Bourdon Effect in CAESAR II: Intergraph CAS

Bourdon Effect in CAESAR II
Intergraph CAS
Richard Ay and Loren Brown
Currently, there are no codes, equations, or technical papers that mention the Bourdon effect. We
have hunted in vain for such a thing for years without success. Therefore we have a phenomenon
that "everybody" knows how to use, how and when to apply, etc. but that nobody will put their
name to. The reason, we believe, is because the traditional Bourdon implementation that
everybody uses does not match up with reality.
Bourdon has little to do with the pressure translation of ovalized cross-sections into circular
cross-sections - that is the pressure stiffening effect that most codes use to modify bend SIFs and
flexibility factors. Bourdon is an attempt to take into account the strain that the piping undergoes
when subjected to pressure. This strain is due to two components - the axial strain due to the
pressure end cap effect (roughly PD/4tE) and then the Poisson effect (axial shrinkage due to
radial and hoop expansion under pressure).
Virtually all pipe stress programs implement the Bourdon effect in the manner first developed for
the MEC-21 pipe stress program, circa 1960. This method applies pressure elongation as a
uniform strain to the entire piping system, in a way similar to thermal expansion (some codes,
such as BS 7159, actually instruct the user to convert pressure strain to "equivalent
temperature"). The actual pressure strain calculation is done as:
e = P(Ri2) / (Ro2 Ri2) / E - P(Ri) / (Ro - Ri)E
or slightly more exact, but virtually identical for "thin" wall pipe:
e = [P(Ri2 ) / (Ro2 Ri2) / E] (1 2)
Where:
e = uniform pressure strain
P = pressure
Ri = internal radius
Ro = outer radius
E = modulus of elasticity
= Poisson's ratio
In the Bourdon method, this strain is then applied throughout the piping system, in the same
manner as a thermal strain would be. The upshot of this is (think piping systems loaded with
thermal strain):
1) On an unrestrained system (i.e., a cantilever), this leads to no stress, non-zero displacements,

and no anchor loads.
2) On a restrained system (straight pipe anchored at both open ends), this leads to compressive
stresses and compressive forces on the restraints and zero displacements.
3) On a restrained system (straight pipe with intermediate anchors), this leads to compressive
stresses, zero anchor loads, and zero displacements.
In real life, the situation would be:
1) On an unrestrained system (i.e., a cantilever), there would be tensile stress due to the end cap
effect, non-zero displacements, and an anchor load (pressure thrust load).
2) On a restrained system (straight pipe anchored at both open ends), there would be tensile
stresses equal to the Poisson's effect (due to hoop stress), tensile loads on the restraints, and zero
displacements.
3) On a restrained system (straight pipe with intermediate anchors), there would be tensile
stresses equal to the Poisson's effect (due to hoop stress), zero loads on the intermediate
restraints, and zero displacements.
(Note that real life piping systems are much more complicated than any of these three scenarios.)
For all load cases containing pressure (whether Bourdon is activated or not), CAESAR II (and
probably most other pipe stress programs) then adds the constant value P(R i2 ) / (Ro 2) to the stress
due to other loads (since this is required by most piping codes).
So looking at the implications of different scenarios:
1) On an unrestrained system (i.e., a cantilever), with no Bourdon activated, this leads to a stress
of P(Ri2) / (Ro2), no displacements, and no anchor loads. Technically this is correct for stress,
incorrect for displacements, and incorrect for anchor loads.
2) On an unrestrained system (i.e., a cantilever), with Bourdon activated, this leads to a stress of
P(Ri2) / (R o2), displacements equal to LP(Ri2) (1 2) / (Ro2 Ri2) / E, and no anchor loads.
Technically this is correct for stress, correct for displacements, and incorrect for anchor loads.
3) On a restrained system (straight pipe anchored at both ends), with no Bourdon activated, this
leads to a stress of P(Ri2) / (Ro2), no displacements, and no anchor loads. Technically this is
incorrect (but conservative, as intended by most codes) for stress [the stress should actually be
tension equal to only the Poisson term: -P(Ri) / (Ro - Ri)], correct for displacements, and
incorrect for anchor loads.
4) On a restrained system (straight pipe anchored at both ends), with Bourdon activated, this
leads to a stress equal to the end cap tension, less the Bourdon compression, or just the Poisson
effect: PRi / (Ro - Ri), no displacements, and compressive anchor loads. So this would be
correct for the stress, correct for displacements, and incorrect for anchor loads.
5) On a restrained system (straight pipe with intermediate anchors), with no Bourdon activated,
this leads to a stress of PRi2 / Ro 2, no displacements, and no anchor loads. Technically this is
incorrect (but conservative, as intended by most codes) for stress (the stress should actually be
tension equal to only the Poisson term: -PRi / (Ro - Ri), correct for displacements, and correct
for anchor loads.
6) On a restrained system (straight pipe with intermediate anchors), with Bourdon activated, this
leads to a stress equal to the end cap tension, less the Bourdon compression, or just the Poisson
effect: PRi / (Ro - Ri), no displacements, and no anchor loads. So this would be correct for the
stress, correct for displacements, and correct for anchor loads.
In our opinion, the correct answer is to model pressure elongation as two distinct effects:
(1) a primary (force driven) load equal to the pressure end cap thrust load, modeled at every
elbow, valve seat, or other thrust surface; and
(2) a secondary (displacement driven) uniform strain equal to the Poisson's effect of the hoop
stress.
This sort of model would make each of the above layouts (as well as all in between) work out
correctly. The problem would be that this would buck a forty-year old trend, and probably would
not be easily implemented by most pipe stress software available today, without modification. A
secondary by-product is that this sort of analysis would not provide the sort of conservatism that
is currently allocated to longitudinal pressure stress by most codes.

Bourdon Effect in CAESAR II: Intergraph CAS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bourdon Effect in CAESAR II: Intergraph CAS

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bourdon Effect in CAESAR II: Intergraph CAS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bourdon Effect in CAESAR II

Richard Ay and Loren Brown

e = P(Ri2) / (Ro2 Ri2) / E - P(Ri) / (Ro - Ri)E

e = [P(Ri2 ) / (Ro2 Ri2) / E] (1 2)

e = uniform pressure strain

1) On an unrestrained system (i.e., a cantilever), this leads to no stress, non-zero displacements,

In real life, the situation would be:

So looking at the implications of different scenarios:

You might also like