WRC297 OR WRC107

I want to know the difference between WRC297 or WRC107,Who can help me?
Thanks in advance!

297 is a supplement to 107. 107 calculates local stresses around attachments to spheres and cylinders. 297 is just cylinders. 297 also calculates local stresses on the attachments. 297 also estimates the flexibility at the attachment.

107 and 297 do not produce the same results.

Can we use 107 & 297 both at same time, to calculate local stress around attachments, with taking the advantage of flexibility at the attachment.

Thanhs & regards

WRC 297
a) d/D <= 0.5
b) D/T<=2500
c) d/t <=100
d) Calculates vessel stress and nozzle stress
e) Used for cylindrical nozzle on cylindrical vessel

WRC 107
a) d/D < 0.33
b) Dm/T>50, where Dm = D – T, mean vessel dia.
c) Calculates vessel stress only.

MK - "Yes".

You can build your piping model and specify that you have a WRC-297 nozzle. This will introduce the WRc-297 flexibilities into the piping model.

Once you have the results, you can use the WRC-107/297 module to determine the local stresses at the nozzle and attachment. Note the limits mentioned above.

Richard Ay

When will you add WRC 490?

Richard Ay

When will you add "WRC 497"?

'NOT WRC 490'

We'll look into it.

Richard Ay

FE-Pipe: Yes! "WRC 497" soon?

Can't say about FE/Pipe, you'll have to talk to Paulin Research.

Here is what has been bugging me for sometime:
Introducing the WRC 297 flexibilities (Figs. 59 and 60)into the piping model as suggested by Richard and Caesar II manual, and applying results (already "softened") to be evaluated by WRC 107 or any FEA software - isn't it taking twice advantage of displacements due to local shell / nozzle flexibilities?
Took part in a heated discussion on this subject recently and no final conclusion has been achieved. Would appreciate both COADE and forum opinions on the above.
Regards

The softened numbers as you put it are just more "realistic" the actual numbers will be slightly different than these.

However this difference will be far less than the results from the ordinary very high default restraint stiffness that CAESAR II employs.

I do not understand the concern you have of double dipping. After you have the "softened" or as I would call it more realistic reaction numbers you or somebody has to evaluate these numbers and WRC107 and or FEA are the only or the most practical ways to evaluate the equipments strength.

There is no double dipping per se. However I caution you and every one else to read the WRC papers and use them within their basis.

Hi
Please visit this web site.http://pipestress.com/papers/WRC107-297.pdf