See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/270754445

An Approach to Derive Primary Bending Stress From Finite Element Analysis for
Pressure Vessels and Applications in Structural Design

Article  in  Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology · December 2010

DOI: 10.1115/1.4001656

CITATIONS READS

5 945

4 authors, including:

Bingjun Gao Xiao Hui Chen

Hebei University of Technology Northeastern University (China)
20 PUBLICATIONS   146 CITATIONS    28 PUBLICATIONS   121 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Thermal stratification, cycling and striping of Neuclear piping system View project

cyclic plasticity behavior of pressurized pipe View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Xiao Hui Chen on 22 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Bingjun Gao
e-mail: bjgao@hebut.edu.cn
Xiaohui Chen
e-mail: huixiao_chen@126.com
Xiaoping Shi
e-mail: xpshi@hebut.edu.cn
Junhua Dong
e-mail: djh2006@hebut.edu.cn
School of Chemical Engineering and Technology,
Hebei University of Technology,
Tianjin 300130, China
An Approach to Derive Primary
Bending Stress From Finite
Element Analysis for Pressure
Vessels and Applications in
Structural Design
An important issue in engineering application of the “design by analysis” approach in
pressure vessel design is how to decompose an overall stress field obtained by finite
element analysis into different stress categories defined in the ASME B&PV Codes III and
VIII-2. In many pressure vessel structures, it is difficult to obtain PL ⫹ Pb due to the lack
of information about primary bending stress. In this paper, a simple approach to derive
the primary bending stress from the finite element analysis was proposed with application
examples and verifications. According to the relationship of the bending stress and ap-
plied loads or the relationship of the bending stress and displacement agreement, it is
possible to identify loads causing primary bending stress for typical pressure vessel
structures. By applying the load inducing primary bending stress alone and necessary
superposition, the primary bending stress and corresponding stress intensity PL ⫹ Pb can
be determined for vessel design, especially for axisymmetric problems.
关DOI: 10.1115/1.4001656兴

Keywords: pressure vessel, design by analysis, primary bending stress, FEM analysis,
stress classification

1 Introduction
An important issue in engineering application of the “design by
analysis” approach in pressure vessel design is how to decompose
an overall stress field obtained from finite element analysis 共FEA兲
into different stress categories defined in the ASME B&PV Code
III and VIII-2. A typical and widely used method is based on the
concept of equivalent linearization of a calculated stress field in a
considered structure along several stress classification lines
共SCLs兲 specified by the user. The concept of “equivalent linear-
ized stress” was initiated by the ASME B&PV Code III and first
applied in 2D finite element analysis by Kroenke et al. 关1–3兴. Lu
and co-workers 关4,5兴 extended the equivalent linearized stress ap-
proach by decomposing finite element stress based on the concept
of “primary structures.” The so called primary structure refers to
the reduced structure with unfavorable redundant constraints re-
moved. The favorable redundant constraints are remained to bear
the external imposing load together with the essential constraints
for a more reasonable structure. However, it is inconvenient to
construct the primary structure by removing the unfavorable con-
straints in the finite element analysis, and it needs a different
analysis model to achieve this target.
In literature, some alternative methods of stress classification
were proposed to determine the primary stress and these include
the reduced modulus method 关6兴, elastic compensation method
关7兴, and GLOSS R-node method 关8兴. These methods are based on
pseudo-plastic analysis in which the modulus must be modified in
every iteration to redistribute the stress and strain field. The elastic
compensation and GLOSS R-node methods, which developed
from the reduced modulus method, were also used for limit load
Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication
in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received September 24,
2009; final manuscript received March 29, 2010; published online October 15, 2010.
Assoc. Editor: William J. Koves.
analysis. The limit load analysis and elastic-plastic stress analysis
are recommended by the ASME B&PV Code VIII-2 共2007兲 关9兴
for pressure vessel design by analysis when the stress categoriza-
tion process may produce ambiguous results, especially for com-
ponents with a complex geometry and/or complex loading. How-
ever, the industry often prefers stress classification when it is
robust.
In this paper, a convenient method to decompose the overall
stress field to derive the primary bending stress is proposed based
on the principle of superposition. The proposed method also al-
lows us to obtain the primary membrane plus primary bending
equivalent stress 共PL + Pb兲, which was often mixed with secondary
bending stress leading to overconservation. From validation in
different structural pressure vessels, this method is generalized for
applications in a wide range of structures such as flange, nozzle at
the small end of the conical shell, and nozzle of the spherical
shell. The concept was initially reported in Ref. 关10兴 and was used
only in a simple structure of a cylinder with circular flat head.
2 Procedure to Derive the Primary Bending Stress by
the Principle of Superposition
In many pressure vessels, the primary bending stress is induced
by loads such as internal pressure, as observed in the circular flat
head. This kind of load can be used as an input parameter in FEA
to calculate the primary bending stress in different structural ele-
ments in a pressure vessel. Then the calculated primary bending
stress may be superposed with the membrane stress when all loads
are applied to the structure, which are added as the stress intensity
PL + Pb. However, in more complicated structural elements in a
pressure vessel, identification of the primary bending stress is not
obvious, and thus, it needs more rigorous procedures to determine.
These procedures for determination of the primary bending stress
are described as follows.

