American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2019

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

e-ISSN: 2320-0847 p-ISSN : 2320-0936
Volume-8, Issue-11, pp-62-74
www.ajer.org
Research Paper Open Access

Comparative research into the load-bearing capacity of horizontal

pressure vessels supported by saddles
Walther Stikvoort
Consultant Static Pressure Equipment & Structural Integrity
Wagnerlaan 37, 9402 SH, Assen, The Netherlands (NL)
 Corresponding Author: Walther Stikvoort

ABSTRACT: This article evaluates and compares permissible saddle reactions for horizontal pressure vessels
resting on two symmetrically placed saddles. Successively allowable saddle loads have been determined for a
pre-selected typical horizontal pressure vessel according to various recognized design codes. Control of the
circumferential compressive membrane plus bending stress at the horn of the saddles is central in the
consideration because it determines often the allowable support load. Limiting these stresses prevents so-called
"bulging" of the cylindrical shell over the saddle ends. Significant differences were found by comparing the
mutually results. Remarkable differences occur in particular between methods based on "Zick" compared to
methods based on "limit loads". The primary aim of this article is to provide engineers involved in the design of
pressure vessels with new insights into this matter in order to arrive at a sound and well - considered vessel
support design while ensuring structural integrity requirements.
KEYWORDS: saddle reactions, horizontal pressure vessel, circumferential compressive membrane plus bending
stress, bulging, "Zick" method, "limit load" method, support design, structural integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
Date of submission: 27-10-2019 Date of acceptance: 15-11-2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

I. INTRODUCTION
Horizontal pressure vessels are usually symmetrically supported with two saddle supports. More saddles
would result in static indeterminacy and difficulty in predicting the load distribution in the event of foundation
settlement. The methodology for calculating stresses in the vicinity of the support saddles was developed by
L.P.Zick [1] in the early 1950s and is still widely used by designers of horizontal pressure vessels. Zick's
analysis was based on the assumption that the supports are rigid and not connected to the vessel shell. In reality
most vessels have flexible supports that are welded onto the vessel shell. This means that Zick's analysis is
conservative for traditional saddle constructions. The L.P. Zick method has been adopted by many recognized
design codes including Rules for Pressure Vessels (RfPV) [2], ASME Section VIII-Division 2[3] and PD 5500
[4]. The current practice is to use the semi-empirical method developed by Zick which is based on beam theory
and various assumptions to simplify the problem. Due to these assumptions Zick´s method may not yield
accurate results but has proved to be sufficiently reliable in practice already for a considerably long period.
However vigilance is required in order not to underestimate the load carrying capacity of the vessel, by realizing
that the stresses are strongly localized in the area of the saddle horns, while the rest of the vessel is only
moderately stressed. This article focuses on the circumferential stresses at the horn of the saddle and at the end
of the wear plate since these are often the most important stresses. Moreover, in most cases those stresses
determine the allowable support load. In addition to the method developed by L.P.Zick, a limit load analysis
method was developed in a later period in the former DDR that was included in the so-called TGL standards [5].
This method is now in slightly modified form included in both AD 2000 [6] and EN 13445-3[7] and will also be
addressed in this article.

II. OBSERVATIONS CONSERNING WEAR PLATES

When calculating the circumferential stresses at the horn of the saddle, it is important to recognize the
influence of the wear plate that may be present between the cylindrical shell and the saddle. It is claimed that
such a wear plate has a stress-reducing effect if it is of sufficient dimensions. However, it appears that the

www.ajer.org Page 62
www.ajer.org
American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2019
various codes apply different criteria for this which make it difficult to obtain a reliable result. Clarity leaves
something to be desired. In practice, different interpretations are attributed to the influence of a wear plate.
In summary, the following conditions generally apply to both the saddles and the wear plates:
 Wear plate welded continuously around the cylindrical shell
 Width of the wear plate  b + 1.56 R. t [1][3] respectively w + 1.6 R. t [2] or b + 10t [4] with b =
width of saddle, R = mean radius of cylindrical shell and t = shell thickness
 Circumferential span of wear plate   + 10° [2] or  + 12° [3] with  = Subtended angle or saddle contact
angle
 Thickness of wear plate, maximum 2 times shell thickness (depending on applicable code) Corners of wear
plate rounded off with radius  3 times the wear plate thickness [2]
 Each support should extend at least 120° around and approximately 30 x vessel diameter [4] along the
vessel in order to transmit the reaction gradually into the shell wall
 One vessel support is fixed while the other support has slotted holes in the base plate for axial movement
when thermal strains occur
 Diameter to thickness ratios up to the order of 250 [4] (depending on applicable code)
 Material of wear plate preferably identical to shell material. In case that the wear plate material has a lower
allowable stress, the wear plate thickness must be corrected with the allowable stress ratio of both materials.
(depending on applicable code)

