this may not directly relate to CII software but I might be able to use a little help from the experienced pipe stress engineers here:

I have a 45 degree pipe to pipe connection in my calculation and the all time dilemma of whether to use Codeti or FE method to figure the SIF value (design code is B31.1)
I made a simplified calculation in FE pipe and here are my observations:
1- the FE SIF inplane/outplane of a normal connection is larger than a 45 degree one
2- In a 45 degree connection the pressure SIF is way higher than its value in a normal connection
3- I am quite dubious about which SIF I will have to use in my calculation ( max (inpane/outplane) or pressure SIF)

I would appreciate if I could get a good explanation about the above points

thanks

From Tony Paulin of PRG:

There are block fittings and pipe laterals. Block fittings for 45’s are used in steam lines mostly and the Do/T ratios are <7ish, and in these cases some further considerations may be warranted. (You know if you have a block fitting.)

For other types of 45’s:
1)We are getting ready to run burst tests since there is some concern about those. We should have those results in about a month for a D/T=91 lateral. The suspicion is that the elastic FEA method is more than adequately conservative in large lambda regions, where lambda is (D/T)^0.5 x (d/D). Large lambda is lambda greater than around 7ish too. (There is a conservative adjustment factor in the Bildy method in VIII-2 Part 4 nozzle design for pressure.) (So the conclusion here is that the elastic FEA design for pressure is likely conservative and maybe too conservative.)

2)For inplane and out-of-plane loads through the branch – the lateral SIFs can be larger than the 90 deg. SIFs because the load distribution footprint can be larger. Since 07-02 corrects iir and ior error, the 07-02 factors can be multiplied by the constants below to get an estimate of an updated SIF. FEATools makes the computation of SIFs for lateral branch connections, and so the CAESAR II user can take a version of FEATools and translate his CAESAR II model. The translated model will have an updated model for the lateral with the FEA SIFs included.

3)The torsional loads through the branch and the run are the problematic ones (along with the pressure). The user can see the adjustments required in the table below. The itb factor is being changed, but the sense of involvement with itb and the SIFs is illustrative of the torsional problem.

If you wish to submit the model thru the FEATools review process from the last webinar, the PRG team will review the model, generate the SIFs and make comments on the results.