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology Copyright © 2010 by ASME DECEMBER 2010, Vol. 132 / 061101-1

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 • Step 1: Based on FEA results, set SCLs in proper positions On the other hand, the ASME B&PV Code VIII-2 共2004兲 Ap-
and directions of the FEA model of the structure. In doing pendix 4–136.3 states that the limits on the general primary mem-
this, FEA stress contour with all loads applied on the struc- brane stress intensity, local primary membrane stress intensity,
ture can be used to set the SCLs when no precedent ex- and primary membrane plus primary bending stress intensity need
amples can be found for the identical structure and loads. not be satisfied at a specific location if the specified loadings do
• Step 2: Identify loads which cause the primary bending not exceed two-thirds of the collapse load Plim. If this is applied,
stress and calculate the stress field only under the identified the allowable load, corresponding to the limit load requirement, is
load, process the equivalent linearization on the set SCLs,
and determine all of the bending stress components. This is 2
关P兴l = Plim 共11兲
the essential step of the proposed method and the primary 3
bending stress in concerned SCLs will be used later for By comparing the allowable load determined by the proposed
stress superposition in Step 4. stress classification method 共Eq. 共10兲兲 and the limit load analysis
• Step 3: Calculate the overall stress field when all loads are 共Eq. 共11兲兲, the agreement between these two methods can be ex-
applied on the structure, process the equivalent linearization amined, and the proposed method be verified. In this paper, the
on the set SCLs, and determine all of the membrane stress limit load is determined by plastic analysis with the effect of
components. nonlinear geometry in consideration, in which the EPP material
• Step 4: Superpose the components of bending stress in Step model and twice elastic slope method were employed, which can
2 and membrane stress in Step 3, and then determine the be used for design purposes, especially in the case of materials
principal stresses and stress intensities for PL + Pb. Take the with long yielding plateau.
membrane stress intensities on every SCLs in Step 3 as
general membrane stress intensities Pm or local membrane 4 Application and Verification of the Proposed
stress intensities PL. Add the membrane stresses and the
bending stresses in Step 3, which are the stress intensities of Method
PL + Pb + Q. The proposed method has been applied to a number of struc-
tures in pressure vessels, including cylinder with a flat head,
nozzle of the small end of the conical shell, and nozzle of the
spherical shell and flange, as illustrated in Fig. 1. Material prop-
3 Bases for Verification of the Proposed Method erties are the same for all of these structures: E = 2 ⫻ 105 MPa;
In the verification, the maximum allowable load is determined ␯ = 0.3; Sy = 235 MPa; allowable stress 共S兲 is two-thirds of the
from various design criteria, as set in design by analysis in the yield stress, namely, 156.7 MPa.
ASME B&PV Code VIII-2 共2004兲 关11兴. Then this maximum al-
lowable load is compared with that from a more sophisticated 4.1 Identifying Loads Causing Primary Bending Stress. As
analysis using an elastic-perfectly plastic 共EPP兲 material model. the essential step of the proposed method, identifying loads,
