53 views

Original Title: Stress Analysis and Design of Bolted Flange Connections Under

Uploaded by vijaygalaxy

- Kellogg Equivalent Pressure Method for Piping Flanges
- Schlepp Concrete Thrust Block
- General Arrangement Model
- Design and Analysis of Flange Gasket and Bolt Assembly for Leak Tightness 05-07-2016
- Flange - Section 8 Div.1
- 06-086-098 Weld Ring Gaskets
- ASME PCC - 1, App. O..docx
- M&Y Gasket Factors
- Closing of Pressure Tested Vents and Drains
- E-0204
- 36036650.pdf
- ASME MY Explanation
- BS EN 1591-2-2008 Flanges and their joints — Design rules for gasketed circular flange connectio
- Panouri Antiex Nov 2013
- Class Flanges Bolt Torque Loads
- Flange Leakage (Working Copy)
- 256324-500-ds-mec-021_rev.b
- ASME SEC V QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.DOC
- Gasket standards
- Components

You are on page 1of 11

PVP2014

July 20-24, 2014, Anaheim, California, USA

PVP2014-28606

INTERNAL PRESSURE

Yuya OMIYA

Toshiyuki SAWA

Graduate School of Engineering,

Graduate School of Engineering,

Hiroshima University

Hiroshima University

1-4-1, Kagamiyama, Higashihiroshima,

1-4-1, Kagamiyama, Higashihiroshima,

Hiroshima, 739-8527, Japan

Hiroshima, 739-8527, Japan

E-mail: omiya-7547@hiroshima-u.ac.jp

E-mail: tsawa@hiroshima-u.ac.jp

Yoshio TAKAGI

Materials Engineering Group, R&D Center,

Tokyo Electric Power Company,

4-1, Egasaki-cho, Tsurumi-ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa, 230-8510, Japan

E-mail: takagi.yoshio@tepco.co.jp

ABSTRACT

In the present paper, the gasket stress distributions, hub

stress and a variation in axial bolt force in bolted gasketed pipe

flange connections under internal pressure are analyzed using

elasto-plastic FEM taking into account the nonlinearity of

gasket behavior. Non-asbestos spiral wound gaskets were

employed. The effect of nominal flange diameter is examined

on the gasket contact stress distributions, the hub stress and the

variation in axial bolt force (the load factor) is examined. Using

the obtained gasket contact stress distribution and the

fundamental data of the relationship between gasket

compressive stress and gasket leak rate according to JIS B 2490,

a method for predicting the leak rate is demonstrated.

Experiments to measure the amount of leakage, the hub stress

and the variation in axial bolt force when the joint is under

internal pressure were carried out. The numerical results of the

leak rate, hub stress and the load factor are in a fairly good

agreement with the measured results. Then, a method is

demonstrated for determining the bolt preload under given

conditions, that is, taking into account assembly efficiency, leak

rate and internal pressure In addition, bolt preload is

determined using the actual gasket contact stress which can be

estimated using the value of the load factor. As a design

example, the procedure for determining the bolt preload in 3

and 20 nominal diameter pipe flange connections is shown for

the allowable leak rate of 1.0-3Pa m3/s. The results are

validated by the experiments.

INTRODUCTION

Pipe flange connections with gaskets have been widely used in

chemical plants, nuclear power plants and so on. Those

connections are usually used under internal pressure as well as

other loadings. In order to optimize the design of pipe flange

connections with gaskets, it is necessary to understand the

mechanical characteristics of the connections under internal

pressure. The important issues in designing the pipe flange

connections under internal pressure are the precise estimations

for the actual reduced gasket contact stress distributions at the

interfaces, the hub stress and a variation in the axial bolt force

(the load factor) from the standpoint of the sealing performance

and structural flange design. Some studies on pipe flange

connections with asbestos gaskets have been carried out for the

connections with the smaller nominal diameters with regard to

the sealing performance, the gasket contact stress distribution,

the hub stress and the load factor. In practice, a lot of pipe

flange connections with larger nominal diameter have been

used, too. However, some questions remain as to whether it is

possible to apply the researched results for smaller nominal

diameters to estimating the behavior of the connections with the

larger nominal diameter, especially regarding leakage

prediction and methods to determine the bolt preload.

In Japan, the usage of asbestos material such as gaskets

has been prohibited since 2008(9). Thus non-asbestos gaskets

must be used in pipe flange connections. However, only a few

studies

have been carried out on the characteristics of

connections with non-asbestos gaskets. Therefore, it is

(1)-(8)

(10)(11)

non-asbestos gaskets. Furthermore, it is desirable to know the

difference in the characteristics between asbestos and nonasbestos gaskets to replace asbestos gaskets with non-asbestos

ones, in particular, any differences in sealing performance.

