature is 127F. Once the
contents of the vessel reach this temperature, a 250 psig relief valve will
open allowing the release of some gas reducing the temperature of the
remaining contents through boiling.

Propane pressure vs temperature curve. Data source

A Typical Vessel Design:

A sample vessel was designed with a minimum wall thickness to just pass
250psi service. The material category was changed from Curve A to B to C to
D. As the pressure was reduced the minimum allowed temperature reduced
depending on the material curve used. A crude generalization is that Curve A
represents coarse grained materials with poor low temperature impact
(toughness) properties. Curve D materials have the best properties obtained
through methods like normalization or quench and tempering. Curve B and C
are intermediate materials. This applies only to carbon and low alloy steels.
The list of materials and their curve is found in Fig UCS-66. Through
application of ASME rules built into all commercial code calculators, the
curves below were generated:

Sample vessel P-T ratings for four different curves of steel used in pressure
vessel design

In this case, all material curve variants for this sample vessel have pressure
ratings above the propane PT curve, so all could be used safely, but Curve A
in this case could not reach -50F. The Curve A material can be seen to have
the poorest pressure rating at low temperature, and the Curve D the best.
When a vessel is designed for new construction it is possible to combine the
selection of material with the appropriate testing to obtain MDMT of -50F,
even at full pressure. However, for this sample vessel, no material
combination provides a full pressure rating at -50F.

Continuing this sample assuming Curve B material: ASME has additional

rules like UG-20(f) that allow higher pressures to be used for some materials
down to -20F service. With UG-20(f) applied, the Material pressure
temperature curve for a Curve-B vessel now looks like:

Just looking at curve B material

The design has been dual rated: 250 psig at down to -20F and 115 psig for
down to -50F. This is recorded according to the rules of UG-116(a(5)
footnote 37 which does not restrict the number of minimum temperature
pressure combinations used. One full calculation set is required for each P-T
combination. Two full calculation sets are required for this vessel: the first is
calculated at a pressure of 250 psig and shows a minimum temperature of
-20F; The second is calculated at 115 psig and shows a minimum
temperature of -20F.

As an alternative to using these curves, it is possible to impact test materials

and welds. See the comment from ABSA at the end of this article. In general
it does not pay to be optimistic about coarse grained materials and welds
passing impact tests prior to seeing the actual test results.

More on SA-212 material:

Source: www.krrao.com, removed from web site

ASTM SA-212-39 (S-55) was put into Section II in the 1940 edition of the
Code. There were two grades in S-55: A and B, each with two different
minimum tensile strength requirements controlled by carbon content.

In 1952 it was required in SA-212 that plates intended for low-temperature

service must meet the impact requirements in SA-300. SA-212 could be
purchased to a fine-grain-melting practice-and subsequently normalized and
tempered-for low temperature service, or purchased to a coarse grain-
melting practice; the single specification permitted the manufacture of both
plate grades. The SA-212 Specification continued up to 1962 as the carbon
steel plate material of choice for low-temperature service for boiler drums
and pressure vessels.

[In the] 1968 edition of Section II the SA-212 Specification was deleted it
was replaced with two specifications. The SA-212 steel plate melted to
coarse-grain practice was replaced with SA-515 (Specification for Pressure
Vessel Plates, Carbon Steel, for Intermediate and Higher Temperature
Service) and the SA-212 steel plate melted to finegrain practice was replaced
with SA-516 (Specification for Pressure Vessel Plates, Carbon Steel, for
Moderate and Lower Temperature Service). These two specifications-along
with SA-299 (Specification for Pressure Vessel Plates, Carbon Steel,
Manganese-Silicon), which has slightly higher room-temperature strength-
were first published in the 1949 Edition of Section II. They continue to be
used today as the carbon steel plate materials of choice for boiler and
pressure-vessel applications.

