|
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
Tom, I suggest you open a Support Request on Smart Support to receive specific support on this issue. Please include the exact version/build of c2 you're using in the request.
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
not to extract but it is possible to find out how many "nodes" have support on it. Go to stress isometrics, choose Edit Stress Annotations, then Restraint/hanger types. It will show you at the left the index, counting exactly how many "nodes" have su
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
is there a way to extract the number of nodes having support in a caesar model? example: node 10: +Z node 20: +Z, guide node 30: +Z, -X, +X in this example i need to know there are 3 nodes having supports. the caesar report extract 1 support for n
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
Hi Michael, you have made your point there regarding the heat loss. At the moment I can only assume a number. The max design of 110 deg C is mainly causing this. Would it be acceptable to assume the max temp for buried piping is the operating temper
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
Hi Tom, thanks for your suggestion. Are you able to share pictures how you do this arrangement?
|
|
CADWorx Plant
|
|
Correct, CADWorx Plant component data can be found in the Xdata on the object and in dictionaries on the object. Then numerous dictionaries in the dwg file itself for program settings.
|
|
CADWorx Plant
|
|
I know that CADWorx can connect with an external database through Live Database. But as far as I know, CADWorx does not have an internal database as such and relies on the existing, internal data storage afforded to it via the format of the .dwg fil
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
You could also put the elbows in an insulation box to allow them to move and install flexible / crushable insulation along a portion of the connecting pipe to allow the pipe to move.
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
anyone??
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
I am trying to run the WRC 297 analysis and the analysis section is blank. Does anyone have the fix for this? It was working until I deleted the WRC107 item at the top of the component list and then it stopped working. Now it won't work at all. T
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
It is not very clear if you have in the SOW also the burried line. If you do not, you can specify that is included only for boundary condition and to delete the allowable. Other thing: do you have an anchor block underground? you can stop there. Man
|
|
CADWorx ISOGEN
|
|
This is really useful info! Thank you for sharing, I am planning to give it a closer look this evening when I get to my home. Thanx once again
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
If you have FEA Tools you can try to use it. Although it's not always a guarantee that it will reduce stress. If still overstressed, try increasing section modulus by increasing bend thickness, but noting the welding requirements for dissimilar thi
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
In an ideal world, you would forgo analysis in CAESAR, not because CAESAR doesn't give you the answer you need, but because you know CAESAR will predict what you already know. I would expect that the line temperature remaining hot could be a point y
|
|
CADWorx Plant
|
|
I'll try to clarify a bit what this is about. I'm interested in carbon steel (EN 10220) and stainless steel (ISO 1127) pipes and welded fittings (EN 10253-2 and 10253-4) and flanges by EN 1092-1
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
Hi fellow pipe stressers, I was wondering if I can pick you brain for the below DN150 STD CS piping system which has a portion buried 1.5m underground as shown in the attached pic. Delta temperature for buried piping is 45 deg C. The lengths of the
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
Hi Richard and Michael, many thanks for the explanation.
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
Hi Fellow Stressers!! I already got it. I have a system where even if I toggle from Max 3D Shear and Von Mises the calculated stress is the same. I think there is only 1 principal stress S1 in my system with S2=S3=0. For this case Equivalent Von Mi
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
Hello Fellow Stressers!! How to set in CII to use Von Mises stress in fatigue evaluation. Thanks & Warm Regards,
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
To take the response a bit further, CAESAR will automatically calculate SIFs and flexibility according to the code. If you believe the SIFs and flexibility factors from the code to be inaccurate, then you'll need to calculate those externally and in
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
It's ok now Dorin. As I understand loading ratio is also related to mean stress. And since the fatigue curve itself have considered the effect of mean stress different loading ratio can be catered but with consideration to the cumulative usage for ea
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
Ratcheting is an incremental plastic collapse. When we satisfy the low cycle fatigue from ASME Fatigue Curves, is it necessary to check ratcheting? What is the main difference between the two? Your expert advise is highly appreciated. Warm Regards
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
Thanks Dorin for that precise information regarding mean stress. It clears my mind now. How about loading ratio? Warm Regards,
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
Hi Borzki, Quote from ASME BPVC VIII-2 Sect. 5.5.1.4: >. So, the common employment of smooth bar fatigue curves given by ASME VIII-2 part 5 do not require mean stress on cycle consideration. Best regards,
|
|
CAESAR II
|
|
Take the nominal OD, multiply by 8, and enter that value in the "bend radius" field.
|
