See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266406299

LIMIT LOAD ANALYSIS OF BOLTED FLANGE

CONNECTIONS

Article

READS

305

2 authors, including:

Robert Kauer
TÜV Süd Group
22 PUBLICATIONS 33 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Robert Kauer
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 20 May 2016
 18th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMiRT 18)
Beijing, China, August 7-12, 2005
SMiRT18-F08-2

LIMIT LOAD ANALYSIS OF BOLTED FLANGE CONNECTIONS

Dr.-Ing. Robert Kauer Dr.-Ing. Jürgen Deininger

TÜV Industrie Service GmbH TÜV Industrie Service GmbH
TÜV SÜD Gruppe TÜV SÜD Gruppe
Festigkeit und Strukturzuverlässigkeit Festigkeit und Strukturzuverlässigkeit
Westendstr. 199 Westendstr. 199
D-80686 München, Germany D-80686 München, Germany
Phone: +49 (0)89 / 57 91-12 77, Phone: +49 (0)89 / 57 91-28 59,
Fax: +49 (0)89 / 57 91-21 77 Fax: +49 (0)89 / 57 91-21 77
E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT
In Europe as well as in other countries a lot of efforts are invested into developing new codes and standards
for bolted joints under various loading conditions. The standardization of gasket factors and the improvement of
calculation methods with respect to these factors characterize the last couple of years in this area.
In Germany, the nuclear code (KTA-Regeln) is also influenced by this development. So, the leak rate
dependency of gasket factors and the results of a research program on metal-to-metal contact type flanges were
introduced into the new approach of the code for Class 2 and 3 components. Herein; flange calculations can be
performed for various flange types, floating type and metal-to-metal contact type. Generally, the calculations to
be performed can be separated into a design step and the proof of sufficient tightness and strength of flange,
bolts and gasket for the various operating conditions according to the chosen bolting method.
In Europe, the most recent development in the field of flange calculations is the new standard EN 1591-1 for
flange connections. The structure of the EN 1591-1 is also a two-step approach, but due to the more
sophisticated and iterative calculation method, the design step is neglected and instead the focus in the first step
is the determination of a suitable bolting force.
In cases, where the allowable stress values are not satisfied by performing code calculations or in cases,
where the applicability of the code is not given, e. g. due to geometric facts, Finite-Element analyses often
replace code calculations but have to demonstrate code compliance.
Therefore, numerical Finite-Element analyses, performed according to a special code, e. g. KTA, must also
fulfill the requirements of the code with respect to considered load cases, bolting condition, allowable stresses
etc., to get an adequate testimony for a certain flange joint. Usually this can be done by checking relevant cross
sections according to the stress category methodology as postulated in the ASME Sect. VIII Div. 2 App. 4,
KTA-Regel 3201.2/3211.2 or AD-2000 Merkblatt S4. Due to the fact that the theoretical background for the
analytical assessment of the flanges in the KTA (respectively old DIN 2505) is the limit load theory
(Traglasttheorie), it seems to be justifiable to use the same background when evaluating flanged connections by
using numerical calculation methods.
By means of Finite-Element analyses (FEA) of a flange joint the allowable loading according to the limit
load theory is determined and compared to the allowable loading given by standard code calculation.