PVRC

(Pressure Vessel Research Council) proposed

the new gasket constants (Gb, a, Gs) and the tightness parameter

Tp as well as a method for evaluating the sealing performance

and for determining the bolt preload using the new gasket

constants and the tightness parameter Tp. However, the PVRC

test method is based on the hypotheses, in which the gasket

stress SG the tightness parameter TP relationship is the linear

and the values converge to the new gasket constant Gb in Part

B. The hypothesis is sometime incorrect. Therefore, a rational

pipe flange design method based on a test method by which the

gasket sealing performance can be evaluated such as JIS B

2490(13) is needed.

Thus, in this paper, the gasket contact stress distributions

in pipe flange connections with different nominal diameters

from 3 to 24 under internal pressure are analyzed using

elasto-plastic finite element method (EP-FEM) by taking into

account non-linearity and hysteresis in the stress-strain curves

of a non-asbestos spiral wound gasket (SWG) obtained from

JIS B 2490(13). In addition, the differences in the characteristics

between asbestos and non-asbestos gaskets are examined. The

effects of nominal diameters of the connections on the gasket

contact stress distributions, the variations in the axial bolt force

(the load factor) and the hub stress are analyzed using the EPFEM (7)(8). The obtained hub stresses are compared with the

values obtained from ASME code(14). The amount of gas

leakage, based on the obtained gasket contact stress

distributions and gasket properties according to JIS B 2490(13),

is estimated. Furthermore, leakage tests and measurements

concerning variation in an axial bolt force are performed for

the connections with 3 and 20 nominal diameters

(ANSI/ASME)(15) using helium gas to confirm the EP-FEM

results and the estimated amount of gas leakage (leak rate).

Discussion is made on the differences in gasket contact stress,

load factor and hub stress between asbestos and non-asbestos

gaskets.

Finally, under given conditions such as working pressure

and the allowable leak rate, a method for determining the

required bolt preload is demonstrated using a flowchart and

some numerical examples are described.

Fc: force eliminated from the contact surfaces

(=(1-g)W/N)

Ff: bolt preload

Ft: increment in axial bolt force

P: internal pressure

L: amount of gas leakage

LS: fundamental leak rate

N: numbers of bolt

W: axial force due to internal pressure (=a12P)

W: total axial force due to internal pressure (=a32P)

X: outer diameter of hub

Y: hub thickness

: gasket displacement

: the circumferential angle of gasket

g: load factor (=Ft/W)

zm: initial average gasket contact stress

z: gasket contact stress

(11)(12)

Nomenclature

2a1: inner diameter of pipe

2a3: inner diameter of gasket

2b1: outer diameter of pipe

2b3: outer diameter of gasket

2h1: pipe flange thickness

2h3: gasket thickness

A: gasket contact area in the analysis

C: bolt pitch circle diameter

Figure 1 shows a pipe flange connection with a gasket, in

which two pipe flanges including the gasket are fastened with N

bolts and nuts with a bolt preload Ff, subjected to internal

pressure P. When the internal pressure P is applied to the

connection, a tensile load W (=a12P) acts on the end part of the

connection in the axial direction, and an increment in axial bolt

force Ft occurs in the bolts and the contact force Fc (per bolt) is

eliminated from the gasket contact surfaces, that is, the total

axial force W/N (=a32P/N) (per bolt) due to the internal

pressure P equals to the sum of Ft and Fc (W/N=Ft+Fc), where

the inside diameter of the gasket is designated as 2a3 and that of

the pipe as 2a1. In predicting the sealing performance of the

connection, the actual reduced gasket contact stress of the

connection under internal pressure P must be estimated exactly.

The ratio Ft to W/N is called as the load factor(4) g (=Ft

/(W/N). When the value of the load factor g is obtained, the

force Fc is obtained by the equation Fc=(1-g)W/N and the

actual reduced average gasket contact stress is obtained from

the equation (Ff -Fc)/A, where A is the contact gasket area per

bolt. The cylindrical coordinate (r, , z) is used in the EP-FEM

analysis. The gasket contact stress distributions, the hub

stresses and the load factor g of the pipe flange connections

with the different nominal diameters from 3 to 24 (3, 8,

16, 20 and 24) are analyzed using the elasto-plastic FEM

(EP-FEM). The flanges used are ASME B16.5 class 300, while

3 pipe flanges are ASME B16.5 class 600 to match the

experimental set-up.

Figure 2 shows an example of mesh divisions of the

connection with 3 nominal diameter in the EP-FEM analysis.