The validation was conducted in a number of structural elements which cause primary bending stress, will be discussed in details
in pressure vessels. According to the stress categories, the design for the above mentioned structures.
criteria for different stress intensities are For the cylinder with a circular flat head 共Fig. 1共a兲兲, it is obvi-
ous that the bending stress in the flat head is the primary bending
Pm ⱕ S 共1兲 stress induced by the internal pressure on the inner surface of the
head. However, it is not so obvious on the classification of the
PL ⱕ 1.5S 共2兲 bending stress at the connection part between the flat head and the
cylinder. Further analysis reveals that it is reasonable to classify it
PL + Pb ⱕ 1.5S 共3兲 as the primary bending stress because such bending is induced
directly by the internal pressure applied on the head. In fact, the
PL + Pb + Q ⱕ 3S 共4兲 cylinder acts just as the support of the flat head when internal
For structural elements in the pressure vessel, the stress intensities pressure is applied only on the head. The bending stress would
are in proportion to internal pressure within the elasticity range. increase without self-limitation with this part of internal pressure.
Therefore, the maximum allowable load may be deduced from Eq. Therefore, the internal pressure on the flat head should be re-
共1兲 garded as the load inducing the primary bending stress. On the
other hand, the bending stress induced by the pressure on the
I
P:Pmax = Pm:S 共5兲 cylinder is induced due to the displacement agreement require-
Namely ment between the cylinder and the head, and should be classified
as the secondary bending stress. The load superposing scheme is
PS also illustrated in Fig. 1共a兲. Although the cylinder bending stress
I
Pmax = 共6兲
Pm at the connection is secondary if the head can take the pressure as
Similarly, the maximum allowable load may also be deduced from a pinned end structure; most of these kind of structure are between
Eqs. 共2兲–共4兲 as follows: pinned and fixed. Without identification, the cylinder bending
stress would be either classified into primary or secondary stress.
1.5PS It is perhaps reasonable for the pinned end structure, but unrea-
II
Pmax = 共7兲 sonable for both fixed end structure and end structures between
PL
pinned and fixed, because the cylinder bending stresses at the
1.5PS connection include both primary and secondary bending stress. So
III
Pmax = 共8兲 the proposed method is recommended, although it would be con-
PL + Pb
servative for pinned end structures, where the proposed method is
unnecessary.
3PS
IV
Pmax = 共9兲 For both the nozzle of the small end of the conical head 共Fig.
PL + Pb + Q 1共b兲兲 and the nozzle of the spherical shell 共Fig. 1共c兲兲, the thrust
From the above analysis, the maximum allowable load based on a load, the force at the end surface of the nozzle due to internal
SCL may be expressed as follows: pressure, would produce bending stress at the connecting region
of the nozzle and shell. Because the bending stress would increase
关P兴 = min兵Pmax
I II
, Pmax III
, Pmax IV
, Pmax 其 共10兲 with the thrust load without self-limitation, the thrust load should

061101-2 / Vol. 132, DECEMBER 2010 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 Fig. 1 Load decomposing of typical pressure vessel component: „a… cylinder with flat
head; „b… nozzle of the small end of conical head; „c… nozzle of spherical shell; „d… connec-
tion of flange and cylinder

