Post on 20-Jan-2018
description
Status of report on chapter 6: Warm cryostat mechanical calculation
PH-DT Engineering Office, CERN
Page 1
CERN, May 20th 2015
Status today– 6 Warm cryostat mechanical calculation– 6.1 Relevant safety codes (Olga and Andrea) (feedback Olga for welds?)– 6.2 Calculation models:– 6.2.1 Dimensions:– 6.2.2 Pressure loads and own weight– 6.2.3 Analytical models (stress, deflection and M,T diagrams) (Andrea and Joao) – 6.2.4 Global “box” models: to shows that a portal model is well representative (Dimitar ?)– 6.2.5 Static analysis portal beam model (Andrea)– 6.2.6 Static and buckling shell portal model (Diego) ongoing: NB: stress linearization !– 6.2.7 Table and Comparison of results above (Andrea and Diego)– 6.3 Portal minimal stability calculations (Piet)– 6.4 Bolted and welded connections– 6.4.1 Design of main connections and analytical calculations (Joao)– 6.4.2 Models and FEA results of connections (Diego)– 6.4.3 Weld analytical calculations (Piet)– 6.5 EC3 verification – SCIAeng® verification (Joao): ongoing: TBD duration– 6.6 Comparison EC3 and ASME global safety factors (who, do we need that?)– 6.7 Possible future optimizations– 6.7.1 Lighter roof, smaller floor, (Piet)– 6.7.2 Bracings (Dimi, Joao) (needed ?)– 6.7.3 Thickness of Stainless steel outer membrane (Dimi) (needed ?) Page 2
Annexes needed• As separate documents, not necessarily in word format but
often .pdf:
• Annex A: Analytical beam models• Annex B: Box beam model plots (Dimi)• Annex C: beam model plots, plus ANSYS scripts• Annex D: beam model verification according to EC3• Annex E: shell model plots, static, buckling• Annex F: stability calculations Piet• Annex G: calculations of connections• Annex H: connection FEA plots• Annex I: Global frame structure full EC3 SCIA report
Page 3
Former Material
Page 4
Status• Baseline:
– Solid corner pieces at bottom: splice connection at 3.4 m from bottom (shaft available envelope 3.7 m)– Splice must be able to take moment of 1-2 MN m and Shear of 3 MN (this to cope with possible
uncertainties in transition point)– Bolted connection on top (better stability, splice calculated)
• Bolted connections all calculated (Joao will summarise results)
• Short side walls: analyses yet to be done– longitudinal force retaining system, bracings– Pinned or M connection at top see next slides for pinned connection– M connection at bottom verify transverse connection to floor I beams
• Behaviour of bottom elements (floor): option to be discussed for the review (Piet)
• Work ahead:– Final proposal short side walls design– Static and Buckling final results and bracings: add bracing, ignore grid– Full run of SCIAeng EC3 verification– Verification of ASME requirements Pm+Pb < 1.5 S for div 1 and div 2– Verification of ASME requirements for welds– Verification of ASME requirements for bolts
– Seismic calculations (no time for the review)– Material x the review
Page 5
A note on the moment transition• The transition point of M along the vertical beam is highly affected by:
– The rotational stiffness of the bottom joint– The position of the bottom support (or contact point)– (The behaviour of the floor beam)
• The top pressure 20, 120, 350 mbar does not influence the transition point• The splice joint (seen these effects) must be capable of taking Moments
and Shear with some good safety factors• Transition at 1.9 (+0.55) for RotStiff =1250 MN m/rad and at 2.66 (+0.55) for perfect joint stiffness
Page 6
Baseline: all M connections
Page 7
• HL1100-607 : beam – joint stiffness calculated and accounted for in FEA
Baseline: all M connections
Page 8
Baseline: all M connections
Page 9
Baseline: all M connections
Page 10
Baseline: all M connections
Page 11
Baseline: all M connections
Page 12
Top connections pinned
Page 13
Top connections pinned
Page 14
Top connections pinned
Page 15
Top connections pinned
Page 16
Top connections pinned
Page 17
Top connections pinned
Page 18
Top connections pinned
Page 19