ASME Ch10 p001-040

ASME_Ch10_p001-040.
qxd
8/13/08
4:14 PM
Page 1
CHAPTER
10
SUBSECTION NFSUPPORTS
Uma S. Bandyopadhyay1
10.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On December 31, 1973, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) published Subsection NF [1] of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1 (hereafter addressed as Subsection NF) as part of the winter 1973 addenda to the 1971 Code edition [2]. This was a historic publication; prior to it, supports (also called pipe hangers and restraints) were not addressed as part of ASME Section III. Existing nuclear plants and plants under construction during that time were using ANSI B31.1 [3], ANSI B31.7 [4], MSS-SP58 [5], and the AISC Manual of Steel Construction [6] to design supports. ASME Section III, Subsection NF, provided a stabilizing position for future nuclear plant support design by designating a single source of rules for the design, construction, fabrication, and examination of supports. This criteria-and-commentary chapter provides information on the origins and evolution of design rules and is intended to allow designers, engineers, and fabricators to make better use of Subsection NF of the ASME Code. Topics of greatest interest are discussed and addressed from both a technical and historical viewpoint. It is not the intent, however, to address every detail or anticipate every question associated with the use of the subsection. However, there will be situations when engineering judgment and special considerations will be used in conjunction with Subsection NF to qualify supports. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Subsection NF, was developed in an attempt to provide rules for the estimated 10,000 piping and component supports existing in a typical nuclear power plant. These rules have evolved so dramatically that the existing support rules seldom resemble the original rules of 1973. This document follows the evolution of Subsection NF as the industry attempted to apply the subsections rules. Commentary is provided to explain how the criteria are used, the source and technical basis for the equations and the rationale, and the reasons for change. It is anticipated that readers will develop a better understanding of Subsection NF to appreciate its complexities and usefulness. Supports, since the term component was relevant to both supports for nuclear components (e.g., tanks, pumps, and vessels) and supports for piping, which is also dened as a component. In a major rewrite rst published in the winter 1982 addenda to the 1980 edition [7], the generic term component supports was redened as supports. This subtle change allowed supports to be separated into two distinct categories: component supports and piping supports, which resulted in a revised philosophy of Subsection NF. The changes and impact resulting from this revision are discussed in various sections of this chapter.
10.2.1
Scope
Subsection NF contains rules for the materials, design, fabrication, examination, installation, and preparation of certication documents (certicate of compliance and NS-1 certicate of conformance for supports) for Classes 1, 2, 3, and MC construction. This statement appears at the beginning of Subsection NF and denes the scope in only one sentence. However, the interpretation of this scope by industry users and the Working Group has provided many inquiries and discussions over the past 25 years or so. Simply stated, the purpose of a support is to provide a path to transmit specied loads from the pressure boundary component to the building structure. It should be noted that supports are not pressure-retaining components but rather structural components. Until the appearance of Subsection NF in the ASME Section III Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, all components were, by denition, pressure-retaining. Because many of the requirements that eventually were included in Subsection NF were taken from the pressure-retaining portions of Subsections NB, NC, ND, NE, and NG, implementation of these rules was sometimes difcult. Many users of Subsection NF regarded some of the rules as too stringent because their purpose was for use on pressure boundary applications, a view that became more apparent when the boundaries of jurisdiction were established for supports. (See Section 10.2.4 of this chapter for a detailed discussion of this subject.)
10.2.2
Types of Supports
10.2
NF-1000 INTRODUCTION
Article NF-1000 provides readers with general information regarding component supports such as their scope and classication, and also regarding types of supports and attachments. When it was rst published, Subsection NF [1] was titled Component
1
Since there are thousands of supports in a typical nuclear power plant, it was considered prudent to identify various types of supports based on their historical use in both fossil fuel and nuclear power plants. Initially, component supports were separated into three types: plate-and-shell supports, linear supports, and component standard supports. Subsection NF dened plate-and-shell supports as supports that are normally subjected to a biaxial stress
Robert J. Masterson was the author of this Chapter for the rst edition but revised by Uma S. Bandyopadhyay for the previous edition and this edition.
ASME_Ch10_p001-040.qxd
8/13/08
4:14 PM
Page 2
2 Chapter 10
eld and are fabricated from plate-and-shell elements. Examples were given as vessel skirts and saddles. It was apparent from this denition that plate-and-shell supports are closely related to pressure boundary items; these types of supports essentially represent a method of making the transition from the pressure boundary of the vessel or piping into the support load path. It was common for plateand-shell supports to be integrally attached (i.e., welded) to the pressure boundary component and designed and analyzed as part of the component. An example of this was a vessel skirt, which normally would be provided with the vessel. It was initially believed that supplying plate-and-shell supports with the components would be a normal procedure (this was often the case as Subsection NF was implemented). Also, the number of plate-and-shell supports turned out to be very low relative to the other two types of supports. Subsection NF dened linear supports as acting under a single component of direct stress that also may be subjected to shear stress. Examples given included tension and compression struts and beams and columns subjected to bending stresses. Linear supports were meant to be structural steel members used to connect the supports and complete the load path to the building structure. Linear supports were also intended to form unique piping and component restraints when these components were subjected to loads other than simple deadweight. These loads were dynamic (both seismic and hydrodynamic); transient, such as water and steam hammer; and thermal operation. Based on the number of supports in a typical plant, linear supports constituted the majority. Finally, Subsection NF created a new category of supports called standard supports, which were dened as one or more generally mass produced units usually referred to as catalog items. For design, fabrication, and examination purposes, standard supports were further classied as being of the linear or plate-and-shell type; this classication was required to maintain consistency with the other two support types. Based on the sheer numbers of standard supports, the linear type again constituted the vast majority. The concept of the standard support was unique considering its sheer numbers. Standard supports were created to take advantage of the historically good manufacturing record of catalog supports. At one of the early Subsection NF meetings (circa 1973 or 1974), a Working Group member who was an employee of a support manufacturer, described standard supports as having a time-tested history of success, a statement that was proven correct because very few if any failures of catalog supports were documented under normal operating conditions on older fossil fuel and nuclear power plants. The design factor of safety and the quality assurance used in the manufacturing process of these catalog supports served as powerful arguments for establishing this category of supports. Figure 10.1 provides pictorial representations of typical standard supports. As we will see, the advantage of this type of support is manifested in the relaxation (i.e., the less stringent) of requirements for materials, design, fabrication, and examination. With the publication of the winter 1982 addenda to the 1980 edition [7], component supports were redened to more closely represent their use in service. The term component support initially was used on the cover of Subsection NF and was descriptive of the entire family of supports. The winter 1982 addenda separated supports into two groups: component supports and piping supports, a Code revision that was the outcome of years of debate within the Code Committee on how to make Subsection NF more useful for the engineering community. It was apparent from the many guests attending the Working Groups meetings that a more descriptive categorization of supports was required to make implementation more efcient. The term component support
ceased to be the term used to describe the entire family of supports and also to describe the type of supports used to support components; it was redened as the group that supported nuclear components, and piping support was dened as the group that supported nuclear piping. The types of supports remained the same because there could be plate-and-shell, linear, and standard (previously termed component standard) supports in both groups of component and piping supports. This descriptive revision was most profoundly benecial in Article NF-3000 Design.
10.2.3
Intervening Elements
As more nuclear power plants were designed to Subsection NF, it became apparent that each type of support had its place in the overall design of piping and components. Many support assemblies consisted of standard supports, such as clamps, that attached to the pressure boundary, and also of linear supports, such as steel beams, that attached to the building structure. In some cases, standard supports composed the entire assembly; similarly, in other cases, linear supports composed the entire assembly. There was, however, another species of support that was about to make an appearance. After four years of Subsection NF implementation, a Code revision was needed to address the concept of a non-Code item in the support load path between the pressure boundary and the building structure. Such items as diesel engines, electric motors, coolers, valve operators, and access structures were bearing on supports or were welded to, bolted to, pinned to, or clamped to them. By denition, supports extending from the pressure boundary to the building structure were within the support load path. Guests attending the Working Groups meetings submitted inquiries concerning what should be done with these intervening elements that were within the load path. After many debates, Subsubarticle NF-1110(c) was revised and paragraph NF-1111 and subparagraph NF-1131.6 were added in the summer 1978 addenda to the 1977 edition [8] to introduce the concept of intervening elements. In addition, Fig. NF-1131-1 was revised to add sketches (g), (h), (i), (j), and (k) to illustrate the many ways that an intervening element may be used in the support load path (see Figs. 10.2 and 10.3). Essentially, intervening elements were outside the Subsection NF jurisdiction; however, paragraph NF-1111 provided the clear requirement that the owners Design Specication shall furnish specic information to the designer of the intervening elements regarding loads, materials, temperature, environmental effects, design, fabrication, examination, testing, and installation. Addressing the concept of intervening elements was a challenge that the Working Group was likely to encounter given the nature of the support load path, that is, between two existing boundaries of jurisdiction. With so many components and other equipment vying for the space between the piping and the building structure, it was inevitable that the concept of intervening elements would eventually manifest itself. What was ironic, however, was that the concept of intervening elements was a jurisdictional boundary issue, but not the most difcult one to address and solve. Working Group members found that addressing the basic concept of the boundary on each side of the support load path, the piping, or component and the building structure, became a monumental task.
10.2.4
Boundaries of Jurisdiction
From the initial issue of Subsection NF in the winter 1973 addenda to the 1971 edition of ASME Section III [1], it eventually became clear that the most challenging task facing the Working Group would be to explain and defend the requirements for boundaries of jurisdiction. At rst glance, it seemed to be a
8/13/08
4:14 PM
Page 3
COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 3
FIG. 10.1
TYPICAL STANDARD SUPPORTS (Source: Fig. NF-1211.4-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
straightforward task to establish the boundaries of jurisdiction for supports at the pressure boundary and building structure ends of the support. In fact, the Working Group was convinced that Fig. NF-1131-1 provided a simplied illustration to dene the boundaries and to specify under which subsection the connection responsibilities rested. For the pressure boundary side of the support load path, it appeared that the gure did indeed provide such an illustration.
No doubt existed about when the pressure boundary ended and when the support began. Even for supports welded to the pressure boundary, it was clear that the weld was in accordance to the pressure-retaining portion of the Code (NB, NC, ND, or NE) and the support jurisdiction began with the item that was welded to the component. However, the building structure end of the support was another matter. Because many supports could contain structural steel elements in their design, and because the building
8/13/08
4:14 PM
Page 4
4 Chapter 10
FIG. 10.2 ILLUSTRATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES [Source: Fig. NF-1131.1.(a)(f), Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]
8/13/08
4:14 PM
Page 5
FIG. 10.3 ILLUSTRATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES [Source: Fig. NF-1131.1.(h)(k), Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]
8/13/08
4:14 PM
Page 6
6 Chapter 10
structure boundary was generally composed of structural steel, the actual boundary of jurisdiction could become difcult to identify accurately. One school of thought, implemented initially to create Fig. NF-1131-1, dened the building structure as the surface of concrete or steel as shown on civil/structural drawings. Any additional steel framed between existing steel or concrete (also called supplementary steel) and needed to support piping or components would be under Subsection NF jurisdiction. The debate on boundaries of jurisdiction began soon after the publication of Subsection NF in December 1973 [1]. Many potential users had difculty identifying the boundary at the building structure, and guests at the Working Group meetings began to have jurisdictional boundary questions. One typical case, which would eventually change philosophy in a future Code revision, concerned baseplates and concrete anchor bolts. Initially, with the rst edition of Subsection NF, it was clear that baseplates and anchor bolts were within the jurisdiction of Subsection NF. Figure 10.2 [Fig. NF1131-1(e) and (f)] clearly states that an integral or nonintegral support connected to the building structure has a connection in accordance with Subsection NF, which means that a baseplate secured to the concrete by anchor bolts (e.g., Hilti Quik bolts and Phillips Red Heads) would conform exactly to the Fig. 10.2(f) sketch. The nonintegral support (the baseplate) was connected to the building structure (the concrete) by means of the anchor bolts; the connection was in accordance with Subsection NF. However, as clear as the boundary to the building structure may appeared to have been, a large number of users questioned its location. On March 30, 1978, Interpretation III-1-78-47 [9] was published in an attempt to answer one of the jurisdictional boundary dilemmas. The following is a verbatim presentation of the question and reply: Question: How are the jurisdictional boundaries between structural members fabricated and installed with the building structure and supports for Section III components to be determined? Reply: It is the responsibility of the Owner to dene the jurisdictional boundaries of component supports in the Design Specication (NCA-3254) [10]. Items furnished as part of the building structure are normally constructed to the appropriate portion of the building code used for the design and construction of the building structure. The Owner is responsible for designating whether or not metallic supports for Section III components, which are attached to the items dened as part of the building structure, are required to be constructed with the provisions of Section III, Subsection NF. The Owner is also responsible for the compatibility of the boundaries and corresponding loads between the building structure and the component supports constructed in accordance with Section III. This interpretation clearly put the responsibility of determining the boundary of jurisdiction with the owner and the Design Specication where, in actuality, the responsibility belonged. Subsection NCA clearly stipulates that one responsibility of the owners Design Specication was the identication of the boundaries of jurisdiction. Therefore, the interpretation answered the inquiry by using existing Code words. The jurisdictional boundary questions continued for many Working Group meetings. A Task Group was established to resolve the questions and produce the appropriate Code revision
