Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1N0000258 |
3
3
"ro
1999
3 1 - 11
BARC/1999/E/037
« GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
g ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
08 Contract No.:
10 Title and subtitle: Development of a software for the ASME Code qualification of
class-1 nuclear piping systems
13 Project No.:
Type: Government
Contd... (ii)
-i-
30 Date of submission: October 1999
60
Abstract: In nuclear industry, the designer often comes across the requirements of Class-1 piping
systems which need to be qualified for various normal and abnormal loading conditions. In order to
have quick design changes and the design reviews at various stages of design, it is quite helpful if a
dedicated software is available for the qualification of Class-1 piping systems. BARC has already
purchased a piping analysis software CAESAR-II and has used it for the Life Extension of Heavy
Water Plant, Kota. CAESAR-II facilitates the qualification of Class-2 and Class-3 piping systems
among others. However, the present version of CAESAR-II does not have the capability to perform
stress checks for the ASME Class-1 nuclear piping systems. With this requirement in mind and the
prohibitive costs of commercially available softwares for the Class-1 piping analyses, it was decided to
develop a separate software for this class of piping in such a way that the input and output details of
the piping from the CAESAR-II software can be made use of. This report principally contains the
details regarding development of a software for codal qualification of Class-1 nuclear piping as per
ASME Code Section-in, NB-3600. The entire work was carried out in three phases. The first phase
consisted of development of the routines for reading the output files obtained from the CAESAR-H
software, and converting them into required format for further processing. In this phase, the node-
wise informations available from the CAESAR-II output file were converted into element-wise
informations. The second phase was to develop a general subroutine for reading the various input
parameters such as diameter, wall thickness, corrosion allowance, bend radius and also to recognize
the bend elements based on the bend radius, directly from the input file of CAESER-II software. The
third phase was regarding the incorporation of the required steps for performing the ASME Codal
checks as per NB-3600 for Class-1 piping systems. The developed software has been tested analytically
for verification of the results and has been found to be performing satisfactorily.
99 Supplementary elements:
•it-
ABSTRACT
The entire work was carried out in three phases. The first phase consisted
of development of the routines for reading the output files obtained from the
CAESAR-II software, and converting them into required format for further processing.
In this phase, the node-wise informations available from the CAESAR-II output file were
converted into element-wise informations. The second phase was to develop a general
subroutine for reading the various input parameters such as diameter, wall thickness,
corrosion allowance, bend radius and also to recognize the bend elements based on the
bend radius, directly from the input file of CAESER-II software.
The third phase was regarding the incorporation of the required steps for
performing the ASME Codal checks as per NB-3600 for Class-1 piping systems. The
developed software has been tested analytically for verification of the results and has
been found to be performing satisfactorily.
CONTENTS
Page nos.
1.0 Introduction 3
2.0 Features of Existing Piping Analysis Software CAESAR-n 4
3.0 Need for a Separate Software for Class-1 Piping Qualification 4
4.0 Development of Post-Processor for Qualification of Class-1 Piping
4.1 Static Analysis 5
4.2 Dynamic Analysis (Inertial) 5
4.3 Missing Mass Correction 6
5.0 Procedure of Qualification for Class-1 Piping
5.1 General Requirements (As per NB-3651) 6
5.2 Consideration of Design Conditions (As per NB-3652) 7
5.3 Consideration of Level-A Service Limits (As per NB-3653) 8
5.4 Consideration of Level-B Service Limits (As per NB-3654) 11
5.5 Consideration of Level-C Service Limits (As per NB-3655) 12
5.6 Consideration of Level-D Service Limits (As per NB-3656) 12
5.6.1 As per Old Code 13
5.6.2 As per New Code( 1998 Edition) 13
6.0 Choice of FORTRAN Language for Development of the Software 13
7.0 Organisation of the Program
7.1Phase-I 14
7.2 Phase-II 15
7.3Phase-m 15
8.0 Testing 16
9.0 Conclusions 16
10.0 References 17
Tables 18
Figures 20
Appendix-A: Sample Formatted Tables for Various Files 24
1.0 Introduction
While a number of softwares are available in the market for the piping
analysis, there are only a few commercially available softwares which have the
capability of performing the Class-1 piping qualification, viz. PS-CAEPIPE. However,
the cost of such softwares is abnormally high and unjustifiable.
(a) The procedure for qualification of piping systems for Class-1 piping is completely
different from the procedure adopted for Class-2 and Class-3 piping.