Taking into account the symmetry of the connection, a oneeight part of the connection is analyzed. EP- FEM employed is

ANSYS for this study. In this study, a non-linearity and a

gas leakage and the experimental results. The ordinate is the

amount of gas leakage per unit gasket diameter (Pam3/s/m),

and the initial average gasket contact stress zm. Figure 13(a) is

the case of the connection with the smaller nominal diameter

pipe flange connection(3), and Fig.13(b) is the case of the

connection with the larger nominal diameter pipe flange

connection (20). A fairly good agreement between the

estimated results and the experimental results is observed. The

leak rate per unit gasket diameter in the connection with the

smaller nominal diameter (3) is smaller than that in the

connection with the larger nominal diameter (20). From the

results, it can be concluded that a larger preload is needed for

the connections with larger nominal diameter for getting the

same sealing performance of the connection with smaller

nominal diameter. In Fig.13(a), the estimated results for the

pipe flange connection with asbestos gasket are shown as an

orange line. It is found that the sealing performance of pipe

flange connection with non-asbestos gasket is better than that

with a non-asbestos gasket.

Finally, the assembly efficiency is defined as

Tp/Tp*,where Tp is the tightness parameter at the uniform bolt

preload and Tp* is that at the scattered bolt preload. Figure 14

shows the assembly efficiency for SWG. The abscissa is the

internal pressure and the ordinate is . It is shown that the value

of is around 0.8 for the connection with SWG.

Design for pipe flange connection under internal

pressure taking account the allowable leak rate

Two design examples are demonstrated in designing the

bolt preload for 3 and 20 bolted pipe flange connections

under working pressure P=5MPa. From the previous data for

the load factor, the values of the load factor are obtained as

0.162 for 3 and -0.148 for 20 bolted pipe flange connections.

A problem is how to determine the bolt preload under the leak

rate L of L=1.010-3(Pam3/s/m).

Force W in the axial direction due to the internal

pressure

As the gasket inside diameter 2a3 is shown in Table 1, the

force W in the axial direction is obtained as W=a32P.

W=40.54kN for 3 and 1084kN for 20 connections.

Calculation of the reduced gasket stress c

When an internal pressure P of 5MPa is applied to the

connection shown in Fig.1, the force Fc which is eliminated

from the gasket interfaces is calculated from the equation

Fc=(1-)W , where the value of the load factor was

obtained as 0.162 for 3 and -0.148 for 20 connection. As the

results, the value of the force Fc is obtained as 33.97kN for 3

and 1245kN for 20 connection. Then the reduced gasket

stress c is obtained as 10.2MPa for 3 connection and

27.5MPa for 20 connection.

state

Figure 13 shows the modified fundamental data on the

relationship between the gasket stress and the leak rate L.

Figure 13(a) is for 3 SWG gasket and Fig13.(b) for 20 gasket.

When the allowable leak rate is chosen as 1.010-3 Pam3/s/m,

the reduced average gasket stress Sg should be more than 40

MPa for 3 SWG and 60MPa for 20 SWG shown in Fig.13.

In addition, the effect of the scattered bolt preloads must be

taken into account, that is the assembly efficiency . As

mentioned before, the assembly efficiency was obtained as

=0.8 for SWG gasket. Then, the initial gasket stress should be

corrected by the equation Sg=Sg/. As a result, the initial gasket

stress Sg is obtained as Sg=50MPa for 3 pipe flange connection

and Sg=75MPa for 20 pipe flange connection.

Determination of bolt preload for each pipe flange

connection

The bolt preload Ff is determined as Ff= Sggasket

area/N=21kN for 3 pipe flange connection and Ff=142kN

for 20 pipe flange connection.

Validation of the leak rate in actual bolted pipe flange

connections

The leakage measurements were carried out for 3 and 20

bolted pipe flange connections. The average initial gasket

stresses are chosen as 50MPa and 60MPa for 3 and 20 pipe

flange connections, respectively. The leak rate measured was

7.010-4Pa m3/s/m for 3" pipe flange connection

and

9.710-4 Pam3/s/m for 20 pipe flange connection. Thus, the

above obtained the initial gasket stresses (50 and 75MPa) are

satisfied enough.

Check of the stresses occurred in bolts, pipe flange

hub and gaskets

Figure 15 shows a flow chart for designing the bolted pipe

flange connection. As mentioned above, the mail procedure is

described. Finally, the following the points must be evaluated.

1) Check bolt stress: the bolt preload Ff is determined as 21kN

for each bolt, thus the bolt stress is obtained as Ff/(effective bolt

area:245)=86MPa for the bolt of 3 pipe flange connection, and

142kN/695=204MPa. When the bolts in the strength

classification of 8.8 are used, the strength is satisfied.

2) Check critical bearing stress: the bearing area Aw for M20 is

356.2 mm2, and Aw for M33 is 1061.4mm2. The average

bearing stress is obtained as 58.9MPa and 134MPa. These

values satisfy the critical bearing stress criteria.

3) Check hub stress: The gasket stress is described above. They

are smaller. Thus, they satisfy the values of hub stress shown in

Fig.10.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper has dealt with the effect of the nominal

diameter of pipe flange connection on sealing performance and

the difference in the mechanical characteristics of the

results. The bolt preload Ff is 41.4kN for 3 and 189kN for 20.

