Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Engineering
News
VOLUME 34
JULY 2003
CodeCalc version 6.5 (also included in PVElite version 5.0) was released in
January 2003 and has many new features. Some of the new capabilities are
listed below:
Enhancements in the TEMA Tubesheet module in CodeCalc 6.5
In this version, the tubesheet module and the thick (flanged and flued)
expansion joint modules were integrated. The tubesheet module contains the
input for the expansion joint. This makes analyzing a fixed tubesheet with an
expansion joint, quicker and easier. As the manual data transfer is eliminated,
the chances of error are also reduced. See the article Integration of Tubesheet
and Expansion Joint also in this newsletter.
> continued on p.2
IN THIS ISSUE:
Whats New at COADE
CADWorx
Equipment
Problems Exporting
to Word
API-579
Program Specifications
CADWorx 2004
July 2003
Added WRC 107 Auto-calc on support lug
An option was added in the support lug dialog to perform WRC-107
calculations without leaving the Leg Lug module. See the dialog in
the figure below.
In the shell, nozzle and flange modules input errors (if any) are now
displayed on the screen at the time of input. Here is an example:
July 2003
A few of the new features in PVElite version 5.0 are:
July 2003
Vessel in CADWorx/Equipment
July 2003
There are two groups of tests. The first set of tests used a
Performance Test program from the HOOPS vendor. The tests
performed here consisted of drawing simple shapes and text, over
and over again, in various positions. These tests indicate that the
better your graphics board, especially the more graphics memory
available, the better the performance.
The second set of tests consisted of plotting a number of
CAESAR II jobs on the test machines. The results of these tests
show the expected interaction between the CPU and graphics
board. For example, the dual 700 Mhz with 8 Mbyte graphics
card performed better than all but one of the machines with a
single processor and 8 times the graphics memory! These tests
indicate that in addition to a good graphics board, you also need
either a very fast single CPU, or dual CPUs of medium speed.
To illustrate the performance improvement made between different
versions of HOOPS, in the CAESAR II tests, a number of the
results are shown in blue, and are noted as Ver 8.12. These
results were obtained with the graphics released for CAESAR II
Version 4.40 Build 030403, using the 8.12 version of the HOOPS
library. (Previous builds of CAESAR II Version 4.40 used the
8.00 version of the HOOPS library.) Depending on the job, the
speed improved by a factor of from 4 to 30. This improvement can
be attributed to 8.12 version of HOOPS, which now draws more
primitives directly using the hardware, instead of COADE drawing
them in software.
In addition, most video cards now have OpenGL built-in, which
allows HOOPS to push the rendering all the way down to the
hardware, where before, most of the drawing had to be done with
the CPU. Video cards with a lot of memory have big z-buffers,
plus good optimization, which helps them avoid drawing things
that will be obscured by objects on top. While the HOOPS
library and COADE software can improve and optimize, the best
performance can be obtained only by also utilizing fast hardware.
This is one of the key concepts to grasp. By default, HOOPS
utilizes the OPENGL capabilities of your system. Utilizing graphics
cards with good OPENGL acceleration will improve the overall
performance of the applications.
(CAESAR II users note that Version 4.50 will provide even faster
performance. The model may be manipulated while it is being
drawn.)
July 2003
Dual 700,
Dual 300 Mhz,
Machine Description 512Mbytes Ram 512Mbyte Ram
1Ghz,
512Mbyte Ram
Windows 2000
Windows 2000
Windows XP
Windows XP
Windows 2000
AccelStar II,
8Mbytes, AGP
Winfast A170,
64Mbytes, AGP
Nvidia GeForce2
Mx400, 64Mbytes,
AGP
Nvidia GeForce4
Radeon 9000 IF
MX 440, 64Mbytes, Pro, 128Mbytes,
AGP
AGP
33,865
30,059
1,164,189
114,472
227,625
1,308,552
4) 3D markers/sec
40,355
49,556
1,717,821
222,819
226,387
1,460,214
7) 3D polygons/sec
17,338
15,039
554,454
143,572
215,665
802,499
8) 3D edgeless polygons/sec
9) 3D lit edgeless
polygons/sec
26,905
26,765
934,892
215,138
413,939
1,265,078
79,421
24,585
807,252
216,095
414,924
1,119,365
2,662
3,364
17,000
18,832
27,546
32,869
875
981
46,531
3,895
7,732
44,263
863
879
37,923
3,894
7,732
41,039
819
826
36,428
3,893
7,771
39,117
Plot Time
Plot Time
Plot Time
Plot Time
Plot Time
July 2003
For those who want to edit their registry and remove this key,
perform these steps.
