Dear Richard/Dave,

I am considering CYLINDERICAL NOZZLES.

As WRC 297 is supplementary version of WRC 107 which give more number of points for stress check. (i.e., on both SHELL & NOZZLE SIDE checking).

Is it sufficient to perform only WRC 297 (Taking max loads & moments into considerations) for same nozzle without doing WRC 107?

Yes you can perform WRC 297 only. I hope that you can have NozzlePro for more realistic analysis.

But in wrc 297 loads and wrc 107 loads are not same.
In wrc 107 we are entering Sus,exp,occ.
Where in wrc 297 direct p vl vc ml mc..
Then how wrc 297 is enough?

Can Anyone please clarify my doubt.

Dear Richard/Dave,

I am considering CYLINDERICAL NOZZLES.

As WRC 297 is supplementary version of WRC 107 which give more number of points for stress check. (i.e., on both SHELL & NOZZLE SIDE checking).

Is it sufficient to perform only WRC 297 (Taking max loads & moments into considerations) for same nozzle without doing WRC 107?

please help in this area..

I don't think anyone will offer advice on this question. Recent work indicates that WRC297 yields non-conservative results. This is a discussion you need to have with your team and the client.

Thank you Richard for your valuable reply,

But I am very confused about this WRC 297, because.

1. I studied in one of the technical research paper it states that – “ WRC 297 comparisons in the vessel or header tend to be good but become overly conservative when the high stress moves into the branch when the t/T ratio becomes less than 1.0”.

2. But you’re saying WRC 297 is non-conservative as per recent works.

I didn’t understand whether it is non-conservative (or) over-conservative. Please clear this one.

Dear Richard, If possible can you please give me the path/file of recent work papers regarding WRC 297.

Even I am facing the same problem

Mr. Richard please share your ideas on it.

Thank you Richard for your valuable reply,

But I am very confused about this WRC 297, because.

1. I studied in one of the technical research paper it states that – “ WRC 297 comparisons in the vessel or header tend to be good but become overly conservative when the high stress moves into the branch when the t/T ratio becomes less than 1.0”.

2. But you’re saying WRC 297 is non-conservative as per recent works.

I didn’t understand whether it is non-conservative (or) over-conservative. Please clear this one.

Dear Richard, If possible can you please give me the path/file of recent work papers regarding WRC 297.

I guess Richard's comment is related to the comparison with NozzlePro analyses on the subject.

In case you have some doubt, you'd better obtain NozzlePro for the reliable analysis and see the comparison with WRC 107 and WRC 297 as well.
Check out " www.paulin.com " for more information.

Thank you for your reply..

This statement is taken from NOZZLE PRO help file only- “ WRC 297 comparisons in the vessel or header tend to be good but become overly conservative when the high stress moves into the branch when the t/T ratio becomes less than 1.0”.

Richard said “WRC 297 is NON-CONSERVATIVE as per recent works” but From NOZZLE PRO “WRC 297 is OVERLY- CONSERVATIVE”.

That is why I am confused,, whether it is NON-CONSERVATIVE or OVERLY- CONSERVATIVE

There are some recent webinars in the web site. I suggest you to watch them to understand the SIF implementation in the available sources within these webinars and decide if they are really applicable for your case. I trust you will find your answers there.
Answering your question is not easy, there are too many details to understand. Please watch these free webinars, you will get some answers from there.

Thank you Ibrahim Demir

In this Topic where SIF comes into picture. Sorry I didn’t get that.

Problem is, in our company from last 5 years, we are doing only WRC 297 for local check analysis. But for a new project PMC is saying u have to perform both 107 & 297, otherwise we have to give satisfied reason. Why only 297, why not both107 & 297 that is my problem. I struck here. Because doing both WRC 107 & 297 takes lot of time. Is it really required to do both as per any technical issues happened in past.

In this forum, so many experience people are there, like you, I hope, I will get the answer. I am waiting for that.

Dear Richard,

what you said" Recent work indicates that WRC297 yields non-conservative results".

If possible can you please give me the path/file of recent work papers regarding WRC 297.