Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
www.elsevier.com/locate/ijpvp
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Ghulam Ishaq Khan Institute of Engineering Sciences and Technology, Topi-23460, NWFP, Pakistan
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK
Received 11 November 2002; revised 11 October 2003; accepted 10 November 2003
Abstract
Bolted flanged joints comprise an assembly of a number of important individual components, which are required to perform well together
in service. The ideal requirement for a bolted flange joint is a zero-leak condition. However, whilst recommended design procedures for
bolted flange joints are available in international codes and standards, leakage problems are still faced by industry. These are common in both
normal operating (internal pressure loading) and critical event conditions. The drive is, therefore, to find a flange joint assembly, which
provides zero-leak condition and requires little or no maintenance and handling. Considerable investigation in the area of optimised bolted
joints has been in progress for the past 10 years comparing traditional gasketed joints and compact non-gasketed joints, using both
analytical and experimental approaches. In this present study, two-dimensional non-linear finite element studies have been performed for
both gasketed and non-gasketed bolted flange pipe joints. Based on the stress results for the flange and the bolt and the flange
rotation/displacement, compact non-gasketed flange joints are shown to be a viable and preferable alternative to the conventional gasketed
flange joints. Recommendations are made for a best-fit flange model for static load conditions with zero-leak sealing in a flange joint.
q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Gasketed; Non-gasketed; Leakage; Flange joints; Finite element
1. Introduction
All modern international design codes and standards
provide calculation rules for the design of the flanges, which
are principally based on the Taylor Forge method [1,2].
Flange joints designed in accordance with international
codes such as ASME [3], PD [4], and CEN [5] experience
leakage and this problem is continuously faced by industry.
In the present study, detailed analysis of flange joints is
undertaken in order to observe the actual stress behaviour in
flange, bolts and gasket. The reason for such a study is that a
bolted flange joint is a combination of different elements
which are inter-linked with each other to perform as a unit
for zero-leak condition. Mathematically, the zero-leak
condition is taken to be zero flange displacement of the
flange at the inside diameter of the mating flanges in the
flange joint. In conventional flange analysis, no consideration has been given to this important issue, i.e. the flanges,
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 92-938-71858~61; fax: 92-938-71889.
E-mail address: abid@giki.edu.pk (M. Abid).
0308-0161/$ - see front matter q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijpvp.2003.11.013
832
M. Abid, D.H. Nash / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 80 (2003) 831841
hod
hub outside diameter
gth
gasket thickness
gid
gasket inside diameter
god
gasket outside diameter
gcringid gasket centring ring inside diameter
gcringod gasket centring ring outside diameter
gsrght gasket seal ring height
bcd
bolt circle diameter
fod
flange outside diameter
bd
bolt diameter
bhd
bolt head diameter
bhh
bolt head height
f
element contact stiffness factor
Nomenclature
A
B
C
g0
h
t
jh
pid
pod
wth
sh
sod
hubht
Table 1
Material properties of gasketed and non-gasketed flange joints
Part
E
(N/mm2)
Design stress
(N/mm2)
As per code
E
(N/mm2)
Design Stress
(N/mm2)
As per code
173,058
168,922
164,095
0.3
0.3
0.3
248.2 2=3sy
723.9 sy
206.8 2=3sy
203,395
204,000
0.3
0.3
248.2 2=3sy
640.0 sy
M. Abid, D.H. Nash / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 80 (2003) 831841
833
Fig. 1. Parameters used in the finite element model of flange joints (a) gasketed, (b) non-gasketed.
834
M. Abid, D.H. Nash / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 80 (2003) 831841
Table 2
Gasketed flange joints geometric parameters
Flange parameters
Flange hub length, Flange joint
Bolt circle dia., Flange outside
hubht (mm)
height, jh (mm) bcd (mm)
dia., fod (mm)
69.9
71.67
Gasket outside
dia., god (mm)
120.65
149.35
235
292
Gasket thick.,
gth (mm)
Gasket seal
ring inside dia.,
gcringid (mm)
106.43
4.5
Flange inside
dia., pid (mm)
87.3
Flange thick.,
fh (mm)
Flange hub
dia., hod (mm)
44.4
159
Gasket seal
Pipe inside
Pipe outside dia., Pipe thick.,
ring outside dia., dia., pid (mm) pod (mm)
wth (mm)
gcringod (mm
206.50
87.3
114.3
13.5
157.2
Bolt dia.,
bd (mm)
30
Table 3
Non-gasketed flange joints geometric parameters
Flange hub
length, h (mm)
Pipe thickness,
g0 (mm)
Joint height,
jh (mm)
Bolt circle
dia., C (mm)
Flange outside
dia., A (mm)
Flange inside
dia., B (mm)
Flange thick.,
t (mm)
Flange surface
angle, taper (deg)
Bolt dia.,
bd (mm)
34
13.5
102.6
146
171
87.3
30
0.03
10
Fully parametric finite element models were used throughout so that the time involved in building the scaled geometry
models of other different sizes is minimised.