1.
2.
3.
Scroll down the list until you see {00020906-0000-0000C000-000000000046} and expand it. There are several keys
that look alike, or differ by only one number, so make sure
that the one you choose matches exactly. This is the secret
code used by Microsoft to determine when and how Windows
will start MSWord.
4.
July 2003
5.
Close REGEDIT.
6.
July 2003
Tubes tab:
Input on the tubes tab was reorganized for consistency. Check the
box Tube to Tubesheet Joint information, to enter information
about the Tube-Tubesheet joint. CodeCalc will use this information
to check tube to tubesheet welds, and in the case of fixed tubesheets,
compute the allowable tube to tubesheet joint load.
Option to specify
design code
July 2003
Tubesheet Tab:
This button merges the flange, gasket and bolting input from an
existing flange, into this tubesheet input.
2.
3.
Next the program extracts the prime pressures (Ps, Pt, Pd)
from the output of the tubesheet calculation and uses those
values to compute the expansion joint stresses.
4.
Results of all the runs are summarized in tabular format like the one
below:
Fixed Tubesheet Required Thickness per TEMA 8th Edition:
The above screen becomes active only in the case of fixed tubesheet
exchangers. The expansion joint can be either a thin (bellows type)
or thick (flanged/flued type) or there can be no joint at all.
For a thin expansion joint, only the axial spring rate needs to be
specified.
For a thick expansion joint, either the spring rate needs to be
specified (Design option set to Existing) or analyze the expansion
joint geometry and allow CodeCalc to compute the spring rate and
expansion joint stresses (Design option set to Analyze).
10
Reqd. Thk. + CA
P r e s s u r e s
Case
Pass/
Case# Tbsht
Extnsn
Pt
Ps
PDif
Type
Fail
1uc
1.471
0.000
71.07
0.00
0.00
Fvs+Pt-Th-Ca
Ok
2uc
0.750
0.000
0.00
2.39
0.00
Ps+Fvt-Th-Ca
Ok
3uc
1.471
0.000
71.07
2.74
0.00
Ps+Pt-Th-Ca
Ok
4uc
0.757
0.000
0.00
0.00
-37.66 Fvs+Fvt+Th-Ca
Ok
5uc
1.471
0.000
71.04
0.00
-39.07
Fvs+Pt+Th-Ca
Ok
6uc
0.784
0.000
0.00
2.65
-37.75
Ps+Fvt+Th-Ca
Ok
7uc
1.471
0.000
71.04
2.74
-39.07
Ps+Pt+Th-Ca
Ok
8uc
0.750
0.000
0.00
0.00
0.00 Fvs+Fvt-Th-Ca
Ok
1c
1.491
0.000
70.45
0.00
0.00
Fvs+Pt-Th+Ca
Ok
2c
0.775
0.000
0.00
2.25
0.00
Ps+Fvt-Th+Ca
Ok
3c
1.491
0.000
70.45
2.64
0.00
Ps+Pt-Th+Ca
Ok
4c
0.839
0.000
0.00
0.00
-43.40 Fvs+Fvt+Th+Ca
Ok
5c
1.490
0.000
70.42
0.00
-45.02
Fvs+Pt+Th+Ca
Ok
6c
0.863
0.000
0.00
2.55
-43.50
Ps+Fvt+Th+Ca
Ok
7c
1.490
0.000
70.42
2.63
-45.02
Ps+Pt+Th+Ca
Ok
8c
0.775
0.000
0.00
0.00
0.00 Fvs+Fvt-Th+Ca
Ok
Max: 1.491
0.000 in.