SA-212 in older vessels being recalculated could be either coarse or fine

grain. Either Curve A or a better curve. Proving that it was built to fine grain
practice and impact tested to SA-300 could be difficult for an old vessel.
Sometimes it is only possible to assume that it was made to Curve A. There
are also some concerns that special care is required for hydrotesting coarse
grained pressure vessels. See TSSA and National Board (search page for SA-
212)

When a used vessel moves to a new location in Canada a new CRN

registration number is usually required. The CRN calculations are based on
the inspected wall thickness. Three possible calculation methods are used: 1)
calculations to be based on current code rules (see note from ABSA below);
2) Calculations based on code rules at time of construction or; 3)
Calculations based on both the time of construction and the current code
rules, the most conservative to be applied. Typically a calculation set to one
of the above methods is prepared to create a submission package and get a
review engineer assigned. At that point the calculation method can be
changed to the assigned reviewers requirements. Also note that some
Canadian reviewers/jurisdictions do not allow vessels to be dual rated. Some
of our customers place reserve bids on used vessels and do not complete the
transactions until the CRN has been obtained. It is important to get this
sorted out before moving the vessel! More info from ABSA:
1.Q2. Is it permissible to bring into and operate a used pressure vessel that
was manufactured of SA-212 Grade B steel? The vessel was not impact
tested when it was manufactured.

1.R2. A used pressure vessel made of SA-212 Grade B steel may be brought
into and registered for operation in provided that its proposed design
conditions meet the intent of the current ASME Pressure Vessel Code. Since
the current Code requires a minimum design metal temperature (MDMT) for
a pressure vessel, such an MDMT must be established for the used vessel
using the current Code methodology. SA-212-B material would be considered
a Curve A material for the purposes of Code paragraph UCS-66. Therefore, a
maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP) that supports the MDMT
without impact testing would have to be established. It is assumed that it is
not feasible to impact test all the shell and head plates and weld joints to
support an MDMT lower than that without impact testing.

Unlisted Materials

File: File:PVE-4245, Last Updated: Aug 20 2014, By: LRB

Background

The Canadian CRN registration system requires that all fittings used on
registered vessels* or included in a registered piping system carry CRNs. To
register the fittings, design validation based either or code calculations, finite
element analysis or proof testing is required.

When a design is based on code listed materials, the code of construction

provides allowable operating stress levels. If the design of the pressure
containing item is simple, the regular code rules can be used and will supply
a pass/fail judgement. If no code rules exist for a complex or unusual shapes,
Finite Element Analysis (FEA) can provide the stresses which can be
compared with the listed allowables for a pass/fail judgement.

An alternate to FEA is to proof test the item at stress levels far above
operating. The items actual and guaranteed minimum tensile strengths are
required for the proof test. The formula used is from VIII-1 UG-101(m):

Where B is the burst test pressure and P the allowed operating pressure. The
burst test has to be at least 4 times the operating pressure. E is the welding
efficiency if the item is welded typically between 0.7 and 1.0. Two more
pieces of information are required Su the specified minimum tensile
strength of the material and Suavg the tensile test results from the item
under test. Typical proof test pressures are 5-6x operating pressure, a
requirement in many cases more conservative than regular code calculations
or FEA.

For code listed materials, all of the required information is available for either
calculations/FEA or for burst testing.

Unlisted Materials

Codes B31.1 and B31.3 are useful for registering fittings because they allow
unlisted materials to be adopted and because they provide fewer restrictive
design rules. Be aware that ABSA has a ruling that requires items that look
like vessels (even slightly) to be registered under VIII-1 where adoption is not
permitted. This requirement was put into writing in 2008. As of 2014 no other
province is in agreement. A significant number of fittings are available
Canada wide but not in Alberta due to this one requirement.

An unlisted material made to a specification can be adopted if the materials

guaranteed minimum yield and tensile strength are available at the
operating temperature. The code adopted strength is based on a formula
using these two inputs resulting in allowable design strength. Or the
minimum tensile strength can be used in the proof test. Using this process,
almost any IID listed material can be adopted for use in B31.1 or B31.3.

This is a typical formula for adopting unlisted material in B31.3. Sy and St are
the materials guaranteed minimum strength. More complex methods are
used at higher temperatures where the materials creep properties need to be
taken into account. Availability of elevated temperature material properties
can severely limit the adoptability of unlisted materials.

Caution: see Unlisted Material Registration Problems below.

Unlisted Materials With No Specified Strength

Many fittings materials are not code listed and have no guaranteed minimum
tensile or yield strength information. Two common examples: SAE1010 is a
carbon steel and B85 A380 is a die cast aluminium. Both are made to
chemical only specifications and both are used in fittings.