be identified as the load causing the primary bending stress. While tures, because the allowable loads determined by stresses other
the bending stress in the connecting region induced by the internal than that of the highest stress position are higher within the stud-
pressure without the thrust load should be classified as the sec- ied configuration parameters.
ondary bending stress, because the bending stress is the result of
displacement agreement requirement between the nozzle and the 4.2.1 Nozzle of the Small End of the Conical Head. The
shell. The load superposing scheme is also illustrated in Figs. 1共b兲 nozzle region in the small side of the conical shell is analyzed, as
and 1共c兲. sketched in Fig. 2, in which, the cone half apex angle ␣ is taken as
For the connection of the flange and the cylinder 共Fig. 1共d兲兲, the a variable for verification in a range from 40 deg to 60 deg.
bolt force together with the gasket force and the internal pressure Internal pressure 共P兲 is taken as 1 MPa and the thrust load 共Pn兲
acting on the torus of the seal surface inside the gasket will induce due to pressure is determined by
bending stress, which would increase with the mentioned loads
P
without self-limitation. Therefore, these loads should be identified Pn = = 8.09 共MPa兲 共12兲
as the loads causing the primary bending stress. The internal pres- K2 − 1
sure acting on the inner surfaces of the cylinder and the flange Based on the FEA results shown in Fig. 3共a兲, with all loads
induce the secondary bending stress at the connecting region for applied, the maximum stress intensity occurs at the transition re-
the same reason of displacement agreement. The load superposing gion of the connection. So the stress classification line is set and
scheme is illustrated in Fig. 1共d兲. also sketched in Fig. 3共a兲. With the aforementioned plastic analy-
In fact, the identification of load causing primary bending stress sis method, the limit pressure was determined according to the
may work in two ways, namely, direct method and indirect datum of the point with maximum plastic strain intensity 共Fig.
method. The direct method is to judge whether the load causes the 3共b兲兲. The determination of the limit pressure is illustrated in Fig.
bending stresses without self-limitation or not. If it is the case, the 3共c兲, in which the limit pressure is corresponding to the intersec-
load should be identified as the load causing the primary bending tion of the load strain curve and its twice elastic slope line. The
stress. The indirect way is to judge whether the load causes the stress classification and verification results are listed in Table 1.
bending stresses directly accompanied by displacement agreement
requirement or not. If it is the case, the loads, except for the load
examined, should be identified as the load causing the primary
bending stress. What should be mentioned is that the load causing
primary bending stress may be a part of a load on a specific
position of the structure such as the nozzle end surface force.
4.2 Stress Analysis, Stress Classification, and Verification.
As discussed in Sec. 4.1, the above structures are analyzed using
the proposed method, and the stresses are then classified into dif-
ferent categories for the application of corresponding design cri-
teria. Because only loads applied in the FEA model are different
for steps 2 and 3, it can be easily done with two load cases in
ANSYS, and works such as superposition of stress components and
stress intensities calculation can be readily done with ANSYS pro-
grammable design language 共APDL兲.
As the result of the cylinder with flat head was detailed in Ref.
关10兴, only the results of the other three structures are given out as
follows. Although it is necessary to assess stresses at different
locations, as discussed in Ref. 关10兴, only the highest stress point
are used to determine the allowable loads for the other three struc- Fig. 2 Geometry of nozzle at small end of conical shell

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology DECEMBER 2010, Vol. 132 / 061101-3

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 Fig. 3 FEA results of nozzle at small end of conical shell with ␣ = 45 deg: „a… stress intensity contour; „b… strain intensity
contour before collapse; „c… determination of limit pressure

In this example, if Pb is not separated and PL + Pb is not worked
out, the allowable load would be determined actually by PL,
which would be nearly 18% higher than that determined by plastic
analysis. In WRC Bulletin 521 关12兴, the discontinuity stress de-
veloped at the cylindrical-to-conical shell junction was computed
using parametric equations or by applying the pressure-area
method, which are in good agreement with FEA results. However,
form the viewpoint of stress classification according to WRC Bul-
letin 521, the bending stress by the thrust load due to pressure is
taken as secondary stress. It is discussible form the viewpoint of
the proposed method.
4.2.2 Nozzle of Spherical Shell. The geometry of the intersec-
tion region of the nozzle and the spherical shell is sketched in Fig.
4. Two nozzle thicknesses, 4 mm and 8 mm, were analyzed for the
nozzle structure. At the same internal pressure 共1.0 MPa兲 as for
the nozzle of conical head, the thrust load 共Pn兲 is 6.01 MPa for
the nozzle with thickness of 4 mm; 2.65 MPa for the nozzle with
thickness of 8mm. The FEA results with all loads applied for the
nozzle of 4 mm thick are shown in Fig. 5, in which the maximum
stress is found to be at the outside corner of the connection. The
limit pressure was determined according to the datum of the point
with maximum plastic strain intensity 共Fig. 5共b兲兲. The determina-
tion of the limit pressure is illustrated in Fig. 5共c兲. The SCLs are
set as sketched in Fig. 6 for consideration of other thickness pa-
rameters in which SCL, other than SCL1, would be the controlling
SCL. The stress classification and verification results are listed in
Table 2. In this example, if Pb is not separated and PL + Pb is not
worked out, the allowable load would be determined actually by
PL, which would be nearly 15–35% higher than that determined
by plastic analysis.
4.2.3 Connection of Flange and Cylinder. The geometry of
the connecting region of flange and cylinder is sketched in Fig. 7.
The center diameter of the gasket load DG = 1037.6 mm, the ef-
fective gasket sealing width b = 8.2 mm, and the gasket factor m
= 2.0. There are 40 bolts uniformly distributed in the center circle
of the bolt holes. The diameter of the bolt hole 共d兲 is 23 mm.