or Code Case. The 1986 edition of Subsection NF published a revision to subsubarticle NF-1130 [11], which dened the boundaries of jurisdiction applicable to Subsection NF. The old Fig. NF-1131-1 (Figs. 10.2 and 10.3), a generic presentation of the boundaries between both the component and the building structure, was replaced with Fig. NF-1132-1 (Figs. 10.4, 10.5, and 10.6). This gure was applicable only to the boundary between the piping support and the building structure. The jurisdictional boundary between supports and the component was deferred to paragraphs NB-1132 [12], NC-1132 [13], ND-1132 [14], or NE1132 [15] as applicable. A review of this gure shows that Fig. 1132-1(d), (g), and (i) now species that the baseplate and anchor bolts are part of the building structure. This is a complete reversal from the original Code edition for identifying jurisdictional boundaries between baseplates and anchor bolts and the building structure. This new revision, however, more realistically separates normal building structure items from support items; historically, baseplates and anchor bolts were normally regarded as building structure components. Since the initial jurisdictional boundary questions were eventually resolved, Subsection NF has evolved without any additional substantial jurisdictional boundary issues.
10.3
10.3.1
NF-2000 MATERIALS
Permitted Material
With the initial publication of Subsection NF in 1973, ASME Section III BoilerPressure Vessel Code Division 1 [1] was providing rules for nonpressure-retaining components. Prior to this, ASME Section III was a pressure-retaining code, concerned primarily with pressure-retaining components such as pumps, valves, piping, vessels, and tanks. Subsection NF, however, brought a new concept on a large scale to ASME Section III because supports were nonpressure-retaining structural elements, of which there were thousands in a typical nuclear plant. To accommodate support design and material requirements, materials specically designated for supports were needed. Mandatory Appendices Tables I-11.1 (Table 10.1), I-12.1 (Table 10.2), I-13.1 (Table 10.3), and I-13.3 (Table 10.4) were included to provide design stress intensities, allowable stresses, and yield strength values for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC plate-and-shell type and linear type supports. With the publication of the 1992 edition, the Code requires that material for supports shall conform to the requirements of the specications for materials listed in the tables of Section II, Part D [35]. Initially, these tables accounted for a very limited number of permitted material specications (less than 20 support materials and 20 bolting material specications). It soon became evident that additional material specications were needed to address the numerous materials used by different support manufacturers. A Materials Task Group was formed consisting of all occupations from the Working Group including the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The purpose of the Task Group was to develop a Code Case to permit additional materials and to provide the design stress intensities, allowable stresses, and yield strength values for these materials. After several Task Group meetings, Code Case 1644 [16] was issued to permit the use of numerous additional structural material specications. The intent of this Code Case was to expedite the publication of structural materials needed for the design and construction of Subsection NF supports. It was planned that a Code Revision would eventually be published to complete the action.
8/13/08
4:14 PM
Page 7
FIG. 10.4 TYPICAL EXAMPLES OF JURIDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PIPING SUPPORTS AND THE BUILDING STRUCTURE [Source: Fig. NF-1132.1.(a) and (d), Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]
In November 1976, as part of the 1974 edition, Code Case 1644 Revision 6 [17] was issued as Code Case N-71 [18] under the revised Code Case numbering system. Subsequently, Code Case N-71 has been revised numerous times to add and delete material specications as needed. At one point between March 1978 and March 1982, Code Case N-71 was revised to remove the material specications that did not permit welding. These materials were placed in the new Code Case N-249 [19]. The most current revision to each Code Case is N-71-18 [20] and
N-249-14 [21]. As mentioned previously, the Working Groups intention was to eventually incorporate Code Cases N-71 and N-249 into the body of Subsection NF, an action currently that is being prepared as Mandatory Appendix NF-1 [22].
10.3.2
Exempt Material
Since some Subsection NF supports were designed with nonmetallic and/or bearing materials, the concept of exempt materials needed to be addressed by the Working Group. Subparagraph
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 8
8 Chapter 10
FIG. 10.5 TYPICAL EXAMPLES OF JURIDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PIPING SUPPORTS AND THE BUILDING STRUCTURE [Source: Fig. NF-1132.1.(e) and (g), Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]
NF-2121(b), Permitted Material Specications, provides guidance for those materials for which the requirements of Article NF-2000, Materials, do not apply. Items such as gaskets, seals, springs, compression spring end plates, bearings, retaining rings, washers, wear shoes, and hydraulic uids, are exempt from the requirements of Article NF-2000. Initially, some users
made the assumption that since a material is exempt from Subsection NF-2000, the material must also be exempt from the remaining articles of Subsection NF. This belief was incorrect because it was clear from subparagraph NF-2121(b) that the exemption applied only to materials, not to design, fabrication, and examination. However, a recent Subsection NF action has
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 9
FIG. 10.6 TYPICAL EXAMPLES OF JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PIPING SUPPORTS AND THE BUILDING STRUCTURE [Source: Fig. NF-1132.1 (h) and (i), Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]
reversed this stand, and the requirements of all Subsection NF articles no longer apply to exempt materials, except for a minor list of caveats. Additionally, NF-2121 (b) states that (1) exempt material requirements, if any, shall be stated in the Design Specication; (2) the material shall not be affected by uid, temperature, or
irradiation conditions; (3) the materials do not require the material manufacturers Certicate of Compliance (COC); and (4) the support manufacturer shall provide the owner with a list of exempt materials. These additional provisions, with the exception of the COC, are intended to provide the owner with the assurance that exempt materials meet the most basic ASME Section III
10 TABLE 10.1 ASME SECTION III MANDATORY APPENDIX I, DESIGN STRESS INTENSITY VALUES, Sm, FOR FERRITIC STEELS FOR CLASS 1 PLATE-AND-SHELL-TYPE COMPONENT SUPPORTS (Source: Table I-11.1, Section III, Appendix 1 of the ASME B&PV Code)
8/13/08 4:15 PM Page 10
ASME_Ch10_p001-040.qxd 8/13/08
TABLE 10.2 ASME SECTION III MANDATORY APPENDIX I, ALLOWABLE STRESS VALUES, S, FOR FERRITIC STEELS FOR CLASS 2, 3, AND MC PLATE-AND-SHELL-TYPE COMPONENT SUPPORTS (Source: Table I-12.1, Section III, Appendix 1 of the ASME B&PV Code)
4:15 PM Page 11
11
12 TABLE 10.3 ASME SECTION III MANDATORY APPENDIX I, YIELD STRESS VALUES, SY, FOR FERRITIC STEELS FOR CLASS 1, 2, 3, AND MC LINEAR-TYPE COMPONENT SUPPORTS (Source: Table I-13.1, Section III, Appendix 1 of the ASME B&PV Code)
8/13/08 4:15 PM Page 12
ASME_Ch10_p001-040.qxd 8/13/08
TABLE 10.4 ASME SECTION III MANDATORY APPENDIX I, YIELD STRENGTH VALUES SY, FOR BOLTING MATERIALS FOR CLASS 1, 2, 3, AND MC COMPONENT SUPPORTS (Source: Table I-13.3, Section III, Appendix 1 of the ASME B&PV Code)
4:15 PM Page 13
13
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 14
14 Chapter 10
requirements. It is important that users be aware that materials exempt from Article NF-2000 requirements must still meet some basic concerns. Currenly, guidance for exempt materials is shown in Subparagraph NF 1110 (e).
material including nuts, and structural material meeting specic dimensional limits. Similar to the NPT stamp required for welded products, material organizations needed to successfully complete an ASME Quality Systems survey to obtain a Quality Systems Certicate for support material.
10.3.3
Certication of Material
Many nuclear plant components require the highest level of material certicationthe Certied Material Test Report (CMTR). The NF Working Group determined that because of the large number of supports in a nuclear power plant, requiring a CMTR for all supports was impractical and unnecessary because of the structural rather than pressure-retaining nature of supports. Subsubarticle NF-2130 requires CMTRs for Class 1 plate-and-shell and linear supports, as well as for material of other types and classes of supports where impact testing is required. Certicates of Compliance with the material specication, grade, class, and heat-treatment condition may be provided for all other supports, which means that the majority of supports could be supplied with a COC rather than a CMTR because of the relatively few Class 1 plate-and-shell or linear supports. Support manufacturers would benet greatly because maintaining full traceability throughout the manufacturing process for supports with COCs is not required. Also, many simple supports such as rods, clamps, and clevises could be manufactured and shipped with a single COC. However, material for small items would need to be controlled during the manufacturing process so that it is identiable as acceptable material until the material is actually consumed in the nal product. To meet this requirement, many support manufacturers would transfer a color-coding system to material after cutting so that the material identication remained on both items of the cut material.
10.4
NF-3000 DESIGN
10.3.4
Impact Testing and Fracture Toughness
Because most support material is structural, the Working Group did not consider it necessary to require support materials to be impact tested when Subsection NF was rst published. As previously mentioned, if impact testing were required, material for any class or type of support would need to be supplied with CMTRs. Doing so would require support manufacturing facilities to initiate a comprehensive material separation and control system for the full line of products. The Working Group concluded that impact testing would be required only when specically stated in the owners Design Specication. Based on service conditions, most support Design Specications would specify impact testing for all support materials being used in cold environments, such as below 40F. When impact testing was required, however, several exemptions were in effect especially for small products. Impact testing would not be required for such items as material thickness 5 8 in. and less; bolting nominal size 1 in. and less; austenitic stainless steel; nonferrous materials; bars of 1 sq. in. in area; supports with a maximum stress not exceeding 6000 psi; and other material dimensional limits. Paragraph NF-2311 was revised in the winter 1982 addenda to the 1980 edition [7] to require impact testing for all classes of Component supports. Piping and Standard supports would still need the Design Specication to state whether impact testing was required.
When Subsection NF was rst published in the winter 1973 addenda of the 1971 edition of ASME Section III [1], the Code was considered complete because it now addressed all major nuclear plant components. Supports were different from many other components because they were nonpressure-retaining structural components rather than pressure-retaining components. In fact, much of the structural steel required for support design and construction closely resembles the building structural steel. This critical difference, nonpressure-retaining components, required the Working Group to establish new rules for structural elements of supports. Design rules for supports were initially established for two types of supports: plate-and-shell and linear. Although both procedures were structural, the plate-and-shell techniques were more consistent with those from other Code subsections. Because Subsections NB, NC, ND, and NE contained rules for pressure-retaining components such as pumps, valves, piping vessels, and tanks, ASME concluded that component supports with a design exhibiting a biaxial stress eld should follow similar design rules. This conclusion was a reasonable one and allowed rules for plate-and-shell supports to be established that were familiar to owners and Architectural Engineers (AEs). Similarly, the rules for linear supports were patterned after an accepted and recognized structural Code found in the seventh edition of the Manual of Steel Construction [25], published by the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC). The AISC Steel Manual was well recognized by support designers because it was extensively used to design steel supports and other structures in fossil fuel and preSubsection NF nuclear power plants. Allowable stresses were based on the material minimum specied yield strength rather than on allowable stresses and stress intensities. The AISC specication was incorporated in its entirety with some enhancement of design criteria such as temperature and buckling requirements. This section discusses the design rules for supportsboth plate-and-shell and linear. All aspects of design are considered including stress theory, loadings, welding, bolting, load testing, and functional requirements.
10.4.1
Design Loadings and Service Conditions
10.3.5
Quality System Program
Material organizations were required to have quality system programs that met the requirements of ASME Section III, Subarticle NCA-3800 [23]. However, except for paragraph NCA-3862 [24], the other requirements of subarticle NCA-3800 did not need to be met for small products that were dened as pipe, tubing, bolting
Because design loadings and service conditions are established as a requirement of the Design Specication (NA/NCA-3252) [26], Subsection NF is also governed by these requirements. Design loadings are dened as design temperature and design mechanical loads. Because supports are subjected to nonpressure-retaining loads, temperature-generated loads are transmitted to supports by the movement of piping and equipment. Structural loads are transmitted to supports through the deadweight of piping and its contents and also of piping components such as valves, anges, owmeters, and in-line pumps. Design mechanical loads also include dynamic loads caused by earthquakes, ow-induced loads such as water and steam hammer, and hydrodynamic loads. The assortments of design loadings are combined based on identied service conditions with specied service limits. When
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 15
Subsection NF was rst published [1] in 1973, these service conditions were identied as normal, upset, emergency, faulted, and testing. The winter 1976 addenda to the 1974 edition of ASME Section III [27] changed the term service condition to service limit. Normal condition was changed to Level A service limit; the term pertains to specied loadings to which supports may be subjected for its specied service function. Upset condition was changed to Level B service limit; the term pertains to specied loadings on supports that must be withstood without damage requiring repair. Emergency condition was changed to Level C service limit; the term pertains to specied loadings that permit large deformations in areas of structural discontinuities and that may require removal of the support from service for inspection or repair. Faulted condition was changed to Level D service limit; the term pertains to specied loadings that permit gross general deformations and may require the removal of the support from service.
10.4.2
Code Class and Design Procedures
Supports are grouped by class as all ASME Section III components. Support Classes 1, 2, 3, and MC (metal containment) follow the denitions of paragraph NA/NCA-2131 [28]. Because there are more supports in a nuclear power plant than there are any other components (the total number is in the thousands), only a few were anticipated as being Class 1 supports; indeed, only 100200 supports are usually classied as Class 1 supports, and the remaining 5,00010,000 fall into Classes 2 and 3. This is signicant because material, design, and examination rules are less stringent for Class 2 and 3 supports. As discussed later in this chapter, there is also a signicant advantage for Class 2 and 3 standard supports, especially material certication, design certication, load capacity data sheets, and visual examination of welds. The Working Groups intent was to provide less stringent rules for standard supports to take advantage of the industrys exceptional manufacturing history. Many support manufacturers had developed an extensive line of pipe support products, many with designs that were based on physical and empirical testing. A safety factor of 5 was a common design factor for these catalog products, and failure of supports in eld use was a rare occurrence. Associated with support class is the type of support and the design procedure to be used for Code qualication. Based on existing support designs and how they are used, the Working Group created three types of supports: plate-and-shell, linear, and standard. Plate-and-shell supports exhibit a biaxial stress eld (in a at plate this would be membrane and bending stresses in both of the plates in-plane axes, that is, Sx and Sy). Also, plate-andshell supports are more associated with pressure-retaining components and usually are vessel skirts and saddles. Very few supports in a nuclear plant will be of the plate-and-shell category. Linear supports are dened as supports that essentially act under a single component of direct stress such as a structural beam or column. Component standard supports (later redened as standard supports) are dened as support assemblies composed of several catelog items and are generally mass produced. Three design procedures also were specied: design-by-analysis, experimental stress analysis, and load rating. The design-byanalysis procedure was established to allow a calculation stress analysis method for Code qualication similar to Subsections NB, NC, and ND. However, because supports can be both plate-andshell or linear in design, a different design-by-analysis procedure was provided for each support type. Plate-and-shell supports
are required to be analyzed by elastic analysis based on the maximum shear stress theory for Class 1 construction and the maximum stress theory for Class 2, 3, and MC construction. Linear supports are required to be analyzed by elastic analysis based on the maximum stress theory for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC construction. The design-by-analysis procedure for standard supports either will be the maximum shear stress theory or the maximum stress theory depending on whether the standard support is constructed of plate-and-shell or linear elements. The maximum shear stress theory calculates principal stresses and transforms these into stress differences or stress intensities. At any point on the support, the stress components for each type of loading may be calculated: namely, x , y , and z , or l, r , and t . These loadings may result in general primary membrane stress, Pm; primary bending stress, Pb; expansion stress, Pe; or secondary stress, Q. (Denitions for these stresses are given in paragraph NF-3121 [29].) For each category of stress the algebraic sum of the j stresses for each loading is obtained and the l, r, and t stress components are translated into principal stresses, 1, 2, 3,. Finally, the stress differences, S12, S23, and S31 are calculated, where S12 1 2, S23 2 3, and S31 3 1. The calculated stress intensity for each location on the support is the largest absolute value of S12, S23, and S31. The maximum stress theory calculates membrane, bending, and shear stresses as direct, not principal, stresses. Membrane stress, 1, is the average stress across a solid section. It includes the effects of discontinuities but not local stress concentrations. Bending stress, 2, is the linearly varying portion of the stress across the solid section. It excludes the effects of discontinuities and concentrations. With the initial publication of Subsection NF in 1973 [1], a third direct stress was required to be evaluated. The maximum tensile stress, 3, at the contact surface of a weld producing a tensile load in a direction through the thickness of a plate or rolled shape, had a reduced allowable stress. This reduction in stress was intended to reduce the maximum load on the connection to prevent plates with the potential of laminations from experiencing the full allowable stressa behavior that applied to all classes and types of supports. The fact that this requirement was a design and manufacturing anomaly was eventually discovered because the intent to limit the load to address the lamination concern in effect exacerbated the condition. As noted in Fig. NF-3321.1(c)-1 (Fig. 10.7), for any given joint, because the allowable stress was essentially limited to 50% of the normal allowable stress, the maximum applied load permitted was effectively reduced. To circumvent this low allowable stress, many designers simply made the weld contact surface larger to permit larger loads but still remain within the reduced allowable stress. It was quickly experienced that increasing the weld size increased the heat input to the joint, and for those plates that exhibited laminations, these conditions caused some joint designs to be compromised. The Working Group was made aware of this condition and quickly revised Subsection NF between the 1977 [30] and 1980 [31] editions to remove this requirement. It was felt that additional rules for fabrication and examination of these types of welded joints were needed as a better approach to the problem. Experimental stress analysis is the second design procedure permitted by Subsection NF. Designers are directed to ASME Section III, Division 1, Appendix II [32], which contains mandatory rules for employing experimental stress analysis. It was the intent of the Working Group to permit a design procedure that provided Code qualication by means of physical testing to determine
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 16
16 Chapter 10
testing and test reports to be used in conjunction with additional testing and the load rating equations in Subsubarticle NF-3280 [33] to establish Code qualication, especially for standard supports. This topic is discussed in more detail in Section 10.4.10 of this chapter.
10.4.3
Stress Intensities and Allowable Stresses
FIG. 10.7 ILLUSTRATION OF MAXIMUM DESIGN STRESS IN THROUGH-THICKNESS DIRECTION OF PLATES AND ELEMENTS OF ROLLED SHAPES [Source: Fig. NF-3321.1 (c)-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]
stress levels within supports. The procedure uses strain gages to determine stresses within actual supports under load. Appendix II contains complete guidelines for performing the tests, obtaining results, and interpreting the results. A third design procedure, known as load rating, was created to provide support manufacturers with a method of establishing maximum load ratings for standard supports using techniques and test reports newly and/or previously developed by the manufacturer. Many manufacturers had established testing procedures and methods that allowed load ratings to be published with condence. It was the Working Groups intent to permit existing
Allowable stresses for all types and classes of supports are categorized in Table NF-2121 (a)-1 (Table 10.5). For Class 1 plateand-shell supports, design stress intensity values, Sm, are used to limit the calculated stresses. Allowable stresses values, S, are used for Class 2, 3, and MC plate-and-shell supports, and yield strength values, Sy, are used for all classes of linear supports and for all classes and types of bolting. Component standard supports are qualied using design stress intensity values, and allowable stress values or yield strength values are based on whether the standard support elements are composed of plate-and-shell or linear items. The specic values for Sm, S, and Sy for supports were provided in ASME Section III, Division 1, Appendix I Tables I-1.1, I-1.2, I-2.1, I-2.2, I-7.1, I-7.2, I-8.1, I-8.2, I-10.1, I-10.2, I-11.1 (given here as Table 10.1), I-12.1 (given here as Table 10.2), I-13.1 (given here as Table 10.3), and I-13.3 (given here as Table 10.4) until the publication of the 1992 edition of ASME Section II [34]. At that time, all material property tables were transferred from Section III, Appendix I, to Section II, Part D [35] for both ferrous and nonferrous materials. For supports, these are Tables 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3, 4, U, and Y-1. These tables contain essentially the same data used in Tables 10.110.4. Similarly, Section II, Part A contains the material specications for all materials permitted for use in Section III construction. The basis for establishing the design stress intensity and allowable stress values are currently found in Section II Part D, Appendices 1 [36] and 2 [37]. These Appendices are very useful for determining stress values because they are essentially a function of yield strength, Sy, and ultimate strength, Su, values at temperature and at room temperature. In many cases, the ultimate strength value at temperature of a particular material specication is not published in Section II, Part D. Appendix 1 and/or Appendix 2 can be used conservatively to determine the Su value if either the S or Sm values are published. Because Appendix 1 stipulates that the design stress intensity value, Sm, can be established as 1 Su at temperature (this choice is 3 the most conservative of the ones given), the value of Sm can be 3Sm. Similarly, Appendix 2 can be used to established as Su 4S, and the smallest value of Su should then be establish Su used. This method was used by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in Regulatory Guide 1.124 [38] in Section C2c, Regulatory Position Method 3. It was recognized early after the initial publication of Subsection NF in 1973 that the material specications permitted in Appendix I, Section III (later Section II, Part D), were not of sufcient quantity to address the materials used by many support manufacturers. The Working Group acted quickly to establish a Task Group to identify and bring these additional materials into ASME Section III for use in Subsection NF. It was expected that additional structural materials would become necessary because most of the existing material specications were required from the pressure-retaining nature of ASME Section III. This important Task Group comprised all Working Group professional disciplines: utilities, manufacturers, AEs, consultants, and regulatory members. The Task Group worked closely with the ASME Section III Subgroup on Materials; consequently, in 1975 Code
ASME_Ch10_p001-040.qxd 8/13/08
TABLE 10.5 MATERIALS TABLES REQUIRED FOR SUPPORTS [Source: Table I-NF-2121(a)-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]
4:15 PM Page 17
17
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 18
18 Chapter 10
Case 1644 [16] was published. This Code Case contained a considerable number of material specications used by support and snubber (both hydraulic and mechanical) manufacturers. In 1976, Code Case 1644 was renamed Code Case N-71 [18]; it contained material specications for both welded and nonwelded construction. The alternative rules for bolted joints eventually were removed from the Code Case and published as part of the NF3000 rewrite in the winter 1982 addenda to the 1980 edition to ASME Section III [7]. In 1980 the nonwelded materials were removed from CCN-71 and placed in a new CCN-249 [19]. Since their original publication, both Code Cases have been revised many times and currently appear as CCN-71-17 [20] and CCN249-13 [21]. All revisions to these Code Cases are addressed and approved for use with caveats in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.85 Code Case Acceptability ASME Section III Materials. Material specications have been added and removed over the years; however, currently there is an effort to reduce the number of material specications to only those that are in use at any given moment. Future plans are to move both Code Cases into Subsection NF as Appendices.
10.4.4
Plate-and-Shell Supports
While the Working Group was preparing Subsection NF for its initial publication, it wrestled with the concept of writing rules for structural and nonpressure-retaining components in what was essentially a pressure boundary Code. The Working Group nally agreed to create three types of supports: plate-and-shell, linear, and component standard supports. As dened previously, plateand-shell supports exhibit a biaxial stress eld (in a at plate, membrane and bending stresses would develop in both in-plane directions together with shear stress). When using the design-byanalysis procedure, calculations used to qualify Class 1 plate-andshell supports would essentially be the same as structural calculations for Class 1 pressure boundary components. Terms relating to design-by-analysis were presented in paragraph NF-3121 [29], which contained denitions for the following stresses: normal, shear, membrane, bending, primary, secondary, free-end displacement, expansion, and total. When Subsection NF was initially published in 1973 [1], Table NF-3217-1 (Table 10.6) contained a matrix that provided classication of stresses for some typical cases. Also associated with Class 1 plate-and-shell design-byanalysis are the design and operating conditions that allow varying allowable limits of stress intensity based on the type of stress (primary and secondary) and the conditions (design and operating) for the plate-and-shell support. This concept is presented in Fig. NF-3221-1 (Fig. 10.8), also known as the Hopper Chart, and is essentially identical to Figs. NB-3221-1 [39] and NB-3222-1 [40] except for the stresses in Class 1 pressure boundary components that are not required to be evaluated in Subsection NF. These stresses are Q stresses as well as secondary membrane and bending stresses (except expansion stress, Pe), an example of which is thermal stress within the support. Unlike piping and other pressure-retaining components, supports were not required to be evaluated for thermal stresses within the support, that is, thermal stress caused by a large differential in temperature in the through-thickness direction of a plate or shell. The only exception to this was expansion stress caused by the restraint of free-end displacement (of piping) and the effect of differential support or restraint motions. Initially, expansion stress, Pe, was considered a secondary stress because it was self-limiting, or local yielding and minor distortions would satisfy the conditions that caused the stress to occur; failure from one application of stress would not be