Given Tubesheet Thickness:
2.0000 in.
Note:
Fvt,Fvs
0.0.
Ps, Pt
Th
Ca
July 2003
1uc
75 20000
0 -13887
2163 19300
0 -5740
303 2160
Ok
2uc
67 20000
0 -13887
0 19300
-138 -5740
19 2160
Ok
3uc
142 20000
0 -13887
2163 19300
-138 -5740
303 2160
Ok
4uc
479 20000
0 -13887
0 19300 -1346 -5395
0 2160
Ok
5uc
517 20000
0
0
2158 19300 -1346 -5395
302 2160
Ok
6uc
479 20000
0 -13887
0 19300 -1483 -5395
19 2160
Ok
7uc
517 20000
0
0
2158 19300 -1483 -5395
302 2160
Ok
8uc
0 20000
0 -13887
0 19300
0 -5740
0 2160
Ok
1c
89 20000
0 -13824
2170 19300
0 -5740
304 2160
Ok
2c
67 20000
0 -13824
0 19300
-136 -5740
19 2160
Ok
3c
156 20000
0 -13824
2170 19300
-135 -5740
304 2160
Ok
4c
568 20000
0 -13824
0 19300 -1570 -5395
0 2160
Ok
5c
613 20000
0
0
2166 19300 -1570 -5395
303 2160
Ok
6c
568 20000
0 -13824
0 19300 -1705 -5395
19 2160
Ok
7c
613 20000
0
0
2166 19300 -1705 -5395
303 2160
Ok
8c
0 20000
0 -13824
0 19300
0 -5740
0 2160
Ok
Annul. Elm.
-38456.
65000. Inside
5c
Pt+Pd
Pass
Cyl. at Y
-989.
65000. Inside
7uc
Ps+Pt+Pd
Pass
Cyl. at L
850.
65000. Inside
5c
Pt+Pd
Pass
Cycle Life
82089
10000 Inside
7c
Pt+Pd
Pass
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
W+T1+P1 (OPE)
W+T2+P1 (OPE)
W+P1 (SUS)
L1-L3 (EXP)
L2-L3 (EXP)
What the article explains is that one more load case is required to
completely satisfy the intent of the code, to address the phrase or
any anticipated condition with a greater differential effect. This
greater differential is created by cycling between T1 and T2.
Therefore, to completely satisfy the intent of the code, another load
case must be setup as follows:
6) L1-L2 (EXP)
CAESAR II doesnt setup this last load case, since the program
doesnt know what the loads (T1 and T2) represent. The construction
of load case 6 above is the users responsibility.
Other situations exist where the user must review the load cases
recommended and consider whether or not they completely satisfy
code requirements. For example, consider the system shown in the
figure below, having a single operating temperature, but where at
any given time, one of the pump branch legs could be spared.
11
July 2003
12) L3-L4 (EXP)
2) W+D1+T1+P1 (HGR)
3) W+D1+T1+P1+H (OPE)
4) W+D2+T2+P1+H (OPE)
5) W+D3+T3+P1+H (OPE)
6) W+D4+T4+P1+H (OPE)
7) W+P1+H (SUS)
8) L3-L7 (EXP)
9) L4-L7 (EXP)
12
These six additional cases consider the effects of the system cycling
between the different possible operating states. This cycling can
cause the extreme displacement range the code requires.
CAESAR II has no knowledge of what OPE cases 3, 4, 5, and 6
represent, therefore the program is unable (at the present time) to
include cases 12 through 17 when it performs its recommendations.
These additional load cases are the responsibility of the user.
According to the code, the expansion stress range SE is the largest
computed displacement stress range. However, SE could come
from different load combinations, which is a point many analysts
miss. For example, consider the metering station shown in the
figure below.