Keywords: Limit Load, Flanges, nonlinear FEA, KTA, EN 1591

1346 Copyright © 2005 by SMiRT18

1. INTRODUCTION
Flange connections as bolted joints have to be designed in order to meet strength and tightness criteria. For
this effort, sufficient knowledge of the deformation behavior of the entire system "flanges - gasket - bolts" is
required. Besides an exact geometric modeling, the description of the material behavior of all components is
very important for the quality of the performed analyses. This applies to analytical as well as to numerical
methods.
Especially the modeling of the gasket is difficult, because of the wide range of common gasket materials and
shapes. To standardize the gasket behavior, a lot of work was carried out (see for example Kockelmann, et. al.
1996, DIN 28090, 1995, Kockelmann, et al., 1998). A main focus of attention was to introduce leak dependent
gasket factors.
The definition and determination of gasket factors always should be developed with respect to calculation
methods, too. On the other hand, codes and standards have to adopt the state of the art in gasket testing. In the
German nuclear codes for Class 1 (KTA 3201.2, 1996) and Class 2 and 3 components (KTA 3211.2, 1996), the
calculation method for bolted joints is based on the method in DIN draft 2505 (DIN 2505, 1990). The
development of the DIN 2505 to become a valid code was stopped in the early nineties because of the upcoming
European standard for flange joints EN 1591 (EN 1591, 2001), which is now valid since 2001.
Nevertheless, the DIN 2505 method was introduced into the nuclear code and will remain there.
Calculations according to EN 1591 can be performed alternatively but only with respect to the additional specific
requirements of the KTA (e. g. proof against sliding between flange and gasket).
For metal-to-metal contact type joints there are no direct calculation rules available. So, in most cases the
method for full face gaskets in the code was adopted individually by the user to get the required proof for the
flange connection. In the KTA draft (KTA 3211.2 Draft, 2001), the results of a VGB research project (VGB,
2001) for metal-to-metal contact type flange connections were included into the code (see e. g. Bartonicek, et. al.,
2001).

Fig. 1 Flange Joint

As the behavior of bolted joints (see Fig. 1) with their complex interaction between flanges, bolts and gasket
is complicated to analyze analytically, numerical calculation methods are going to be used more and more but
also must fulfill the basic requirements stated by the code to be applied to get a valid testimony of the joint. So,
the simulation of the gasket material, the modeling of the bolts, the application of the loading conditions, and the
realization of the contact behavior between the flanges allows multiple ways how to built up a Finite-Element
model (see e. g.: Kauer and Strohmeier, 1996, Kauer et. al., 1996, Kauer and Strohmeier, 2000, Kauer et. al.,
2001).
Also code requirements must be addressed by calculating a bolted joint with numerical methods. So, the
loadings to be considered, the allowable stresses, the gasket factors etc. have to be determined with respect to the
applicable code or standard. The specific requirements of the German nuclear code (KTA) and the possible
solutions how to handle these requirements by performing numerical Finite-Element calculations are
demonstrated for instance in Kauer (2002).
Especially for flange connections classified as Class 1, Class 2 or Class 3 components in nuclear service,
loading situations are often crucial with only a low likeliness of occurrence and a low number of repetitions. For
instance forces and moments due to emergency situations assumed for the connected piping systems are often of
high magnitude and are then determining the entire flange design procedure. Due to the conservatism in

1347 Copyright © 2005 by SMiRT18

 Fig. 2 KTA calculation method Fig. 3 KTA calculation method
(floating type flange joint) (metal-to-metal contact type flange joint)

analytical code methodologies, expensive and difficult to realize consequences must be chosen, which are often
in contradiction to the most suitable solution for the normal operating conditions. Especially for those emergency
cases the maximum allowable loading of the flange connection can be determined by using limit load analysis
alternatively.
In the following, the limit load is calculated for different loading conditions, e. g. bolt force, internal
pressure and an additional axial force equivalent to an external bending moment, by means of a Finite-Element
calculation. The results are compared to the results of standard code calculations.

2. FLANGE CALCULATION ACCORDING TO KTA

In principle, flange calculations according to the German nuclear code can be separated into a design step
and the following proof of sufficient tightness and strength of flanges, bolts and gasket for the various operating
conditions under the bolting condition chosen in the design step.
The principle scheme of a flange calculation due to KTA (KTA draft, 2001) is shown in Fig. 2 (flange joints
of floating type) and Fig. 3 (flange joints of metal-to-metal contact type).
Loadings to be considered according to KTA are:

• mounting condition
• internal pressure for testing and operating conditions (P)
• temperature for testing and operating conditions (T)
• external loadings for mounting, testing and operating conditions (forces, moments)