Table 1 Stress classification and verification results

PL + Pb PL + Pb + Q
共MPa兲 共MPa兲
␣ PL PIImax PIIImax PIVmax 关P兴 关P兴l Error
共deg兲 共MPa兲 Inside Outside Inside Outside 共MPa兲 共MPa兲 共MPa兲 共MPa兲 共MPa兲 共%兲

40 38.84 45.2 45.6 45.4 43.6 6.05 5.16 10.36 5.16 5.16 ⫺0.08
45 43.20 51.1 50.8 51.2 48.4 5.44 4.60 9.19 4.60 4.61 ⫺0.06
50 48.47 57.8 56.9 57.9 54.0 4.85 4.06 8.12 4.06 4.12 ⫺1.39
55 55.44 65.1 65.2 66.2 61.9 4.24 3.60 7.10 3.60 3.61 ⫺0.12
60 64.33 75.6 75.5 77.2 71.2 3.65 3.11 6.09 3.11 3.09 0.54

061101-4 / Vol. 132, DECEMBER 2010 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 Fig. 6 Stress classification lines for structure of Fig. 4

Fig. 4 Geometry of intersection region of nozzle and spherical

shell ␲ 2
D P + 2␲DGbmP
4 G
Pbolt = = 12 共MPa兲 共14兲
Although the structure is not strictly axisymmetric for its bolt ␲Bd
holes, it may be treated as an axisymmetric one with an equivalent The gasket sealing pressure
elastic modulus for the ring representing the part with bolt holes.
The equivalent elastic modulus in the axial and radial direction 2␲DGbmP
of the ring can be determined as follows 关13兴: PS = = 2mP = 4 共MPa兲 共15兲
␲ D Gb
␲ In the FEA stress calculation, two thicknesses of 12 mm and 16
␲Bd − n d2
4 mm for the cylinder were used. The stress and strain intensity
Ez = Er = ⫻E 共13兲 contours for the 12 mm thickness are shown in Fig. 8共a兲. It reveals
␲Bd
that the maximum stress is at the connecting region of the flange
In the FEA, the internal pressure 共P兲 is 1 MPa and the equivalent and cylinder, and thus, the stress classification line is set there, as
pressure on the torus of the bolt hole can be calculated by sketched in Fig. 8共a兲. The limit pressure was determined accord-

Fig. 5 FEA results in connection region of a nozzle and spherical head with nozzle thickness of 4 mm: „a… stress intensity
contour; „b… strain intensity contour before collapse; „c… determination of limit pressure

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology DECEMBER 2010, Vol. 132 / 061101-5

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 Table 2 Stress classification and verification results

PL + Pb PL + Pb + Q
共MPa兲 共MPa兲
Nozzle thickness PL PIImax PIIImax PIVmax 关P兴 关P兴l Error
共mm兲 SCL 共MPa兲 Inside Outside Inside Outside 共MPa兲 共MPa兲 共MPa兲 共MPa兲 共MPa兲 共%兲