Metering Station
Either leg could be hot, with the other leg cold. The greatest stress
on the tees occurs when switching from one leg to the other. The
difference between these two operating conditions will produce the
extreme condition for the proper stress evaluation of the tees.
Understanding the requirements of the applied piping code, as well
as what the recommended load cases represent, is necessary in
determining if the intent of the code is completely satisfied, or if
additional load cases are necessary.
July 2003
n =
EIg
( n ) 2
*
2
l
w
The term (n )2 is valid for simply supported beams only, where (n)
is the mode of vibration. This equation can be easily rearranged to
solve for the length (l), which will correspond to a specified
frequency. Substituting = 2 f, the equation used to determine
the span length corresponding to frequency (f in Hz) is:
l2 =
l2 = k2 *
EIg
(n ) 2
*
2f
w
EIg
( n ) 2
*
2f
w
13
July 2003
Once this selection has been made, the Pipe Data tab can be
presented. Filling in the necessary data and clicking on the
[Calculate] button yields the maximum suggested nodal spacing, as
shown in the figure below.
Gathering data.
Section 1 Introduction
14
July 2003
15
July 2003
API 579 Section 4 limitations for Level 1 and Level 2 assessments
are as follows:
Flanges
Piping systems
16
July 2003
1,
Description: E5111
300.00
650.00
NO
psig
F
psi
psi
SA-516 70
K02700
17500.00
20000.00
B
1.00
L
CYLLEN
D
120.0000
20.0000
96.0000
in.
in.
in.
T
T
FCA
1.2500
1.2500
0.1250
Inside
0.1000
0.9000
60.0000
300.00
0.0010
in.
in.
in.
S
SA
XLOSS
RSFA
Lmsd
MAWP
Crate
in.
in.
psig
in.
No
Profile
5
9
1.0000
0.5000
NO
Type of Element:
Cylindrical Shell
1, Desc.: E5111
96.2000
1.1500
in.
in.
38
-72
F
F
TMM =
Rt =
Q =
0.450
0.389
0.447
in.
Flaw Dimension
3.021 |
3.342
17
July 2003
Rt >= 0.20
0.389 >= 0.20
TRUE
If you dont use Windows Messenger, you probably want to turn off
the auto load of this application. This will save some system
resources, and simply avoid the nuisance of seeing its icon in your
task bar tray. Here is how to turn this off, for good.
0.480
0.389
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Long./Merid. - RSF
0.926
0.900
Passed
Circ. - Figure 57 Check
Passed
| : 168.90
|Rt>(TMM-(Crate * Time))/TMIN|
SECTION 5 LEVEL 2 ANALYSIS:
Longitudinal Check:
Using Slicing Method:
With
*
S =
* Length Inc.=
Acceptable
3.342
0.025
Circumferential Check:
* Figure 5.7 check is ACCEPTABLE with: C/D = 0.031
Rt = 0.389
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?q=+site:
support.microsoft.com
Long./Merid. - RSF
0.977
0.900
Passed
Circ. - Figure 57 Check
Passed
Once this search page is displayed, fill in your search criteria, then
click [Google Search]. This same idea can be extended to any web
site. For example, to search the COADE web site for any articles or
documents on friction, this link can be used:
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?q=+site:www.coade.com
18
July 2003
Disadvantage
Computationally intensive
Automatically learns
Hard for spammers to trick
Allows user fine tuning
19
CAESAR II Notices
Listed below are those errors & omissions in the CAESAR II
program that have been identified since the last newsletter. These
corrections are available for download from our WEB site, for
Version 4.40.
Static Load Case Setup Module / Dynamic Input
July 2003
Configuration Module
Material Database
PipePlus Interface
Structural Modeler
20
B31.3_SUS_SIF_FACTOR display
OCCASIONAL_LOAD_FACTOR display
Animation Module
Element Generator
Static Solver
July 2003
Intergraph Interface
Offshore DLL
B31.3_SUS_SIF_FACTOR display
OCCASIONAL_LOAD_FACTOR display
Corrected the printing of stress titles for TD/12 code when the
yield stress criterion is set to Von Mises.