1348 Copyright © 2005 by SMiRT18

 For the operating conditions, pressure, temperature and external loadings have to be considered separately
for design, normal operation, abnormal operation, design-based faults and design-based damage conditions. If
there are no special requirements for the leak rate, recommendations are given in the code.
For typical flange types, like welded neck flanges, blind flanges, etc. formulas are given in the code to get
the results required.
In the design step, the required bolt forces for mounting, testing, and operating conditions must be
determined by considering the applicable gasket factors and loading conditions. The design step for the bolts and
the flanges must be performed with respect to scattering effects due to the chosen mounting procedure. For
metal-to-metal contact type flange joints, the required flange bending resistance must be calculated according to
an allowable flange rotation. Here, 0.1° is given by the code to ensure proper stiffness of the flange, if there is no
additional proof for a greater allowable rotation.
After performing the design step, the nominal mounting bolt force FSO and the deviation corresponding to
friction and scattering FS0min and FSOmax are the basis for the proof of sufficient tightness and strength of all
components. Therefore, external loadings (F, M) and the stiffness of flanges, bolts and gasket (CF, CS, CD) must
be considered as well as differences in thermal expansion (∆W) and gasket seating (∆hD). The result is the
change in gasket stress, flange stress and bolt stress due to internal and external loading as well as due to
temperature effects and gasket seating based on the nominal mounting bolt force. With this knowledge, the
required and maximum allowable values for each operating condition can be checked for the gasket, the flanges
and the bolts.
In a last step the assumed quality for flanges, bolts and gasket must be ensured as well as the assumed
boundary conditions for the mounting procedure.

3. FLANGE CALCULATION ACCORDING TO EN 1591

In Europe, the most recent development in the field of flange calculations is the new standard EN 1591-1 for
flange connections. The calculation procedure addresses the interaction between flange, bolts and gasket in all
loading conditions investigated. Important parameters considered are:

• Internal pressure
• Material behavior for flange, bolts and gasket
• Sealing characteristic of the selected gasket
• Assembly bolt load and scatter during bolt assembly
• Changes in gasket force in all loading conditions
• External loading, like axial forces or bending moments
• Differences in temperature of flange and bolts

The calculation procedure for the tightness step is based on an elastic analysis of the deformations
characteristics with respect to the loading condition of all components and addresses also plastic deformations of
the gasket.
In order to check for sufficient strength, the mechanical stiffness is calculated based on the interaction of
flange and adjacent pipe and with respect to allowable (plastic) deformations.
In the first step the initial value for the minimum required bolting force is determined, so that for all possible
loading situations during service a sufficient remnant gasket force is guaranteed. This means that under all
possible loading conditions a gasket force higher than the required value for tightness is ensured. The initial
value for the minimum required bolting force strongly depends on the gasket width established during assembly.
However, the gasket width also depends on the bolting force. Therefore, an iterative cycle is necessary.
In the second step the internal forces acting at the flange connections are determined. After this, the flange
connection is checked for sufficient strength considering all internal and external forces as well. For the
assembly condition this is done by the assumption of the maximum bolting force with respect to the expected
bolting scatter. For all service conditions and also for testing conditions only the minimum bolting force has to
be considered, since by this assumption no plastic deformations of the flanges are allowed to occur. In the case of
higher bolting forces only limited plastic deformations might happen, but these local plastic deformations might
not lead to a decrease in the bolt forces lower than the minimum required bolting load for tightness.

