</colgroup
Applies To | |
Product(s): | AutoPIPE |
Version(s): | ALL; |
Area: | Reporting |
Date Logged & Current Version |
March 2025 24.00.02.243 |
Why does the Center of Gravity report not match the Gr load case?
Example:
Totaled up all of the forces from the gravity load on the supports in the y-direction and came up with an overall number. However, this number is about 4000 lb lighter than the overall weight of the piping and the contents
After adding all the support loads = 73032 lbs
difference of 4602.35 lbs
Why?
The following list was compiled by taking a deep dive into modeling all of the component in AutoPIPE in order to calculate their weight in the COG report and Restraint report to find reasons for the disparities mentioned above.
Random pipe properties and other component properties were used in this analysis. The point is to find component that do not match across the various reports.
1. Pipe
1. Bend
2. Tee
3. Flange
4. Valve
5. Flexible Joint
6. Reducer
7. Support
8. Added weight
9. Distributed weight
10. Concentrated force
11. Beam
The following component are not correctly accounted for across the 2 reports: Tee, Distributed Loads, and Concentrated forces. The reason why a tee is not accurately accounted for is because of the modeling technique used to model a TEE. As of March 2025, a tee is a single point component. Consider the following modeling techniques to correct this weight issue (2-point Tee):
1. Add a node point on the branch piping located at the imaginary surface of the header pipe.
2. Select the internal piping, and Insert "Rigid Properties" over the length of this internal piping
3. Set Rigid properties to consider thermal expansion but to ignore weight
4. As shown in the reference 2-point tee page, take care of the SIF value.
Conclusion
Most of all AutoPIPE's components are correctly accounted for across the various reports. Any discrepancies of weight between these reports can be attributed to these few items until they are addressed.