Upload
ngoque
View
250
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ASME BPVC and Process
Piping Code Application and
Analysis
HDICE In Beam Cryostat Project
Orlando Pastor, Jr.
Structural Engineer
March 30, 2011
Introduction
•! Review current IBC design for compliance with ASME
BPVC and B31.3
•! Analyze components to determine stresses to compare
with requirements of BPVC
•! Identify areas not in compliance with BPVC
•! Determine plans for showing problem areas meet intent
of the BPVC
•! Document analysis and tests verifying compliance with
the BPVC
2
ASME BPVC
•! Department of Energy contractors must ensure pressure
vessels meet the requirements of the ASME BPVC
•! Section 6151 of JLAB Environmental Safety and Health
(ES&H) manual governs pressure vessels
•! Pressure Vessels – ASME Section 8 Div 1 (SVIII Div 1)
–! Vessels within the scope of SVIII Div 1 Include
•! Vessels with an internal or external operating pressure
exceeding 15 psi
•! Vessels with an inside diameter, width, height, or cross
section diagonal greater than 6 inches
•! Piping – Process Piping Code – ASME B31.3
3
HDICE IBC System Pressure Map
4
HDICE IBC System Thermal Map
5
HDice In Beam Cryostat (IBC) FEA
•! Component Selection for FEA –! Outer Vacuum Can (OVC) Assembly
–! Liquid Helium Can Assembly
–!Mixing Chamber –!Miscellaneous Piping
–! Still Body
–! 1K Pot
•! Primary Loads –! Gravity
–! External/Internal Pressures
–! Thrust Reaction Loads
–! Temperature Changes
6
HDice IBC LHe Can Analysis
•! Initial Conditions
–! Initial Temperature: 293K
–! Internal Pressure: 0 psid
•! Loading
–! Operating Temperature: Varying
–! Internal Pressure: 30 psid
•! Properties
–! Temperature Dependent CTE
–! Temperature Dependent Modulus
of Elasticity
•! Detailed analysis of nose weld area
7
Miscellaneous Piping Analysis
•! Piping was analyzed in
accordance with ASME B31.3
•! Minimum wall thickness was
determined using hand
calculations
•! Effects of temperature and
pressure were determined by FEA
8
ASME Code Compliance Issues
!"#$%&'( ()"*+,$(,-(."/%-0%&'( 122#%345#"(6"3*%,&(78((
9#"3*/,&(:"4;(!"#$%&'(,-()%<%&'(=+4;5"/( >"?*(62"3%;"&( @!ABCD(
9#"3*/,&(:"4;(!"#$%&'(,-(EF"(=4&(G,?"( >"?*(62"3%;"&( @!ABCD(
=,/&"/(H%##"*(!"#$(( I/"J%,K?(9<2"/%"&3"LH91( A(
:/4M%&'(
6*%##(4&$(CN(I,*(=,J"/(*,(:,$0(O,%&*( >"&?%#"(4&$(:"&$(>"?*?( @:ACDPLCQP(
6*4%&#"??(?*""#(*K5"(*,(6*%##(O,%&*( >"&?%#"(4&$(?"3*%,&(*"?*?( @:ACDPLCRP(
6*4%&#"??(?*""#(*K5"(*,()%<%&'(=+4;5"/(O,%&*( >"&?%#"(4&$(?"3*%,&(*"?*?( @:ACDPLCRP(
:,&$%&'(
6*4%&#"??(6*""#(*,(1#K;%&K;(>/4&?%*%,&?( =,#$(6+,3SLI>( A(
9
ASME Code Compliance Issues (continued)
10
)4*"/%4#( )"*+,$(,-(."/%-0%&'(
>+"/;4#(2/,3"??%&'(,-(=CPCPP(/"$K3"?(
?*/"&'*+(5"#,T(16)9(:I.=(J4#K"?(
>"&?%#"(*"?*?(,&(*+"/;4##0(
2/,3"??"$(?4;2#"?( A(
I/"??K/"(>"?*%&'(
FU%3"(7:=()%<%&'(=+4;5"/(G,*(I/"??K/"(
>"?*"$(2"/(16)9(=,$"(
I/"??K/"(>"?*(,-(
9VK%J4#"&*()%<%&'(
=+4;5"/(*,(CQD(2?%4(((
IFWACCAPPCA
>X6IYZ"JP(
[=,;2#"*"$\(
7:=()%<%&'(=+4;5"/(
I/"??K/"(>"?*"$(*,(]](2?%4(
T%*+(?0?*";(2%2%&'(
IFWACCAPP^A
>X6IYZ"JP(
Electron Beam Welding of Mixing Chamber
•! Test Sample to Simulate Pressure
Loading
•! FEA performed to compare stresses
due to pressure loading and tensile
loading
•! Component stresses were similar in
magnitude and distribution
•! Pull test performed by Applied Testing
Services (ATS)
11
Fillet Weld at Corner Joint in LHe Can
•! Construction of LHe can did not
allow interior weld at the root, this is
the final weld in the assembly
•! A joint of this type is not permitted
by the Code without reinforcement
•! Weld geometry was included in
FEM, stresses in the weld are low
•! Extensive experience with this type
of joint in similar temperature and
loading environments at JLAB
12
Stainless Steel to Aluminum Transitions
•! Provided by Meyer Tool
•! ASME Certifications for material
strength included
•! No certification as to joint
acceptance per ASME BPVC
•! Stresses are driven by the different
coefficient s of thermal expansion,
not pressure
•! A “cold” test was performed at 77K to
assess the joint fusion.