1349 Copyright © 2005 by SMiRT18

4. NUMERICAL CALCULATIONS
Using numerical methods, e. g. Finite-Element analyses (FEA), problems in structural mechanics can be
solved individually for arbitrary geometries and with the possibility to address special tasks beyond the
restrictions and scope of analytical methods.
Nevertheless, testimonies according to a specified code have to fulfill at least the fundamental requirements
of the code. In the considered case addressing KTA-Regeln, the gasket factors and the allowable stress values
must be chosen with respect to KTA requirements. Additionally, the loading conditions to be considered must be
chosen regarding the requirements of the code. The easiest way to get a sufficient mounting bolt force is to
perform the design step according to the equations given in the code, which are based on simple equilibrium
condition. If necessary, a numerical model can also be used to calculate the reaction of a flange according to bolt
forces FS, summed axial forces FR and the internal pressure P. The gasket force FD can be determined as the
resulting reaction force.
In the second step sufficient tightness and strength must be proven regarding to the maximum and minimum
possible mounting bolt forces. For this purpose, the behavior of the gasket and the bolts needs to be implemented
into the numerical model.
Normally, an axisymmetric Finite-Element model yields to sufficient results. The bolt force must be applied
in a way to include the stiffness of the bolts. While modeling mounting condition, the bolt force is applied at the
end of the bolts, which are simulated by a simple spring. After mounting the bolt force must be removed so that
during the simulation of the service conditions the bolt can act as a spring with its calculated stiffness CS. The
bolt force for the several service conditions can be determined as reaction force at the boundary node. To
introduce the differences in thermal expansion between flanges, bolts and gasket, the calculated value for ∆W
can be applied directly as displacement of the bolt boundary node.
For the simulation of the gasket behavior it is also necessary to introduce the gasket stiffness. This can be
done by modeling a spring with stiffness CD and a effective gasket width bDe, calculated for example by EN 1591
(see left side of Fig. 4) or by simulating the gasket as a continuum with a stiffness corresponding to geometry
and modulus of elasticity (see right side of Fig. 4). Due to the non-linear material behavior of most of the used
gasket materials, it is necessary to choose the gasket thickness in a way that for the mounting condition the
gasket thickness becomes the thickness of the pressurized gasket using the recovery modulus of elasticity ED.
The seating of the gasket (∆hD) can be simulated as displacement of the gasket boundary nodes. To introduce the
non-linear gasket behavior into a Finite-Element calculation, a suitable method is demonstrated by Kauer and
Strohmeier (2000).
For simulating the mechanical behavior of joints with metal-to-metal contact, it is necessary to simulate the
contact behavior of the gap between the two flanges. In Kauer et. al., (2001) a method is shown for introducing
the non-linear gasket behavior in metal-to-metal contact type joints, in the case of the sealing system of a reactor
pressure vessel.

Fig. 4 Proof of sufficient tightness and strength

1350 Copyright © 2005 by SMiRT18

5 LIMIT LOAD ANALYSES
Two different ways are available to determine the maximum allowable load utilize plastic material behavior.
For a detailed description see e. g. ASME VIII Div. 2 Appendix 4-136.

• A limit load analysis is by definition based on the theory of small deformations and the assumption of
an elastic-perfectly plastic material model (see also KTA 3201.2 7.7.4).

• To determine the plastic collapse load a plastic analysis is used. This analysis type takes into account
the actual material stress-strain relationship and considers small and large deformations as well. The
material models used for the hardening stress range may be based on simple bilinear kinematic models,
but also more sophisticated approaches using curve fittings and piecewise linearization of the real strain
hardening curve might be used.

For the limit load analysis as well as for the plastic analysis, the allowable load is determined as 2/3 of the
calculated limit load or plastic collapse load.

Pallow = 2/3 PLim with: PLim : limit load

respectively Pallow : allowable loading (with safety margin 1.5)

Pallow = 2/3 PP PP : plastic collapse load

So in both cases a safety margin of 1.5 has to be maintained for the actual loadings during all service
conditions.
In the Finite-Element analysis the model is loaded with a steadily increasing loading of the type investigated.
Any other loadings to be considered are applied as usually.
In order to determine the limit or plastic load an evaluation of a load versus deflection curve is necessary.
Sometimes it might be quite difficult to make the proper choice of the point for evaluation but with some care
and a quick check of the global deformation behavior of the model this should be properly possible. A typical
load versus deflection curve is shown in Fig. 5.
For the limit load analysis the load versus deflection curve should – by increasing the load - lead to a
horizontal line representing the limit load.

Load vs. deflection diagram for flange DN100 PN16 material X 6 CrNiTi 18 10
- Limit load for internal pressure -

180

160
Plim
140
internal pressure [bar]

120

100 Pa
deflection

Plim approx. 150 bar

80
Pa = 100 bar
60

40

internal pressure
20

0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
deflection [mm]

Fig. 5 Determination of limit load

In the case of determining the plastic collapse load a bit more complex evaluation procedures are required.
Here, the steadily increased load in the calculation leads to an asymptotic linear increasing line in the load versus

1351 Copyright © 2005 by SMiRT18

deflection diagram. To determine the plastic collapse load, several evaluation procedures are available, which are
discussed in detail for instance in the EPERC manual “Design by analysis”. The commonly used procedures are:

• Tangent-intersection method
• 1% plastic strain limit
• twice elastic deformation limit
• twice elastic slope limit

Although in the present paper only the limit load is of interest, these methods are of interest because in those
cases, where the supporting effect of adjacent areas influences the stiffness of the weakest cross section, also
limit load deflection curves show an increase in the load versus deflection curve similar to those ones expected
for a plastic collapse load analysis. So in these cases, the tangent-intersection method is a very suitable way to
determine the limit load on a reliable basis. Another advantage is that sometimes the numerical calculation shows
a bad convergence behavior and in order to save computational time the tangent-intersection method might lead
to a conservative estimation of the limit load although the horizontal part of the load-deflection curve is not yet
reached.
An example of a load versus deflection curve and the application of the tangent-intersection method for
determining the plastic collapse load is given in Fig. 6.

6 EXAMPLE
To demonstrate the capability and also the limitations of limit load analyses in the field of flange
connections some example calculations have been conducted.

6.1 Geometry and modeling approach

The flange type considered here is a flange connection of nominal size DN350 (pipe outside diameter:
355.6 mm) and a nominal working pressure of 10 bar (notation DN350 PN10). The flanges are of floating type
and a flat gasket (material PTFE) is used to seal the connection. A ferritic material (RSt 37-2) is used for the
flanges and the adjacent pipes. The bolting material quality corresponds to a yield stress of Rp0,2 = 640 MPa. The
temperature of each component is in all load cases equal to room temperature.
During assembly a total bolt pre-load of 758.3 kN is applied to the 16 bolts of size M20. The flange
connection is loaded with an internal pressure of 7.9 bar and an equivalent axial force of 206.2 kN, due to an
additional axial force and bending moment acting on the flange joint.
Therefore three different loading conditions are considered:

• assembly condition only with bolt pre-load,

• bolt pre-load and internal pressure,
• bolt pre-load, internal pressure and equivalent axial force.

As described in section 4, axisymmetric Finite-Element models have been created, considering the
guidelines required in order to ensure compliance with the relevant codes. According to the requirements of a
limit load analysis the material of flange and pipe is defined as an elastic-ideal-plastic material. The gasket is
modeled as a continuum.

1352 Copyright © 2005 by SMiRT18

6.2 Comparison of standard calculation to elastic FEA
The standard calculation according to the German nuclear code KTA and the European standard EN 1591-1
yields, that for the given combination of loadings the cross-section at the junction flange-to-pipe is highly
stressed. A maximum usage factor of 100 % is allowable. The usage factors in percentage for the given loadings
at the considered flange cross-section are in detail:

KTA EN 1591 elastic FEA

Assembly 89 % 66 % 52 %

Assembly and internal 93 % 64 % 61 %

pressure

Assembly, internal pressure 102 % 83 % 79 %

equivalent axial force

Despite the results of the standard calculations, the elastic FEA gives a significant lower stress level in the
flange joint and clearly demonstrates that the flange joint is able to withstand the considered loadings during
service.

6.3 Limit loads

Three different loading conditions are considered in order to determine the limit load for each type of
loading. At first the assembly condition is investigated. Therefore the flange connection is loaded with a steadily
increasing bolt force. Second, in order to determine the limit load for a pressure loading the flange connection is
subjected to a steadily increasing internal pressure, while prior to the pressure loading a bolt force of 758.3 kN is
applied. The third load case is a flange connection loaded with 758.3 kN as a bolt force, the internal pressure of
7.9 bar and as load to be evaluated, a steadily increasing axial force, equivalent to an external bending moment
acting on the flange joint. The load cases considered are:

• steadily increasing bolt force Ö limit load for assembly condition

• bolt force, steadily increasing pressure Ö limit load for pressure loading
• bolt force, pressure, steadily increasing Ö limit load for external bending moment
axial force

Especially when determining the limit load for bolting, the steadily increasing load yields to an asymptotic
linear increasing line in the load versus deflection diagram. The load vs. deflection curve for the DN350 PN10
flange joint is drawn in Fig. 6. By means of the tangent-intersection method the limit load is determined to a
value of approximately 2300 kN respectively the allowable load to approximately 1530 kN.

