Caesar nozzle simulation fixture – to quickly determine whether the nozzle is under normal stress?

In my opinion, if the stress handling of the nozzle holder is satisfactory, then in most cases it will be fine. The problem with ANC simulation is that it is too conservative. Pipeline design is not merely a matter of considering design aspects alone; practical constraints such as material limitations, site constraints, and costs often prevent the use of overly conservative designs. As for what value the triaxial stress should be below to be considered acceptable, it cannot be determined simply by assigning a single numerical value. I remember that it seems the inlet of the DN200 turbine can’t withstand a load of 100 KG. I’m not sure if my impression is correct.

The specifications for various devices and containers vary; the stress on pipe connections should still be determined in accordance with relevant standards, or some equipment manufacturers may provide specific requirements regarding stress levels. That’s my personal opinion.

Different standards specify the stress requirements for the connection ports of various devices; for example, API610 for pumps, API618 for compressors, and NEMA23 for turbines, among others. For the nozzle loads on stationary equipment, various institutions generally have their own empirical values; during verification, these values can be used for comparison. Some equipment manufacturers have specific requirements, and for larger devices, professional evaluation by specialists is necessary

Generally, the pipe ends of equipment that require pipeline stress analysis experience thermal displacement; there may also be settlement displacement of the equipment, and all of these factors need to be taken into account. There are corresponding specifications or rules set by the design institute for the limits of equipment outlets. Also, not only the forces acting in three directions need to be considered, but bending moments and torques as well.

The device’s outlet cannot be considered as a fixing point; it is better to include the device itself in the simulation. Generally, the fixing points for devices are located at the supports. Since the pipes are exposed to high temperatures, the devices are also usually at high temperatures, and the displacement of the pipe outlets due to thermal expansion of the devices cannot be ignored. Regarding the stress on the equipment ports, for dynamic equipment, manufacturers generally provide the load-bearing capacity; for static equipment, if the manufacturer cannot provide this information, calculations are required, and there are established formulas for such calculations. When the stress is high, it needs to be submitted to the manufacturer for confirmation. Generally speaking, the stress cannot exceed a certain level – think about it, can the bearing capacity of a DN50 pipe connection be the same as that of a DN500 pipe connection?

Firstly, you haven’t taken into account the thermal displacement of the pipe ends, which is likely to affect the selection of the compensator； Secondly, simulating the pipe end using fixed supports does not indicate that the stress on the pipe end meets the manufacturer’s requirements. Considering only the safety and stress conditions of the pipeline itself is also not entirely correct; the displacement of the pipe end can vary in magnitude, and a small displacement may have little impact on the pipeline, whereas a larger displacement is more concerning ； Calculating the additional displacement at the pipe outlet is not difficult ； To verify the load on the pipe connection, it is necessary to communicate with the manufacturer; one should not act on their own.

Passed by and saw there are many students*; thanks for the summary

It’s better to simulate the equipment; the pipe connections should not use ANCHOR, as that is too conservative. Generally, equipment manufacturers will provide the load capacity of the equipment, but the values are usually quite low.