4 1 67.87 94.7 40.2 101.6 46.0 3.46 2.48 4.63 2.48 2.56 ⫺3.12
2 55.87 59.3 52.8 63.9 48.4
3 55.02 72.7 47.1 89.9 53.8
8 1 46.16 55.5 35.7 55.4 52.9 5.09 4.23 7.17 4.23 4.43 ⫺4.51
2 46.12 50.5 41.6 65.6 28.9
3 40.52 41.6 32.9 51.5 22.6

ing to the datum of the point with maximum plastic strain inten-
sity 共Fig. 8共b兲兲. The determination of the limit pressure is illus-
trated in Fig. 8共c兲. The stress classification and verification results
are listed in Table 3. If all bending stresses are treated as primary
bending stress, namely, taken PL + Pb + Q as PL + Pb, the allowable
loads would be more conservative than that determined by the
proposed method. If all the bending stresses are treated as second-
ary bending stress, the allowable load would be determined actu-
ally by PL + Pb + Q, which would make the allowable load nearly
88% higher than that determined by plastic analysis.
What should be mentioned is that the above treatment is only a
suggestion for the design of the flange when calculating the pri-
mary stress, but far from the design of the flange, in which all load
conditions must be considered. In the above example, only the
loads proportional to pressure and required by the seal in operat-
ing condition are considered. It is a condition to resist the leakage
Fig. 7 Geometry of the connecting region of flange and
and the pressure, in which the initial bolt load, the gasket load,
cylinder

Fig. 8 FEA results for the connecting region of flange and cylinder with cylinder thickness of 12 mm: „a… stress intensity
contour; „b… strain intensity contour before collapse; „c… determination of limit pressure

061101-6 / Vol. 132, DECEMBER 2010 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 Table 3 Stress classification and verification results

PL + Pb PL + Pb + Q
共MPa兲 共MPa兲
Cylinder thickness PL PIImax PIIImax PIVmax 关P兴 关P兴l Error
共mm兲 共MPa兲 Inside Outside Inside Outside 共MPa兲 共MPa兲 共MPa兲 共MPa兲 共MPa兲 共%兲

12 73.51 167.1 164.5 171.7 169.9 3.20 1.41 2.74 1.41 1.45 ⫺3.24
16 50.80 109.4 115.3 114.3 121.4 4.63 2.04 3.87 2.04 2.08 ⫺2.03

