The calculation of fixed tubesheet exchangers according to ASME Section VIII

division1, Clause UHX

Clause UHX of ASME Section VIII division 1 defines the rules for the calculation of tubesheets in shell and
tube heat exchangers. This calculation is based on the Gardner’s theory (1948-1952), also considered
in Appendix A of the TEMA standards (previously generally used in tubesheet calculations): however
Clause UHX of ASME VIII division 1 also contains a series of additions and improvements which make this
standard far more complicate than TEMA, and in many cases requires information and data not known by the
mechanical designer.
The Gardner’s theory takes into consideration the bending and shear stresses caused by shell side and
tube side pressures on the tubesheets, and also the axial stresses in the tube bundle caused by the
tubesheet deflections. Of course the problem is relevant in the cases where two tubesheets are connected
together by a tube bundle, that is in floating head and fixed tubesheet exchangers. In these exchangers the
reaction of the tube bundle against the tubesheet deflections is the one of an elastic foundation, which will
take a portion of the pressure loads, depending on the mutual elasticity of the components: thin and flexible
tubesheets will transfer a substantial part of the pressure loads to the tube bundle as axial tensile or
compressive tube stresses, while thick and rigid tubesheets will take themselves the greater portion of the
pressure loads as tubesheet bending and/or shear stresses.
The calculation rules are far more complicated in fixed tubesheet heat exchangers (TEMA
types BxM, AxL, NxN), where also the stresses due to the differential thermal expansion between shell and
tubes shall be considered, and where also the shell is called to give a contribution to the tubesheet stability: in
these exchangers the effect of the differential thermal expansion is converted into an additional tube
side pressure when the tubes are colder than the shell, or into an additional shell side pressure in the
opposite case. Also the stresses resulting from the Poisson’s effect in the shell and in the tubes are
considered: in fact hoop stresses caused by pressure in these components have an effect similar to the
temperature difference between shell and tubes, since they will also cause longitudinal
expansion/contraction, with consequent additional loads acting on the tubesheets.
It has to be noted that since the UHX and the TEMA standards are based on the Gardner’s method, in both
standards a high tubesheet thickness may be needed just to reduce local tensile or compressive
stresses is some part of the tube bundle (which has very low allowable compressive stresses, imposed by
the need to prevent tube buckling). In such cases the mechanical designer has no possibility to change the
characteristics of the bundle (tube dimensions and baffle spacing: tube buckling stress is smaller when the
free tube length between two baffles is large), because these data have been fixed by the thermal designer:
therefore the only possibility to avoid an increase of the tubesheet thickness it often the adoption of
an expansion bellows on the shell. Moreover, in the cases where the differential expansion of the tubes in
respect of the shell is large, even very high tubesheet thicknesses cannot lead to a substantial reduction of
tube stresses, particularly when the tubes are under compression: in these cases the expansion bellows
remains the only possible solution.
Moreover, Clause UHX contains an important addition to the Gardner’s theory: in fact in this theory the
edge rotation of the tubesheet is considered only in the two extreme cases of simply supported (free
rotation, no edge moment) and fixed tubesheets (no rotation, high edge moment). On the contrary, UHX
takes into account more accurately the flexibility of the tubesheet border, giving correlations for
the calculation of the tubesheet edge rotation resulting from the mutual rigidity of the tubesheet, the
shell and the channel (in case of channels welded to the tubesheet). The effect of this rotation may become
important even if the tubesheet itself is correctly dimensioned, because it may cause high bending stresses on
the other components. In other words, in the UHX method the need for a high tubesheet thickness may
not depend on its own stability or on the stability of the tubes (as in the TEMA standards), but also on
the need to reduce high secondary bending stresses on the shell and/or the channel. In such cases, the
possibility of an increase in thickness of these components has also to be carefully evaluated, since it is
generally more economic than the increase of the tubesheet thickness, considering the higher costs of the
material and of the drilling operation. Therefore an automatic optimization of the tubesheet thickness
made by keeping constant all the other thicknesses may be misleading.
A further problem in fixed tubesheet exchangers, not considered either by the Gardner’s theory or by the
TEMA standards, is the one of the thermal stresses caused by the radial thermal expansion of the
tubesheet. In fact the tubesheet operating temperature may be different from the operating temperature of
the rim (its peripheral undrilled portion) and from the operating temperatures of the shell and the channel
(at least in cases where also the channel is welded to the tubesheet). Supposing that these four components
were not connected with each other, in going from room temperature to the respective operating
temperatures their diameters at the connection would become different. This virtual difference will therefore
generate additional thermal stresses, which, as all the thermal stresses, are commonly categorized
as secondary stresses: that is, they cannot cause a plastic collapse of any one of the components, but only
a local plasticization, that can be dangerous only after a great number of temperature cycles. This happens
when the range of the fictitious elastic stress during each cycle is greater than twice the elastic limit (or three
times the allowable stress). This is the reason why the radial thermal expansion has to be taken into
account only in the cases provided in par. UG22 e) of ASME Section VIII division1 (“cyclic and dynamic
reactions due to pressure or thermal variations, or from equipment mounted on a vessel, and mechanical
loadings”). According to UHX the need to take into account the radial thermal expansion must be prescribed
by the user, who is also responsible for giving to the mechanical designer the “tubesheet temperature at the
rim”, the “channel temperature at the tubesheet” and the “shell temperature at the tubesheet”, together
with the “tubesheet operating temperature” (which is needed also for the proper calculation of the
tubesheets in all cases governed by the differential thermal expansion of the tubes in respect of the shell).

