Samples
Pressure Vessel Engineering Ltd has worked on thousands of projects over the last decade. Our projects have varied from simple fittings to complex storage spheres and towers.
We base our calculations on commonly used commercial software programs: Compress, Design Calcs (formerly Advanced Pressure Vessel) and Pressure Vessel Elite. We also can design unusual pressure vessels completely from our extensive library of spread sheets, but more often we use spread sheets to calculate details that commercial programs do not cover.
Some of these samples show our use of Finite Element Analysis (FEA) to solve problems not covered by code rules. Whether the problem is to validate an existing design to meet Canadian code requirements, design a new product or to determine the cause of a product failure, FEA is an extremely powerful and productive tool. See "Linear Analysis - A Step by Step Introduction to FEA" below for a primer on the use of FEA in pressurized equipment.
Please contact us if you have any questions about our capabilities. The samples:
This example shows ASME code calculations completed for a horizontal vessel. As ASME does not provide a calculation method for the support saddles a "Zick" analysis is completed. This example discusses the effects of saddles on a design and provides an example saddle calculation.
This example shows ASME code calculations for a vertical vessel. Pressure Vessel Engineering Ltd., regularly completes ASME code review on vessels similar to this. This example includes leg support calculations accounting for seismic loadings as well as review of a pad flange.
This example shows calculations completed for some difficult to design items such as large nozzles, swing bolt covers and lugs, cone discontinuities, and ferrules. Pressure Vessel Engineering Ltd. has extensive experience analyzing these and other obscure items. We have completed thousands of projects with features such as this, many used for Canadian or National Board registration.
This vessel has a large nozzle located on the straight shell. The diameter of the nozzle requires Appendix 1-7 calculations. The nozzle also has large loads and moments specified by the customer. Nozzle PRO has been used to calculate the resulting stresses. The Nozzle PRO results are much more accurate than using WRC-107 methods.
Pressure Vessel Engineering was hired to prepare calculations for both pressure containment and supports for wind and seismic loads on a series of large propane storage spheres for Conrex. The vessel wall thickness and nozzle supports were calculated using standard ASME code calculations. The vessels supports were constructed using industry standard designs but Finite Element Analysis (FEA) was used for the analysis instead of existing design rules. 
A B16.5 flange's pressure at temperature ratings are taken straight from the B16.5 standard. But what if this same flange is calculated by VIII-1 Appendix 2 rules? And how does this compare to FEA results?
This sample report illustrates how Finite Element Analysis is used to validate common pressure components and applications. This report format may be used to justify ASME code compliance, provide stress and displacement analysis, provide cycle life estimates, complete thermal analysis, and perform design validation and optimization studies. This format is fully CRN compliant and may be applied to many applications. This level of analysis can typically be completed within a week. 
Pressure Vessel Engineering has extensive experience completing code calculations (ASME & TEMA) for plate as well as shell and tube heat exchangers. This example shows a heat exchanger calculated in accordance with ASME VIII-1 UHX for the seven possible load cases.
PVEng has completed ASME code calculations for hundreds of piping systems. Canadian registration (CRN) is typically required for piping systems operating above 15 psi. Registration of piping can be confusing as the requirements vary from province to province and are not well documented. This example details a simple system calculations and drawings. We would be happy to discuss your requirements and help guide you through the registration process.
This example shows a vertical vessel with several features associated with this type of design. ASME code calculations addressing skirt, cone, and seismic and wind conditions are shown.
The Problem:
The Problem:
The Problem:
Connections such as flanges, tri-clamps and any other multi-body assembly are analyzed using FEA. This example shows a Tri-Clamp connection under internal pressure and describes how FEA is used to provide insight into the interaction between components.
We also utilize FEA to complete thermal analysis of pressure equipment. FEA can be used to confirm and/or replace calculations and to provide resulting thermal gradients, heat transfer, temperatures and their corresponding displacements and stresses. This example explains how FEA can be used to replace ASME code rules and steps through the application of FEA for a heat exchanger.
We frequently validate pressure equipment for code compliance. Our FEA's are completed in accordance with ASME VIII-2, Part5 - Design by Analysis and used to validate numerous other codes of construction. Our work is regularly accepted for National Board as well as Canadian registration. This example shows a FEA completed for a valve and discusses primary and secondary stresses associated with ASME VIII-2.
An FEA is completed by PVEng to determine the maximum alternating stress which is then plotted on a cycle life curve to obtain an estimated cycle life. This method is much more accurate than classical calculations and may be used for any geometry. This example steps through the application of FEA to determine an estimated cycle life of a pressure vessel.
PVEng uses FEA to complete thermal analysis of components. From the FEA temperatures, heat transfer rates, displacements, and stresses can all be obtained. Thermal analysis may be completed for steady state and transient (time dependant) conditions and used to ensure the design requirements are met. This example shows a FEA used to determine heat time and required power for an injection mold. Steady state and transient analysis are described and their differences discussed.
Pressure Vessel Engineering utilizes Non-Linear FEA to provide more accurate results of components operating past the yield point, or for time dependant studies. Non-Linear analysis is an excellent tool as it provides real world results and considers the effects of yielding and strain hardening. This example describes the difference between Linear and Non-Linear analysis and compares the results of a flange for each.
This example shows calculations completed for the addition of a nozzle to an existing vessel. While the calculations are very simple the registration requirements of a used vessel can be complex. Calculations must be completed in accordance with the original code of construction. Ultrasonic testing may also be required to confirm the current condition of the vessel.
To ensure buckling will not occur we run designs under eternal pressure or compressive load typically but also ensure that other, not so obvious, buckling modes will occur. As a linear-elastic analysis does not investigate buckling it is important this failure mode is analyzed in addition. This example explains buckling and why it is investigated.
PVEng uses FEA to complete vibration/frequency analysis when classical calculations cannot be used. The FEA provides the natural frequency of the object which can then be checked against the system resonance or used to complete seismic analysis in accordance with building codes such as NBC, UBC, and IBC. This example steps through the application of FEA to complete a seismic analysis.
This digester was installed and has been in use since 1926. Vessels built in that time period were typically constructed with riveted butt joints. 
Burst testing is a form of physical testing using a pressurized medium to load a component. This testing can be used to justify component designs that are too complex for analytical calculations. Guidelines for this type of testing can be found in ASME Section VIII Division 1 under design Section UG-101. Here formulas are used to determine a maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP) from the measured burst pressure. The MAWP can be used to justify the component for different applications or obtaining a Canadian Registration Number (CRN). An authorized inspector must witness the test and sign off on the results if the test is to be used for the purpose of proving an acceptable design pressure for CRN. In addition to the AI further documentation such as mill test reports (MTR) and material specifications are required to prove actual and minimum physical properties of the component material. The physical properties along with corrosion and efficiency factors directly affect the resulting MAWP calculation. For example, higher expected corrosion and weaker materials will both lower the calculated MAWP. The MAWP is not the only key piece of information yielded by burst testing. The results of a burst testing allow designers to observe actual failures in the design and will provide them with valuable insight for optimization.