expected. However, the Task Group, during one of the meetings for the NF-3000 rewrite in the winter 1982 addenda [7], redened expansion stresses in supports caused by free-end displacement of piping as primary stresses. It was concluded that the growth in the piping caused by thermal expansion was a true secondary stress in the piping; however, the support would see this as a primary load and thus a primary stress. Design-by-analysis of plate-and-shell supports for Class 2 and 3 construction is less complicated than Class 1 supports. Because the maximum stress theory is used rather than the maximum shear stress theory, true allowable stresses are employed to qualify supports rather than design stress intensities. Calculated membrane and bending stresses are compared directly to the allowable stress, S, and to factors of S to account for the differences in membrane and bending action and the different operating conditions (service limits). It should be noted that the total number of plate-and-shell supports for all Classes is relatively small when compared to the linear and standard supports. Based on the many pre-Subsection NF nuclear power plants designed to ASME B-31.1 [3] and US AS B31.7 [4] Codes for Power Piping, the dramatic difference in quantities of linear and standard supports with plate-and-shell type supports was anticipated by the Working Group. It was this distinction in the quantity of linear and standard supports that prompted the Working Group to concentrate its efforts to establish new rules for supports that exhibited mainly structural behavior.
10.4.5
Linear Supports
During the early days of the Subsection NF Working Groups mandate to write rules for supports applicable to ASME Section III, Division 1 philosophy, it was evident that the task of addressing linear and standard supports would be a challenge. The literally thousands of supports that were composed of various structural steel elements (viz., wide anges, channels, structural angles, square tubing, structural pipe, and manufacturers standard catalog products) presented some difculties for the Working Group. It eventually became apparent that in lieu of creating exclusively new design rules for linear and standard supports, the Working Group should take a more pragmatic approach by investigating rules for these supports already existing in other design Codes. For linear supports, this document was the seventh edition of AISC Manual for Steel Construction [41]. Originally used to design building structures, such as commercial steel buildings, the AISC Code was also already in use at nuclear power plants to design the building structures that housed the nuclear piping and other components. In fact, almost all linear and/or standard supports are attached to the building structure at one end of their load path. Therefore, it was a reasonable approach to extend the AISC rules to include the design of linear supports because many of the support elements were the same as those of the AISC Code [41]. Because the distinct differences between building structures and nuclear power plants, especially in areas of varying temperatures, environmental conditions, and multiple operating conditions, some additional considerations needed to be added to the design rules of AISC to adjust the rules for supports for use in nuclear plants. At this juncture, the Working Group considered it necessary to include the structural rules in ASME Section III as opposed to making reference to the AISC Manual of Steel Construction. When Subsection NF was rst published in the winter 1973 addenda to the 1971 edition of ASME Section III, Division 1 [1], the design rules for linear supports were published in Mandatory Appendix XIII [42]. However, when the 1974 edition was
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 19
TABLE 10.6 CLASSIFICATION OF STRESSES FOR SOME TYPICAL CASES (Source: Table I-NF-3217-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
published, the rules for linear support design were moved to Mandatory Appendix XVII [43], where they remained until the winter 1982 addenda [7] when the major revision to Article NF-3000the NF-3000 rewritewas published. As stated earlier, linear supports exhibit essentially a single component of direct stress (uniaxial stress) and they also may be subjected to shear stress. This is best demonstrated by a simply supported or cantilever wide ange beam with a vertical load. The resulting stresses are bending about the strong axis of the beam and shear stress in the beam. Because linear supports were designed by elastic analysis based on the maximum stress theory as stipulated in paragraph NF-3143 [44], principal stresses are not required to be calculated. Each individual direct stress resulting from all loadings is compared to an allowable stress for the corresponding type of stress. Appendix XVII [45] is organized so that these individual stresses can be easily evaluated; that is, tension, compression, bending (weak and strong axis), and both shear and bearing stresses are clearly identied together with their allowable stresses for all load aplications. Similar to the AISC Code, Appendix XVII [45] uses the specied minimum yield strength as the basis for the allowable stresses. However, the working group included some additional requirements in Appendix XVII to account for the differences in nuclear
power plants and commercial buildings. A list of these additional caveats follows. Appendix XVII accounts for the specied minimum yield strengths at temperature. To avoid column buckling in compression applications the allowable stress is limited to two-thirds of the critical buck ling stress. An upper limit of 0.5Su is applicable to tension stress except for pin-connected members. Shear stress on the effective area in resisting tearing failure is limited to 0.3Su. Increases in allowable stresses are permitted for different operating conditions (service limits). The maximum bearing load on the projected area of bolts in bearing connections is limited to 1.5Su. Commencing with the NF-3000 rewrite, allowable stresses for bolting are based on percentages of Su. Between 1973 and 1982 many interested Subsection NF users attended Working Group meetings and advocated a more useful design Code. A Task Group was formed with the mandate to rewrite Article NF-3000, an effort that culminated with the
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 20
20 Chapter 10
FIG. 10.8 STRESS CATEGORIES & LIMIT OF STRESS INTENSITIES FOR PLATE-AND-SHELL ANALYSIS FOR CLASS 1 SUPPORTS (Source: Fig. NF-3321-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 21
publishing of a complete revision to Article NF-3000 in the winter 1982 addenda to the 1980 edition of ASME Section III, Division 1 [7]. The three major Subsection NF changes that appeared in this revision were (1) the introduction of the concept of piping supports and component supports, (2) the introduction of stress limit factors to establish the increased allowable stresses for various service loadings, and (3) the incorporation of Mandatory Appendix XVII into Subarticle NF-3300. Initially, Subsection NF viewed component supports as the entire family of supports within its scope of responsibility. With the winter 1982 addenda, Subsection NF divided all supports into two categories: piping supports and component supports. Piping supports were considered those supports used to support nuclear piping and that were frequently of the linear or standard types; additionally, they included supports on piping used to support other piping components, such as in-line valves and pumps. Component supports were considered those supports that were used to support nuclear components such as vessels, tanks, and other pressure components and were commonly of the plate-andshell type. It was expected that this categorization of supports would put the major emphasis for more stringent design and construction rules with the newly dened component supports. Historically, piping supports that constituted the vast majority of supports in a nuclear power plant were simple in design and construction. A failure of a piping support would normally not be
catastrophic to its piping system, but the failure of a support on a major nuclear component could have serious consequences. Therefore, more stringent rules were contemplated for component supports. This concept was strongly supported by the Working Group and had considerable input from regulatory personnel. The second major revision to the winter 1982 addenda to Subsection NF [7] was the introduction of stress limit factors to provide increased design stress intensities and allowable stresses for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC plate-and-shell, linear, and standard supports for both component and piping supports. For Class 1 plate-and-shell supports, Tables NF-3522.2-1 (Table 10.7) and NF-3622.2-1 (Table 10.8) replaced the old Hopper chart (Figure 10.8). Similarly, Tables NF-3552.2-1 (Table 10.9) and NF-3652.2-1 (Table 10.10) provide stress limit factors for Class 2, 3, and MC plate-and-shell supports; Tables NF-3523.2-1 (Table 10.11) and NF-3623.2-1 (Table 10.12) provide stress limit factors for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC linear supports. The purpose of these tables was to present the increase factors for various service levels (A, B, C, D, and testing) in a concise, simplied form and to provide consistency for different types and categories of supports. Additionally, these tables also introduced the concept of piping and component supports. One major consideration that was included was the redenition of restraint of free-end displacement and anchor motions of piping as a primary rather than a secondary stress.
TABLE 10.7 ELASTIC ANALYSIS STRESS CATEGORIES AND STRESS LIMIT FACTORS FOR CLASS 1 PLATE-AND-SHELL SUPPORTS DESIGNED BY ANALYSISCOMPONENT SUPPORTS (Source: Table NF-3522.2-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 22
22 Chapter 10
TABLE 10.8 ELASTIC ANALYSIS STRESS CATEGORIES AND STRESS LIMIT FACTORS FOR CLASS 1 PLATE-AND-SHELL SUPPORTS DESIGNED BY ANALYSIS PIPING SUPPORTS (Source: Table NF-36522.2-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
The third important revision was the incorporation of Appendix XVII, Design of Linear Type Supports by Linear Elastic and Plastic Analysis, into Subarticle NF-3300 [46], an act done to make Subsection NF a more complete Code. It was concluded that a major source of mandatory design rules should not be in an Appendix, but rather merged into its appropriate location in the subsection. Because of the task of moving the linear design rules into Subsection NF and of the task of rewriting Article NF-3000 were both large, a cross-referencetype table was provided to identify the previous location of each NF-3000 item. This table was extremely helpful, for it enabled users to understand the many changes in this revision and also provided a roadmap for the new NF-3000.
10.4.6
Standard Supports
One of the unique ideas introduced to ASME Section III with the initial publication of Subsection NF was the concept of component standard supports (presently called standard supports). Early in the preparation of Subsection NF, the Working Group realized that nuclear plants contained thousands of supports of various designs and application. The support industry had evolved with manufacturers developing catalogues of what were known as catalog or standard supports. These supports were grouped into various families such as rod hangers, spring hangers, rigid supports, seismic supports, clamps, and clevises. These standard
supports and their families grew over the years as they were applied to fossil fuel and nuclear power plants. The concept was to identify and categorize designs that could be mass-produced and stored on the manufacturers shelf. Key to their success was the design margin of 5 on failure that all manufacturers advertised in their catalogues. These products proved popular because many different categories of standard supports existed to address the types of applications that engineers were designing. When it was rst discussed in the Working Group meetings, the concept of standard supports appealed to many members. Underlying this concept was the idea that providing design and construction rules would be simple and not require stringent considerations. The reason for allowing a group of supports with less rigorous rules was to take advantage of the fact that standard supports were catalog items and normally mass-produced. Discussed at length during the early meetings of the Working Group, but not included in the text of Subsection NF, was that standard supports had a time-tested history of success. Very few, if any, failures of these supports were ever documented because of incorrect or poor designs. Usually, when a failure was discovered, the cause was determined to be an overload or product misapplication. This time-tested history of success was instrumental in convincing the Working Group that this type of support should be included in Subsection NF. Standard supports, then, were permitted to possess less stringent material, design, fabrication, and examination
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 23
TABLE 10.9 ELASTIC ANALYSIS STRESS CATEGORIES AND STRESS LIMIT FACTORS FOR CLASS 2, 3, AND MC PLATE-AND-SHELL SUPPORTS DESIGNED BY ANALYSISCOMPONENT SUPPORTS (Source: Table NF-3552.2-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
TABLE 10.10 ELASTIC ANALYSIS STRESS CATEGORIES AND STRESS LIMIT FACTORS FOR CLASS 2, 3, AND MC PLATE-AND-SHELL SUPPORTS DESIGNED BY ANALYSISPIPING SUPPORTS (Source: Table NF-3652.2-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 24
24 Chapter 10
TABLE 10.11 ELASTIC ANALYSIS STRESS CATEGORIES AND STRESS LIMIT FACTORS FOR CLASS 1, 2, 3, AND MC LINEAR-TYPE SUPPORTS DESIGNED BY ANALYSISCOMPONENT SUPPORTS (Source: Table NF-3523.2-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
rules than plate-and-shell and linear supports as a result of their successful use over the years as a unique group of supports. Since 1973, standard supports have proven to be, and continue to be, a popular type of support and have maintained an excellent historical record of safe products.
10.4.7
Component and Piping Supports
Component and piping supports were addressed briey in Section 10.4.5, Linear Supports, to explain their role in the NF-3000 rewrite of the winter 1982 addenda to the 1980 edition of ASME Section III [7]. Initially, all supports were dened as component supports (see the title on the cover of Subsection NF from 1973 through the 1992 edition). As dened in Subsubarticle NF-1110(c) [47], these structural elements are used to support nuclear components. Because components encompass vessels, tanks, pumps, and piping, the terminology of component supports seemed appropriate, for all of these components would require some type of support. However, after the industry had used Subsection NF for several years, the Working Group considered establishing separate categories for supports for those used on piping and those used on components. This consideration was the result of many queries from members and inquiries concerning the actual use of supports in the everyday application of Subsection NF. It was concluded that the vast majority of supports used on piping were either linear or standard supports. Similarly,
many of the supports used on components such as vessels and other pressure-retaining items were plate-and-shell supports. It seemed appropriate, then, to create these categories of supports to better dene how supports were used in actual practice. This separation was also acceptable to the regulatory authorities because plate-and-shell supports normally used to support components were of great interest to the NRC and the more stringent requirements for plate-and-shell supports seemed appropriately placed. With the publication of the NF-3000 rewrite in the winter 1982 addenda to the 1980 edition [7], the inclusion of component and piping supports brought Subsection NF up to date with the use of supports in the nuclear power plant industry.
10.4.8
Snubbers