As a consequence, the design of the tubesheets in fixed tubesheet exchangers shall be made as follows.

 14 different conditions shall be considered: 3 design conditions (4 when there is vacuum either on
shell side, or on tube side, or on both sides) in which only the pressure load is considered, and 4
operating conditions taking also into account the differential thermal expansion between shell and
tubes (thermal expansion + shell side pressure, thermal expansion + tube side pressure, thermal
expansion + both pressures, thermal expansion alone). However for all the above conditions a double
calculation is needed, because the situation may be different in corroded and uncorroded conditions.
The stresses to be verified are the bending and shear stress on the tubesheet, the stresses (tensile
and compressive) on the tubes (including the check of the tube to tubesheet joints), the stresses
(tensile and compressive) on the shell.
 In all design conditions the bending stress in the tubesheet is to be compared with a nominal design
stress equal to 1,5 S, while the limit for the shear stress is to be taken equal to 0,8 S. (S = allowable
stress from the tables of Section II, part D). For the channel and the shell possibly connected to the
tubesheet, that are loaded by its edge rotation, the limit is the usual limit of all “secondary” stresses
(that is, those stresses that are not necessary for the equilibrium, but are caused by the mutual
restraint of the adjoining components): for such stresses the limit stress range shall be 3S. If this
limit is exceeded, it is possible (only for the design conditions) an additional verification using the so
called “plasticity correction factor”. This additional verification is not possible in the 4 operating
conditions, and the only possibility to reduce the secondary stresses remains the increase in thickness of
some one of the adjoining components (shell, channel or tubesheet). As said above, the increase of the
tubesheet thickness could be more economically avoided through the increase in thickness of
other components, for example the channel and/or the shell.
 In case of very high compressive stresses in the tubes, due to the already mentioned impossibility to
increase the buckling stress provided by the standard by changing either the tube dimensions or
the baffle pitch, it is often necessary to increase the tubesheet thickness just to reduce the compressive
stress in the tubes. Of course there are situations where the buckling stress in the tubes is exceeded
whatever is the tubesheet thickness: and there are also cases (for example with very high shell side
pressures) where there is not even the possibility of inserting an expansion bellows in the shell. In all
these cases the possibility of using a different heat exchanger type should be taken into consideration.
 Note that one of the fundamental problems in carrying out a fixed tubesheet calculation in accordance
with UHX is the determination of the average shell temperature and of the average tube
temperature. These data are generally available in the thermal design specification, which must
show at least the inlet and outlet temperatures of the tube side and the shell side fluids. However, while
 it is reasonable to suppose that the average shell temperature may be obtained as the average
between the inlet and outlet temperature of the shell side fluid, the determination of the average
tube temperature, if it is not explicitly reported in the thermal specification , is far more
complicate: in fact the tubes are in contact with both the tube side and the shell side fluids, and their
average temperature (which, by the way, is not the same in each tube side pass) depends on the
average film coefficients of both sides: in other words, the tube temperature is closer to the
temperature of the fluid which has the higher film coefficient. If these data are not available, it is
very difficult, except in a few cases, even to give a rough estimation of such coefficients. Just to make a
few examples, when it is sure that one of the coefficient is substantially higher than the other one, it
may be assumed that the tube temperature is the average of the side with the higher coefficient: in a
heat exchanger where steam at 150°C is condensing on the shell side, while in the tube side there is a
gas or a very viscous liquid heated from 50 to 100°C, the tube temperature is close to the shell
temperature, so you may assume that both the shell and the tubes are at 150°C (in a case like this it