and the reaction of the gasket and bolt when the pressure in-
creased are not in consideration. Only loads contributed to pri-
mary stress are applied.
5 Discussion
The results of the application and verification in various struc-
tures of the pressure vessel have shown that the allowable loads
determined by the proposed stress classification method are close
to those determined by plastic analysis with the EPP model and
twice elastic slope method. What should be mentioned is that
stress intensity is used in the ASME B&PV Code VIII-2 共2004兲,
and the Von Misses stress is used in the ASME B&PV Code
VIII-2 共2007兲. In this paper, the Von Misses stresses were also
used for stress classification and allowable load determination ac-
cording to the ASME B&PV Code VIII-2 共2007兲. It is found that
there is no substantial difference between the allowable load de-
termined by plastic analysis with stress intensity and that with the
Von Misses stress if the same limit load criteria are applied. How-
ever, the limit load was permitted to be determined in plastic
analysis with the twice elastic slope method in the ASME B&PV
Code VIII-2 共2004兲, which is conservative than that determined
by the maximum load corresponding to the converging solution
according to the ASME B&PV Code VIII-2 共2007兲. On the other
hand, the allowable loads are different between that determined by
stress classification according to the ASME B&PV Code VIII-2
共2004兲 and that according to the ASME B&PV Code VIII-2
共2007兲. The results are compared in Table 4. Generally, the allow-
able loads according to the ASME B&PV Code VIII-2 共2007兲
with the proposed method are higher than that according to the
ASME B&PV Code VIII-2 共2004兲. This is partly due to the use of
the Von Misses stress in the ASME B&PV Code VIII-2 共2007兲,
while stress intensity is used in the ASME B&PV Code VIII-2
共2004兲. Another reason is the special consideration of shear stress
in the ASME B&PV Code VIII-2 共2007兲, which may give a higher
allowable load.
In the current paper, it is early to say that the proposed method
works very well according to the ASME B&PV Code VIII-2
共2007兲, because the allowable loads determined by the proposed
method is a little higher than that determined by plastic analysis
for the nozzle of the small end of the conical shell, but much
lower for the other two structures. However, considering that the
EPP material model generally gives conservative results than
other real material plastic models in plastic analysis, we are con-
fident that the proposed method can be safely applied with the
ASME B&PV Code VIII-2 共2007兲 in the structures examined. On
the other hand, It is discussible to determine the limit load directly
by the load corresponding to divergence in plastic analysis of
every configuration, because the divergence loads of the last two
structures correspond to plastic strain of nearly 30% 共not fully
shown in Figs. 5共c兲 and 8共c兲兲, which is too large to be accepted in
engineering design. So, further study is needed.
Finally, it should be pointed out that, from the current paper, the
proposed method is more suitable for application in the axis-
symmetry structures. However, we would not recommend using
this method in complex structures as the stress categorization is
not suitable. These structures include the connecting region of the
nozzle to the cylinder, where SCLs lack sound physical meaning,
and where application of SCPs 关14兴 共stress classification planes兲
can be too complicated. In these structures, although the primary
bending stress may be identified without difficulties, the validity
of the stress categorization itself causes problems. In such cases,
limit load analysis and elastic-plastic analysis is preferred.
6 Conclusion
The proposed method to derive the primary bending stress is
based on the principle of superposition. In the FEA model, the
constraints are consistent when every part of the load is applied.
With small displacement, the total stress field can be obtained by
superposing the stresses determined separately, and the stress
characters due to every part of the load can be discussed sepa-
rately. By a detailed analysis of the load and structure, it is not
difficult to see that some parts of the load are directly related to
secondary stress, and others to primary stress. As long as the
identification of loads causing primary bending stress or second-
ary stress works, the proposed method should work.
For many structures in pressure vessels, it is possible to identify
loads causing primary bending stress according to the relationship
of the bending stress and applied loads, or the relationship of
bending stress and displacement agreement. Generally, if the load
induces bending stress without self-limitation, it should be identi-
fied as loads causing primary bending stress; however, if the load
induces bending stress with self-limitation and accompanied with

Table 4 Comparison of allowable loads „MPa…

Allowable load by stress classification

of ASME B&PV Code VIII-2 Allowable load Allowable load by plastic analysis
by plastic analysis 共maximum load corresponding
Structure 2004 2007 共twice slope method兲 to converging solution兲

Nozzle of conical
shell 共␣ = 40 deg兲 5.16 5.77 5.16 5.41
Nozzle of conical shell 共␣ = 45 deg兲 4.60 5.13 4.61 4.75
Nozzle of conical shell 共␣ = 50 deg兲 4.06 4.77 4.12 4.17
Nozzle of conical shell 共␣ = 55 deg兲 3.60 4.02 3.61 3.65
Nozzle of conical shell 共␣ = 60 deg兲 3.11 3.46 3.09 3.10
Nozzle of spherical shell 共nozzle thickness 4 mm兲 2.48 2.65 2.56 5.6
Nozzle of spherical shell 共nozzle thickness 8 mm兲 4.23 5.02 4.43 5.9
Flange with cylinder of thickness 12 mm 1.41 1.48 1.45 3.84
Flange with cylinder of thickness 16 mm 2.04 2.29 2.08 5.1

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology DECEMBER 2010, Vol. 132 / 061101-7

