Application issues of WRC107 and WRC297
Thread Content
Should we use WRC107 or WRC297 to calculate the local stresses on the fittings? WRC107 is used for calculating circular attachments on cylinder shells and fittings, without taking into account the wall thickness of the fittings; it seems to assume that they are solid. Is this method of calculation accepted by everyone? WRC297 takes the takeover wall thickness into account; please ask those who understand to give some advice!
This post was last edited by “One Table of Sweet and Sour Pork” on July 25, 2019, at 09:53. I’m not very knowledgeable; I’m just rambling on without much clarity. Please bear with me and correct me if I’m wrong. WRC107 is not a specific method for calculating the local stress in perforated nozzles; in the calculations, the nozzle is considered to be a solid structure, and there is no verification of the local stress at the nozzle. Therefore, the accuracy of the calculation results is relatively high when the thickness of the takeover wall is large. In WRC297, the nozzle is a real hollow structure, and the local stress at the nozzle was checked, but the local stress at the reinforcement ring was not checked. The problem is that the local stress values calculated for WCR297 are also higher than those for WRC107. As for the calculation method that yields results closer to reality, and how to choose such a method, experts like Qin Shujing and Duan Rui have provided some conclusions; the original poster can look for relevant articles to read. Additionally, there are now specialized finite element analysis software programs for calculating local stresses; the original poster might want to give them a look as well.