To use either of these materials in Canadian registered fittings, the purchaser

has to agree with the mill/foundry what minimum tensile and yield strength
level is acceptable. A specification referenced or written into each material
batch purchase order is required. Chosen strength levels are obviously
important. Set too high and excessive batches will be rejected upon physical
testing. Set to low and the parts will not pass code calculations. Also note
that the ratio between the actual and minimum tensile strength impacts the
required burst test pressure. The lower the minimum specified strength, the
higher the required proof test. A sample purchase order or a copy of the
specification would be required with the CRN application. Caution: see
Unlisted Material Registration Problems below. Setting appropriate
guaranteed minimum stress levels commonly causes confusion, an example
follows.
Example: A manufacturer who is investigating a new unlisted material gets
some pull test results. 4 tensile test results at ambient [ksi] 47, 46, 44, 48. 4
yield stress results [ksi] 25, 26, 23, 28. The results are at ambient only, and
the product will only be used at ambient so elevated temperature testing is
not required. What should the guaranteed minimum yield and tensile be?
Each material batch will be tested, so setting the specified minimum too high
will results in batches being rejected. For example, a specified minimum
tensile of 45 ksi would cause the 3rd specimen to be rejected. Some number
around 40 ksi tensile and 20 ksi yield might be reasonable as is shown in this
graph.

The unknown materials test results after specified minimum tensile and yield
strengths are chosen.

What happens if the guaranteed minimum is set too low? If the product is to
be burst test, from the top equation, the required burst test is increased by
the ratio of Su/Sur, where Su is the specified minimum burst test, and Sur
the test results from the item under test. If samples 1, 2 and 3 are taken
from the test object, Sur = average(47,46,44) = 45.6. If the specified
minimum is 40 ksi, then the burst test ratio is 4 x 45.6/40 or 4.56x. However
if the specified minimum was set way low to 20 ksi, then the ratio would be 4
x 45.6/20 or 9.12x.

If the product will not be used at ambient, then elevated materials properties
are required. For CRN applications, temperatures above 100F are considered
elevated (source unknown). Additional elevated temperature material testing
is required to cover the design conditions.

The manufacturer needs to document the minimum specified properties and

other characteristics of the unlisted material with no specified strength per
B31.3:
B31.3 2010 323.1.2 Unlisted Materials. Unlisted materials may be used
provided they conform to a published specification covering chemistry,
physical and mechanical properties, method and process of manufacture,
heat treatment, and quality control, and otherwise meet the requirements of
this Code. See also ASME BPV Code Section II, Part D, Appendix 5. Allowable
stresses shall be determined in accordance with the applicable allowable
stress basis of this Code or a more conservative basis.

Alberta requires that this document be published on the manufacturers web

site available for unrestricted access.

Caution: Although B31.1.2(C) states Unlisted materials shall be qualified for

service within a stated range of minimum and maximum temperatures based
upon data associated with successful experience, tests, or analysis; or a
combination thereof.Applicants should consider that the use of experience
to register fittings in the CRN system is practically impossible.

Unknown Materials

If all of the above fails, many Canadian reviewers will allow a fitting to be
registered with unknown materials if it can be proof tested to 10x
operating pressure (no tensile strength testing required, no guaranteed
minimum specification provided). This category includes many plastics that
are not covered by the piping codes, glass, ceramics and steels that cannot
be adopted by the above methods.

Clearly 10x operating is a severe test not possible with many products. This
method is reserved for products that are highly overdesigned.

Heat Exchanger FEA with Thermal Loads Sample

File: PVE-3520, Last Updated: June 4, 2013, By: LB

Why use FEA on Heat Exchangers?

FEA Analysis

ASME UHX VIII-1 and 2 rules cover the design of tubesheets, tubes and the
shell next to the tubesheet. The rules cover multiple failure modes and
provide considerable insight into the safety of the complete exchanger
allowing design optimization. But the UHX rules are limited to designs with
uniform hole patterns that cover the complete tubesheet. What if the hole
pattern is not uniform, or in the case of this sample, the holes are not a
uniform size?

Burst testing is an economical way to validate inexpensive products.