Red lines show the results for the connection with 3 nominal

diameter. Black line shows the case of the 20 nominal

diameter. The axial bolt force in the connection with the larger

nominal diameter decreases linearly as the total axial force

W/N increases while it increases linearly as the total axial force

W/N increases in the connection with the smaller nominal

diameter. A fairly good agreement is observed between the

results obtained from EP-FEM and the experimental results.

From the present analysis, the value of the load factor g in the

connections with 3 nominal diameter was obtained as

g=0.162 and it was obtained as g= -0.148 in the connections

with 20 nominal diameter.

Table 2 shows the values of the load factor g of the

connections with the different nominal diameters from 3 to 24

obtained from EP-FEM. The load factor g of the connections

with 3 nominal diameter is the biggest. As the nominal

diameter of the connections increases, the value of the load

factor g decreases. The force Fc, which eliminates the gasket

contact stress due to the internal pressure, is obtained as Fc =(1g) W/N. Thus, the force Fc increases as the value of the load

factor g of the connections decreases. In particular, when the

value of the load factor is negative, the value of Fc increases.

Thus, it can be concluded that the sealing performance of the

connections with larger nominal diameters will be worse. In

determining the bolt preload Ff of the pipe flange connections

with larger nominal diameter (more than 8 flange), it is

necessary to take into account that the values of the load factor

g are negative. In Table 2, the values of the load factor for the

connections with conventional asbestos gasket (SWG) are

described in brackets(8). It is found that the values of the load

factor for the connections with non-asbestos gaskets are larger

than those with asbestos gaskets. The result reveals that the

average reduced gasket stresses in connections with nonasbestos gaskets are smaller than those with asbestos gaskets.

Therefore, the sealing performance of the connections with

non-asbestos gaskets would be expected to be better than those

with asbestos gaskets.

Hub stress

Figure 10 shows the effects of the nominal diameter of the

pipe flange connections on the hub stress (stress component in

z-direction z(hub)) at the circumferential angle =0, where the

initial average gasket contact stress is zm =100MPa and the

internal pressure is P=5MPa. The ordinate is the stress

component in the z-direction z(hub), and the abscissa is the

nominal diameter (inch) of the pipe flange. Purple lines show

the EP-FEM results, and the red lines show the results obtained

from ASME code(14). Solid lines show the case of initial

clamping state, and the dotted lines show the case of

pressurized state. In EP-FEM results, it is shown that the values

of the hub stress of the connections with smaller nominal

diameter under internal pressure are larger than that in the

initial clamping state. However, as the nominal diameter of the

connections increases, the values of the hub stress in the case

in the initial clamping state. The effect of the nominal diameter

of the connection on the hub stress is seen to be small from the

obtained results. The difference is found to be substantial

between the results obtained from ASME code and the EP-FEM

results. The hub stress obtained from ASME code is about 5.6

times larger than the hub stress obtained from EP-FEM in the

case where the nominal diameter is 24. The bolt preload Ff

must be smaller due to the hub stress based on ASME code (14).

This leads to increased likelihood of joint leakage. From EPFEM result, the bolts should be tightened with a larger bolt

preload. The hub stress in the z-direction was measured using

strain gages in the leakage experiment for verification of EPFEM result. The strain gages, with length of 2mm, were

attached to flange hub. The hub stress was measured as

88.5MPa, while EP-FEM result was 85.5MPa. A fairly good

agreement was observed between EP-FEM results and the

experimental results. The hub stresses of connections with

asbestos gaskets are compared with those with non-asbestos

gaskets. The difference is found to be small between asbestos

and non-asbestos gaskets.

COMPARISON OF THE LEAKAGE BETWEEN THE

ESTIMATED AND THE MEASURED RESULTS

The amount of helium gas leakage L(Pam3/s/m) from the

gasket interfaces is estimated using the gasket contact stress

distribution obtained from the EP-FEM. The procedure is

described as follows; (1) The sealing test, according to JIS B

2490 is conducted using the same types of gasket (SWG) of

which the nominal diameter is 3. The gasket stress z -gasket

displacement curve and gasket stress z-fundamental leak rate

Ls (Pam3/s) curve are obtained from the test results. Figure 11

shows the schematic of the experimental set up according to JIS

B 2490(13). Figure 12 shows the gasket stress z -gasket

displacement curve and gasket stress z- fundamental leak rate

Ls curve obtained from JIS B 2490(13). (2) The gasket contact

stress distributions obtained from the EP-FEM calculation are

divided by number n in the circumferential direction. In this

study, the number n is equal to the number of bolt N because

the variation of gasket contact stress distribution in the

circumferential direction is small. (3) The averages of gasket

contact stress in each divided area are calculated. (4) The

amount of leakage is obtained using the relationship between

the gasket stress z - fundamental leak rate Ls curve obtained

from the above procedure and the averages of gasket contact

stress in each divided area. (5) The estimated fundamental

leakage from the pipe flange connection is obtained from the

sum of leakage in each divided area. (6) The shape factor k(13)

(k=1/(do/di)-1)) which corrects the dimensions of the gaskets

and the value of (P/P*)m (13) multiplied by the estimated

fundamental leakage Ls for taking into account the nominal

diameter and difference in the internal pressure, where, do is the

outer diameter of gasket, di is the inner diameter of gasket and

m is a value that describes the relationship between internal

pressure and leakage. The value of m is usually chosen as

1.5(13).

gas leakage and the experimental results. The ordinate is the

amount of gas leakage per unit gasket diameter (Pam3/s/m),

and the initial average gasket contact stress zm. Figure 13(a) is

the case of the connection with the smaller nominal diameter

pipe flange connection(3), and Fig.13(b) is the case of the

connection with the larger nominal diameter pipe flange

connection (20). A fairly good agreement between the

estimated results and the experimental results is observed. The

leak rate per unit gasket diameter in the connection with the

smaller nominal diameter (3) is smaller than that in the

connection with the larger nominal diameter (20). From the

results, it can be concluded that a larger preload is needed for

the connections with larger nominal diameter for getting the

same sealing performance of the connection with smaller

nominal diameter. In Fig.13(a), the estimated results for the

pipe flange connection with asbestos gasket are shown as an

orange line. It is found that the sealing performance of pipe

flange connection with non-asbestos gasket is better than that

with a non-asbestos gasket.

Finally, the assembly efficiency is defined as

Tp/Tp*,where Tp is the tightness parameter at the uniform bolt

preload and Tp* is that at the scattered bolt preload. Figure 14

shows the assembly efficiency for SWG. The abscissa is the

internal pressure and the ordinate is . It is shown that the value

of is around 0.8 for the connection with SWG.

Design for pipe flange connection under internal

pressure taking account the allowable leak rate

Two design examples are demonstrated in designing the

bolt preload for 3 and 20 bolted pipe flange connections

under working pressure P=5MPa. From the previous data for

the load factor, the values of the load factor are obtained as

0.162 for 3 and -0.148 for 20 bolted pipe flange connections.

A problem is how to determine the bolt preload under the leak

rate L of L=1.010-3(Pam3/s/m).

Force W in the axial direction due to the internal

pressure

As the gasket inside diameter 2a3 is shown in Table 1, the

force W in the axial direction is obtained as W=a32P.

W=40.54kN for 3 and 1084kN for 20 connections.

Calculation of the reduced gasket stress c

When an internal pressure P of 5MPa is applied to the

connection shown in Fig.1, the force Fc which is eliminated

from the gasket interfaces is calculated from the equation

Fc=(1-)W , where the value of the load factor was

obtained as 0.162 for 3 and -0.148 for 20 connection. As the

results, the value of the force Fc is obtained as 33.97kN for 3

and 1245kN for 20 connection. Then the reduced gasket

stress c is obtained as 10.2MPa for 3 connection and

27.5MPa for 20 connection.

state

Figure 13 shows the modified fundamental data on the

relationship between the gasket stress and the leak rate L.

Figure 13(a) is for 3 SWG gasket and Fig13.(b) for 20 gasket.

When the allowable leak rate is chosen as 1.010-3 Pam3/s/m,

the reduced average gasket stress Sg should be more than 40

MPa for 3 SWG and 60MPa for 20 SWG shown in Fig.13.

In addition, the effect of the scattered bolt preloads must be

taken into account, that is the assembly efficiency . As

mentioned before, the assembly efficiency was obtained as

=0.8 for SWG gasket. Then, the initial gasket stress should be

corrected by the equation Sg=Sg/. As a result, the initial gasket

stress Sg is obtained as Sg=50MPa for 3 pipe flange connection

and Sg=75MPa for 20 pipe flange connection.

Determination of bolt preload for each pipe flange

connection

The bolt preload Ff is determined as Ff= Sggasket

area/N=21kN for 3 pipe flange connection and Ff=142kN

for 20 pipe flange connection.

Validation of the leak rate in actual bolted pipe flange

connections

The leakage measurements were carried out for 3 and 20

bolted pipe flange connections. The average initial gasket

stresses are chosen as 50MPa and 60MPa for 3 and 20 pipe

flange connections, respectively. The leak rate measured was

7.010-4Pa m3/s/m for 3" pipe flange connection

and

9.710-4 Pam3/s/m for 20 pipe flange connection. Thus, the

above obtained the initial gasket stresses (50 and 75MPa) are

satisfied enough.

Check of the stresses occurred in bolts, pipe flange

hub and gaskets

Figure 15 shows a flow chart for designing the bolted pipe

flange connection. As mentioned above, the mail procedure is

described. Finally, the following the points must be evaluated.

1) Check bolt stress: the bolt preload Ff is determined as 21kN

for each bolt, thus the bolt stress is obtained as Ff/(effective bolt

area:245)=86MPa for the bolt of 3 pipe flange connection, and

142kN/695=204MPa. When the bolts in the strength

classification of 8.8 are used, the strength is satisfied.

2) Check critical bearing stress: the bearing area Aw for M20 is

356.2 mm2, and Aw for M33 is 1061.4mm2. The average

bearing stress is obtained as 58.9MPa and 134MPa. These

values satisfy the critical bearing stress criteria.

3) Check hub stress: The gasket stress is described above. They

are smaller. Thus, they satisfy the values of hub stress shown in

Fig.10.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper has dealt with the effect of the nominal

diameter of pipe flange connection on sealing performance and

the difference in the mechanical characteristics of the

contact stress distributions, the load factor and hub stress are

obtained from EP-FEM taking into account the non-asbestos

gasket property according to JIS B 2490. Leakage tests were

also conducted to demonstrate the validity of the result of EPFEM. The results obtained are as follows.

(1) The gasket contact stress distributions in pipe flange

connections with nominal diameter from 3 to 24 were

calculated using EP-FEM taking account hysteresis and nonlinearity of the non-asbestos gasket. It is found that the

variations of the gasket contact stress distributions in the pipe

flange connections with the larger nominal diameter are larger

than those with the smaller nominal diameter. When an internal

pressure is applied to the pipe flange connections, it is observed

that the reductions of the average gasket contact stress in the

pipe flange connections with the larger nominal diameter are

much larger than those with the smaller nominal diameter. It is

also found that the reduction in the average gasket contact

stress in the connection with asbestos is larger than that with

non-asbestos gasket.

(2) An increment in axial bolt force (load factor g) on the

connections is obtained from EP-FEM. It is found that the load

factor g of the connections with larger nominal diameter is

negative. A good agreement is observed between the results of

the EP-FEM and the experimental results for connections with

3 and 20 nominal diameters. It is also found that the values of

the load factor of the connections with non-asbestos gaskets are

larger than those with asbestos gaskets. Thus, the sealing

performance of the connection with non-asbestos gaskets is

assumed to be better than that with asbestos gaskets.

(3) The effects of the nominal diameter in the pipe flange

connections on the hub stress are calculated when the initial

average gasket contact stress z is 100MPa. It is shown that the

values of the hub stress for the connections with smaller

nominal diameter when internal pressure is applied to the

connections are larger than that in the case of initial bolt

tensioning.

(4) The gas leakage is estimated using the gasket contact

stress distributions obtained from the EP-FEM and the

relationship between gasket stress z and basic leak rate LS

according to JIS B 2490. A fairly good agreement is observed

between estimated gas leakage and experimental gas leakage.

The sealing performance of the connection with smaller

nominal diameter is better than that with larger nominal

diameter. It is demonstrated that the sealing performance of the

connection with non-asbestos gaskets are better than that with

asbestos gaskets.

5 A method for determining the bolt preloads is

demonstrated for 3 and 20 bolted pipe flange connections for

a given allowable leak rate of internal fluid , that is, a method

for how to determine the bolt preload taking into account the

load factor by which the reduction in actual gasket stress is

predicted. The predicted gasket stress is compared with the

experimental results. A fairly good agreement is shown between

the predicted values and the experimental values.

REFERENCES

1. Morohoshi, T., Sawa, T., On the Characteristics of

Rectangular Bolted Flanged Connections With Gaskets

Subjected to External Tensile Loads and Bending

Moments, Transactions of the ASME, Journal of

Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol.116, (1994), pp.207215.

2. Bickford, J. H., Gaskets and Gasketed Joints, Marcel

Dekker Inc., (1997).

3. Bouzid, A. H., Derenne, M., Analytical Modeling of the

Contact Stress with Nonlinear Gaskets, Transactions of

the ASME, Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology,

Vol.124, (2002), pp.49-53.

4. Sawa, T., Ogata, N., Nishida, T., Stress Analysis and

Determination of Bolt Preload in Pipe Flange Connections

with Gaskets under Internal Pressure, Transactions of the

ASME, Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol.124,

(2002), pp.385-396.

5. Takagi, T., Fukuoka, T., Three-Dimensional Finite

Element Analysis of Pipe Flange Connections (In Case of

Using Compressed Asbestos Sheet Gasket), Transactions

of the Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers, Series A,

Vol.68, No.665, (2002), pp.22-27.

6. Ando, F., Sawa, T., Ikeda, M., A New Design Method

for Piping Components Against Leakage and Damage

Subjected to High Level Earthquake Load, Proc. of

ASME PVP Conference 2002, Vol.445, No.1, (2002),

pp.113-118.