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 displacement agreement, it is not the load causing the primary ␣ ⫽ cone half apex angle
bending stress. The load causing the primary bending stress may ␯ ⫽ Poisson’s ratio
be a part of the load on a specific position of the structure such as Sy ⫽ yield stress
the force at the nozzle end surface due to internal pressure.
For a wide range of axisymmetric problems in the pressure
vessel, the primary bending stress and corresponding stress inten- References
sity PL + Pb can be determined for vessel design by applying the 关1兴 Kroenke, W. C., 1974, Classification of Finite Element Stresses According to
ASME Section III Stress Categories, SAE, Miami Beach, FL/American Society
load inducing the primary bending stress alone and necessary su- of Mechanical Engineers, New York, pp. 107–140.
perposition. This will provide a reasonable alternative for the de- 关2兴 Kroenke, W. C., Addicott, G. W., and Hinton, B. M., 1975, “Interpretation of
sign of such pressure vessel component. Finite Element Stresses According to ASME Section III,” ASME Paper No.
Although the verification is done with the ASME B&PV Code 75-PVP-63.
关3兴 Kroenke, W. C., Hechmer, J. L., and Hollinger, G. L., 1985, “Component
VIII-2 共2004兲, the proposed method is also possible to be applied Evaluation Using the Finite Element Method,” Pressure Vessel and Piping
with the ASME B&PV Code VIII-2 共2007兲, but further studies are Technology—1985: A Decade of Progress, C. Sundararajan, ed., American
needed. Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, pp. 145–160.
关4兴 Lu, M. W., and Li, J. G., 1996, “Primary Structure—An Important Concept to
Distinguish Primary Stresses,” PVP 共Am. Soc. Mech. Eng.兲, 340, pp. 357–
Nomenclature 363.
B ⫽ diameter of the center circle of the bolt holes 关5兴 Lu, M. W., Chen, Y., and Li, J. G., 2000, “Two-Step Approach of Stress
Classification and Primary Structure Method,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Tech-
b ⫽ effective gasket sealing width nol., 122, pp. 2–8.
d ⫽ diameter of the bolt hole 关6兴 Dhalla, A. K., 1984, “Verification of an Elastic Procedure to Estimate Follow-
DG ⫽ center diameter of the gasket load Up,” PVP 共Am. Soc. Mech. Eng.兲, 86, pp. 81–96.
关7兴 Mackenzie, D., and Boyle, J. T., 1994, “Computational Procedure for Calcu-
E ⫽ elastic modulus lating Primary Stress for the ASME B&PV Code,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel
Ez , Er ⫽ effective elastic modulus Technol., 116, pp. 339–344.
K ⫽ ratio of nozzle outside diameter to inside 关8兴 Seshadri, R., and Fernando, C. P. D., 1991, “Limit Loads of Mechanical Com-
diameter ponents and Structures Using the GLOSS R-Node Method,” PVP 共Am. Soc.
Mech. Eng.兲, 210–212, pp. 125–134.
m ⫽ the gasket factor 关9兴 The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, ASME, 2007, Boiler and
n ⫽ bolt number Pressure Vessel Code: Section VIII, Division 2, American Society of Mechani-
P ⫽ internal pressure cal Engineers, NewYork.
关10兴 Gao, B. J., Shi, X. P., Liu, H. Y., and Li, J. H., 2007, “Separation of Primary
Pm ⫽ general primary membrane stress Stress in Finite Element Analysis of Pressure Vessel With the Principle of
PL ⫽ local primary membrane stress Superposition,” Key Eng. Mater., 353–358, pp. 373–376.
Pb ⫽ primary bending stress 关11兴 The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, ASME, 2004, Boiler and
Pbolt ⫽ equivalent pressure on the torus of bolt hole Pressure Vessel Code: Section VIII, Division 2, American Society of Mechani-
cal Engineers, New York.
Ps ⫽ gasket sealing pressure 关12兴 Sowinski, J. C., Cao, Z., Osage, D. A., Carr, N. A., and Brubaker, J. E., 2009,
Plim ⫽ limit pressure of the vessel component Development of Design Rules for Conical Transition in Pressure Vessels for
Pmax ⫽ maximum allowable pressure the ASME B&PV Code, Section VIII, Division 2, WRC Bulletin 521.
关13兴 Ding, B. M., 1995, Analysis of ASME B B&PV Code VIII-1 and VIII-2, Hua-
Q ⫽ secondary stress dong University of Science and Technology, Shanghai, p. 369.
S ⫽ allowable stress based on the material of con- 关14兴 Hechmer, J. L., and Hollinger, G. L., 1991, “The ASME Code and 3-D Stress
struction and design temperature Evaluation,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 113, pp. 481–487.

061101-8 / Vol. 132, DECEMBER 2010 Transactions of the ASME

DownloadedViewFrom:
publicationhttp://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/
stats on 03/03/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms