ASME Section III, NC-3658 Analysis of Flanged Joints
Steve Lawrence
Does anyone know the paper, or reference, that formed the basis of
NC-3658.1(Analysis of Any Flanged Joint) and the limits defined in
NC-3658.3 (ANSI B16.5 flanged Joints With High Strength Bolting)?
Have searched most PVRC journals but I have come up dry.
Regards
S.R. (Steve) Lawrence, P.Eng.
lawr...@idirect.com
SLBraune
I'm not sure, but I think you may be interested in the method used by in the
TAYLOR FORGE flange design booklet. It's been around for years. Check out any
of the ASME Section VIII handbooks. If you come up empty, email me at slbraune
@aec-va.com. I'll dig it out of my files for you. I'm out of town the first
week of March, so see me after that.
Regards, Steve Braune
Alexander Sharon
Steve Lawrence wrote:
Hi Steve,
I have been using for years Taylor Forge Bulletyn 502 "Modern Flange
Design". Several editions were published since my student's years.
Several reference positions in the "Bibliography" section of this
Bulletin may assist you:
1. Waters, E.O., Wesstrom. D.B.. Rosheim D.B. and Williams F.S.G.
"Formulas fo Stresses in Bolted Flanged Connections," Transaction ASME,
Volume 59, 1937, PAges 161-169.
2. Waters, E.O. and Taylor J.H. "The Strengths of Pipe Flanges",
Mechanical Engineering, Volume 49, Mid-May 1927, Pages 531-542.
3. Waters E.O., Rossheim D.B. Wesstrom, D.B. and Wiliams F.S.G.
"Development of General Formulas for Bolted Flanges", Taylor Forge and
Pipe Works, Chicago Ill, 1949
4. Rossheim, D.B. and Markl A.R.C. "Gasket Loading Constants",
Mechanical Engineering, September 1943, pp. 647-648
5. Roberts, I. "Gaskets and Bolted Joints", Journal of Applied
Mechanics, Trans ASME Vol. 17June 1950, pp. 169-179
There are other listed references in the T-F Bulletin concerning with
the Flanges with Metal-Metal Contact beyond the Bolt Circle (Part "B"
Flanges)
To obtain the required references, you might wish to contact directly
ASME, they have furnished me in the past with the photocopies of the
required pages of "Mechanical Engineering" and Transactions, or directly
from Taylor Forge, last time i spoke with them they were known as Taylor
Forge, G+W Taylor Bonney Division, at Southfield Michigan.
(My educated guess that this is now a Bonney Forge affiliate).
Another great source for any current papers on bolted flange connection
are publications by Welding Research Council (WRC). I can not figure out
how my previous employer got copies of WRC publication. I guess it was
somehow connected with the paid membership of API (American Petroleum
Insttitute). In any event, WRC publications show same address as ASME
headquarters in NYC (345 East 47 Street, NYC, NY 10017).
I used to watch in the past WRC publications, trying to figure out with
what type material they will finally come out as a proven substitution
for asbestos gasketing.
Good luck, Steve
Alexander Sharon, P.Eng
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
sha...@cadvision.com
Alexander Sharon
Steve Lawrence wrote:
> Does anyone know the paper, or reference, that formed the basis of
> NC-3658.1(Analysis of Any Flanged Joint) and the limits defined in
> NC-3658.3 (ANSI B16.5 flanged Joints With High Strength Bolting)?
> Have searched most PVRC journals but I have come up dry.
>
> Regards
>
> S.R. (Steve) Lawrence, P.Eng.
> lawr...@idirect.com
Hi again, Steve
This is postscriptum to my earlier reply to your questions.
While browsing through the pressure vessels sources in my home library,
I came accross an another publication, maybe also relevant to your
question.
I am refering to PD 6438, "Design of Bolted Flanges for Pressure
Vessels" published by British Standard Institution (BS) in October 1969.
This actually is a memorandum by P.J. Kemp, a three pages long document
with five pages of the references.
In this document, issued before the first publication of British
Standard BS 5500, Unfired Fusion Welded Pressure Vessels (first
appearance in 1976), author analyses ASME Taylor Forge vs. BS Lake and
Boyd calculation methods for bolted flanges.
Please bear in mind that this paper (PD 6438) has been published prior
to BS 5500, and author make references to old pressure vessels
standards, BS 1500 and BS 1515. The old British Pressure Vessel Standard
BS 1500 has retained Lake and Boyd method for bolted flanged connection
(refer to Lake, G.F and Boyd, G. "Design of Bolted Flanged Joints of
Pressure Vessels" Proceeding, Institute of Mechanical Engineers, 1957,
Vol.171, No. 31)
Author's remarks are relevant only to flanges over 24" in diameter (>
ASME B16.5 scope). This would compare with API 605 and MSS 44, now
integrated into ASME B16.47 standards (NPS 26 to NPS 60), design of
which is also based on theTaylor Forge method, adopted in ASME BPVC and
ASME B31 Piping Codes.