(b) The equations used in the code NB (Class-1) and the load combination checks
suggested in it, are different from those required to be carried out for codes NC
(Class-2) & ND (Class-3).
(c) Stress Intensification Factors (SDFs) used in the equations are different for NB (Class-
1) and NC (Class-2), ND (CIass-3) codes. The primary plus secondary stress check for
Class-1 piping uses Q & C2 stress indices whereas for the Class-2 and Class-3
pipings, i is used as the SIF.
(d) For Service Levels-A & B conditions, there is no elasto-plastic discontinuity analysis
procedure defined in codes NC (Class-2) & ND (Class-3) whereas these are well
defined in NB (Class-!) code.
Analysis of piping systems can be divided into the following three stages :
4.1 Static Analysis - This is carried out to evaluate the response of piping due to weight,
internal pressure and thermal loading.
4.2 Dynamic Analysis (Inertial) - This is carried out to evaluate the response due to
OBE and SSE. The earthquake loading is applied in two horizontal directions, i.e. North-
South, East-West and Vertical direction utilizing the respective site spectra or floor
response spectra.
The responses due to various modes are combined using any one of the
modal combination methods viz., Grouping method, 10% Square Root Sum of Squares
method (SRSS), Double Sum method (DSRSS), Absolute method & SRSS method.
Spatial combinations are carried out using SRSS method. The response due to Seismic
Anchor Movement (SAM) is also calculated and added with the inertial response in an
absolute manner.
4.3 Missing Mass Correction - In order to account for the missing mass in various
directions, which has not participated upto the floor ZPA (Zero Period Acceleration)
frequency or upto the cut-off frequency in the seismic inertial analysis, the rigid body
mode response is estimated by pseudostatic method, which uses the appropriate
acceleration value either corresponding to the floor ZPA or corresponding to the cut-off
frequency.
Analysis of piping system should be carried out for the following stresses:
(i) Primary stress check: This is carried out to evaluate the stresses due to dead weight &
pressure loading,
(ii) Primary plus Secondary stress check : This is carried out to evaluate the stresses on
the piping system due to thermal expansion, thermal anchor movements and due to
earthquake loading,
(iii) Peak stress check : This analysis is carried out to find out peak stress intensity range
which is utilised for carrying out fatigue check on the system.
Mi,j = Moment about i-th axis due to j-th loading (for static case)
(Mi,n)k = Moment about i-th axis for n-th loading, with excitation in k-th direction (for
dynamic case).
Where,
i = x for x-direction
= y for x-direction
= z for x-direction
P * Do Do * Mi
+ B2* <n.5Sm (9)
2*t 2*1
where,
Bl, B2 = Primary stress indices for the specific product under investigation
(NB-3680)
P - Design pressure, Kgf/mm2
Do = outside diameter of pipe, mm (NB-3683)
t = nominal wall thickness of product, mm (NB3683)
I a Moment of Inertia (mm4)
Mi = resultant moment due to a combination of Design Mechanical
Loads, Kgf-mm. All Design Mechanical loads and combinations
thereof shall be provided in the Design specification. In the
combination of loads, all directional moment components in
the same direction shall be combined before determining the
resultant moment (i.e., resultant moments from different load
sets shall not be used in calculating the moment Mi). If the
method of analysis for earthquake or other dynamic loads is such that
only magnitudes without relative algebraic signs are obtained, the
most conservative combination shall be assumed.
2
MX,OBE= SQRT((X N.s) + (X E -w V + ( X V E R f)
Then,
Po* Do Do* Mi
Sn m Cl* + C2* £ 3Sm (10)
2 *t 2*1
where,
A= Mx.pr + tf,
B=
C=
Mi =SQRT( A 2 + B 2 + C 2 )
If the above equation (10) cannot be satisfied for all pairs of load sets, an
alternative approach, i.e. simplified elastic-plastic discontinuity analysis can be adopted
as given in NB 3653.6 which is as follows:
Only those pairs of load sets which do not satisfy Equation (10) need to
be considered. First Equation (12) shall be satisfied.
Do* Mi
C2 * £ 3Sm (12)
2*1
Po*Do Do* Mi
Sn = Cl* + C2 * £ 3Sm (13)
2 *t 2*1
Mi = Resultant moment due to loads other than thermal bending and thermal expansion
stresses.