7. Nagata, S., Matumoto, M., Sawa, T., Stress Analysis and

Sealing Performance Evaluation of Pipe Flange

Connections under Internal Pressure (Effects of Scatter in

Bolt Preload), Transactions of the Japan Society of

Mechanical Engineers, Series A, Vol.70, No.699, (2004),

pp.1595-1602.

8. SAWA, T., Nagata, S., Tsuji, H., New Development in

Studies on the Characteristics of Bolted Pipe Flange

Connections in JPVRC, Transaction of ASME, Journal

of Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol.128, (2006), pp.103108.

9. Ministry of Health. Labor and Welfare, Government

ordinance in which a part of labor safety hygiene law

enforcement order is revised (Government Ordinance

Vol.349), (2008). (In Japanese).

10. Kobayashi, T., Nishiura, K., Hanashima, K., Study on

the Tightening Criteria of bolts for Low Pressure Rating

Flanges, Yamanashi District Conference, 504, (2008),

pp.131-132.

11. Bouzid, A. H., Derenne, M., El-Rich, M., Effect of

flange Rotation and Gasket Width on Leakage Behavior

of Bolted Flanged Joints, Welding Research Council

Bulletin, 496, (2004).

12. Pressure Vessel Research Council, Standard Test Method

for GASKET CONSTANTS FOR BOLTED JOINT

DESIGN, Draft 10.01, (2001).

13. Japanese Industrial Standards. JIS B2490 Test method

for sealing behavior of gaskets for pipe flanges , (2008).

Division 1 Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels

App.2, (2004).

15. ANSI/ASME B16.5, Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings,

(1996).

Z

Hub

Bolt

Gasket

analysis of a pipe flange connection and mesh

divisions

Fig.1 A pipe flange connection with a gasket

subjected to internal pressure (Bolt number, N=8

for 3 pipe flange)

with the spiral wound gasket used in the present

EP-FEM (unit: mm)

(15)

2a1

2b1

D

C

R

X

h1

Y

2a3

2b3

2h3

N

Bolt

3inch

74

89.1

210

168

127

117

32

82.6

101.6

120.6

4.5

8

M20

8inch

196

216.3

381

330

270

260

41.5

111.1

233.4

263.6

4.5

12

M24

16inch

378

406.4

648

571.5

470

483

57.2

146

422.4

463.6

4.5

20

M33

20inch

476

508

775

686

584

587

63.5

161.9

525.5

577.8

4.5

24

M33

24inch

574.9

609.6

915

812.8

692.2

702

71.6

168.1

314.3

342.9

4.5

24

M39

flange connection

SWG used in this study

(in initial clamping state)

for 8 pipe flange connection

(in pressurized state)

under internal pressure (3 and 20)

the sealing behavior of gaskets (JIS B 2490)(13)

pipe flange connections on the hub stress at =0

rate of non-asbestos SWG

Fig 13 Comparison of leak rate in the pipe flange connection with spiral wound gasket between

estimation and experiment

10

(the values in the brackets are the load factor o the connections

with asbestos SWG(8))

Nominal

diameter

Load Factor

(Calculation)

3inch

0.162(0.161(8))

8inch

-0.003(-0.06(8))

16inch

-0.134(-0.197(8))

20inch

-0.148(-0.226(8))

24inch

-0.161

Fig14 the assembly efficiency for SWG

Fig.15 a flow chart for designing the bolted pipe flange connection

11

- Kellogg Equivalent Pressure Method for Piping FlangesUploaded bypindarello
- Schlepp Concrete Thrust BlockUploaded byfazyroshan
- General Arrangement ModelUploaded bydonaxta
- Design and Analysis of Flange Gasket and Bolt Assembly for Leak Tightness 05-07-2016Uploaded byrenu rani
- Flange - Section 8 Div.1Uploaded byVu Tran
- 06-086-098 Weld Ring GasketsUploaded byopenid_ZrfbXb06
- ASME PCC - 1, App. O..docxUploaded byShijumon Kp
- M&Y Gasket FactorsUploaded byGanesh.Mahendra
- Closing of Pressure Tested Vents and DrainsUploaded byRakesh Ranjan
- E-0204Uploaded byalokbdas
- 36036650.pdfUploaded byfujiman35
- ASME MY ExplanationUploaded bymichal_lysy
- BS EN 1591-2-2008 Flanges and their joints — Design rules for gasketed circular flange connectioUploaded byOlafl0
- Panouri Antiex Nov 2013Uploaded byRosu Gabriel
- Class Flanges Bolt Torque LoadsUploaded byTe Te
- Flange Leakage (Working Copy)Uploaded byabrarakbar
- 256324-500-ds-mec-021_rev.bUploaded bySean Davis
- ASME SEC V QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.DOCUploaded byAshwani Dogra
- Gasket standardsUploaded bySiva Raman
- ComponentsUploaded bykarthikv83
- FM-CR_FLGAUploaded bygjaby
- 71EKF10BB001Uploaded byammarmp
- Sungov CatalogueUploaded bypkrishna984
- Comparison of Flange Stress Calculated by Asme Design Code and Finite Element AnalysisUploaded byMohammed Eljammal
- Espct- Tba Ensamble Total Monobore 3k Acording With Kom 3-1-8 3k Forging Anda Part NumberUploaded byJeaneth Herrera
- Bp-On Stream Leak Repairs of Piping ComponentsUploaded byAlberto Fernando Leon Arismendy
- PTTCHEM-SP-P-602-000 UNDERGROUND PIPING CONSTRUCTION.pdfUploaded byCivil Friend
- API.570.QBank2[1]Uploaded byvishnu ram k
- FlangeUploaded byNurul Lailyah
- Mechanical Maintenance (Pankaj)..........Uploaded byPankaj Patel