Factors Affecting Stress Distribution At Horn Of Saddles

Saddle horn area is the area in the vessel where wear plate just adjoins the vessel. In this area high
stresses are produced compared to the other vessel area. The following elements affect the magnitude of these
stresses:
 Saddle wrap (embracing) angle
 Saddle width
 Wear plate width (wear plate is synonymous with reinforcing plate and saddle plate)
 Distance of saddle from head
 Wear plate extension
 Wear plate thickness

Exemptions Regarding Wear Plates

The wear plate according to APPENDIX 2 does not satisfy the conditions of the relevant design code
for a vessel with an outside diameter of 2000 mm and a shell thickness of 10 mm. Therefore the value zero must
be entered for the wear plate thickness in the formulas for the determination of the circumferential compressive
membrane plus bending stress at the horn of the saddle.

Extended Wear Plate Dimensions (For "Zick" Based Analysis)

The wear plate according to APPENDIX 2 may be taken into account when calculating the
circumferential compressive membrane plus bending stress if it satisfy the following dimensions:
Width of the wear plate  w + 1.56 R m . t = 250 + 1.56 995 x 10 = 405.6 mm  Take: 410 mm
Subtended angle or saddle contact angle:  + 12° = 132°

Scope Of "Zick" Based Analysis

In determining the allowable saddle support reaction, it will be assumed that the allowable
circumferential compressive membrane plus bending stress is achieved at the horn of the saddle while the vessel
is under atmospheric pressure. The following cases will be calculated:
 A/R  0.5 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature
 A/R  0.5 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
 A/R  1.0 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature
 A/R  1.0 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
The above cases will be calculated according to the following design codes:
 RfPV- Sheet D 1105 § 3.2
 PD 5500 - Clause G.3.3.2.6.2
 ASME BPVC Section VIII-Division 2; Clause 4.15.3.5

www.ajer.org Page 63
www.ajer.org
American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2019
Formula Overview For Determining The Allowable Saddle Support Reaction
The table below shows the equations to determine the allowable saddle reactions that are derived from the
relevant design codes.

Design Code Equations for allowable saddle reactions

RfPV- Sheet D 1105 § 3.2
1.5 𝑓
𝐹=
1 6 𝑘3 . 𝑟. 𝐶
[ + 2 ]
4 𝑑 + 𝑑1 (𝑏 + 1.6 𝑟. 𝑑) 𝑏𝑒 ∙ 𝑑 2 + 𝑑1

PD 5500 - Clause G.3.3.2.6.2

1.25 𝑓
𝑊1 =
1 6 𝑘6 . 𝑟. 𝐶
[ + 2 ]
4 𝑡 + 𝑡1 (𝑏2 + 10𝑡) 𝑏𝑒 ∙ 𝑡 + 𝑡1

ASME BPVC Section VIII-Division 2; Clause 4.15.3.5

1.25 𝑆
𝑄 =
1 6 𝑘6 . 𝑅𝑚 . 𝐶
[ + ]
4 𝑡 + 𝑡𝑟 𝑏 + 1.56 𝑅𝑚 . 𝑡 𝑏𝑒 ∙ 𝑡 + 𝑡𝑟 2

Where:
F = W1 = Q = saddle reaction (N)
r = Rm = the mean vessel radius (mm)
t = d = the wall thickness of the vessel (mm)
t1 = d1 = thickness of wear plate (mm)
b = b2 = the width of the saddle (mm)
be = the smaller value of 4R and half the length between the tangent lines of the vessel (mm)
f = S = design strength (MPa) respectively foper @ operating condition and ftest @ hydrostatic test condition i.e.
f is respectively: foper = Re;m /1.5 (MPa) and ftest = Re/1.5 (MPa)
k3 = k6 = factor depending on saddle angle and the distance of saddle to the tangent line (see the table below) (-)
𝑏 −300 𝑚𝑚
C = 1 - with minimum 0.4 and maximum 1.0 (-)
𝐴
A = distance from saddle support to adjacent end of cylindrical part (mm)
Re = yield strength @ test temperature (MPa)
Re;m = yield strength @ operating temperature (MPa)