could be wise, in order to provide a minimum thermal expansion, to suppose that the film coefficient on
the tube side is at least 10% of the one of the shell side: in which case, considering that the average
temperature of the tube side fluid is 75°C, the resulting temperature difference of 125°C with the shell
side fluid would cause a decrease of the tube temperature of 12,5°C, so that an average tube
temperature of 150 – 12,5 = 137,5°C may be considered). Of course if you reverse the fluids you get a
shell temperature of 75°C, while the tube temperature can be conservatively left at 150°C. Note that
even when the thermal specification provides the values of the shell and tube temperatures, it must be
clarified how the exchanger is put into or out of service: in this situation, taking the second example,
one must be sure that the shell side fluid is progressively heated by the tube side steam at 150°C,
otherwise there is the risk of having the tubes at 150°C while the shell is still cold, therefore with a
differential thermal expansion certainly higher than in operation.
 One more problem (and this is generally never solved even in presence of a detailed thermal design) is
the determination of the tubesheet temperature: in all operating cases it is possible to consider the
nominal design stresses at this temperature, which is of course lower than the design temperature.
Basically, the tubesheet is in contact more with the tube side fluid than with the shell side fluid:
considering that also tubes welded to the tubesheet are generally light expanded into the tube
holes, most of the heat transferred from the tube side fluid to the tubesheet flows through the
inside tube surface, which is generally much higher than the tubesheet surface in contact with the
channel ; this surface is certainly also higher than the tubesheet surface in contact with the shell.
Moreover, the tube side film coefficient at tube inlet is generally higher than the film coefficient
along the tube. Therefore in most cases it is reasonable to suppose that the operating
temperature of the tubesheet is equal to the operating temperature of the tube side fluid flowing
into or out of the tubesheet: which of course involves the need to consider the number of tube side
passes of the exchanger. In fact a single pass exchanger must have one tubesheet at the inlet
temperature of the tube side fluid, and the other tubesheet at the outlet temperature of the same
fluid (which involves a double calculation), while for a multipass exchanger both tubesheets may be
considered at on operating temperature equal to the average between inlet and outlet tube side
temperatures. Particular attention however should be given to exchangers with very high tube side
temperatures, like the so called waste heat boilers: in these cases the tubesheet temperature cannot
be simply taken equal to the tube side inlet temperature, also because these tubesheets are
intentionally made reasonably thin in order to decrease the heat input from the tube side fluid: a
particular thermal calculation may be needed in order to find the operating tubesheet temperature of
these exchangers.
 When the check of the “radial thermal expansion” of the tubesheet is required, it has to be made only
in the 4 operating load cases: the relevant standard calculation procedures shall be modified by
adding the consideration of the radial thermal stresses generated because of the temperature
differences existing in the 4 adjoining parts: the rim (outside undrilled part of the tubesheet), the shell,
the channel and the tubesheet itself. UHX makes a difference between the “operating temperature of
the tubesheet” and the “tubesheet temperature at the rim”, that is, the temperature of the tubesheet
at the periphery of the bundle: in reality there is no specific reason to suppose that the outer part of the
drilled area is at a temperature different from the one existing inside, therefore the same value may be
taken for these temperatures. It has to be noted that, in the cases where this radial thermal expansion
 is generating high radial tubesheet stresses, an increase of the tubesheet thickness has generally a
negative effect: also in these cases automatic software procedures based on the progressive
increase of tubesheet thickness may not lead to a solution, which shall be carefully investigated
considering a possible change of other parameters. The starting point should be always a tubesheet
thickness which has been previously assessed considering only the standard design and operating load
cases, before adding the radial thermal expansion.