Because ASME Section III requires that dynamic loads caused by such events as earthquakes be considered, the support manufacturers saw the opportunity to suggest the use of hydraulic snubbers (shock suppressors) for piping to address this requirement. Prior to this application, snubbers were commonly used in fossil fuel plants to restrain piping and equipment during water and steam hammer events. The application of snubbers to restrain earthquake loadings seemed to be a natural outgrowth of the design of snubbers, which allows relatively unrestrained growth of piping during thermal excursions; however, snubbers lock up during rapid dynamic events such as earthquakes.
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 25
TABLE 10.12 ELASTIC ANALYSIS STRESS CATEGORIES AND STRESS LIMIT FACTORS FOR CLASS 1, 2, 3, LINEAR-TYPE SUPPORTS DESIGNED BY ANALYSISPIPING SUPPORTS (Source: Table I-NF-3623.2-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
Few support products have generated as much controversy and have produced both popular yet questionable responses from the industry as snubbers. Initially, snubbers were of the hydraulic design and were used liberally throughout the nuclear industry. After several years of use, mostly in the passive sense (i.e., being stroked in unrestrained thermal applications and not in activated dynamic events), hydraulic snubbers began to exhibit leakage of the hydraulic uid. This was unacceptable and resulted in action by the regulatory authorities (NRC). Technical specications were written that required continuous inspection and testing of snubbers to identify those snubbers in use that had fallen outside of predetermined parameters. (Inspection and testing of snubbers was conducted under the auspices of ASME Section XI.) Based on statistical sampling and testing, snubbers that did not meet the technical specications needed to be replaced. As the number of replaced snubbers increased, manufacturers saw an opportunity to offer a different snubber design that was not beset by leakage and other technical specication problems. At that time, approximately in the mid-1970s, the mechanical snubber was introduced to the industry. The paramount reason for the popularity of mechanical snubbers was because they did not leak uid. As utilities slowly began to replace hydraulic snubbers, many of them implemented snubber reduction programs that became practical with new and more aggressive piping analysis techniques and rules. The reduction programs were popular
because there were fewer snubbers to test and replace. Eventually mechanical snubbers began to exhibit their own problems. Unlike hydraulic snubbers, which failed in the passive mode, that is, loss of hydraulic uid meant the snubber would fail to restrain the pipe during low probability dynamic events, mechanical snubbers began to fail in the active mode. This failure involved the snubbers locking up in a thermal excursion, thereby placing potentially large thermal loads on piping and equipment. Recently, some utilities began making a return to newly designed hydraulic snubbers because of the unacceptability of failing mechanical snubbers in the active mode. It seems that snubber design has made a complete turnabout with the return to hydraulic snubbers; however, most utilities would agree that the fewer the snubbers the better.
10.4.9
Welding and Bolting
Two specialized areas of support design-by-analysis that demands some attention are welding and bolting design. Both of these are connection design and historically can be the weak link of a support design. Permissible types of welded joints for Class 1 plate-and-shell supports were initially presented in Fig. NF-3291 (a)-1 (Fig. 10.9) and later in Fig. NF-3226.1-1 (Fig. 10.10). These designs consisted of full penetration and llet welds in butt, lap, angle, corner, and T-joints. Class 1, 2, 3, and MC linear supports permitted full-penetration, partial-penetration, and llet welds in various congurations as specied in Table NF-3292.1-1 (Table 10.13),
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 26
26 Chapter 10
FIG. 10.9 PERMISSIBLE WELDED JOINTS FOR COMPONENT SUPPORTS [Source: Fig. NF-3291(a)-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]
later in Table NF-3324.5(a)-1 (Table 10.14) and in Appendix XVII2450 [48], later in subparagraph NF-3324.5 [49]. The stress limits in Table 10.13 were essentially identical to the welding stress limits in the AISC Manual of Steel Construction [25]. Welding of linear supports, which constituted the vast majority of supports, also had restrictions, such as a minimum and maximum size of llet welds. This was necessary because of differences
in the thickness of the parts being joined. Also of consideration was welding to a plate in a T-joint conguration, also known as the through-thickness direction; this was discussed in detail in Section 10.4.2 regarding stress theories and types of stresses. The requirement to reduce the allowable stress in this joint conguration was eventually removed and addressed as a fabrication consideration in later editions of Subsection NF.
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 27
FIG. 10.10 PERMISSIBLE WELDED JOINTS FOR CLASS 1 PLATE-AND-SHELL-TYPE SUPPORTS [Source: Fig. NF-3326 1-1. (h) and (i), Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]
Historically, piping support welds are primarily llet and are bevel welds, and component support welds are more often partialand full-penetration welds. Fillet welds are frequently analyzed by treating the weld prole as a line rather than an area of weld deposition. By using this technique, the analyst establishes an allowable weld stress as a force per in. as opposed to a force per sq. inch. The shape of the weld prole, that is, the contour of the weld around the connection between two or more items, is dictated by the manner in which the items are connected. This orientation of the connection will determine the type of weld joint; examples of such types include the butt joint, T-joint, and angle joint. The most common weld joint in supports is the T-joint because of the
nature of supports designed to restrain load in any or all of the three orthogonal directions. Fillet weld joint analysis is commonly performed by using the methods of Omer W. Blod-gett [50], who provides bending and twisting properties of many weld proles treated as a line. These properties allow an analyst to determine weld stresses for connection proles of many common structural shapes such as angles, channels, wide ange beams, square tubing, and structural pipe. Based on the type of loading on the welded connection, the analyst determines the resultant weld stress as the square root sum of the squares (SRSS) of the normal stress (sum of bending and tension) and the shear stresses (sum of direct shear and torsional shear). This resultant stress is
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 28
28 Chapter 10
TABLE 10.13
ALLOWED STRESS LIMITS FOR LINEAR COMPONENT SUPPORT WELDSALL CLASSES (Source: Table NF-3292.1-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
TABLE 10.14
ALLOWABLE STRESS LIMITS FOR CLASS 1 SLINEAR-TYPE SUPPORT WELDS [Source: Table NF-3324.5(a)-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 29
compared to an allowable stress calculated as a percentage of the ultimate strength of the material based on the throat thickness of the weld size. Bolting design for all types and classes of supports was governed by the rules for linear supports in Appendix XVII-2460 [51], later in subparagraph NF-3324.6 [52]), and Table XVII2461.1-1 (given here as Table 10.15). Initially, the allowable bolt tension and shear stresses in Table XVII-2461.1-1 was similar to comparable allowable stresses in the AISC Manual of Steel Construction [25]. This table, however, provided allowable stresses for a limited number of bolting material specications. With the publication of the winter 1982 addenda to the 1980 edition of ASME Section III [7], the bolting requirements were totally revised and were no longer based on the AISC Manual of Steel Construction. Subparagraph NF3324.6 [52] presented new rules for the design of bolted joints that were based on work performed by John W. Fisher [53].
Tension and shear allowable stresses are specied as a function of ultimate strength, Su, rather than the previously used yield strength, Sy, basis. Because the allowable stresses are given in equation form rather than table form, the material specications are no longer limited. In fact, separate tension and shear equations are given for ferritic and austenitic steels to account for the differences in the ratio of yield strength to ultimate strength, Sy/Su. When the yield strength is less than half of the ultimate strength, which is the case for austenitic materials, using the tension equation for the ferritic steel would result in an allowable stress above the yield strength. It is for this reason-keeping the allowable stress below the yield strength - that a larger denominator is used in the equations for austenitic steel. The new rules also provide for combined tension and shear stresses (normally used with concrete anchor bolts), bearing- and friction-type joints, slip resistance joints, and minimum and maximum edge distances.
TABLE 10.15 ALLOWABLE BOLT TENSION AND SHEAR STRESSES (Source: Table XVII-2461.1-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code)
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 30
30 Chapter 10
10.4.10
Load Rating
Subsubparagraph NF-3132.1(a)(3) [54], later Subarticles NF3280 [55] and 3380 [56]), identies load rating as the third design procedure permitted for use for support qualication. Since many support manufacturers had established a complete line of catalog supports, the load rating procedure was advantageous, especially because many products had catalog load ratings previously established by some form of load testing. The load rating procedure is a series of simple equations based on operating conditions (later called service level limits). The equations establish the product load rating as a function of a test load multiplied by the ratio of allowable stress, S, to ultimate strength, Su, for plate-and-shell supports; the ratio of allowable stress, Fall, to ultimate strength, Su, for linear supports; and the ratio of either S or Fall to Su for component standard supports, depending on whether it is produced from plate-and-shell or from linear items. The term test load is dened as the support test load equal to or less than the load under which the component support fails to perform its specied support function. Also, the tests are required to be performed on a statistically signicant number of full-size samples, or a 10% reduction in load rating results is taken if only one sample was tested. It soon became apparent that a 10% reduction in the load rating results was a small price to pay because (1) it was very difcult to dene a statistically signicant number of samples to satisfy the design organization, the owner, and the regulatory authorities; and (2) testing one rather than several samples was more economically attractive to the manufacturer. When it was rst published in 1973 [1], load rating was a new concept, and the denition of the term test load caused some confusion in the industry. It was unclear whether the phrase fails to perform its specied support function was referring to the support exceeding the yield strength or the ultimate strength of the material. The working group had many discussions regarding the meaning of this phrase and concluded that its meaning is dependent upon the product being tested and what the tester determines to be the mode of failure of the support. If the tester believes a support no longer performs its support function, when the load applied to the support reaches the support material yield strength, then this load is the test load. Similarly, it may be at complete failure, ultimate strength, at which the tester feels the support no longer performs its support function. Historically, many manufacturers used yield strength as their threshold to determine the test load for catalog products. In many instances, catalog load ratings could have been increased based upon the results of the load rating tests; however, manufacturers believed that the success history of their products was attributed to the catalog loads that had persisted for many years. Therefore, many manufacturers catalog load ratings remained unchanged. The winter 1983 addenda to the 1983 edition of ASME Section III [57] included a major revision to the load rating procedure. The revision to Subarticles NF-3280 [55] and NF-3380 [56] addressed the earlier concern regarding whether yield or ultimate strength should be used to determine if the support test sample failed to perform its support function. The new requirements directed the tester to determine a yield test load and an ultimate test load that were then multiplied by the ratio of the appropriate allowable stress to either the actual yield strength or the actual ultimate strength as applicable. The load rating would then be the lower of the two values. The use of the actual yield strength, Syact, and the actual ultimate strength, Sauct, is needed, since these values vary with different Certied Material Test Reports (CMTRs).
Load ratings determined with this approach would be more realistic because the strength of the actual material used in the test is used as the basis for establishing the load ratings.
10.4.11
High-Cycle Fatigue and Limit Analysis
Subsection NF required evaluation of high-cycle fatigue for Class 1 linear supports and their connections (Appendix XVII3000 [58], later Subsubarticle NF-3330 [59]), which were subjected to more than 20,000 cycles of fatigue loading. This requirement was unique for supports and was not considered necessary for the many support designs. Most supports were not expected to undergo more than 20,000 cycles of fatigue loading; therefore, this requirement was not considered to be a normal criterion for supports. In fact, user questions and requests for interpretations serve as a measure of how often a particular topic is addressed by the engineering community. Because the topic of high-cycle fatigue did not manifest itself as a common topic at Working Group meetings, it can be assumed that not many users of Subsection NF availed themselves of this requirement. In fact, the author found it necessary to use this Subsection NF requirement for the rst time only recently. Similarly, limit analysis design (Appendix XVII-4000 [60], later Subsubarticle NF 3340 [61]) was intended to be an alternative to elastic analysis for Class 1 linear supports. In this case simple or continuous beams and rigid frames may be proportioned on the basis of plastic design namely, on the basis of the lower bound collapse load. This strength shall not be less than that required to support a factored load equal to 1.7 times those of the normal (Level A) and upset (Level B) conditions and 1.3 times that of the emergency (Level C) condition. Again, because this topic was rarely discussed at Working Group meetings, it can be concluded that this option to elastic design was very seldom used.
10.4.12
Functional Requirements
Even though Article NF-3000 was a design Code, functional requirements of supports were also addressed. These considerations were important, even though they did not specify requirements. Paragraph NF-3122 [62] (later NF-3123 [63]) specied that the Design Specication shall indicate when a support is to be designed to perform a specic function. Some examples of support functional requirements that Article NF-3000 addressed follow: VibrationPiping shall be arranged and supported so that vibration shall be minimized. Movement of supported componentConsideration shall be given to the relative motion of the supported piping or other supported component and the component support. Rolling and Sliding supportsShall permit free movement of the component or the component shall be designed to include the imposed load and frictional resistance. Sway Brace and Vibration DampenersThe effect of sway braces shall be included in the stress analysis of the component. SnubbersThe end connection of the snubber shall be designed to accommodate the vertical and horizontal move ment of the component. Support spacingSupports for piping shall be spaced to prevent excessive shear stresses resulting from sag and bending in the piping.
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 31
10.5
10.5.1
NF-4000 FABRICATION AND INSTALLATION