1353 Copyright © 2005 by SMiRT18

 Load vs. deflection diagram for flange DN350 PN10 material RSt 37-2
- Limit load for bolt force -

2800000
2600000
2400000
Plim
2200000
2000000
1800000
bolt force [N]

1600000
Pa
1400000
1200000 Plim approx. 2300000 N θ

1000000
Pa = 1533000 N bolt load
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
flange rotation [°]

Fig. 6 Determination of limit load by means of the tangent-intersection method

Whereas for the loading types “bolt pre-load and internal pressure” and “bolt pre-load, internal pressure and
equivalent axial force” the allowable load is determined to a value of 42 bar and 452 kN.
In all loading conditions the flanges are showing a sufficient strength to withstand the loads applied during
the considered service conditions.
Considering the ability of the gasket to seal the flange joint the remaining gasket force during the increase of
the pressure loading or the external force are of great importance. In all cases a decrease in the remaining gasket
force has been observed. Moreover in most instances the gasket is almost completely de-pressurized before the
allowable load according to the limit load analysis is reached.
It should be also mentioned that in some cases the bolt load increases further with applied loading of the
flange. So care should be taken in order not to “over-stress” the bolts resulting in a plastic permanent elongation.

6.3 Flange rotation as an indicator for load limitation

Generally with further applied loading the deformations of the flanges are increasing, too. First these
deformations are of elastic nature and are increasing in a proportional matter. But with further loading the
proportional limit is reached and a plastic hinge is starting to develop. By this the deformation starts to increase
faster due to the reduced stiffness of the determining component. With continued loading a plastic hinge is fully
developed and again the incremental grow of deformations is increasing.
The rotation of the flange ring is a good indicator for the overall flange deformation and loading situation.
Furthermore the inclination angle of the flange ring could be measured with reasonable efforts.
An example for the dependence of flange rotation and flange loading is given in Fig. 7 for a flange
connection DN350 PN10 loaded with bolt preload, internal pressure and an increasing axial force.
Unfortunately there are only a few sources of information about the allowable rotation angle available.
Whereas the German nuclear design standard KTA (Draft KTA 3211.2, 2001) defines in case of a metal-to-metal
contact flange joint a limiting inclination angle of 0.1°, some authors cited a value of 0.3° for general
applications of flange connections, Bouzid et. al. (2004). Additional information about the allowable inclination
angle should be requested by the gasket manufacturer.
Bouzid et. al. (2004) also published some recent investigations where the flange rotation is used as a
measure to predict the leakage rate for a given gasket during service.

1354 Copyright © 2005 by SMiRT18

 Load vs. flange rotation for flange DN350 PN10 material RSt 37-2
- bolt pre-load 758,3 kN / internal pressure 7.9 bar / increasing axial force -

800000

700000
limit load Plim

600000
Pa=2/3 Plim
axial force [N]

500000
allowable load Pa
400000
usage factor 46 % Load cases:
300000
1) Assembly: bolt pre-load 758.3 kN

200000 2) bolt preload, internal pressure 7.9 bar

3
100000 3) bolt pre-load, internal pressure,
1 2 axial force 206.2 kN
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00
flange rotation [°]

Fig. 7 Load vs. inclination angle for loading with axial force

7 CONCLUSION
In the paper the methodology of the KTA flange part is briefly explained for floating type flange joints as
well as for flanges of metal-to-metal contact type. Some special requirements of the code were demonstrated.
The most recent development in the field of flange calculations in Europe is the new standard EN 1591-1 for
flange connections. The structure of the EN 1591-1 is also a two-step approach, but neglecting the design step
and instead focusing on the criteria tightness and strength of the flange connection.
By means of Finite-Element analyses (FEA) of several flange joints the allowable loading according to limit
load theory is determined and compared to the allowable loading given by standard calculation.
The flanges are showing a sufficient strength to withstand the loads applied during typical service conditions.
But care should be taken in order not to “over-stress” the bolts resulting in a plastic permanent elongation.
Moreover in all cases a significant decrease in the remaining gasket force has been observed. Until the allowable
load according to the limit load analysis is still not reached, this raises the questions for sufficient tightness of the
flange joint.
The findings suggest not to focus on the strength of the flanges, but instead to concentrate on the rotation of
the flange in combination with the assessment of the strength of bolting and adjacent pipe. It is also of crucial
importance to maintain a sufficiently gasket stress to ensure tightness of the flange connection. Because the
rotation of the flange ring is a good indicator for the overall flange deformation and loading situation, it might be
useful to restrict the flange rotations to a value the applied gasket is able to withstand.