Formally the UHX calculation of a fixed tubesheet exchanger is valid only if both tubesheets have the
same thickness and the same boundary conditions (that is, tubesheet operating temperature and
temperatures of the adjoining components): which happens unfortunately very seldom. Therefore in all cases
where the 2 tubesheets are in a different situation, a reasonable approach is the one to perform a double
calculation, each one with the specific conditions of one of the tubesheets, taking then the most conservative
design. This happens very often when the calculation of the radial thermal expansion is prescribed. Note that
generally neither the thermal specification nor the user’s design specification contain sufficient data to find
the “tubesheet temperature at the rim”, the “channel temperature at the tubesheet”, the “shell
temperature at the tubesheet” and the “tubesheet operating temperature”, as required by UHX. The
following tables are therefore a suggestion, in all cases where the user is not able to supply the data needed
for the calculation (with Tint and Toutt, Tins and Touts we have indicated the inlet and outlet temperatures
of the tube side and the shell side respectively). All the TEMA types of fixed tubesheet heat exchangers have
been considered, for the case of a single tube side pass and for the one of several tube side passes (always
supposing, as it usually happens, an even number of passes).

AxL and BxM exchangers (tubesheet bolted to channel and integral with shell)
 NxN exchangers (tubesheet welded to shell and channel)

Notes:

1. For these cases a double tubesheet calculation is necessary.

2. Data valid for countercurrent arrangement – if concurrent reverse the two temperatures
3. J12 is a TEMA type J with 1 inlet and 2 outlets, J21 is a TEMA type J with 2 inlets and one outlet.
ASME VIII DIVISION 1
Part UHX
UHX-14: Rules for the design of floating tubesheets

Description

Rules for the design of floating tubesheet heat exchangers according UHX -14. There are two
tubesheets connected with tubes. The floating tubesheet can move axially to compensate for the axial
thermal differential expansion between the tubes and the shell barrel. The stationairy and floating
tubesheet must me calculated separately.

Heat exchanger with one stationary tubesheet and one floating tubesheet.

There are three types of floating tubesheet heatexchangers covered:

 Immersed floating head

 Externally sealed floating head
 INternally sealed floating head

Scope

See for scope and conditions of applicability UHX-10 and UHX-11. The rules for bolted flange
connections with gaskets are according UHX 8 and Appendix 2. The rules for tube-to-tubesheet joint
loads are according Appendix A. The effect of plasticity at the joints between the tubesheets and the
shell or the channel may be considered. The stationairy and floating tubesheet can be loaded
with radial diffential thermal expansion. The two tubesheets shall have the same thickness and
material, but can have different edge connections.

Stationary tubesheet configurations

a. Tubesheet integral with shell and channel (config a).

b. Tubesheet integral with shell and gasketed with channel (config b).
c. Tubesheet integral with shell and gasketed with channel, not extended as a flange (config c).
d. Tubesheet gasketed with shell and channel (config d).
e. Tubesheet gasketed with shell and integral channel (config e).
f. Tubesheet gasketed with shell and integral channel, not extended as a flange (config f).

UHX 14.2 (config a) Integral shell and channel.

TEMA equivalent type is NES

UHX 14.2 (config b) Integral shell and gasketed channel.

TEMA equivalent types are AES and BES
without removable bundle
UHX 14.2 (config c) Integral shell and gasketed channel.
Tubesheet not extended as flange.
TEMA equivalent types are AES and BES
without removable bundle.