10
5.4 Consideration of Service Level B Limits (As per NB-3654)
P*Do Do* Mi
+ B2* £ min(L8Sm,1.5Sy) —(9)
2* t 2*1
where,
Pa (Allowable pressure)
= (2 Sm t)/( Do - 2yt ) where, y = 0.4
The primary plus secondary stress intensity range for each pair of load sets
is checked as per equation (10) where,
Po* Do Do* Mi
Sn = Cl* + C2 * £ 3Sm (10)
2 *t 2*1
A= !Mx, pr+ th I + Mx, OBE (Mx, OBE as defined under design condition)
11
M u =SQRT( A 2 + B 2 + C 2 )
If the above equation (10) cannot be satisfied for all pairs of load sets, an
alternative approach, i.e. simplified elastic-plastic discontinuity analysis can be adopted
as given in NB-3653.6 which is described above under Service Level-A condition.
P * Do Do * Mi
B,* + B2* £ min (2.25 Sin, 1.8 Sy) (9)
2* t 2*1
where,
12
5.6.1 As Per Old Code
P * Do Do * Mi
B,* + B2* £ min(3Sm,2Sy) (9)
2*t 2*1
The permissible pressure shall not exceed 2.0 times the pressure Pa.
In the new code, apart from the criteria for reversing dynamic loads that
are not required to combined with non reversing dynamic loads code has permitted to go
upto 4.5 Sm value. Apart from this kind of loading, the criteria defined above should be
followed. The stress due to weight and inertial loading due to reversing dynamic loads in
combination with the Level D coincident pressure shall not exceed the following:
P * Do Do * Me
- + B2* S 4.5 Sm (9)
2*t 2*1
where,
Me = the amplitude of the resultant moment due to inertia] loading from
earthquake, other reversing type dynamic events and weight.
13
available in the market. Here, the software development work has been carried out using
Microsoft FORTRAN (Refs,5&6).
a) Phase - 1 : Development of module for reading the required parameters from the
output of CAESAR-H, basically the moments for both static and
dynamic load cases.
b) Phase • II: Development of module for reading the required parameters from the
input sheet of CAESAR-II, like diameter, wall thickness, corrosion
allowance, bend radius and pressure.
7.1 Phase-I
Phase-I, deals with reading the results from the CAESAR-H software
output neutral files. A sample dynamic output sheet obtained from CAESAR-H is shown
as Table A-l in Appendix A.
The main aim is to pick up the moments from the output files of
CAESAR-II. For picking up of the values from the format of the neutral files, the work
would have been simple if there is no random variation in the CAESAR-H output. But
this was not the case, there were variations, in the formatting of the outputs obtained from
CAESAR-II. Thus, the whole work was becoming more and more challenging and
interesting.
Phase-I work involved the development of two small modules for reading
the "STATIC" & "DYNAMIC" outputs from the CAESAR-U and subsequently to be
written in intermediate files. The working and reliability of the programs have been
14
checked for various real life problems. A sample intermediate file obtained from the
developed program is attached as Table A-2 in Appendix A.
7.2 Phase-II
7.3 Phase-Ill
This phase utilizes the intermediate input & output files generated with the
help of software modules developed under Phase-I and Phase-II. Phase-Hi, is the final
part of this program. The main aim of this phase is the qualification of Class-1 piping
for various load cases, as per ASME^code NB-3600 as described in para 5.0 above.
15
8.0 Testing
A typical real-life plant problem has been solved using the developed
software and the comparison of results obtained from developed software to that obtained
analytically is included in this report. The piping layout as shown in Fig. 2 is connected
with three process towers. Various supporting arrangements i.e. anchors, directional
restraints and hangers on this layout is shown in Fig. 3. Mathematical model developed
using piping analysis software CAESAR-H is shown in Fig. 4.
The results were obtained as per the requirements for the different load conditions
using Equation (9) and Equation (10) using the developed software. The results obtained
from developed software for a few typical locations (both bend and straight pipe
locations) for various service levels were checked analytically as well and the
comparative results are shown in tabular forms in Tables 1-3. As evident from these
tables, the results obtained from the developed software are found to be in excellent
agreement with the analytical ones, thus ensuring that the developed software is capable
of performing the required ASME code qualification for Class-1 nuclear piping systems.
9.0 Conclusions
A software for Class-1 piping system qualification has been developed and
tested successfully. This software incorporates following capabilities to facilitate the user:
1. The software picks-up the output forces directly from the output neutral files of
CAESAR-II.