The following author's observations have surprised me a bit:
1 "It was known in 1957 that the ASME (Taylor Forge) method was liable
to be unsatisfactory for large diameter flanges and it was reported,
could lead to designs that could not be made leak tight"
2. "Murray and Stuart, using theoretical and experimental evidence
showed that for the large flanges the Taylor Forge method (ASME)
underestimates and BS 1500 method over-estimates the stress for large
taper hub flnages. Cosequently, for diameters over about 10 ft ASME
flanges may be too thin and BS taper hub flanges may be uneconomically
thick."
3. "The discrepancies are due to the neglect of a particular integral in
the original calculations. The Murray and Stuart method enables
calculations to be made of the longitudinal stresses behind the hub and
the rotation of the flanges for the individual cases. Printing errors in
the equations in the original paper have to be correcte before solving
the eight simultaneous linear equations".
3." DIN 2505 includes a method for dealing with load deformation of the
joint due to pressure. The Swedish Pressure Vessel Code has a procedure
for calculating full face flanges and non-circular flanges."
[Note: For Murray, N.W. and Stuart, D.G. paper refer to "Behaviour of
large taper hub flanges", Proc. I.Mech. E, 1961 Symposium]
Author proceeds with evaluation of a particular cases in cryogenic, high
temperature and high pressure services.
In conclusions the following deficiencies of ASME method are summirised:
"The ASME method does not meet all the requirements for flange design
and has the following major deficiencies:
1. Satisfactory up to 5 ft diameter, progressively more unsatisfactory
abobe this and inadequate anove 10 ft.
2. Flat face flanges with metal to metal contact beyond the bolt circle
not covered
3. Hoop stresses due to internal pressure neglected
4. Applies primary to flanges with the same modulis of elasticity as
carbon steel
5. Does not cosidered separately the deformation characteristics of the
gasket under effects of pressure and temperature
6. Designs with self-enegizing seals not covered other than elastomer O
rings.
7. Thermal effects neglected
8. Designs with radial slotted holes not covered
9. Apply primary to circular flanges
10. Stress concentrations as filets and holes neglected
11. Does not give rotation of flanges"
My remarks:
Bearing in mind that:
a. the above paper has been written in 1969
b. BS 5500 has superseded old BS 1500 and 1515 in 1976
c. ASME BPV Code has evolved from 1968 edition by adding many new
sections (non circular flanges, metal to metal contact calculation
methodology for beyond the bolt circle, etc.
d. Asbestos filled gasketing has been eliminated from the marketplace
quit a while ago, but ASME BPV Code did not notice it, and continues
publishing "m" and "y" gasket factors based on findings of 1937 paper,
as if asbestos is still available around.
e. Computerized commercial programs have dramatically improved
calculations speed,
f. WRC has published many excellent papers on bolted flange design.
etc.,
Where are we standing today with the calculation methodology for bolted
flanges designs? Are all defficiencies of ASME methods listed above have
been taken care of. What is new BS 5500 methodology for flanger
calculations, how it compares with ASME method. What surprises are
prepared in 1998 ASME BPV Code edition. Some hints were given in
"Mechanical Engineering".
Your comments will be highly appreciated.
Robert
I thought that Graphite filled gasketing was widely accepted as the most
suitable replacement for asbestos gasketing. The graphite filled product
is fire resistant and is suited to the majority of typical oil and gas
process services. Mineral filled gaskets are neither fire resistant nor do
they have the resilence of the graphite filled gaskets so they do not seal
as well.
--
Robert
Ran...@bigfoot.com
Alexander Sharon <sha...@cadvision.com> wrote in article
<34F825F2...@cadvision.com>...
>
>
> Steve Lawrence wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know the paper, or reference, that formed the basis of
> > NC-3658.1(Analysis of Any Flanged Joint) and the limits defined in
> > NC-3658.3 (ANSI B16.5 flanged Joints With High Strength Bolting)?
> > Have searched most PVRC journals but I have come up dry.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > S.R. (Steve) Lawrence, P.Eng.
> > lawr...@idirect.com
>
> Hi Steve,
> I used to watch in the past WRC publications, trying to figure out with
> what type material they will finally come out as a proven substitution
> for asbestos gasketing.
>
> Good luck, Steve
>
> Alexander Sharon, P.Eng
> Calgary, Alberta, Canada
> sha...@cadvision.com
>
>