Saddle angle  k3 = k6 k3 = k6
A/R  0.5 A/R 1.0
120° 0.0132 0.0528
150° 0.0079 0.0316

NOTE: For 0.50 < A/R < 1.00 values for k3 and k6 should be obtained by linear interpolation of the values in
this table.
If the wear plate does not satisfy the conditions of the applicable design code, then the value 0 (zero) must be
entered for t1 or tr in the formulas for F , W1 and Q.

A notable difference has been observed in the equations with respect to F, W 1 and Q, namely that the term
relating to the circumferential bending stress in particular:
𝐹 .6 𝑘 3 .𝑟.𝐶 𝑊1 . 6 𝑘 6 .𝑟.𝐶 𝑄 . 6 𝑘 6 .𝑅𝑚 .𝐶
2
𝑏𝑒 ∙ 𝑑 + 𝑑 1 2 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑦 2
𝑏𝑒 ∙ 𝑡+𝑡 1
𝑎𝑛𝑑
𝑏𝑒 ∙ 𝑡+𝑡 𝑟 2 differ from each other in the term between brackets!
Moreover a paragraph has been included in [8] concerning "circumferential bending". This includes specific
conditions that relate to the shell - and wear plate thickness as well as the dimensions of the wear plate i.e. if A/R
 0.5(stiffened by the adjacent heads) and the wear plate extends R/10 above the horn of saddle then: t s = ts + tw
and ts2= ts2+ tw2, where ts = d = t and tw = d1 = tr. Note that if the saddle support is near the vessel end, then the
shell remains circular and the full section is available to resist bending. If not, then only a partial section is
available. The highest stress is often at the saddle horn, where the shell "bends" over the support and has little or
no resistance to radial deformation. More information on this topic can be found in [9].
Unfortunately, a solid explanation for all these differences could not be found.

www.ajer.org Page 64
www.ajer.org
American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2019
Numerical Elaborations "Zick" Based Analysis
Vessel and saddle data are included in APPENDIX 1.Typical saddle configuration is included in
APPENDIX 2.
CASE: A/R  0.5 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature
RfPV- Sheet D 1105 § 3.2
Input data: 1.5 f
f = 170.67 MPa @ 50°C respectively: 𝐹=
1 6 k 3 . r. C
176.67MPa @ 20°C; k3 = 0.0132; [ + 2 ]
4 d + d1 (b + 1.6 r. d) be ∙ d2 + d1
r = 995 mm; C = 1.0; d = 10 mm; d1 = 0 mm;
b = 250 mm; be = 3980 mm
Foperating = 988302 N Ftest = 988302 x 176.67/170.67 = 1023046 N
CASE: A/R  0.5 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
RfPV- Sheet D 1105 § 3.2
Input data: 1.5 f
f = 170.67 MPa @ 50°C respectively: 𝐹=
1 6 k 3 . r. C
176.67MPa @ 20°C; k3 = 0.0132; r = 995 mm; [ + 2 ]
4 d + d1 (b + 1.6 r. d) be ∙ d2 + d1
C = 1.0; d = 10 mm; d1 = 13 mm; b = 250 mm;
be = 3980 mm
Foperating = 2556394 N Ftest = 2556394 x 176.67/170.67 = 2646266 N
CASE: A/R  0.5 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature
PD 5500 - Clause G.3.3.2.6.2
Input data: 1.25 f
f = 170.67 MPa @ 50°C respectively: 𝑊1 =
1 6 k 6 . r. C
[ + ]
176.67MPa @ 20°C; k6 = 0.0132; r = 995 mm; 4 t + t1 (b2 + 10t) be ∙ t + t1 2
C = 1.0; t = 10 mm; t1 = 0 mm; b2 = 250 mm;
be = 3980 mm
Woperating = 791815 N Wtest = 791815 x 176.67/170.67 = 819651 N
CASE: A/R  0.5 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
PD 5500 - Clause G.3.3.2.6.2
Input data: 1.25 f
f = 170.67 MPa @ 50°C respectively: 𝑊1 =
1 6 k 6 . r. C
[ + ]
176.67MPa @ 20°C; k6 = 0.0132; 4 t + t1 (b2 + 10t) be ∙ t + t1 2
r = 995 mm; C = 1.0; t = 10 mm; t1 =13 mm;
b2 = 250 mm; be = 3980 mm
Woperating = 3115098 N Wtest = 3115098 x 176.67/170.67 = 3224611 N
CASE: A/R  0.5 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature
ASME Section VIII-Division 2; Clause 4.15.3.5
Input data: 1.25 S
𝑄 =
S = 170.67 MPa @ 50°C respectively: 1 6 k 6 . R m . C
[ + 2 ]
176.67MPa @ 20°C; k6 = 0.0132; 4 t + t 𝑟 b + 1.56 𝑅𝑚 . t b e ∙ t + t𝑟