2. The software picks-up the required input parameters from CAESAR-U input neutral
file directly.
3. The software has demonstrated capability for qualifying Class-1 piping for various
service levels as per ASME Section-Ill Subsection NCA load combinations.
4. A few practical test problems were solved using the software developed. The results
obtained from the software agree well with the analytical results.
16
10.0 References
1. Piping Analysis Software CAESAR-D, Version 3.23, COADE Inc. Houston, Texas,
USA
2. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section-Ill, Div. 1, Sub-section NCA, 1998
3. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Sectiori-III, Div. 1, Sub-section NB, 1998
17
TABLE 1 : Comparison of Results obtained from the Software with the Analytical Results
for Test Problem (Figs.2-4) (Design condition Eq. 9 (Ref.3))
TABLE 2 : Comparison of Results obtained from the Software with the Analytical Results
for Test Problem (Figs.2-4)
18
TABLE 3 : Comparison of Results obtained from the Software with the Analytical Results
for Test Problem (Figs.2-4)
19
c CAESER-II INPUT
NEUTRAL FILE
y-L 7
READ GEOMETRICAL,
DATA
( *
CEASER-II OUTPUT
NEUTRAL FILE y-i READ FORCES
AND MOMENTS
- ^ SERVICE LEVEL - A ^ -
NO (Pr+TH) YES
IF CHECK FOR
-—_ CREEP REQUIRED ^*-
CHECK FOR (Pr+Th)fNB 3653. EQ.IO; CHECK FOR CREEP (NB 3653. EQ.IO)
<
''1k + Ca*$?-<3 S«
SERVICE LEVEL B EQ.9 CHECK
Cj^-« J3 S m
R PDo . R M 1.8 S,
SERVICE LEVEL - B
YES NO
(TH+OBE) NB 3654. EQ.10
(TH+0BE)>(2 OBE)
USE RESULTANT MOMENT (Mo) USE RESULTANT MOMENT (Mo)
DUE TO (TH-»-OBE)LOADINGS DUE TO 20BE LOADINGS
PDo Mo
1
SERVICE LEVEL-C (Wt+Pr+SSE)(NB 3655, EQ. 9)
r | ^ S Sm
SERVICE LEVEL - 0
(Wt+Pr+SSE+LOCA)
F CHECK REOD. AS
PER OLD CODE
AS PER NEW CODE AS PER OLD CODE
S . - 4 . 5 Sm .5 S»
CHECK AS PER NB 3656, EQ.9
FIL£NAME:RM1
20
1617TE
PROCESS
TOWERS
ro
PPELME
FLANGED VALVE
NOZZLE
- ORECTIONM.
4E8TRAMT
(OCC)SHOCK CASE # 1
TOTALS.. .. Fa Fb Fc Ma Mb Me
MODE MAX .. Fa/Mode Fb/Mode Fc/Mode Ma /Mode Mb/Mode Me/Mode
TABLE A-1:A typical dynamic output sheet obtained from piping analysis
software CEASAR-II for the layout shown in Fig.2
25
ELEMENT NODE MOMENT (Kgf-mm)
No. No. Mx My Mz M*
26
CAESAR I I VERS 3 . 2 3 JOBNAME:N22IN NOV 271998 6:19pm Page 1
L i c e n s e d To: BARC . ID: 15257
PIPE DATA
TABLE A-3:Input neutral file generated from piping analysis software CAESAR-II
for the problem shown in Fig.2
27
ELEMENT NODE O.D. THICK- CORROSION BEND PRESS. ELE.
No. No. NESS ALLOWANCE RADIUS (DESIGN) TYPE
(ram) (mm) (mm) (ram) (kgf/sq.mm)
TABLE A-4: A typical intermediate input file generated for the problem shown
in Fig.2, by the module of the developed software from the input
neutral file (TABLE A-3)
28
Stress checks for Design condition & Service Level D using code equation (9)
TABLE A-5: A sample output sheet generated by the developed software for the
Test Problem (Figs.2-4)
29
Stress checks for Service Levels A(eq.10),B(eq.10) & C(eq.9) using code
TABLE A-6: Other sample output sheet generated by the developed software for
the Problem shown in Fig.2, showing codal checks for Service
Levels A, B & C.
30
Published by : Dr.Vijai Kumar, Head Library & Information Services Division
Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai - 400 085, India.