General Requirements
Fabrication and installation are important steps in the overall support construction process. Prior to the existence of Subsection NF, supports were fabricated and installed based on manufacturers practices and recommendations and also on standards such as MSS SP-58 [5], MSS SP-69 [64], and MSS SP-89 [65]. Article NF-4000 [66] for the rst time presented a structured approach to control the fabrication and installation of supports. These rules attempted to provide requirements for the entire fabrication cycle, including forming, tting, aligning, welding, heat treatment, and bolted connections. The Working Group believed that requiring reasonable and benecial fabrication and installation practices would enhance the quality and inherent safety of supports.
10.5.2
Form, Fitting, and Aligning
These requirements addressed such support fabrication topics as cutting, forming, bending, tolerances, aligning methods, and tack welds. Since the majority of supports consisted of either linear or standard supports, Article NF-4000 [66] had its largest impact on support manufacturers. The requirements for forming, cutting, and bending affected the manufacturers complete line of support products. Standard products such as clamps, beam attachments, variable- and constant-support spring hangers, formed and forged clevises, baseplates, and saddle supports were fabricated using a variety of standard forming operations such as cold- and hot-forming, shearing, and thermal cutting. Consideration needed to be given to preheating before thermal cutting and the effect of reducing impact properties of materials below minimum values as a result of the fabrication process. Material identication during these operations is required to be maintained throughout the manufacturing process. Original identication markings are required to be transferred to subsequent parts when they were cut or otherwise separated during the process. Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-D [102] incorporates all tolerances, was published in 2007 edition of ASME Section III [103]. These tolerance guidelines, though non-mandatory, were followed by most support manufacturers and installers. Many of these tolerances were prevalent in other support standards or manufacturing practices. Fitting and aligning methods include such operations as bars, jacks, clamps, and tack welds. Tack welds are used to secure alignment and shall be removed completely or incorporated into the nal weld after the proper weld preparation.
10.5.3
Welding and Heat Treatment
employ welding as a fabrication process are required to obtain and maintain an ASME NPT (nuclear parts) stamp. This stamp is obtained initially through an ASME survey and maintained through subsequent surveys on a 3 yr. audit basis. Class 1 plate-and-shell and linear supports are required to show identication marks of the welders who construct welded joints. This is a form of material identication as dened in Subsubarticle NF-2150 [69]. For all other classes and types of supports, the manufacturer must certify that only qualied welders are used in making all welds. Subarticle NF-4400 [70] presents the rules governing the making and repairing of welds. Prewelding considerations, such as identication, storage and handling of welding materials, and the cleanliness of weld surfaces, are of great importance and must be addressed by manufacturers and installers of supports. Rules are provided for the making of the welded joint including backing strips, peening, weld surface quality, butt weld reinforcement, and the shape and size of llet welds. Defects discovered in welds by means of weld examination (Article NF-5000 [71]) are subject to weld repairs. Surface defects may be removed by grinding or machining rather than repair by welding when specic conditions pertaining to design thickness, blending, and magnetic particle or liquid penetrant examination are considered. Repair by welding is permitted when defects result in reduction of design thickness. Weld repairs must use materials, welders, and welding procedures in accordance with the provisions of this article. After the weld repair is performed consideration must be given to blending, examination, and heat treatment (when required) of repaired areas. Heat treatment of welded joints is a process that may be specied under the welding procedure qualication requirements of ASME Section IX [68]. Preheat may be necessary depending on such factors as chemical analysis, elevated temperature, physical properties material thickness, and the degree of restraint of the joined parts. The preheat method must not harm or alter the base material or preapplied weld metal. Limitations of interpass temperatures must be considered for quenched and tempered materials to avoid detrimental effects on the materials mechanical properties. Post-weld heat treatment (PWHT) is a more common practice and is required for all welds, including repair welds, except for those exempted in subparagraph NF-4622.7 [72] and Table NF-4622.7(b)-1 (Table 10.16). This table is organized by material P-number (ASME Section IX, QW-420 [73]) and type of weld. A considerable number of materials and weld types are exempted based on material thickness, percent of carbon, and preheat requirements. Factors and requirements for PWHT are time-temperature recordings (required for the Authorized Inspector), nominal thickness denition, holding time at temperature, dissimilar P-number materials, heating and cooling rates, and heating methods.
Welding of support products is the most prevalent of all fabrication processes. Even though Subsection NF is a structural rather than pressure-retaining Code, many of the welding rules and requirements have their origins in the other subsections that pertain to pressure-retaining design and construction. Welding procedure qualication requirements of ASME Section IX [68] apply to supports fabricated to Subsection NF. Emphasis is placed on welding qualication and maintenance and certication of records. These qualication and certication records are crucial for a manufacturer to maintain his ASME stamping certication. Because welding is considered Code work (the material properties are altered during this process), support manufacturers who
10.5.4
Bolting
Subarticle NF-4700 [74] provides the fabrication and installation requirements for bolted construction including both items in the connection, the bolt, and the connected parts. Bolting is a signicant item in the support load path because many standard supports use bolting to connect support products both to the component (clamping device) and the building structure (beam attachment). Thread engagement is the primary mechanism through which the bolted connection performs its function. Threads for bolts and studs are required to be engaged for the full length of the thread in the load-carrying nut. Thread lubricants must not
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 32
32 Chapter 10
TABLE 10.16 EXEMPTIONS OF MANDATORY PWHT [Source: Table NF-4622.7(b)-1, Subsection NF of the ASME B&PV Code]
react unfavorably with support materials except in friction-type joints where contact surfaces must be free of lubricants. Bolt tensioning, or preload, is a form of locking device that is common for high-strength bolts (yield strength 80 ksi) and is designated in the Design Specication. Preload may be obtained by (1) turn-of-the-nut method, (2) calibrated wrenches (hardened
washer required), (3) load-indicating washers, and (4) direct extension indicators. For other than high-strength bolts, locking devices, which are required to prevent loosening during service, may be any of the following: elastic stop nuts, lock nuts, and freespinning and prevailing torque. Upset threads may be used as a locking device when the threads are upset by cold-working or
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 33
tack welding. When locking devices cannot be installed because of the assembly geometry, preloading of fasteners with yield strengths 80 ksi can be used if specic preload values are maintained, dynamic testing is performed, and acceptable preload methods are used. Bolted connections are also used in pure shear and shear combined with tension. Bolts loaded in pure shear shall not have the threads located in the load-bearing part of the shank unless permitted by the Design Specication, which is more of a functional requirement. In addition to the bolt part of the connection, requirements also apply to the mating portion of the connected part. Bolt holes shall have specic requirements regarding the diameter of bolt holes relative to the diameter of the bolt. Oversized and slotted holes shall have specic dimensions and may have restrictions regarding the direction of loading.
penetrant or magnetic-particle examination. A closer scrutiny of these requirements shows that llet welds typically used in structural applications use predominantly visual examination, whereas the full-penetration butt welds normally seen in pressure boundary applications primarily require more rigorous examination methods. The Working Group intended this approach to maintain the ASME philosophy regarding pressure boundarytype welds while realizing that most support welds, being structural in nature, would fall into the llet weld category.
10.6.2
Acceptance Standards
10.6
NF-5000 EXAMINATION
Nondestructive examination of support welds was a relatively new requirement for support manufacturers and had its origins in the other ASME Section III subsections that dealt with pressureretaining design. The Working Group recognized that structural elements did not require the more stringent examination techniques except for specic conditions. Since there were thousands of supports in a nuclear plant, examination requirements needed to be practical by taking advantage of the different types of supports and their construction methods. Examination of supports would have a dramatic impact on support manufacturers by its effect on the fabrication process of the many different standard support products. The Working Group provided rules for nondestructive examination, conducted in accordance with ASME Section V [75]), that would address manufacturers considerations and ensure a safe product.
Acceptance standards are given for all ve examination methods: ultrasound, radiography, liquid penetrant, magnetic particle, and visual. Indications identied by the particular method of examination are characterized as imperfections and are unacceptable when they exceed specic dimensional limits. Visual examination does not identify indications as a result of a supporting test, as is the case for the other examination methods. Therefore, there are many dimensional acceptance standards that address such parameters as weld size, weld fusion, overlap, craters, surface porosity, undercut depth, weld location and length, arc strikes, blemishes, and slag.
10.6.3
Special Considerations
Article NF-5000 [71] contains examination requirements for items with special considerations. These requirements do not fall under the examination methods categorized by support class as indicated in Section 10.6.1; instead, they have special requirements as follows. For weldments that impose loads in the through-thickness direction of primary members 1 in. and greater in thickness, the base material beneath the weld shall be ultrasonically examined when required by subsubarticle NF-4440 for all classes of supports. When this article requires radiographic examination, inertia and continuous drive friction welds shall also be examined by the ultrasonic method to verify bonding over the entire area. Springs for Class 1 variable, constant, and sway standard supports shall be examined after coiling by the liquid-penetrant or magnetic-particle method. Weld repairs and special welded joints may require examination by the ultrasonic, liquid-penetrant, or magnetic-particle methods.
10.6.1
Examination Methods
The vast majority of supports fall into the linear and/or standard support type of Class 2 and 3 construction. Initially, Subarticle NF-5200 [76] was organized based on the type of support: plate-and-shell, linear, or standard support. However, Subarticle NF-5200 was revised in the winter 1978 addenda to the 1977 edition of ASME Section III [77] to present examination requirements based on class of construction. Paragraph NF-5221 [78] identies the method of examination based upon the type of weld and weld throat dimension for Class 2 and MC primary member welded joints. Primary members of supports are those members designed to carry load under any postulated condition, whereas secondary members are those members typically used as bracing and not designed to sustain any signicant stress (>50% of the allowable stress). Primary members that have groove depth dimensions less than 1 in., T-joint welds that have throat dimen1 sions less than 2 in., and all secondary member welded joints need only to be examined by the visual method. All Class 3 welded joints for both primary and secondary members require visual examination except for primary member welded joints with a groove depth greater 1 in., in which case liquid-penetrant or magnetic-particle examination is required. Liquid-penetrant or magnetic-particle examination is also required for Class 1 primary member welds other than full-penetration butt welds, which must be radiographed. Class 2 primary member butt welds, Class 2 primary member partial-penetration or llet welds with groove depth dimensions greater than 1 in., and T-joint welds with throat dimensions 1 in. or greater also require liquid2
10.7
NF-8000 NAMEPLATES, STAMPING, AND REPORTS
When Subsection NF was rst published in the winter 1973 addenda to the 1971 edition of ASME Section III [1], requirements for Code symbol stamping were not included. However, the winter 1974 addenda to the 1974 edition of ASME Section III [79] included stamping requirements for Subsection NF. This meant that for any component support contract written between July 1, 1974 (when the 1974 edition became mandatory) and July 1, 1975 (when the winter 1974 addenda [79] became mandatory), Code symbol stamping was not required. This stamping requirement would have a major impact on support manufacturers because, for the rst time, an Authorized Inspector would be required to inspect welds at a manufacturers plant on a daily
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 34
34 Chapter 10
basis. After this time, support manufacturing for all types and classes of supports would never be the same. During the period from July 1, 1974 to July 1, 1975, a concerted effort to sign as many component support contracts as possible was the goal of many support manufacturers. Utilities also had a vested interest in committing to the earlier Code Edition to reduce their exposure to the requirements of nameplates, stamping, and data reports.
10.7.1
General Requirements
Article NF-8000 [80] is concise, simply stating that the requirements for certicates of authorization, nameplate, stamping, and data reports are specied in NCA-8000 [81]. It also states that stamping is not required for supports fabricated from materials (i.e., not welded). This is an important consideration because performing Code work or welding would require that a support manufacturer apply for an ASME NPT stamp, which necessitates an initial ASME Survey and subsequent renewal surveys every three years. In November 1976, the rst support manufacturer successfully scheduled and passed the ASME survey and received the rst NPT stamp for supports. Since 1975 several attempts have been made to eliminate the requirement for stamping of supports, with the Working Group discussing in depth Code Revisions and Code Cases that would eliminate this requirement. Code Cases CCN-500 [82] and CCN-570 [83] have currently accomplished this task: CCN-500 allows support manufacturers to design and construct standard supports to a support manufacturers standard MSS-SP-58 [5], which does not require nameplates, stamping, or data reports; and similarly, CCN-570 allows linear and standard supports to be designed to ANSI/AISC N-690 [84], a specication that does not require nameplates, stamping, or data reports. The Working Group has discussed this topic at length over the past 25 years or so, and its consensus was that stamping of standard and linear supports (normally piping supports) should not be a requirement. As a result of these discussions, the Working Group has succeeded in gaining approval of a very recent (July 1, 1999) Code Revision to Article NF-8000 [85] that eliminates the requirements for Code symbol stamping of all supports. In conjunction with this revision, Subsubarticle NCA-3680 [86] introduced a new entity, the NS Certicate Holder. This Certicate Holder essentially has responsibilities similar to that of the NPT Certicate Holder (which formerly pertained to welded supports) except that Code symbol stamping is not required (the rules apply to all supports). Other differences are that (1) the duties of the Authorized Inspection Agency (AIA) have been greatly reduced, (2) a new data report formNS-1 Certicate of Conformance NCA-8100 [87]is required for welded items, and (3) a Certicate of Compliance is required for nonwelded support.
involved with this effort, which culminated in the initial publication of the rst Appendix in the 1995 edition, A96 addenda [88]. In actuality, two Appendices were identied. However, Mandatory Appendix NF-I [89] was published as being in the course of preparation, and it is being reserved for the transfer of additional permitted material table data on allowable stress values, design stress intensity values, specied minimum yield strength values, and ultimate strength values. Code Cases N-71 [20] and N-249 [21] currently permit these additional materials. When the Working Group completes the appropriate effort, these materials will be transferred to Appendix NF-I and Code Cases N-71 and N-249 will be annulled. Appendix NF-II [90] presented the design requirements for single angle members, which were not included in Subsection NF-3300 [91]. Single-angle members require more comprehensive design requirements because their unique structural shape makes them asymmetrical at either of their axes. Structural angles have both geometric and principal axes. Seely and Smith [92] dene the geometric axes as the perpendicular axes lying in a transverse section of the beam and passing through the centroid of the section and dene the principal axes as the centroidal principal axes of inertia of a transverse section of the beam. For a laterally unrestrained structural angle, determining the bending stress with a load not passing through the angles shear center and using the section modulus of the angles geometric axes will considerably understate the true bending stress. This Mandatory Appendix accounts for the differences between the geometric and principal axes of a single angle. Additional Appendices were published in the 1998 edition of Subsection NF [93]. Mandatory Appendix NF-III [94] contains rules in addition to those of Article NF-3000 [95] for the design and construction of linear supports using energy-absorbing material designed to yield by dissipating energy associated with dynamic piping movements. Two Non-Mandatory Appendices were included in the 1998 edition of ASME Section III [93]. NonMandatory Appendix NF-A [96] considers structural bolt preloading of steel to steel joints for bolting materials other than A-490 and A-325, which are included in the AISC Steel Manual [6]. Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-B [97] provides background for the allowable stresses and design stress intensities used for the design of supports in Article NF-3000 [95]. Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-C [101] provides design basis for Linear-Type Supports. Another Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-D [102] which provides tolerances was included in the 2007 edition of ASME Section III [103].
10.9
10.9.1
CODE CASES AND INTERPRETATIONS