Rm = 995 mm; C = 1.0; t = 10 mm; tr = 0 mm;

b = 250 mm; be = 3980 mm
Qoperating = 821680 N Qtest = 821680 x 176.67/170.67 = 850567 N

CASE: A/R  0.5 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
ASME Section VIII-Division 2; Clause 4.15.3.5
Input data: 1.25 S
𝑄 =
S = 170.67 MPa @ 50°C respectively: 1 6 k 6 . R m . C
[ + ]
176.67MPa @ 20°C; k6 = 0.0132; 4 t + t 𝑟 b + 1.56 𝑅𝑚 . t be ∙ t + t 𝑟 2
Rm = 995 mm; C = 1.0; t = 10 mm; tr = 13 mm;
b = 250 mm; be = 3980 mm
Qoperating = 3321606 N Qtest = 3321606 x 176.67/170.67 = 3438379 N

www.ajer.org Page 65
www.ajer.org
 American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2019
CASE: A/R  1.0 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature
RfPV- Sheet D 1105 § 3.2
Input data: 1.5 f
f = 170.67 MPa @ 50°C respectively: 𝐹=
1 6 k 3 . r. C
176.67MPa @ 20°C; k3 = 0.0528; [ + 2 2 ]
4 d + d1 (b + 1.6 r. d) be ∙ d + d1
r = 995 mm; C = 1.0; d = 10 mm;
d1 = 0 mm; b = 250 mm; be = 3980 mm
Foperating = 300111 N Ftest = 300111 x 176.67/170.67 = 310661 N
CASE: A/R  1.0 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
RfPV- Sheet D 1105 § 3.2
Input data: 1.5 f
f = 170.67 MPa @ 50°C respectively: 𝐹=
1 6 k 3 . r. C
176.67MPa @ 20°C; k3 = 0.0528; [ + 2 2 ]
4 d + d1 (b + 1.6 r. d) be ∙ d + d1
r = 995 mm; C = 1.0; d = 10 mm; d1 = 13 mm;
b = 250 mm; be = 3980 mm
Foperating = 797621 N Ftest = 797621 x 176.67/170.67 = 825661 N
CASE: A/R  1.0 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature
PD 5500 - Clause G.3.3.2.6.2
Input data: 1.25 f
f = 170.67 MPa @ 50°C respectively: 𝑊1 =
1 6 k 6 . r. C
[ + ]
176.67MPa @ 20°C; k6 = 0.0528; 4 t + t1 (b2 + 10t) be ∙ t + t1 2
r = 995 mm; C = 1.0; t = 10 mm; t1 = 0 mm;
b2 = 250 mm; be = 3980 mm
Woperating = 247082 N Wtest = 247082 x 176.67/170.67 = 255768 N
CASE: A/R  1.0 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
PD 5500 - Clause G.3.3.2.6.2
Input data: 1.25 f
f = 170.67 MPa @ 50°C respectively: 𝑊1 =
1 6 k 6 . r. C
[ + ]
176.67MPa @ 20°C; k6 = 0.0528; 4 t + t1 (b2 + 10t) be ∙ t + t1 2
r = 995 mm; C = 1.0; t = 10 mm; t1 =13 mm;
b2 = 250 mm; be = 3980 mm
Woperating = 1180145 N Wtest = 1180145 x 176.67/170.67 = 1221633 N
CASE: A/R  1.0 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature
ASME Section VIII-Division 2; Clause 4.15.3.5
Input data: 1.25 S
𝑄 =
S = 170.67 MPa @ 50°C respectively: 1 6 k 6 . R m . C
[ + ]
176.67MPa @ 20°C; k6 = 0.0528; 4 t + t 𝑟 b + 1.56 𝑅𝑚 . t be ∙ t + t 𝑟 2
Rm = 995 mm; C = 1.0; t = 10 mm; tr = 0 mm;
b = 250 mm; be = 3980 mm
Qoperating = 249916 N Qtest = 249916 x 176.67/170.67 = 258702 N