3.1. Element selection
Since the flange, bolt and gasket stresses were the
required outputs from this study, it was necessary to use two
classes of element: solid element PLANE82 to model the
solid entities and contact element CONTACT48 to measure
contact pressure or stress variation between the mating
surfaces. Contact stiffness (KN) for CONTACT48 element
quantifies the level of penetration that the target surface
allows. Over penetration results in inaccuracy if it is too
small a value and non-convergence of solution results if it is
too large a value. From the earlier study by Spence et al.
[14], it is noted that only a lower value of f ; the element
contact stiffness factor, affects the maximum axial stress at
the intersection of the taper hub and the vessel. When
varying the value of f between 0.1 and 100, at the value of
f $ 1 stress was almost levelled out, and therefore, a value
was selected of f 10 for further analysis. The effect of the
variation of contact stiffness on stress is shown in Fig. 3.
Fig. 2. Schematic quarter models for (a) gasketed, (b) non-gasketed flange
joints, showing bolts as continuous bolt ring (as used in axi-symmetric
representation).
M. Abid, D.H. Nash / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 80 (2003) 831841
835
Fig. 4. Element plots for flange joints (a) gasketed, (b) non-gasketed with
enlarged hub portion.
836
M. Abid, D.H. Nash / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 80 (2003) 831841
Fig. 5. Non-gasketed flange joint, (a) stress intensity plot for full joint at internal pressure of 15.3 N/mm2, (b) stress intensity plot for flange only at internal
pressure of 15.3 N/mm2, (c) maximum principal stress plot at internal pressure of 40 N/mm2.
Table 4
Non-gasketed flange joint, maximum principal stress and flange rotation results
Internal Pressure (N/mm2)
15.3
23.0
40.0
309.59
316.62
321.66
94.64
100.31
137.95
0.1589
0.3085
0.3131
0.0300
0.0307
0.0424
M. Abid, D.H. Nash / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 80 (2003) 831841
837
Fig. 6. Gasketed flange joint, (a) principal stress plot after pre-loading or bolt up, (b) stress intensity (exaggerated) plot for flange at a pressure of 15.3 N/mm2.
Fig. 7. Gasketed flange joint, (a) stress intensity plot showing the location and the depth at which the yielding starts at a pressure of 15.3 N/mm2, (b) stress
intensity plot for full joint model, (c) stress intensity plot for flange only at internal pressure of 15.3 N/mm2.
838
M. Abid, D.H. Nash / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 80 (2003) 831841
Fig. 8. Non-gasketed flange joint bolt only, (a) stress intensity plot for the full joint due to the operating load, (b) stress variation in the bolt due to the operating
load (zoomed bolt portion only).
Table 5
Bolt stress variation for non-gasketed and gasketed flange joints with the variation of pressure
Internal pressure
(N/mm2)
Stress in bolts
(N/mm2)
Non-gasketed flange joint
15.3
23.0
40.0
Inside diameter
(mm)
Mid diameter
(mm)
Outside diameter
(mm)
Inside diameter
(mm)
Mid diameter
(mm)
Outside diameter
(mm)
392.20
391.88
402.26
374.13
373.10
376.38
356.06
354.30
350.46
343.65
346.86
347.50
242.87
243.17
243.82
141.86
141.86
139.93
M. Abid, D.H. Nash / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 80 (2003) 831841
839
Fig. 9. Gasketed flange joint bolt only, (a) stress intensity plot for the full joint due to the operating load, (b) stress variation in the bolt due to the operating load
(zoomed bolt portion only).
5. Conclusions
In view of the stress distributions resulting in the flange
and bolts together with the observed flange rotation, bolt
bending, bolt fatigue and bolt relaxation it is concluded that
840
M. Abid, D.H. Nash / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 80 (2003) 831841
Fig. 11. Gasketed flange joint, gasket stress variation plot along the gasket, after the operating load.
Fig. 12. Non-gasketed flange joint, stress variation at the symmetry plane (contact surface).
M. Abid, D.H. Nash / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 80 (2003) 831841
References
[1] Waters EO, Taylor JH. The strength of pipe flanges. Trans Mech
Engng 1927;49:53142.
[2] Waters EO, Wesstrom DB, Rossheim DB, Williams FSG. Formulas
for stresses in bolted flanged connections. Trans ASME 1937;59:
1617.
[3] American Society of Mechanical Engineers. ASME boiler and
pressure vessel code. Section VIII, Division 1. App. Y, 2001 Edition.
[4] PD5500:2000. Unfired fusion welded pressure vessels. British
Standards Institution, London.
841