Pipe Stress Analysis vs Pipe flexibility calculations: basic concepts, frequent mistakes/case study

The increasing use of finite element software for the calculation of pipe flexibility has increased the calculation capacity and detail of these calculations, but at the same time, in general, the analytical capacity of Stress Engineers has decreased and dependence on computers has increased, compared to engineers who in the past did the analysis and calculations of flexibility and stress evaluation manually with the support of empirical equations.
At the same time, new mistakes appear due to the lack of knowledge of the basic concepts of pipe flexibility.
The purpose of this seminar is the recovering of old tools and to show basics concepts of pipe flexibility analysis, as well, to show frequent mistakes that occur when finite element analysis software is used without the required knowledge of this phenomenon, and without the use of empirical equations and rules, used to predict the behavior of Piping systems.

[@santhanakrishnan3660]

Very good initiative, keep up the good work

[@sr2ak]

Which code did you use to calculate guide distance from elbow?

[@nerzuri]

24:50 are you sure CAESARII uses Finite Element Method?

[@JohnniVasquez]

I do not think so

[@pawankoppal1936]

Yes, CAESAR II or any other pipe stress analysis software uses FEM for all computations. Only difference is, CAESAR-II or STAAD Pro is based on a 2D beam element method (where there is only one 2D element between two nodes) whereas core FEA softwares such as ANSYS or Abacus use a strain based approach which allows breaking the element into pieces called meshing. Hope that helps