•! Dye penetrant (PT) test was
performed prior to cooling and after
pieces were allowed to warm to room
temperature Max Shear: 6.4 ksi
Avg Shear: 3.2 ksi
13
Alloy C10100 Tensile Testing
•! Tensile Testing Alloy C10100
–! Test material brazed or brazed and sintered
–! Material from brazed joint test & mixing chamber (MXC) lots
–! Spare MXC material (Lot# VA198774) lost strength
•! Yield strength impact most severe
•! Ultimate strength impact ~ 10% below expected 30 ksi
–! Impact to still body/1K pot material unknown
•! No material testing after thermal processing
•! FEA shows stress levels in parts very low
•! Worst case outcome – localized yielding in stress
concentrations
•! Considered acceptable risk to proceed
14
Mixing Chamber Pressure Testing
•! IBC MXC not tested IAW ASME BPVC
–! Risk to sintered material internal to MXC
too great if pressurized to 165 psi
–! IBC MXC will be included in pressure test
with liquid helium piping (33 psia vs. 165
psia)
•! Duplicate MXC unit tested IAW ASME BPVC
•! Upstream End – Both from same lot
•! Stainless Steel Tubes – Both from
same lot
•! Downstream base – from different
lots
–! Both Units EB welded in the same setup
–! Same brazing profile followed for
stainless tubes
•! Material strengths were verified with tensile
tests from duplicate MXC after pressure test
15
Joint Tracking
J – 1100 - 03
Drawing Number
Incremental Joint Number “Joint”
•! Created joint numbers for weld
inspectors to track joint
•! Welder
•! Procedure
•! Inspection Required
•! “Officially” documented joint number
•! All joints are assigned numbers
•! ASME BPVC
•! B31.3 Piping
•! Structural
•! Vacuum
•! Non-structural
16
Pressure Test Liquid Helium Piping
•! IBC will be pressure tested in accordance
with ASME BPVC and B31.3 requirements
•! PHY-11-004-TOSP prepared for pressure
testing liquid helium piping circuits
•! Test schedule TBD but before IBC is
loaded into Hall B
17
Analysis Reports
18
Conclusion
•! Stresses in HDice IBC are below the allowable stresses
as specified by the ASME BPVC
•! Areas not in compliance have been tested and/or
analyzed to verify factors of safety in accordance with
the ASME BPVC
•! Design of the HDice IBC is in accordance with the ASME
BPVC
•! Analysis and testing documented and provided to JLAB
•! IBC will be pressure tested in accordance with ASME
BPVC and B31.3
19
BACK-UP SLIDES
20
DOE Pressure Systems Requirements
•! Pressure Systems at Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility (JLAB)
–! Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 851 (10 CFR 851)
requires Department of Energy (DOE) sites to establish Worker Safety and Health Program (WSHP)
–! 10 CFR 851 requires DOE contractors to ensure pressure systems
conform to applicable section of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code Pressure Systems
•! Section 6151 of the JLAB Environmental Safety and Health Manual (ES&H)
Governs Pressure Systems at JLAB
•! Section 6151 Pressure System Design Requirements
–! Pressure Vessels - ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel (BPVC) Section
VIII
–! Piping Design – ASME Pressure Piping Code B31.3 Process Piping
21
ASME Code Section Selection
•! Pressure Vessel Code
–! ASME BPVC SVIII Div 1
–! ASME BPVC SVIII Div 2
•! Part 4 - Design by Rule Requirements
•! ASME BPVC SVIII Div 1 - Selected for Simplicity
–! Basic Fundamental Calculations
–! Lower Allowable Stress Limit on Ultimate Strength
–! SVIII Div 2 Part 4 - Requires 0.0625 min thickness for ferrous
alloys
•! Piping Design Code
–! ASME Pressure Piping Code B31.3 Process Piping
22
ASME BPVC SVIII Div 1 Scope (continued)
