疲劳分析与U2的关系

luberus

有个项目，客户要求压力容器进行温度疲劳试验分析，相关规范要按照ASME VIII Div 2的相关内容进行。我想请教一下，是否意味着最终容器钢印就是U2钢印？还是说只是需要验证而已？

可是客户明明注明容器设计标准是按照AMSE VIII Div 1。

另外，FEA 分析是否跟U1 或者 U2 有关系？

多谢解答！

asdfyanxiang

小白想问下 PV是否可以做疲劳分析 如何操作 哪个模块

hmk

期待高手解答！！！！

452909407

是否U2钢印主要看业主有没有强制要求，而且看你们设备是否具备免除疲劳分析的条件，如果具备免除条件的话，可以自己疲劳分析后给业主看，不需要打钢印（前提是业主同意的情况），如果不满足免除疲劳分析的条件，则必须进行疲劳分析且要打钢印，这时就要按U2设计了，一般分析都是用ansys，或者其他应力分析软件

luberus

452909407 发表于 2015-5-4 09:21
是否U2钢印主要看业主有没有强制要求，而且看你们设备是否具备免除疲劳分析的条件，如果具备免除条件的话， ...

多谢回复，回复非常明确

我问了之前做类似项目的厂家。他们也是用ANSYS做的分析，但是最终没有打U2钢印，只是U钢印而已。说来可能是业主同意了吧。

技术1部

452909407 发表于 2015-5-4 09:21
是否U2钢印主要看业主有没有强制要求，而且看你们设备是否具备免除疲劳分析的条件，如果具备免除条件的话， ...

还是不怎么明白，我再找找其他资料

dljdw

容器设计标准是按照AMSE VIII Div 1,局部按照ASME VIII Div 2进行温度疲劳试验分析是允许的。

一般按照ASME VIII DIV.1 的U-2(g),
This Division of Section VIII does not contain rules to cover all details of design and construction. Where complete details are not given, it is intended that the Manufacturer, subject to the acceptance of the Inspector, shall provide details of design and construction which will be as safe as those provided by the rules of this Division.
U-2(g) allows the user to pick any reasonable method for fatigue analysis.Most calculations use ASME VIII-II Part 5.当然按其它适用的方法也是允许的。

https://becht.com/blog/performing-an-fea-in-section-viii-division-1-to-qualify-an-article-u-2-g-component

there is some pretty decent guidance in API 579/ASME FFS-1.

The allowable stress for all product forms except bolting needs to be from Section II, Part D, Table 1 and Table 1A (i.e. the allowable stress for Section VIII Division 1 construction).
For bolting materials the allowable stress needs to be determined from Section II, Part D, Table 3.
Limiting values that are not calculated using the allowable stress, S, such as fatigue and compressive allowable stresses, can be determined from the current rules in Section VIII Division 2.
The weld joint efficiency needs to be established in accordance with UW-11 and UW-12 of Section VIII Division 1. (more on this item in another post)
The Design By Analysis Rules in ASME Section VIII, Division 2, Part 5 should be followed. This is only possible for temperatures not in the creep regime. If your vessel has operating temperatures into the creep regime (indicated by the allowable stress being in italics in Table 1 or Table 1A), I would suggest that you retain the services of an expert, because there are NO rules right now for that situation.
ALL of the load case combinations of the applicable Division 2 assessment procedure need to be considered in addition to any other combinations defined by the User. In evaluating load cases involving the pressure term, P, the effects of the pressure being equal to zero needs to be considered (this ought to be standard practice of anyone using Part 5, but it is worth stating, again).
All of failure mechanisms in 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5 of Part 5 need to be evaluated. In 5.3, a component is exempt from the Local Failure Criteria evaluation if the component design is in accordance with the standard details of Part 4. That said, there are many details permitted in Division 1 that are not permitted in Division 2. If the component being evaluated is not covered by a standard detail from Part 4, then an evaluation per 5.3 is required.
When elastic-plastic analysis is performed, the required load case combinations from ASME FFS-1/API-579 Table B1.4 Note 6 need to be used.
Evaluation of the test condition per paragraph 4.1.6.2 of Section VIII, Division 2 is not mandatory, but consideration of the test condition per UG-22(j) of Section VIII, Division 1 is mandatory.
All other requirements for construction need to comply with Section VIII, Division 1.

ZZCSJV

这个应该是采购商的附加要求，跟取证没关系吧！