hi experts, I just came across a question while doing my analysis.
I need to analyze pipes connecting a heat exchanger and a vertical vessel, the line in question comes right up from heat exchanger then goes to vessel's nozzle which is a tangent nozzle, I got different vertical forces on the nozzle if I modeled the nozzle differently, one is as usual that the nozzle connects to vessel using rigid element the other is that the nozzle connects to vessel using pipe, the one using rigid element is much bigger than that of uing pipe;

so which one is more accurate? why is there the difference?

thanks in advance.

Use rigid elements to connect the vessel part is correct. You must satisfy the nozzle loads for this case. Run wrc 107 program if one component l, longitudinal force exceed. If wrc 107 fails use a spring support as suitable location on pipe from vessel clip.

Thanks sridhar; I need to double-check this issue with owner's engineer;

WRC is inapplicable to tangential nozzles. WRC107 is only applicable to straight cylinder/cylinder and straight cylinder/sphere intersections. WRC297 is only applicable to straight cylinder intersections, but is less conservative.

The most accurate option is to run FEA (e.g. Nozzlepro) on the vessel to determine flexibilities, model these flexibilities into CAESAR with CNODEs, and then export loads from CAESAR back to the FEA program.

Minus Nozzlepro, your best bet is to coordinate with the manufacturer.

Wrc 107 is applicable for tangential nozzles pls run wrc module in cII.

I recommend review of the bulletin in question. Minus access to the bulletin, review the User's Guide, where the attached graphic appears.

WRC-107 is only applicable if the end-user permits it.

As rightly said by Michael, collinear nozzles are in reality out of scope of WRC bulletin. Considering them perpendicular to each other is a wild approximation. Its better to use finite element template like NozzlePro or send the loads to vendor for approval.

http://www.whatispiping.com/wrc-107-and-wrc-297


Pls refer fig 2 .

This is one website there is lots of other websites recommend wrc applicable for tangential nozzle

Sridhar,

You are entirely wrong! Do not take any more as trustful references miscellaneous internet sources...they are not validated and not recognized by scientific community!

Go back to Caesar II Manual and original WRC 107 Standard....and you may have a search on Caesar II forum, where the distinguish moderators and other professionally skilled members brought many posts which clarified WRC 107 standard applicability area.

Read carefully and try to educate yourself before to address such inquiries/posts which may create confusions for beginners ...

Regards,

Okay thanks Dorin,
Just wanted to investigate the solution, this platform for intended for same i guess.
Its not for confusing anyone but to clear the confusion.
Still I will take care here onward.

Sridhar,

From the website you reference:



No mention of applicability of WRC is offered or implied.

Okay I agree I have cross checked detail dear needed to run in case of tangential nozzle. It do not fall under scope of WRC

Dear all,
I gave a tangential nozzle checking job to a static equipment engineer and when I got the report, it read as per WRC-107.
So it seems that THOUGH WRC-107 document indicates that it is not to be used for tangential, but there are people (and software) using this bulletin for tangential nozzles as well.

Shahid,

The problem is NOT the SOFTWARE, BUT is the "ENGINEER"!

SOFTWARE STILL (fortunately!) are algorithms more or less accurate/competitive which DO NOT THINK!
Computers still (again fortunately!) are machines which do not think!

Everybody may use a software under any circumstances, as long as they are allowed to to do this, generally by ignoring the warning messages and omitting to acknowledge the theory background!

So, for such unforgivable and elementary mistakes, the "engineers" (please note the quote-marks) are always guilty! Do not blame the software!

Regards,

In caesar if you run the WRC 107, how can define that its tangential nozzle?

It asks for direction cosin for vessel and nozzle.

its not possible direction cosins can represent tangential nozzle.

If its possible and still WRC107 program runs in CAESAR, with correct plot also appear then only possible to comment on it.

Till that time its not possible to analyse tangential nozzle in WRC 107.

I agree with Dorin and Shahid that software operators have been misapplying WRC-107 for decades. If it's the manufacturer, the end-user is really only partially protected insofar as contract allows and the fabricator's ability to pay for damages.

Sridhar, because WRC-107/297 are not applicable to hillside/tangential nozzles, Intergraph is not currently offering any such option. Until such a time that the WRC bulletin or ASME codes offer a calculation, the addition to CAESAR is unlikely to become an option anytime soon.

Whether FEA tools offers a solution, I am at present unaware - I do not have access to this software. Perhaps someone from Intergraph will interject.

At present time, I am only cognizant of the use of NozzlePro to accomplish this, or perhaps a more general FEA software.