Proceedings of the ASME 2014 Pressure Vessels & Piping Conference

PVP2014
July 20-24, 2014, Anaheim, California, USA

PVP2014-28606

STRESS ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF BOLTED FLANGE CONNECTIONS UNDER

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)

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2014 by ASME

necessary to examine the characteristics of connections with

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.

D: outer diameter of pipe flange

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

ELASTO-PLASTIC FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS(EPFEA)

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

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2014 by ASME

Figure 13 shows the comparison between the estimated

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.

Determination of the gasket stress in initial clamping

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

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2014 by ASME

from the EP-FEM. The dotted line shows the experimental

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

where the internal pressure is applied decreases more than that

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).

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2014 by ASME

Figure 13 shows the comparison between the estimated

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.

Determination of the gasket stress in initial clamping

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

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2014 by ASME

connections with asbestos and non-asbestos gaskets. The gasket

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).

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2014 by ASME

14. ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code Section VIII

Division 1 Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
App.2, (2004).
15. ANSI/ASME B16.5, Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings,
(1996).

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2014 by ASME

Z
Hub
Bolt

Gasket

Fig.2 A model for the elasto-plastic finite element

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)

Table.1 Dimensions of the pipe flange connections

with the spiral wound gasket used in the present
EP-FEM (unit: mm)

(15)

Fig.3 Designations of the connection

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

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

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

Copyright 2014 by ASME

Fig.5 Schematic of experimental setup for 20 pipe

flange connection

Fig.4 Stress-displacement curve of non-asbestos

SWG used in this study

Fig7 Contact stress distributions in the r-direction

(in initial clamping state)

Fig6 Contact stress distributions in the -direction

for 8 pipe flange connection

Fig8 Contact stress distributions in the r-direction

(in pressurized state)

Fig.9 Variations in axial bolt force of connections

under internal pressure (3 and 20)

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2014 by ASME

Fig 11 Schematic of experimental setup for measuring

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

Fig 10 The effects of the nominal diameter of the

pipe flange connections on the hub stress at =0

Fig 12 The relationship between gasket stress an leak

rate of non-asbestos SWG

(b) case of 20 pipe flange

(a) case of 3pipe flange

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

10

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2014 by ASME

Table 2 The values of the load factor obtained from FE-FEM

(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

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2014 by ASME