CHAPTER 4 Simplified Method for Flexibility Analysis ITH piping, as with other structures, the analysis of stresses may he carried to vary- ing degrees of refinement. At one extreme Jie mere comparisons with layouts which have met the test of service; at the other extreme are compre- hensive methods invelving long and tedious com- putstions and commensurate engineering expense. ‘The many approaches lying in between are com- promises which have a scope and value not readily definable since their accuraey and general reliability are so heavily dependent on the skill and experience of the user. ‘These so-called ‘'simplified methods,” nevertheless, fulfil an important need, In capable hands, and with ample allowance for their limita- tions, they serve to provide the quick rough check demanded in establishing an initial layout while avoiding the use of the more refined calculations unnecessarily for false starts. Moreover, their use allows the final confirmation by comprehensive methods to be more safely postponed, when neces sary, in order to even out the work load of specialists ususlly employed for the purpose. In eases of non- critical service, moderate expansion requirements, or small pipe diameters, the availability of generous safety margins may make certain simplified methods acceptable for final analysis 4.1, Scope and Merits of Approximate Methods Approximate approaches are built upon a variety of simplifying assumptions whieh range from minor to drastic significance, All such approaches may be classified in four groups, as follows: 1. Approximate methods dealing only with spacial "The economic disadvantage of the comprehensive methods Ins bees offset coniderably by developments in model testing (eo Chapter 6) and, more recently, by the rapid progres io programmed automstie compaters (see Chapter 5) simple piping configurations of two-, three, or four- member systems having two terminals with complete fixity and the piping layout usually restricted to square corners, Solutions are usually obtained from charts or tables. ‘The approximate methods falling into this category are limited in seope of direct appli- cation, but they are sometimes usable as a rough guide on more complex problems by assuming sub- vision into anchored sections fitting the contours, ‘of the presolved cases, However, the inexperienced analyst is cautioned not to extend these solutions beyond the restricted proportions of their geometry. 2, Methods restricted to. square-corner, single- plane systems with two fixed ends, but without limit 1s to the number of members. 3, Methods adaptable to space configurations with square corners and two fixed ends. 4, Extensions of the previous methods to provide for the special properties of curved pipe by indirect ‘means, usually a virtual length eorreetion factor. ‘This chapter covers a number of approximate solu- tions including a recently developed simplified ver- sion of the General Analytical Method presented in Chapter 5. It discussos the fundamental assump- tions and range of applicability of each of these methods and is complemented by illustrative ex- amples. In the interest of a clear and concise presentation, detailed derivations and procedures are omitted but references are given to published technical literature. ‘The shorteut solutions pre- sented here were selected either for their ease of application or for their relative accuracy; numerous ‘other approaches proposed in the literature involve various combinations of simplicity and accuracy but those given are generally deemed to be most repre- sentative. The methods described all involve the usual assumptions for analyses to the Theory ofSIMPLIFIED METHOD FOR FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS 1 Elasticity which have been incorporated in the General Method itself, and which are discussed in Appendix A3. . ‘The principal weakness of all approximate methods is that, with current limitations of mathematical analysis in treating the unbounded geometrical com- plexity of piping layouts, there exists no means of assessing the maximum error involved. With any given approximate method, a layout, can be devised for which the analysis will lend to vastly misleading results. Hence, the ‘‘accuraey” of an approximate method is largely hypothetical, while considerations of “degree” or “probability” of accuracy are also uiot realistie. Tn this vein, there is no intent, in the use of examples common fo the methods, to convey any true comparison of their accuracy, but rather to give an appreciation of the manner of application and, only in # general way, to indicate limitations in their use Piping flexibility calculations provide securacy in proportion to their completeness. Once simplifying assumptions of unassessable accuracy ate incor porated, it serves no purpose to employ excessive refinements in the remainder of the work. When close results are essential on important or intricate piping systems, the use of approximate methods is questionable. It is usually more effective and less time consuming for organizations equipped to handle comprehensive solutions to proceed directly with tho General Method, particularly if pro- grammed eutomatie computation and model testing are available 4.2 Thermal Expansion ‘Most engineering materials respond to a tempera ture rise by a nearly proportionate increase in linear dimensions. If the temperature change is uniform throughout a homogeneous part, the dimensional Aste ch Une npn) Fro, 4.1 Expansion at various points on a header, yee na foe ‘mrtg Sy ate a ieee Ta ojala fr eompning Fic, 42 Computing components of restrained ‘thormal expansion increase will likewise be uniform along all direetions. ‘The change of any dimension L is calculated from the relationship a e ay where ¢ = unit linear thermal expansion? (dimensionless if both & and Z are in the same units) ‘The application of this equation to the determina- tion of unrestrained expansion is illustrated in Fig. 4.1 fora header with a single point of anchorage and with the two ends fre to expand. Tn the usual