For B31.3 Welding Tees and Sweepolets, changed the test for
Note 11 to correct a code error.
21
July 2003
2) Output Module:
Corrected the activation of the Eff field for new jobs when
the code is switched to B31.8.
B31.3_SUS_SIF_FACTOR display
OCCASIONAL_LOAD_FACTOR display
WRC107 Module
TANK Notices
CODECALC Notices
Listed below are those errors & omissions in the CODECALC
program that have been identified since the last newsletter.
1) TEMA Tubesheet module:
2) Program Interface:
Listed below are those errors & omissions in the TANK program
that have been identified since the last newsletter. These corrections
are available for download from our WEB site, for Version 2.40.
1) Solution Module:
22
July 2003
3) Shell:
Fixed MAWP on the status bar for jobs with static head
specified.
4) Nozzle:
12) For leg baseplates when there were 0 bolts in tension the
program could abort.
13) When user defined wind pressure was specified and there was a
top head platform, the wind load on the platform may not have
been calculated in some cases.
5) Flange:
PVElite Notices
Listed below are those errors & omissions in the PVElite program
that have been identified since the last newsletter.
1) Algebraic force/moment summation for base skirt supported
vessels was corrected.
2) On screen nozzle calcs for external pressure were not considering
the shell CA. This has been corrected.
3) Changed Nozzle diameter limit and added pad area for 5500
closely spaced nozzle check.
4) The F factor was being used on offset hillside nozzles in
cylinders unintentionally for the external tr case.
5) Fixed on screen calc of the pad diameter when the pad width
was entered on actual thickness basis for larger nozzles.
6) Fixed the on screen weld calc for required thickness of the
inside weld.
7) Sorted out a memory issue with the output processor and color
hightlighting.
8) Implemented new computation for partial volumes of nonstandard F&D Heads.
9) Sorted out a sign issue for cone/knuckle/ring/shell inertia calc.
10) Fixed the use of local shell thickness for the on screen nozzle
calcs.
23
July 2003
Thomas Van Laan, president of COADE, believes that the improvements offered in AutoCAD 2004 are exactly those for which the plant
design industry has been hoping. Says Van Laan, Our customers are always concerned with three things - speed, size, and how to manage
them - so we think our customers will love this new version of AutoCAD. Weve found that a 22-megabyte project created under CADWorx
2002 drops to less than 6 megabytes under CADWorx 2004, a dramatic 70%+ reduction in project file size. Van Laan continued,
CADWorx has always taken maximum advantage of AutoCADs XREF capabilities to the hilt. The new XREF management features,
including improved load speed and change notification, are perfect complements to the way that our customers manage large projects.
John Sanders, Vice President Platform Technology Division for Autodesk, agrees that COADE has done a great job leveraging the best
features of AutoCAD 2004. Sanders says, We are very pleased that COADE was able to develop a 2004-compatible version of CADWorx
so quickly. Autodesk has been working very closely with COADE to determine what AutoCAD enhancements that would be most valued by
the plant design community. Were impressed by how they have leveraged the strengths of AutoCAD 2004 - speed, teamwork and
management - and translated these strengths into productivity improvements for process plant designers. CADWorx 2004 is a great tool for
anyone involved in the design of process plants.
Following the release, COADE and Autodesk collaborated on a multi-city tour to conclusively demonstrate the advantages of CADWorx
2004 operating in an AutoCAD 2004 environment. Presentations showing how CADWorx 2004 can offer a more economic plant design
solution over a full range of project sizes were made to receptive audiences in Houston, New Orleans, Philadelphia, New York, Boston,
Chicago, Calgary, Singapore, Antwerp, and Moscow with more of the same touted for Birmingham, Atlanta, Seattle and Kuala Lumpur in
mid to late July.
Tel: 281-890-4566
Fax: 281-890-3301
Web: www.coade.com
E-Mail: techsupport@coade.com