I did search in other topics before post without succeed.

My problem is about use of WRC 329. Until today I always use this one because I believed this bulletin is a correction to B31.3 / 31.1 codes. Secondly I believed WRC 329 is conservative and so it is the reason we can use instead of real code table.


I will give you an exemple standard (inside B31.3 scope :no D/t>100...)

unreinforced branch
Header 20" Sch: 10
branch (no impact only diameter more than half of the header) i.e:12" Sch : 10


As per B31.3 ;
header SIF (i) : 8.08
header SIF (o) : 10.44
same for branch

In caesar with WRC 329:
As per B31.3 ;
header SIF (i) : 5.9
header SIF (o) : 5.9

branch SIF (i) : 5.6
branch SIF (o) : 9.9



Whereas if I read WRC 329 bulletin I believed find this result:

header SIF (i) = header SIF (o) : 10.44
same for branch

I succeed to found this results instead of "unreinforced" I choose a "reinforced" branch with pad of 0.


If I remember well when I start caesar on vs. 4.4 I already saw this problem.


Where are the mistake : Me, CII or in fact WRC 329 is not always conservative?

Thanks