CASE: A/R  1.0 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
ASME Section VIII-Division 2; Clause 4.15.3.5
Input data: 1.25 S
𝑄 =
S = 170.67 MPa @ 50°C respectively: 1 6 k 6 . R m . C
[ + ]
176.67MPa @ 20°C; k6 = 0.0528; 4 t + t 𝑟 b + 1.56 𝑅𝑚 . t be ∙ t + t 𝑟 2
Rm = 995 mm; C = 1.0; t = 10 mm; tr = 13 mm; b
= 250 mm; be = 3980 mm
Qoperating = 1208611 N Qtest = 1208611 x 176.67/170.67 = 1251101 N

www.ajer.org Page 66
www.ajer.org
American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2019
In the graph below the allowable saddle loads expressed in kN are summarized.

The elaborated cases above shows that there is a considerable difference between the two cases dealt
with. In the case where the saddles are placed closer to the heads (A / R  0.5), the allowable saddle load varies a
factor of 2.64 to 3.3 than in the case where the saddles are more removed from the heads (A / R  1.0). Thus the
load-bearing capacity can be significantly increased by placing the saddles near the ends. Moreover with respect
to the influence of a wear plate that meets the requirements of the relevant code, the numerical elaboration shows
that this results in a factor 2.6 to 4.8 higher allowable saddle load.

Summary of saddle load capacities (lowest calculated values)

Allowable saddle load (N) Saddle location
during operating / hydrostatic test
791815 / 819651 (PD 5500) A/R  0.5 i.e. near the ends w/o wear plate
2556394/2646266 (RfPV) A/R  0.5 i.e. near the ends with wear plate
247082 / 255768 (PD 5500) A/R > 1.0 i.e. remote from the ends w/o wear plate
797621 / 825661 (RfPV) A/R > 1.0 i.e. remote from the ends with wear plate
Saddle reactions of selected base case horizontal pressure vessel Weight divided by two
Saddle reaction during operation 93654 N
Saddle reaction during hydro test 157397 N
Situations Usage factors pertaining to the considered condition
A/R  0.5 i.e. near the ends w/o wear plate Operation: 791815 / 93654 = 8.45
Hydro test: 819651 / 157397 = 5.2
A/R  0.5 i.e. near the ends with wear plate Operation: 2556394 / 93654 = 27.3
Hydro test: 2646266 / 157397 = 16.8
A/R  1.0 i.e. near the ends w/o wear plate Operation: 247082 / 93654 = 2.64
Hydro test: 255768 / 157397 = 1.62
A/R  1.0 i.e. near the ends with wear plate Operation: 797621 / 93654 = 8.52
Hydro test: 825661 / 157397 = 5.25

Note: Saddle data are obtained from APPENDIX 2

Supplementary calculations according to ASME Section VIII - Division 1

ASME BPVC Section VIII - Division 1[10] refers in G-6 which relates to horizontal vessel supports to
the publication by L.P. Zick "Stresses in Large Cylindrical Pressure Vessels on Two Saddle Supports" which
corresponds to reference [1].