However burst testing provides more conservative pressure rating than code
calculations and it may be unreasonable to use to validate costly or large
heat exchangers. Burst testing provides a failure mechanism and a pressure
rating but does not provide deep insight into the safety of the whole object in
areas that did not fail. Burst testing highlights the weakest area, it does not
help optimize the whole design.

Finite Element Analysis (FEA) can be used to obtain the insight into safety as
provided by the UHX code rules but for geometries not calculable by the UHX
rules. The deflection plots provide an in depth understanding of how the
exchanger deforms in response to the thermal and pressure loads. The stress
plots show how well the exchanger can handle the loads and deflections;
information is provided that allows design optimization. As an added bonus,
the FEA provides stress levels for permissible cycle life evaluation.

Using FEA to Replace ASME Code Rules

The ASME code rules must be used if they are applicable. In this sample, the
tubesheet has multiple tube sizes eliminating the possibility of using UHX.
Standard code rules would still apply to all other areas of the exchanger
The scope of the FEA analysis would be tubesheet design, tubesheet to shell
junction and the tube load calculations. Stress limits for the analysis are
obtained from ASME VIII-1 the same as for the rest of the exchanger. The
rules of ASME VIII-2 are used to determine how these limits are applied when
interpreting the stress results.

The UHX rules account for three stresses in the design of an exchanger:

the tubesheet stress caused by pressure and thermal loading

the shell stress next to the tubesheet caused by tubesheet rotation

the tube compression or tension loading caused by tubesheet displacement

and thermal expansion.

The stress limits for FEA are the same as used in UHX analysis. Per UHX rules
these stresses are analyzed for the following seven load cases in fixed tube
exchangers:

Tube side pressure only

Shell side pressure only

Tube + shell side pressure

Thermal loads only

Tube side pressure + thermal loads

Shell side pressure + thermal loads

Tube side pressure + shell side pressure + thermal loads

For a finite element analysis to successfully replace the UHX rules for a fixed
tubesheet exchanger the three stresses need to be studied for the seven
load cases.

Sample Study

The report available at the end of this article provides an in depth analysis of
thermal and pressure stresses on an exchanger. Some illustrations from the
report are shown here. The exchanger is symmetrical at both ends allowing
only half to be modelled and studied.

The tubesheet and part of the shell are solid modelled. The rest of the shell,
the head and tubes are shell modeled. The shell portions are less computer
intensive to analyze, but provide less information especially at connections
and joints. Here shell elements are only used in areas that will not be
studied.

A mesh has been applied to both the solid and shell modelled sections. The
mesh is reduced in size at locations of interest such as the tubesheet, the
tubesheet to tube junction, and the adjacent shell to get more detailed
results. The mesh in other areas does not significantly affect the results and
has been left coarser.

All thermal and pressure loads are applied to the model. Shown below is the
applied pressure load from load case 2 shell side pressure only. In total
seven different cases are run as shown in the report.

Close up of the mesh used in the sample study

Close up of the mesh used in the sample study.

Load case 2 - shell side pressure only

Load case 2 shell side pressure only.

The sample FEA report walks through all seven load cases and checks all
three stresses for each case. Each stress is compared to the ASME allowable
stress to determine pass/fail for each load case. The shots below show the
tube to tube sheet interaction. The tube sheet dishes under load creating a
bending stress in the adjacent shell.

Deformation plot with the displacements magnified 100x.

Deformation plot with the displacements magnified 100x.

Deformation plot with the displacements magnified 100x. The rotation of the
tube sheet with the adjacent shell bending it causes can be seen.

Stress plot with the displacements magnified 100x.

Summary

We have successfully used this FEA method to provide reports justifying heat
exchanger designs reviewed by Authorized Inspectors and review engineers.
FEA can be used to address ASME code rules where calculations cannot be
applied. It is an excellent, and in some cases the only option to validate a
design. It can be cost effective, reduce lead time and expedite registration.

Downloads:

FEA Report

Drawing

2013 Postscript

This report was first written in 2009. The combined shell and solid model was
created to reduce the computing time especially important with the required
seven runs. With the increasing speed of modern computers we usually do
not simplify geometry to shells. The increased modelling effort is no longer
justified in saved run times. We have also developed methods of replacing
the tubes with springs.