NAFEMS Pressure Vessel Stresses - resources - engineering analysis and si...
inite Element Analysis, CFD, Computational Fluid Dynamics, and Simulation
home about membership
home > resources > knowledge base > pressure vessel stresses
resources
analysis terms a-z
knowledge base
the importance of mesh
convergence - part 1
the importance of mesh
convergence - part 2
fundamentals of numerical
techniques for static, dynamic and
transient analyses - part 1
fundamentals of numerical
techniques for static, dynamic and
transient analyses – part 2
assessing errors in analysis models
commercial analysis validation
concepts in load application and
stressing
probabilistic analysis
analysis of fabricated structures
nominal and non-linear stresses -
part 1
nominal and non-linear stresses -
part 2
pressure vessel stresses
inelastic analysis
plastic analysis
plasticity, collapse and fatigue
hysteresis in fatigue
fatigue overview
cfd jargon explained
cfd analysis - guidance for
good practice
general guidelines for good
convergence in cfd
discussion groups
consultancies
software
register of advice experts
http://www.nafems.org/resources/knowledgebase/012/ (1 of 2)2007/10/26 11:47:15
English
events publications resources regional groups technical groups media & news projects contact us
advanced search
Search >>
Members Login
username
password
Pressure Vessel Stresses
forgot password >
The pressure vessel codes (including the ASME code and others) were originally
intended to partner manual or hand calculation methods from which discrete values
of stress can be obtained. Difficulties can arise when attempting to use them in Shopping Basket
conjunction with numerical analysis that produces a continuously varying stress field.
This article explains some important concepts behind the pressure vessel codes, as Description Qty Item Price
well as issues that arise in practice when using them in partnership with FEA (termed
‘design by analysis’.) To improve understanding, some of the definitions from the your basket is empty
codes have been simplified.
Primary and Secondary Stresses
The pressure vessel codes define two important ‘classes’ of stress. A primary stress
is related to mechanical loading directly and satisfies force and moment equilibrium.
Primary stress that exceeds the yield stress by some margin will result in failure. By
contrast, secondary stresses are those arising from geometric discontinuities or
stress concentrations. For an increasing external load, at any point, both primary and
secondary stresses increase in proportion to this load, until the yield point is
reached. But secondary stresses are termed self-limiting by the ASME code: that is,
once the yield point has been passed locally around the stress concentration, the
direct relationship between load and stress is broken, due to the reduced post-yield
stiffness of the material. This is in contrast to primaries (sometimes termed ‘load
controlled’ stresses) that will continue to increase in overall magnitude, in direct
proportion to the applied load, irrespective of the shape of the stress-strain curve,
until failure.
In a region away from any discontinuities, only primary stress will arise. The
secondary stress cannot arise alone however - at a discontinuity, the secondary
stress will be superimposed on the underlying primary stress. It is worth pointing out
the distinction made between primary and secondary stress in the pressure vessel
codes is broadly similar to that made between net section and peak stresses
identified in the British Standards for the assessment of fabricated structures, as
described in previous articles.
Primary stresses are further categorised into a uniform (single value) membrane
stress distribution across a cross-section; and a linearly varying, bending stress
distribution. These definitions are more ambiguous in the codes than those for
primary and secondary stress but are necessary since they have different allowable
values.
Allowable Stresses Based on Failure Modes
Because different modes of failure are associated with primary membrane, primary
bending and secondary stress, different allowable values are defined for each.
These are not given as absolute values in the pressure vessel codes, but as a
proportion of the yield stress of the material in question.
Primary membrane stresses are not allowed to exceed yield otherwise there is the
possibility of a catastrophic plastic collapse e.g. a burst under pressure. For a
membrane stress, the limiting value will be reached over the full vessel cross-section
simultaneously and a margin of safety is included by specifying an allowable
membrane stress of 2/3 yield. The total primary (membrane plus bending) allowable
stress is greater, having a value of yield, because the bending element means that
the stress will only be reached at a location in a localised crosssection, most distant
from the neutral axis. Secondary stress can comfortably exceed yield but must be
NAFEMS Pressure Vessel Stresses - resources - engineering analysis and si...inite Element Analysis, CFD, Computational Fluid Dynamics, and Simulation

limited to ensure shakedown under cyclic load. Hence the range of secondary stress
is limited to twice yield, as explained in the previous article. High cycle fatigue
considerations are also addressed by the code but these are not discussed further
here.

Identifying Primary and Secondary Stresses

The biggest problem when using continuum stress field results produced by FEA in
conjunction with the codes is to decompose the total stress at a point into the
primary and secondary stresses. In the long term, additional code rules may be
developed that consider better how to do this. One solution the analyst has currently
is to define hand calculations to relate the primary stress to the applied direct and
bending loads. If this cannot be achieved, an analyst would not be able to show how
much of the stress at a point is secondary and, for conservatism therefore, he would
have to consider it all as primary. This results in the undesirable situation of
comparing peak stress (which may be mainly secondary) with the primary allowable
stress (2/3 yield) which can give very conservative designs.

Another alternative might be to select a cross-section away from stress

concentrations but not from the load path, where primary stresses are at least the
dominant part of the total stress distribution. However, in practice, it is difficult to
define how to locate such a section and to do it to the satisfaction of clients who may
be unconvinced by reasoning that ignores the maximum stress.

Many postprocessors have a facility to decompose the bending and membrane parts
of primary stress across a cross-section in a vessel (called stress linearization).
These procedures assume all stress is primary however and can also be over-
conservative.

The Inelastic Approach

Differentiating between primary and secondary stress is an indirect method of

accounting for the different failure modes of the vessel. Given the difficulties
described and the power of modern analysis, it is not surprising that new approaches
are being discussed. One such is to represent the failure modes directly in the FEA
by an inelastic analysis. This will be discussed in subsequent articles.

© copyright NAFEMS 2007 The international association for the engineering analysis community site by duodesign | powered by duo cms

http://www.nafems.org/resources/knowledgebase/012/ (2 of 2)2007/10/26 11:47:15