www.ajer.org Page 67
www.ajer.org
 American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2019
The following cases are further elaborated:
Case # 1: A/R  0.5 ; wear plate width = 410 mm; wear plate thickness = 13 mm; wear plate contact angle = 132°
Case # 2: A/R  1.0 ; wear plate width = 410 mm; wear plate thickness = 13 mm; wear plate contact angle = 132°
Case # 3: A/R  0.5 ; wear plate width = 340 mm; wear plate thickness = 13 mm; wear plate contact angle = 132°
Case # 4: A/R  1.0 ; wear plate width = 340 mm; wear plate thickness = 13 mm; wear plate contact angle = 132°

Formula overview
Allowable saddle support reaction Q for operating respectively hydrostatic test condition at saddle horns
1.5 𝑆𝑎 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝. 0.9 𝑆𝑦
𝑄=
1 3 𝑘3
[ + ]
4 𝑡 + 𝑡𝑝 (𝑏 + 1.56 𝑅𝑜 . 𝑡) 2 𝑡 2 + 𝑡𝑝2

Allowable saddle support reaction Q for operating respectively hydrostatic test condition at wear plate
horns
1.5 𝑆𝑎 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝. 0.9 𝑆𝑦
𝑄=
1 3 𝑘3
[ + ]
4 𝑡 (𝑏 + 1.56 𝑅𝑜 . 𝑡) 2 𝑡2

Where:
Sa = Allowable stress at operating temperature = 117 MPa
Sy = Yield strength at test temperature = 265 MPa
t = Shell thickness = 10 mm ; tp = wear plate thickness = 13 mm
Ro = Outside radius of cylindrical shell = 1000 mm ; b = saddle width = 250 mm
k3 = Design factor depending on saddle angle and A/R ratio

Design factor A/R  0.5 A/R  1.0

k3 @  = 120° 0.0132 0.0525
k3 @  = 132° 0.0109 0.0431
Summary of calculation results
Cases Q - operating weight (w/o pressure) [N] Q - test weight (w/o pressure) [N] Q – Ratios saddle horns / wear
saddle horns / wear plate horns saddle horns / wear plate horns plate horns (-)
Case #1 2004500 / 779735 2724064 / 1059640 2.571
Case #2 549256 / 206695 746425 / 280893 2.657
Case #3 676102 / - (*) 918805 / - (*) n.a
Case #4 206695 / - (*) 280993 / - (*) n.a

Note that the "COMPRESS" Pressure Vessel Design Software has been used to obtain the above
results.
(*) Insufficient wear plate dimensions

Computations Based On Limit Load Analysis

AD 2000 - Merkblatt S3/2 [6] and EN 13445-3 Clause 16.8 [7] are almost identical and both stem from
the TGL standard [5]. However the main focus is on EN 13445-3 rather than on AD - Merkblatt S3/2 [6].
APPENDIX 3 shows a typical saddle support arrangement for a horizontal vessel.
Calculation of maximum allowable saddle load as per EN 13445- Part 3; Clause 16.8
The horn of the saddle is considered the most critical location for determining the permissible saddle
support reaction, therefore the following formula applies:

𝟎. 𝟗 𝝈𝒃,𝒂𝒍𝒍, 𝑫𝒊 𝒆𝒂 ∙ 𝒆𝒂
𝑭𝒎𝒂𝒙,𝒂𝒍𝒍. =
𝑲𝟕 𝑲𝟗 𝑲𝟏𝟎
Where:
𝐹𝑚𝑎𝑥 ,𝑎𝑙𝑙 . allowable support reaction force resulting from loading in circumferential direction at the horn of
the saddle (N)
𝜎𝑏,𝑎𝑙𝑙 , the bending limit stress of shell (MPa)
𝐷𝑖 inside diameter of cylindrical shell (mm)
𝑒𝑎 wall thickness of cylindrical shell (mm)
𝐾7 , 𝐾9 , 𝐾10 coefficients (-)

www.ajer.org Page 68
www.ajer.org
American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2019
The following load cases will be considered:

Parameters Case # 1 Case #2 Case # 3 Case # 4

with wear plate with wear plate with extended wear with extended wear
according Appendix 2 according Appendix 2 plate plate
a1 (mm) 495 995 495 995
l1 (mm) 6970 5970 6970 5970
 (°) 120 120 120 120
2 (°) 132 132 143 143
b2 (mm) 340 340 511 511
e2 (mm) 13 13 13 13
Formula overview
𝜎𝑏,𝑎𝑙𝑙 , = K1. K2.f (1 − 2.718282−𝛽 𝑐𝑜𝑠 )
𝐾4 =

K2 = 1.25 for design conditions respectively 1.05 for test condition
f = design strength for the considered condition

0.9 𝜎𝑏,𝑎𝑙𝑙 , 𝐷𝑖 𝑒𝑎 ∙ 𝑒𝑎 1.45 − 0.007505 𝛿

𝐹𝑚𝑎𝑥 ,𝑎𝑙𝑙 . = 𝐾7 =
𝐾7 𝐾9 𝐾10 𝑠𝑖𝑛(0.5 𝛿)

𝑎 𝑒𝑎 0.91𝑏1 0.65 60
𝛾 = 2.83 ( 1 ) ;𝛽= 𝐾9 = 1 −
𝐷𝑖 𝐷𝑖 𝐷𝑖 .𝑒𝑎 1+(6𝛾)2 𝛿

1 − 22 1
𝐾1 = 𝐾10 =
1 1 2 𝑏1 3 𝐷𝑖
+ 1 2 + + 1 2 + 1 − 22 12 1+ 𝛿 0.010472
3 3 𝐷𝑖 𝑒𝑎

𝐾4 𝑃 .𝐷𝑖 1 5
1 = −0.53 ; 2 = 𝐾11 =
𝐾7 𝐾9 𝐾10 𝑠𝑖𝑛 (0.5 𝛿) 2𝑒𝑎 𝐾2 .𝑓
3 𝐷𝑖
( 0.10472. 𝛿
𝑒𝑎
Nomenclature: See Appendix 1 & 3
Detailed elaboration of the above formulas for the various cases falls outside the scope of this article and is
therefore intentionally omitted. Hence, only the computation results are displayed in the next section .
Results Of Computations Obtained With The Aid Of "VES" Software Package From P3 Engineering
The table below shows the load limits of the saddles for the various load cases and the associated conditions
LOAD CASES (EN 13445-3; Clause 16.8 ) CASE #1 CASE #2 CASE #3 CASE #4
Operating incl. pressure (N) 1005627 978152 1545752 1496701
Operating w/o pressure (N) 599286 584997 1091445 1059374
Hydrostatic test incl. pressure (N) 1324199 1287131 2004718 1940286
Hydrostatic test w/o pressure (N) 744426 726676 1355780 1315942

LOAD CASES (AD 2000 ; Merkblatt S 3/2) CASE #1 CASE #2 CASE #3 CASE #4
Operating incl. pressure (N) 1271970 1233413 1858083 1796316
Operating w/o pressure (N) 759773 739961 1242866 1213535
Hydrostatic test incl. pressure (N) 1674168 1622011 2409559 2328379
Hydrostatic test w/o pressure (N) 943781 919170 1543873 1507438
The table below shows the allowable saddle loads that are ranked according to A / R ratio, with and without
effective wear plate and design code.
CASE: A/R  0.5 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature
RfPV

Foperating = 988302 N Ftest = 988302 x 176.67/170.67 = 1023046 N

CASE: A/R  0.5 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature
PD 5500
Woperating = 791815 N Wtest = 791815 x 176.67/170.67 = 819651 N
CASE: A/R  0.5 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature
ASME Section VIII - 2

Qoperating = 821680 N Qtest = 821680 x 176.67/170.67 = 850567 N

www.ajer.org Page 69
www.ajer.org
 American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2019

CASE: A/R  0.5 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
RfPV

Foperating = 2556394 N Ftest = 2556394 x 176.67/170.67 = 2646266 N

CASE: A/R  0.5 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
PD 5500
Woperating = 3115098 N Wtest = 3115098 x 176.67/170.67 = 3224611 N
CASE: A/R  0.5 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
ASME Section VIII - 2

Qoperating = 3321606 N Qtest = 3321606 x 176.67/170.67 = 3438379 N

CASE: A/R  1.0 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature
RfPV

Foperating = 300111 N Ftest = 300111 x 176.67/170.67 = 310661 N

CASE: A/R  1.0 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature
PD 5500