case, however, the piping will heve more than one point of anchorage or connection to equipment and consequently will be subject to re- straint whenever expansion differentials arise. If the piping is not uniform in temperature throughout or if itis made up of several materials having dlfer- ent coeficients of expansion, the differences in tem- perature or material must be taken into aecount in the expansion calculations. ‘The expansions of the equipment to which the piping atteches must be similarly treated. ‘The first basie operation in the determination of the thermal expansion stresses (Set up as @ result of restraint) requires the ealoulation of the unrestrained ‘expansion of the piping, which is the expansion that ‘would take place with regerd to an assumed single reference point, all movement proceeding, from that "Values of ¢ in the Code, ASA B 1-1, cover most of the metals commonly used in piping. ‘These tables are based ‘on datum temperutare of 70 F, which is considered as most nearly representing the condition under which the average installation is made, A mate earefuleelestion of this datum may be warranted if its effect on the tempersturediferonce is significant. Chart O-2 of Appendix C gives the elightly diferent values of ¢ wsed in the earmple calculations of thie ‘ook, which were in preparation bafore the Code values were adopted.92 DESIGN OF PIPING SYSTEMS point without interference of any kind. If there is no displacement of the anchors, the ealeulated re- sultant expansion between them jg ealled the result- ant restrained thermal expansion of the piping system. ‘The components of this expansion are conveniently computed directly from the projection of the anchor distances on the respective axes. This procedure is illustrated in Fig. 4.2, where, by eq. 4.1, dz = eh, = net restrained expansion in the 2 di rection. net restrained expansion in the y di- rection. resultant restrained expansion, ie., a= VER ‘More complex eases involving more than one tem- perature range for parts of the system, or terminal displacement duc to equipment expansion, will be treated in the illustrative problems in this and in the following chapter. Only cases where the tem- perature is constant over a measurable length of piping are shown; however, thermal gradients along piping runs can usually be readily approximated as to their contribution to the expansion of the leg in which they occur. ‘The second basic operation in ealeulating stresses due to thermal expansion is the determination of the forces and moments which must bo applied to the ends of the system (which are imagined to have temporary initial freedom for expansion) in order to return them to their setual fixed positions, ‘This operation of structural analysis is distinguished by its involvement with irregular configurations and the necessity for conversion of deflestion (expansion) into reactions and stress. It occupies the principal role in the General Analytical Method of the next chapter and is equally involved in this chapter, al- ‘though it is obscured in certain of the approximate approaches, A large amount of piping in conventional layouts possesses satisfactory inherent flexibility for the in- tended service. Thus the piping engineer, fuced with the problem of effectively apportioning the time to be spent. on a project, is immediately eon fronted with the need for recognition of such piping with a minimum of attention to each line. Approxi mate solutions or simple rules of thumb are there- fore essential. ‘The results obtained cannot be ex- pected to compare with those established by the use ‘of acceptable analytical methods, but in the hands of a compotent designer they serve to assist in the recognition of totally inadequate flexibility, and serveasa base line for sharpening judgment by associ- ation of occasional results with accurate analysis, Piping flexibility, in providing for the changes i Jength which rosult from thermal expansion of pip- ing and connecting equipment, must be adequate to serve txo purposes: L To control within acceptable limits the piping reactions on conneeted equipment located between or at the terminals of the line. 2. To maintain stresses in the pipe itself within f range so that direct or fatigue failure and joint leakage are avoided. ‘Where sensitive equipment (due to close clearance fon moving parts, high speed, ete.) is involved, a tccurate flexibility analysis is usually advisable, since approximate approaches are apt to be particu larly unreliable for reaction evaluation. Accurate calculations are also advisable for hazardous con- tents in relation to an installation locetion where strength is seriously reduced, as at high tempera- ‘tures; for unusually stiff piping due to size, thickness, configuration, ete.; for economic use of expensive materials; for definitely cyclic serviee; or when ap= proximate analyses indieate overstress. Most. of these criteria are quite general and subject to opin- ion in their significance and manner of application. They may be grouped under four headings: strength requirements; reaction hazards; service hazards; evonomies. Positive assurance that the minimum required strength for satisfactory servic is attained is pos- sible only by complete analysis; however, for not too complex piping systems which consist predomi- nantly of straight runs not concentrated too near the line of thrust through the anchor points, approxi- mations of reasonable but varying securacy are attainable, A designer ean develop, for a given shortcut, approach, an idea of its limitations and range of accuracy’ for average problems provided he has a reasonably adequate knowledge and experi- ‘ence with both approximate and accurate analysos. Hazards attendant to excessive reactions are cov- ered in Chapters 2, 3, and 8 It should be noted that approximate methods generally do not give the reactions. In many of those which do, the indiea- tions are unreliable. In particular, neglest of the flexibility of eurved members will result. in abnor- rally high values which provide little guidance in