1355 Copyright © 2005 by SMiRT18

NOMENCLATURE
bDe effective gasket width
CD axial stiffness of the gasket
CF rotating stiffness of the flange
CS axial stiffness of the bolts
ED gasket recovering modulus of elasticity
F external forces
FD gasket force
FR axial force according to P, F, M
FS bolt forces
FSO chosen mounting bolt forces
FSOmax maximum mounting bolt forces
FSOmin minimum required mounting bolt forces
∆hD gasket seating (full-face gasket)
M external moment
∆W difference in thermal expansion (flanges, bolts and gasket)

REFERENCES
Kockelmann, H., Birembaut, Y., (1996), "Asbestos free materials for gaskets for bolted flange connections,"
Synthesis report of the Brite EuRam Project BE 5191 focusing on gasket factors and associated gasket testing
procedures, 4th International Symposium on Fluid Sealing, Mandelieu-La Napoule
DIN 28090 September (1995), "Statische Dichtungen für Flanschverbindungen, " Hrsg. Deutsches Institut
für Normung. Berlin: Beuth-Verlag.
Kockelmann, H., Bartonicek, J. and Roos, E., (1998), "Characteristics of gaskets for bolted flange
connections – present state of the art," ASME PVP-Vol. 367
DIN 2505 Entwurf, (1990), "Berechnung von Flanschverbindungen," Hrsg. Deutsches Institut für Normung.
Berlin: Beuth-Verlag.
KTA 3201.2, (1996), "Komponenten des Primärkreises von Leichtwasserreaktoren – Teil: Auslegung,
Konstruktion und Berechnung," Fassung Juni 1996
KTA 3211.2, (1992), "Druck- und aktivitätsführende Komponenten des Primärkreises von
Leichwasserreaktoren – Teil: Auslegung, Konstruktion und Berechnung," Fassung Juni 1992 mit Korrekturen
Juni 1994.
EN 1591, (2001) "Flanges and their joints - Design rules for gasketed circular flange connections," April
2001.
VGB Research Project, (2001), "Entwicklung eines Berechnungsverfahrens für Flanschverbindungen im
Kraftnebenschluss," Juli 2001.
KTA 3211.2, (2001), Draft: "Druck- und aktivitätsführende Komponenten des Primärkreises von
Leichwasserreaktoren – Teil: Auslegung, Konstruktion und Berechnung," Entwurf März 2001.
Bartonicek, J., Kockelmann, H., and Schöckle, F., (2001), "Design method for bolted flanged connections of
metal-to-metal contact type," ASME PVP-Vol. 416
Kauer, R. and Strohmeier, K., (1996), "Determination of Leakage Gap and Leakage Mass Flow of Flange
Joints Subjected to External Bending Moments," ASME PVP-Vol. 332
Kauer, R., Steil, U. and Strohmeier, K., (1996), "Determination of Leakage Gap of Flange Joints under
non-axisymmetric loadings, using non-linear gasket material," 4th International Symposium on Fluid Sealing,
Mandelieu-La Napoule
Kauer, R. and Strohmeier, K., (2000), "Finite-Element simulation of non-linear, time and temperature
dependent effects of flange gasket materials," ASME PVP-Vol. 414
Kauer, R., Holzer, W., Hüttner, Ch., (2001), "A Finite-Element based method for calculating metal-to-metal
type flange joints," ASME PVP-Vol. 416
Kauer, R., (2002), "Requirements for Numerical Flange Calculations According to the German Nuclear
Code”, ASME PVP-Vol. 433
Bouzid A, Derenne M. and Diany M., (2004), "Determination of gasket effective width based on leakage,"
ASME PVP-Vol. 478
EPERC-Manual (2005), “Design by Analysis”, http://ped.eurodyn.com/, last visited 22 March 2005

1356 Copyright © 2005 by SMiRT18