UHX 14.2 (config d) Gasketed shell and channel.

TEMA equivalent types are AES and BES.

UHX 14.2 (config e) Gasketed shell and integral

channel. TEMA equivalent type is CES
 UHX 14.2 (config f) Gasketed shell and integral channel.
Tubesheet not extended as a flange.
TEMA equivalent type is CES

Geometry stationairy tubesheet

Gc, Gs Gasket force reaction diameter for the channel or shell side flange.

C Bolt circle diameter

W* Effective tubesheet bolt load from channel or shell side flange according UHX 8.

Dc, Ds Inside diameter channel or shell

tc, ts Wall thickness channel or shell

h Tubesheet thickness

hr Tubesheet extension thickness

A Outside diameter tubesheet

Floating tubesheet configurations

A. Integral floating tubesheet (config A).

B. Gasketed floating tubesheet extended as a flange (config B).
C. Gasket floating tubesheet not extended as a flange (config C).
D. Internally sealed floating tubesheet (config D).
 UHX 14.3 (config A) Integral floating tubesheet used
for floating tubesheet heat exchanger of type (b)
[see figure UHX-14.1 (b)]

UHX 14.3 (config B) Gasketed floating tubesheet extended

as a flange. Equivalent TEMA types are AET and BET.

UHX 14.3 (config C) Gasketed floating tubesheet

not extended as a flange.
Equivalent TEMA types are AES and BES.
 UHX 14.3 (config D) Internally sealed floating tubesheet
used for floating tubesheet heat exchanger of
type (c) [see figure UHX-14.1 (c)].
Equivalent TEMA types are AEW and BEW.

Geometry floating tubesheet

Gc, Gs Gasket force reaction diameter for the channel or shell side flange.

C Bolt circle diameter

W* Effective tubesheet bolt load from channel or shell side flange according UHX 8.

Dc, Ds Inside diameter channel or shell

tc, ts Wall thickness channel or shell

h Tubesheet thickness

hr Tubesheet extension thickness

A Outside diameter tubesheet

Loading cases stationary and floating tubesheet

In the calculation the following loads occur:

 Tube side design pressure Pt

 Shell side design pressure Ps
 Radial differental thermal expansion adjacent to the tubesheet with integral shell and/or
integral channel
Loadcase Description

Tube side pressure Pt only, shell side pressure Ps = 0 and without radial differential
1
thermal expansion

Shell side pressure Ps only, tube side pressure Pt = 0 and without radial differential thermal
2
expansion

Tube side pressure Pt and shell side pressure Ps and without radial differential thermal
3
expansion

Radial differential thermal expansion only, tube side pressure Pt = 0 and shell side
4
pressure Ps = 0

5 Tube side pressure Pt and radial differential thermal expansion, shell side pressure Ps = 0

6 Shell side pressure Ps and radial differential thermal expansion, tube side pressure Pt = 0

7 Tube side pressure Pt and shell side pressure Ps and radial differential thermal expansion

Notes

1. For normal operating conditions use loading cases 1 through 7

2. When using vacuum pressure, the shell side pressure becomes Ps = - Pv in loading cases 1, 4 and
5 and the tube side pressure becomes Pt = - Pv in loading cases 2, 4 and 6
3. For normal operating conditions with differential pressure only use loading cases 3 and 7
4. For test conditions use loading cases 1, 2 and 3 (no differential thermal expansion)
5. The radial differential thermal expansion is optional and to be used when cyclic or dynamic
reactions due to pressure or thermal variations are specified.