Code Cases
10.8
NF APPENDICES
From 1982 to 1984, the Working Group on Supports (known then as component supports) began discussions to determine the feasibility of publishing Appendices to Subsection NF that would provide aid and guidance for frequent users of that subsection. Several areas of consideration, including materials, stress analysis methods, Design Specication contents, design reports, and special design considerations, were identied as topics worthy of inclusion into these proposed Appendices. Initiating these topics and developing them into Code language for the Appendices was a formidable task. Several Working Group members were
After the initial publication of any Code, and if users of that Code begin to deal with its effects, questions concerning Code rules and requirements are inevitable. One mechanism to deal with these questions and concerns is for the appropriate Code Group (e.g., the Subgroup or Working Group) to develop a Code Case that addresses additional or alternative rules. Since 1973, several Code Cases have been published addressing Subsection NF. Essentially, Code Cases provide some aspect of relief to existing Code rules either by enhancing existing rules or by providing alternative rules for the particular Code topic. It should be noted that Code Cases pertaining to design and fabrication are
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 35
addressed with respect to their acceptability in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.84 [98] and, similarly, Code Cases pertaining to materials are addressed in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.85 [99]. Also, the owner must approve the use of any Code Case and must document its use in all applicable design reports and calculations. Table 10.17 lists selected important Code Cases addressing Subsection NF that have been approved for use by ASME since Subsection NFs inception. These Code Cases are not listed in the References because the information is given in Table 10.17, and no revision level for each is given.
10.11
ASME B31.1 AND B31.3 SUPPORTS
10.9.2
Interpretations
A second technique for determining Code intent or clarication is the inquiry-and-interpretation process. Code users from any organization may ask a question (i.e., prepare an inquiry) and request an interpretation from ASME of any Code Section. This process requires the author of a question to state the question and propose a response. After reviewing the inquiry, ASME will then issue an ofcial interpretation as a response. An important aspect of the inquiry-and-interpretation process is that the interpretation will attempt to use existing Code words in response to the inquiry. Table 10.18 lists some selected important interpretations issued for Subsection NF. As with the Code Cases in Table 10.17, these interpretations are not listed in the References because the information is given in Table 10.18, and no revision level for each is given.
10.10
SUMMARY OF CHANGES
Table 10.19 lists all the changes in 2007 edition of ASME BPVC, Section III, Subsection NF, Supports. [102]
As an enhancement to this chapter, it is appropriate to mention a few words about Code rules for supports of other jurisdictions, such as power piping (non-nuclear power plants) and petrochemical piping. ASME B31.1 [3] is the Code for power piping for nonnuclear power plants. Before the initial publication of Subsection NF [1], ASME B31.1 was the Code of record for pipe supports of both fossil fuel and nuclear power plants. The B31.1 power piping Code was essentially a design Code for piping with some basic rules for supports. In comparison, Subsection NF [93] contains 185 pages of design, fabrication, and examination rules for supports, whereas ASME B31.1 [3] contains less than ve pages. It is clear that Subsection NF established a new standard for the design fabrication and examination of supports. ASME B31.1 [3] primarily addresses standard (normally catalog) supports. Paragraph 121.1 [3] species that MSS SP-58 [5] shall be used for the design of standard supporting elements. Paragraph 121.2 [3] provides allowable stress values for materials other than those in MSS SP-58 [5]. The remainder of the design section, paragraph 121 [3], is concerned with providing additional rules addressing hanger adjustments, hanger spacing, anchors and guides, rigid hangers, springs (variable and constant support), shock suppressors (snubbers), and structural attachements. These additional rules are used in conjunction with MSS SP-58 to ensure a comprehensive support design. ASME B31.3 [100] provides similar rules and requirements for supports as ASME B31.1 [3], including reference to MSS SP-58. One major difference between ASME B31.3 and ANSI/ASME B31.1 concerns how to establish the allowable stresses for materials other than bolting materials. B31.1 paragraph 102.3.1(c) identies
TABLE 10.17 SELECTED SUBSECTION NF CODE CASES (Source: ASME Section III, Division 1, Code Case Supplements)
CCN No. N-71 N-249 N-74 N-175 N-180 N-111 N-116 N-86 N-220 N-225 N-337 N-357 N-403 N-413 N-414 N-420 N-476 N-500 N-570
Title Additional Materials for Subsection NF Class 1, 2, 3, and MC Component Supports Fabricated by Welding, Section III, Division 1 Additional Materials for Subsection NF Class 1, 2, 3, and MC Component Supports Not Fabricated by Welding, Section III, Division 1 Interim Requirements for Certication of Component Supports, Section III, Subsection NF Welded Joints in Component Standard Supports, Section III, Division 1 Examination of Weld Repairs of Springs for Class 1 Component Standard Supports, Section III, Division 1 Minimum Edge Distance Bolting for Section III, Division 1, Class 1, 2, 3, and MC Construction of Component Supports Weld Design for Use for Section III, Division 1, Class 1, 2, 3, and MC Construction of Component Supports Furnace Brazing Section III, Subsection NF, Component Supports Code Effective Date for Component Supports, Section III, Division 1 Certication and Identication of Material for Component Supports, Section III, Division 1 Use of ASTM B 525-70 Grade II, Type II, Sintered Austenitic Stainless Steel for Class 2, 3, and MC Component Standard Supports, Section III, Division 1 Certication of Material for Component Supports, Section III, Division 1 Reassembly of Subsection NF Component and Piping Supports, Section III, Division 1 Minimum Size of Fillet Welds for Subsection NF Linear-Type Supports, Section III, Division 1 Tack Welds for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC Component and Piping Supports, Section III, Division 1 Linear Energy Absorbing Supports for Subsection NF, Classes 1, 2, and 3 Construction, Section III, Division 1 Classes 1, 2, and 3 Linear Component SupportsDesign Criteria for Single Angle Members, Section III, Division 1, Subsection NF Alternative Rules for Standard Supports for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC, Section III, Division 1 Alternative Rules for Linear Piping and Linear Standard Supports for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC, Section III, Division 1
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 36
36 Chapter 10
TABLE 10.18
SELECTED SUBSECTION NF INTERPRETATIONS (Source: ASME Section III, Division 1, Interpretations: Vols. 135)
Interpretation No. III-1-77-110 (Vol. 1) III-1-77-120 (Vol. 1) III-1-77-144 (Vol. 2) III-1-77-164 (Vol. 2) III-1-77-169 (Vol. 2) III-1-77-217 (Vol. 2) III-1-77-233 (Vol. 2) III-1-77-259 (Vol. 2) III-1-77-262 (Vol. 2) III-1-77-269 (Vol. 2) III-1-78-19 (Vol. 3) III-1-78-47 (Vol. 3) III-1-78-49 (Vol. 3) III-1-78-93 (Vol. 3) III-1-78-121 (Vol. 3) III-1-78-124 (Vol. 3) III-1-78-134 (Vol. 3) III-1-78-165 (Vol. 3) III-1-78-180 (Vol. 3) III-1-78-207 (Vol. 3) III-1-81-110 (Vol. 12) III-1-83-05 (Vol. 12) III-1-83-10 (Vol. 12) III-1-83-12 (Vol. 12) III-1-83-49 (Vol. 13) III-1-83-54 (Vol. 13) III-1-83-128 (Vol. 14) III-1-83-142 (Vol. 14) III-1-83-168 (Vol. 14) III-1-83-176 (Vol. 14) III-1-83-196 (Vol. 15) III-1-83-213 (Vol. 15)
Subject Section III, Division 1, NF-2400CMTRs Section III, Division 1, Stamping and Inspection of Component Supports Section III, Division 1, NF-3133.3, Piping Support Adjustments Section III, Division 1, Component SupportsCerticate of Authorization Section III, Division 1, NF-5410Class 1 Springs Section III, Division 1, NF-2000Bolting Material Section III, Division 1, Stamping and Inspection of Component Supports Section III, Division 1, Subsection NF, Component SupportsCode Jurisdiction Section III, Division 1, Table NF-3132.1(b)-1 and NF-3292Welding Section III, Division 1, NF-1214, Component Standard Supports Section III, Division 1, NF-1214 and NCA-3820, Material Supplier Section III, Division 1, NF-1120 Jurisdictional Boundaries Section III, Division 1, NF-1130 Jurisdictional Boundaries Section III, Division 1, NF-4452, Elimination of Surface Defects Section III, Division 1, NF-4721(e), High Strength Bolts Section III, Division 1, Class 1 Component SupportsStress Reports Section III, Division 1, NF-2130, Certication of Material; NCA-3867.5, Transmittal of Documents of a Material Supplier Section III, Division 1, NF-5200, NF-5352, and NF-5342Weld Examination Section III, Division 1, NF-3212, Appendix F-1323.1(a) Section III, Division 1, Design of Component Support Assemblies Section III, Division 1, NF-1214 Component Standard Supports, and NCA-3820 Quality System Certicate Section III, Division 1, NF-2130, Certication of Material Section III, Division 1, NF-1110 Elements for Construction; NF-1133.1 Intervening Elements Connected to Pressure-Retaining Components; Code Case N-160 Finned Tubing for Construction Section III, Division 1, NF-4720, Bolting Section III, Division 1, NF-4725, Locking Devices (1980 edition with winter 1980 addenda) Section III, Division 1, NF-2121 Permitted Material Specications Section III, Division 1, NF-3280 Design by Load Rating Section III, Division 1, NF-1130 Boundaries of Jurisdiction Section III, Division 1, Table NF-3324.5(a)-1 Allowable Stress Limits for Linear-Type Supports, Class 1, 2, 3, and MC (editions and addenda prior to the winter 1982 addenda) Section III, Division 1, NF-3292 Design of Welded Joints; NF-3392 Permissible Types of Welded Joints in Linear-Type Joints (1974 edition with winter 1976 addenda) Section III, Division 1, NF-2130 Certication of Material (1980 edition with summer 1982 addenda) Section III, Division 1, NF-1121 Rules for Supports; NF-3213.10 Free-End Displacement; NF-3231.1 Elastic Analysis (1974 edition with winter 1974 addenda); Thermal Stress (1980 edition with winter 1982 addenda) Section III, Division 1, NF-4724 Bolt Tension (all editions) Section III, Division 1, NF-1130 Boundaries of Jurisdiction (all editions) Section III, Division 1, NF-3324.6(a)(3)(b) Friction Type Joints; NF-3324.6(a)(4) Slip ResistanceFriction-Type Joints (1983 edition with winter 1985 addenda) Section III, Division 1, NF-3200 Design of Class 1 Component Supports, Appendix XVII (1974 edition) Section III, Division 1, Table NF-3523(b)-1 Elastic Analysis Stress Categories and Stress Limit Factors (1989 edition) Section III, Division 1, NF-3290 & NF-3390 Design of Welded Joints Section III, Division 1, NF-1214 Standard Supports (1986 edition with any 1987 addenda) Section III, Division 1, NF-3282 and NF-3382 Load Ratings in Relation to Service Loadings Section III, Division 1, NF-2121 and NF-5400 Material Specication, Examination, and Acceptance CriteriaCoiled Wire Rope (1974 edition and later editions and addenda through the 1992 edition with the 1992 addenda)
III-1-83-266 (Vol. 16) III-1-86-26 (Vol. 18) III-1-86-60 (Vol. 19) III-1-86-69 (Vol. 20) III-1-90-11 (Vol.27) III-1-90-21 (Vol. 27) III-1-91-05 (Vol. 29) III-1-92-05 (Vol. 30) III-1-92-77 (Vol. 35)
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 37
TABLE 10.19 SUMMARY OF CHANGES (Reference: ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE SECTION III, SUBSECTION NF, SUPPORTS, THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS, 2007 ed. [103])
Page 4 7 10
Location Fig. NF-1132-1 Fig. NF-1214-1 Table NF-2121(a)-1
Change Illustration (g) corrected by errata Illustration for Welded Attachment corrected by errata (1) Under Yield Strength Values column, [Note (1)] moved next to Table 4 by errata (2) Under Yield Strength Values column, Table Y-1 added by errata First parenthetical number corrected to 19 000 by errata Paragraph head corrected by errata Metric value added by errata Under the third column, third parenthetical number corrected by errata On the vertical axis, fourth parenthetical number from the top corrected by errata Parenthetical number corrected by errata Revised Last table designation corrected by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata Parenthetical sentences corrected by errata Parenthetical sentences corrected by errata Last value in rst paragraph corrected by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata NF-3322.2(d)(5) or (d)(6) corrected to read NF-3322.2(e)(5) or (e)(6) by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata Corrected by errata Denominator of second equation corrected by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata Metric unit corrected by errata Metric unit in denition of M corrected by errata Parenthetical sentence corrected by errata Last two sentences added by errata Values in last two rows corrected by errata Values in rst box under fourth column corrected by errata Entries for 10C Gr. 1 corrected by errata NCA paragraph designation in footnote 3 corrected by errata Units added to denitions of RB and RT by errata First sentence corrected by errata Units and last sentence added by errata (1) Plus/minus sign added to rst value in sixth row under second column by errata (2) Two minus signs added to values in last row under second column by errata
12 13 14 15 16 22 24 42 4749
NF-2222.1 NF-2224 NF-2311(b)(l) Table NF-2311(b)-1 Fig. NF-2311(b)-l NF-2351(b)(3) NF-2431.1(b) NF-3256.2(b) NF-3322.1(d)(1)(a)(2) NF-3322.1(d)(l)(a)(3) NF-3322.1(d)(2) NF-3322.1(d)(3) NF-3322.1(d)(5)(b) NF-3322.1(d)(6) NF-3322.2(d)(1)(b)(l) NF-3322.2(d)(1)(b)(2) NF-3322.2(d)(1)(b)(3) NF-3322.2(d)(2)(b)(1) NF-3322.2(d)(2)(b)(2) NF-3322.2(d)(2)(b)(3) NF-3322.2(e)(2) NF-3322.2(e)(3)(b) NF-3322.2(e)(3)(c) NF-3322.2(e)(5) NF-3322.4(a)(3)(a) NF-3322.4(a)(3)(b) NF-3322.6(a) NF-3322.6(e)(2) NF-3322.6(e)(4)(d) NF-3324.2(b)(5) NF-3324.3(b)(1) NF-3412.2 Table NF-4232-1 Table NF-4622.1-1 Table NF-4622.7(b)-1 NF-5521(a) NF-A-1311 NF-B-1200 NF-D-1320(c)(2) Table NF-D-1330-1
51, 52
5254
55 56 58 62 79 92 101 104 111 123 126 134 140
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 38
38 Chapter 10
ASME Section II, Part D [36], as the source for the basis of establishing allowable stresses. One calculation specied in ASME Section II, Part D, Appendix 1, for establishing allowable stresses is one-fourth of the specied minimum tensile strength at temperature [36]. This is one of several calculations, the lowest of which establishes the allowable stress. Comparatively, ASME B31.3 paragraph 302.3.2(d)(1) species that one of the calculations for establishing allowable stresses is one-third of the specied minimum tensile strength at temperature [100]. If it is compared to ASME B31.1, this difference results in higher allowable stresses for ASME B31.3 for the same material. One possible reason for these higher allowable stresses is that ASME B31.1 power plants are designed for a longer life; thus a lower, more conservative allowable stress is warranted because the material will be subjected to stress for a longer time.
16. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code Case 1644, Additional Materials for Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1975. 17. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code Case 1644 (Revision 6); The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, March 3, 1976. 18. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code Case N-71, Additional Materials for Component Supports and Alternative Design Requirements for Bolted Joints; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Rev. March 3, 1976. 19. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code Case N-249, Additional Materials for Subsection NF Class 1, 2, 3, and MC Component Supports Fabricated Without Welding; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Rev. 1980. 20. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code Case N-71-17 (Revision 17); The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Sept. 24, 1999. 21. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code Case N-249-13 (Revision 13); The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, May 11, 1997. 22. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Mandatory Appendix NF-I (in course of preparation); The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, A95 addenda, 1995 ed. 23. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA, Subarticle NCA-3800, Metallic Material Organizations Quality System Program; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 24. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA, Paragraph NCA-3862, Certication of Material; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 25. AISC Manual of Steel Construction; The American Institute of Steel Construction, 7th ed., rst revised printing 1970. 26. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA, Paragraph NCA-3252, Contents of Design Specication; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 27. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Nuclear Power Plant Components; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, winter 1976 addenda, 1974 ed. 28. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA, Paragraph NCA-2131, Code Classes and Rules of Division 1; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 29. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Paragraph NF-3121, Terms Relating to Design by Analysis; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 30. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1977 ed. 31. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1980 ed. 32. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory Appendix II, Experimental Stress Analysis; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 33. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subsubarticle NF-3280, Design by Load Rating; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 34. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Nuclear Power Plant Components; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1992 ed. 35. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section II, Part D, Materials, Properties; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1995 ed.
10.11
REFERENCES
1. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF,
Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical

Engineers, winter 1973 addenda, 1971 ed. 2. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Nuclear Power Plant Components; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, winter 1973 addenda, 1971 ed. 3. ASME B31.1, Power Piping; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1995 ed. 4. USA Standard B31.7, Nuclear Power Piping, 1969 ed. 5. MSS SP-58, Pipe Hangers and SupportsMaterials, Design, and Manufacturer; Manufacturers Standardization Society of the Valve and Fittings Industry, Inc., 1993 ed. 6. AISC Manual of Steel Construction; The American Institute of Steel Construction, 9th ed., 1990. 7. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, winter 1982 addenda, 1980 ed. 8. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, summer 1978 addenda, 1977 ed. 9. ASME Boiler & amp; Pressure Vessel Code Interpretation III-1-7847, Paragraph NF-1120, Section III, Division 1; The American society of Mechanical Engineers, March 30, 1978. 10. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA, Paragraph NCA-3254, Design Specication; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1977 ed. 11. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subsubarticle NF-1130, Boundaries of Jurisdiction; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1986 ed. 12. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NB, Paragraph NB-1132, Boundary Between Components and Attachments; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1986 ed. 13. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NC, Paragraph NC-1132, Boundary Between Components and Attachments; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1986 ed. 14. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection ND, Paragraph ND-1132, Boundary Between Components and Attachments; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1986 ed. 15. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NE, Paragraph NE-1132, Boundary Between Components and Attachments; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1986 ed.
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 39
36. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section II, Appendix 1, Part D, Materials, Properties; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 37. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section II, Appendix 2, Part D, Materials, Properties; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 38. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.124, Service Limits and Loading Combinations for Class 1 Linear Type Component Supports, rev. 1, Jan. 1978. 39. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NB, Fig. NB-3221-1, Stress Categories and Limits of Stress Intensity for Design Conditions; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 40. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NB, Fig. NB-3222-1, Stress Categories and Limits of Stress Intensity for Level A and Level B Service Conditions; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 41. AISC Manual of Steel Construction, Specication for the Design, Fabrication, and Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings, 7th ed., Feb. 12, 1969. 42. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory Appendix XIII, Design of Linear Type Supports by Linear Elastic and Plastic Analysis; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, winter 1973 addenda, 1971 ed. 43. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory Appendix XVII, Design of Linear Type Supports by Linear Elastic and Plastic Analysis; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed. 44. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Paragraph NF-3143, Linear Type SupportsAnalysis Procedure; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 45. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory Appendix XVII, Design of Linear Type Supports by Linear Elastic and Plastic Analysis; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 46. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subarticle NF-3300, Design Rules for Linear Type Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, winter 1982 addenda, 1980 ed. 47. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subsubarticle NF-1110(c), Aspects of Construction Covered by These Rules; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 48. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory Appendix XVII, Paragraph XVII-2450, Design of Linear Type Supports by Linear Elastic and Plastic Analysis; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed. 49. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subparagraph NF-3324.5, Design of Welded Joints; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 50. Blodgett, O. W., Design of Welded Structures, James F. Lincoln Arc Welding Foundation, June 1966. 51. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory Appendix XVII, Paragraph XVII-2460, Design of Linear Type Supports by Linear Elastic and Plastic Analysis; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed. 52. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subparagraph NF-3324.6, Design Requirements for Bolted Joints; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 53. Kulak, G. L., Fisher, J. W., and Struik, J. H. A., Guide to Design Criteria for Bolted and Riveted Joints; New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1st ed., 1974.
54. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subsubparagraph NF-3132.1(a)(3), Types of ProceduresLoad Rating; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed. 55. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subsubarticle NF-3280, Plate and Shell SupportsDesign by Load Rating; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 56. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subsubarticle NF-3380, Linear SupportsDesign by Load Rating; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 57. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, winter 1983 addenda, 1983 ed. 58. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory Appendix XVII-3000, Design of Linear Type Supports by Lin ear Elastic and Plastic AnalysisHigh Cycle Fatigue Analysis for Class 1; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed. 59. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subsubarticle NF-3330, High Cycle Fatigue Analysis for Class 1; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 60. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Mandatory Appendix XVII-4000, Design of Linear Type Supports by Linear Elastic and Plastic AnalysisLimit Analysis Design for Class 1; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed. 61. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subsubarticle NF-3340, Limit Analysis Design for Class 1; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 62. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Paragraph NF-3122, Functional Requirements; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, winter 1976 addenda, 1974 ed. 63. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Paragraph NF-3123, Functional Requirements; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 64. MSS SP-69, Pipe Hangers and SupportsSelection and Application; Manufacturers Standardization Society of the Valve and Fittings Industry, Inc., 1991 ed. 65. MSS SP-89, Pipe Hangers and SupportsFabrication and Installation Practices; Manufacturers Standardization Society of the Valve and Fittings Industry, Inc., 1991 ed. 66. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Article NF-4000, Fabrication and Installation; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed. 67. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Non-Mandatory Appendix K, Tolerances; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 68. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section IX, Welding and Brazing Qualications; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 69. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subsubarticle NF-2150, Material Identication; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 70. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subarticle NF-4400, Rules Governing Making, Examining, and Repairing Welds; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 71. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Article NF-5000, Examination; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 72. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subparagraph NF-4622.7, Exemptions to Mandatory Requirements; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed.
8/13/08
4:15 PM
Page 40
40 Chapter 10
73. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section IX, Paragraph QW420, Material Groupings; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 74. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subarticle NF-4700, Requirements for Bolted Construction; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 75. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section V, Nondestructive Examination; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 76. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subarticle NF-5200, Required Examination of Welds; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1974 ed. 77. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subarticle NF-5200, Required Examination of Welds; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, winter 1978 addenda, 1977 ed. 78. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Paragraph NF-5221, Examination of Class 2 and MC Support Welds, Primary Member Welded Joints; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 79. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, winter 1974 addenda, 1974 ed. 80. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Article NF-8000, Certicates of Authorization, Nameplates, Stamping, and Data Reports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 81. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA, Article NCA-8000, Certicates, Nameplates, Code Symbol Stamping, and Data Reports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 82. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code Case N-500, Alternative Rules for Standard Supports for Class 1,2, 3, and MC; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Dec. 9, 1993. 83. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Code Case N-570, Alternative Rules for Linear Piping and Linear Standard Supports for Class 1, 2, 3, and MC; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Aug. 9, 1996. 84. ANSI/AISC N-690, Nuclear FacilitiesSteel Safety-Related Structures for Design, Fabrication, and Erection; The American National Standards Institute, July 19, 1984. 85. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Article NF-8000, Certicates of Authorization and Certicates of Conformance; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, A99 addenda, 1998 ed. 86. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA, Article NCA-3680, Responsibilities of an NS Certicate Holder; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, A99 addenda, 1998 ed.
87. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NCA, Article NCA-8100, Authorization to Perform Code Activities; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, A99 addenda, 1998 ed. 88. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, A96 addenda, 1995 ed. 89. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Mandatory Appendix NF-I (in course of preparation); The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, A96 addenda, 1995 ed. 90. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Mandatory Appendix NF-II, Design of Single Angle Members; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, A95 addenda, 1995 ed. 91. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Subarticle NF-3300, Design Rules for Linear Type Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, A95 addenda, 1995 ed. 92. Seely, F. B., and Smith, J. O., Advanced Mechanics of Materials; New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2nd ed., 1952. 93. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 94. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Mandatory Appendix NF-III, Energy-Absorbing Support Material; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 95. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Article NF-3000, Design; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 96. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-A, Structural Bolt Preloading; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 97. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-B, Design Allowable Stresses for Plate-, Shell-, and Linear-Type Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998 ed. 98. U.S. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.84, Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section III Design and Fabrication, Rev. 31, May 1999. 99. U.S. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.85, Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section III Materials, Rev. 31, May 1999. 100. ASME B31.3, Chemical Plant and Petroleum Renery Piping; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers. 101. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-C, Design Basis for Linear-Type Supports; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2004 ed. 102. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Non-Mandatory Appendix NF-D, Tolerances; The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2007 ed. 103. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF, Supports, The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2007 ed.

ASME Ch10 p001-040

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

ASME Ch10 p001-040

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

ASME_Ch10_p001-040.

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 3

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 5

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 7

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 9

8/13/08 4:15 PM Page 10

8/13/08 4:15 PM Page 12

Impact Testing and Fracture Toughness

Design Loadings and Service Conditions

Quality System Program

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 15

Code Class and Design Procedures

Stress Intensities and Allowable Stresses

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 19

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 21

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 23

Component and Piping Supports

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 25

Welding and Bolting

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 27

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 29

High-Cycle Fatigue and Limit Analysis

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 31

NF-4000 FABRICATION AND INSTALLATION

Form, Fitting, and Aligning

Welding and Heat Treatment

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 33

NF-8000 NAMEPLATES, STAMPING, AND REPORTS

CODE CASES AND INTERPRETATIONS

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 35

ASME B31.1 AND B31.3 SUPPORTS

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 37

Location Fig. NF-1132-1 Fig. NF-1214-1 Table NF-2121(a)-1

55 56 58 62 79 92 101 104 111 123 126 134 140

Component Supports; The American Society of Mechanical

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE 39

S-ar putea să vă placă și