- FEDEX PKG Testing Over150LbsUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- Drill Size - Inch Go and No GoUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- Raghavendra Hegde ResumeUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- 9485&926Uploaded byvijaygalaxy
- Hypoxic air venting system.pdfUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- Fraction Conversion ChartUploaded byMichael Rusynyak
- Fraction Conversion ChartUploaded byMichael Rusynyak
- RBUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- Full Page PhotoUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- 237428394-Oisd-Rp-233-DraftUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- 237428394-Oisd-Rp-233-DraftUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- tchart.pdfUploaded byferdyak1
- Thickness Calucaltion 200 Bar - Is 7285Uploaded byvijaygalaxy
- GCR_2016_62-63Uploaded byvijaygalaxy
- TRN-4260-LCTUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- EPF PensionUploaded bysrikrishnanp825
- WorkCover NSW Fees Schedule - From July 2015 - WorkCoverUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- Step by Step Guide to Reset Epson L200 Ink CounterUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- Hypoxic air venting system.pdfUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- Mojo Brochure BajajUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- MSDS 3MUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- Full Time Postgraduate ProgramUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- Dimensional Tolerance ChartUploaded bypushkar_k123
- GD&T - Level 1Uploaded byvijaygalaxy
- Flexi Online Term PlanUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- Fraction ConverterUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- ವಿಜಯವಾಣಿ_2016.03.17Uploaded byvijaygalaxy
- 3.125 11ns THread specificationUploaded byvijaygalaxy
- Charge Hr Sizing GuideUploaded byvijaygalaxy

- Chapter 06 Fracture Mechanics Analysis of Fretting Fatigue Considering Small Crack Effects, Mixed Mode, And Mean Stress EffectUploaded byJorge Perdigon
- Magnesium OxideUploaded byCésarUgarteArgomedo
- Deep Foundation - WikipediaUploaded byABHAY SHRIVASTAVA
- LCA Architects, Inc.-architecture_RedactedUploaded byL. A. Paterson
- Wespwer Alp 09Uploaded byJIMMY
- Fabric Structure DesignUploaded byAhmed
- Material GradesUploaded byMarius Popa
- Corrosion of Steel RftUploaded byஆனந்த் கிருஷ்ணன்
- Anchor Chair Design CheckUploaded byManish542
- 2205 Spec SheetUploaded byArun Rave
- 135-136_en_id955[1]Uploaded bybalaji_jayadeva9546
- Cable Trench.xlsUploaded byHari Krishna Aryan
- Transtec Cables ltd.pptxUploaded byMethela Barua
- 2Uploaded byMarius Rizea
- Pap_498_ver_4.pdfUploaded byAshokkumar Bhaskaran
- w-500-isspecificationsheetsUploaded byapi-261294473
- Sigma Catalogue 2014Uploaded byChien Nguyen Dang
- PART 3 - CONCURRENT DELAYS IN CONSTRUCTION A PRACTICAL APPROACHUploaded byBen Musimane
- Auto Air Eliminator 1745Uploaded bymechkour
- Asst.engineer Civil .PDFUploaded byAnilkumar CE
- BOQ.pdfUploaded byfanna
- 115630593-Engineering-Materials.pdfUploaded byDavid Ariyanto
- chapter42Uploaded bystephen155
- Life Expectancy of house componentsUploaded byaliu_risk
- IRC_075-1979 Design of High embankments.pdfUploaded byRoshanRSV
- Table of ContentreUploaded byzci69
- 43R-08 RISK ANALYSIS AND CONTINGENCY DETERMINATION USING PARAMETRIC ESTIMATING – EXAMPLE MODELS AS APPLIED FOR THE PROCESS INDUSTRIESUploaded byDody Bdg
- Interior Design of WDSG Art & Craft DepartmentUploaded bymarginalju
- 07_D155_HYD CIRCUIT.pptUploaded byMichael Davenport
- cv - jason taylor schoolUploaded byapi-264225447