•! Vacuum Systems Are Outside the Scope of ASME
BPVC SVIII Div 1
•! ASME BPVC SVIII Div 1 Paragraph U-1(c)(1) recognizes
authority of government entities to invoke the ASME
Code
•! 10 CFR 851 – Appendix A.4(c) – Vacuum systems are
outside of the national consensus codes
–! Design documentation is peer reviewed
–! Fabrication accomplished by qualified technicians
–! Documentation maintained for each unique vessel
23
ASME SVIII Div 1 Material Toughness
•! Material Toughness
–!Aluminum
•! Wrought Aluminum approved by ASME SVIII Div 1
Paragraph UNF-65 for temperatures down to
-452F (4.26k)
•! Not possible to conduct impact tests at the
minimum design metal temp(MDMT) (1K)
•! No known physics to alter behavior of aluminum
•! Considered acceptable if room temperature
toughness is validated
24
ASME SVIII Div 1 Material Toughness
–!Copper
•! Approved by ASME SVIII Div 1 Paragraph UNF-65
for temperatures down to -325F (74.8k)
•! Conflicts with ASME B31.3 which allows
temperatures down to -452F (4.26K) (See Table 323.2.2 and Table A-1)
•! No known physics to alter behavior of copper
•! Considered acceptable if room temperature
toughness is validated
25
ASME SVIII Div 1 Material Toughness
–!Stainless Steel
•! UHA-51(g) – Exemption From Impact Testing
Because of Low Stress
–! Stainless steel stress threshold is 0.35*SE
–! S is the primary stress in the part (Hoop, direct tension,
etc.)
–! E is weld joint efficiency where applicable
•! Stress levels of stainless steel HDice Cryostat
components kept below the threshold
•! Welding filler metal for joints at cryogenic temp
–! Stainless steel alloy 316 (low ferrite)
–!Qualified by JLAB to meet ASME toughness
requirements
26
ASME BPVC Fatigue Screening
•! Fatigue Screen Method A – ASME BPVC Section VIII Division 2 (SVIII Div 2)
–! Material Ultimate Tensile Strength ! 80 ksi
•! Estimate Pressure & Temperature Cycles
–! Full Range Pressure Cycles (N!FP)
–! Operating Pressure Cycles > 20% of Maximum Allowable Working
Pressure (MAWP) for Integral Construction (N!PO)
–! Operating Temperature Changes (N!TE)
–! Temperature cycles between material of different CTE (N!T")
27
Alloy C10100 Tensile Testing
28
HDice IBC Still Assembly Analysis
•! Initial Conditions
–! Initial Temperature: 293K
–! Internal Pressure: 0 psid
•! Loading
–! Operating Temperature: 0.7K
–! Internal Pressure: 30 psid
•! Properties
–! Temperature Dependent CTE
–! Temperature Dependent Modulus
of Elasticity
29
HDice IBC 1K Pot Analysis
30
•! Initial Conditions
–! Initial Temperature: 293K
–! Internal Pressure: 0 psid
•! Loading
–! Operating Temperature: 0.7K
–! Internal Pressure: 30 psid
•! Properties
–! Temperature Dependent CTE
–! Temperature Dependent Modulus
of Elasticity
Still Body/1K Pot Covers Brazed Joints Tensile/
Bend Tests
•! Testing was performed to verify the
joint strength requirements for the Still
and 1K Pot cover brazed joints
•! Samples were fabricated IAW ASME
BPVC Section IX
•! Tensile and bend tests were performed
by ATS
•! Specimens met the strength
requirements
31
Stainless Steel to Copper Brazes
•! Testing was performed to verify the joint strength requirements for the stainless steel to copper furnace brazed joints
•! Samples were fabricated IAW ASME BPVC Section IX
•! Tensile and section tests were performed by ATS
•! Failure in the stainless tube vs. brazed joint required for acceptance
•! Two sets of test
•! 0.020” thick wall tube
•! 0.006” thick wall tube
•! ASME BPVC allows for testing of dissimilar metals which qualifies brazing of similar metal
•! Specimens met the strength requirements
32
HDICE IBC System Overpressure Cases
Pump Line Overpressure
Outer Vacuum Can Overpressure
33