Calculated values stationary tubesheet

 Required bolt area

 Bolt loads for operating and assembly/atmospheric condition
 Lever arms for reaction forces
 Moments for operating and assembly/atmospheric conditions
 Minimum required tubesheet extension thickness
 Radial differential thermal expansion
 Effective pressure on tubesheet
 Bending stress in the tubesheet
  Average shear stress in the tubesheet
 Largest axial stress in the tubes (tensile and buckling)
 Largest tube-to-tubesheet joint load
 Combined stress in the shell containing membrane stress and bending stress
 Combined stress in the channel containing membrane stress and bending stress

Calculated values floating tubesheet

 Required bolt area

 Bolt loads for operating and assembly/atmospheric condition
 Lever arms for reaction forces
 Moments for operating and assembly/atmospheric conditions
 Minimum required tubesheet extension thickness in the floating tubesheet
 Radial differential thermal expansion in the floating tubesheet
 Effective pressure on the floating tubesheet
 Bending stress in the floating tubesheet
 Combined stress in the floating channel containing membrane stress and bending stress

Assessment bolts

 Ab ≥ Am (bolt area shell side and tube side)

Assessment stationary and floating tubesheet

S is the allowable stress tubesheet

SPS is the allowable primary plus secondary stress tubesheet

 h ≥ hr1 (extension thickness)

 h ≥ hr2 (extension thickness)
 AL ≤ 4 Do p (untubed area)
 |σb| ≤ 1.5 S (tubesheet bending without plasticity effect and loading case 1, 2, 3)
 |σb| ≤ SPS (tubesheet bending without plasticity effect and loading case 4, 5, 6, 7)
 |σh| ≤ 0.8 S (tubesheet average shear)
 |σb| ≤ 1.5 S (tubesheet bending with plasticity effect and loading case 1, 2, 3)

Assessment tubes
St is the allowable stress tubes
Sy,t is the yield strength tubes

 |σt,max| ≤ St (tubes tensile, loading case 1, 2, 3)

 |σt,max| ≤ 2 St (tubes tensile, loading case 4, 5, 6, 7)
 |σt,min| ≤ Min [ 1/Fs π2 Et / Ft2, St] (tubes buckling when Ct ≤ Ft)
 |σt,min| ≤ Min [Sy,t / Fs (1 - Ft / (2 Ct)), St] (tubes buckling when Ct > Ft)

Assessment shell (stationary tubesheet)

Ss is the allowable stress shell

SPS,s is the allowable primary plus secondary stress shell

 l1 ≥ 1.8 √Ds ts (decay length shell side)

 σs ≤ 1.5 Ss (shell stress without plasticity effect and loading case 1, 2, 3)
 σs ≤ SPS,s (shell stress without plasticity effect and loading case 4, 5, 6, 7)
 σs ≤ SPS,s (shell stress integral with plasticity effect and loading case 1, 2, 3)

Assessment channel (stationary tubesheet)

Sc is the allowable stress channel

SPS,c is the allowable primary plus secondary stress channel

 l1 ≥ 1.8 √Dc tc (decay length tube side)

 σc ≤ 1.5 Sc (channel stress without plasticity effect and loading case 1, 2, 3)
 σc ≤ SPS,c (channel stress without plasticity effect and loading case 4, 5, 6, 7)
 σc ≤ SPS,c (channel stress integral with plasticity effect and loading case 1, 2, 3)

What are the differences between them two in terms of design, fabrication, and testing?

At the most general level TEMA addresses features that are partiucular to shell & tube heat exchangers that
Code does not. Some examples are baffle thickness and clearance to the shell, tie rod standards, instrument
connections and many others. Design of the actual pressue boundary is usually governed by Code.

Code generally is mandated by law in various jurisdiction, TEMA standards are not.

If you are talking about tubesheet design, Part UHX is much more detailed that TEMA. It more "accurately"
accounts for elastic properties in the perforated and unperforated regions of the tubesheeet, and of the tubes.
It takes into account stresses in cylinders integral to the tubesheet.
Part UHX calculations require that nearly all details of the design are known to perform tubeshet design.
TEMA standards solve for a thickness directly, Part UHX solves for stresses and therefore is usually an
iterative calculation. TEMA calculations for other than fixed tubesheet exchangers can usually be solved with
pencil and paper in a few minutes. I am not sure Part UHX calculations can be solved by hand at all.

Still, fabrication and testing are mostly governed by other parts of the Code such as Parts UG, UCS, etc.

Part UHX is mandatory under the Code, TEMA is not.

No doubt I've left out some important differences...