Woperating = 247082 N Wtest =247082x 176.67/170.67 = 255768 N

CASE: A/R  1.0 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature
ASME Section VIII - 2

Qoperating = 249916 N Qtest = 249916 x 176.67/170.67 = 258702 N

CASE: A/R  1.0 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
RfPV

Foperating = 797621 N Ftest = 797621 x 176.67/170.67 = 825661 N

CASE: A/R  1.0 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
PD 5500

Woperating = 1180145 N Wtest = 1180145 x 176.67/170.67 =1221633 N

CASE: A/R  1.0 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
ASME Section VIII - 2

Qoperating = 1208611 N Qtest = 1208611 x 176.67/170.67 = 1251101 N

The allowable saddle support reactions for four different cases calculated according to the indicated design code
are presented in the table below.

Overview of allowable saddle support reactions (N) @ operating vs. test temperature

DESIGN CODE CASE CASE CASE CASE Mutual ratios of the

YELLOW BLUE GREEN GREY different cases
RfPV (NL) 988302 2556394 300111 797621 0.213:0.551:0.065:0.172
1023046 2646266 310661 825661
PD 5500 (UK) 791815 3115098 247082 1180145 0.148:0.584:0.046:0.221
819651 3224611 255768 1221633
ASME VIII-2 (USA) 821680 3321606 249916 1208611 0.147:0.593:0.045:0.216
850567 3438379 258702 1251101
ASME VIII-1 (USA) 676102 779735 206695 549256 0.306:0.353:0.093:0.248
918805 1059640 280993 746425
EN 13445 (EU) 599286 1091445 584997 1059374 0.180:0.327:0.175:0.318
744426 1355780 726676 1315942
AD 2000 - S3/2 (D) 759773 1242866 73996 1213535 0.192:0.314:0.187:0.307
943781 1543873 919170 1507438
KEY CASES:
YELLOW : A/R  0.5 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature or insufficient wear plate dimensions
BLUE : A/R  0.5 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature
GREEN : A/R  1.0 w/o wear plate @ operating and test temperature or insufficient wear plate dimensions
GREY : A/R  1.0 with wear plate @ operating and test temperature

www.ajer.org Page 70
www.ajer.org
American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2019

Although the graph above relates to the situation during operation (saddle support reaction is half the
weight during operation), it can be assumed that the mutual relationships during the hydrostatic test temperature
correspond to those during the operation.
Mutual Ratios of Permitted Saddle Reactions During Operation
CASE RfPV PD 5500 ASME VIII - 2 ASME VIII - 1 EN 13445 AD 2000 – S 3/2
(NL) (UK) (USA) (USA) (EU) (D)
YELLOW 0.213 0.171 0.177 0.146 0.129 0.164
BLUE 0.211 0.257 0.274 0.064 0.091 0.103
GREEN 0.129 0.106 0.107 0.089 0.251 0.318
GREY 0.133 0.196 0.201 0.092 0.176 0.202
Lowest Highest
III. DISCUSSION
In practice, saddle supports are usually provided with a wear plate (see APPENDIX 2) that is
continuous-ly welded to the cylindrical shell. In order to be able to take into account the stress-reducing effect of
such a plate, the plate must meet certain dimensional requirements. When applying standardized saddle supports
it often appears in practice that the dimensions do not meet the specified code requirements and their thickness is
therefore generally left out of consideration. Of course, in practice, if there is a need for this, the wear plate can
be given such dimensions that it can be taken into account in the saddle calculations. It also appears that in the
various design codes there are different views on the interpretation of incorporating the wear plate into the
calculations. This can give rise to significant differences in occurring stresses in the vicinity of the saddles.
Particular in EN 13445-3 and AD 2000-Merkblatt S 3 / 2, there is potential for confusion because of the
assumption that a wear plate (reinforcing plate) and also a so-called saddle plate are present, although AD 2000 –
S 3/2 states that the procedure is also valid without reinforcing plate. It would be desirable for the relevant code
committee to pay attention to this crucial aspect, which should lead to an adjustment of the relevant design code,
which will aim to remove any ambiguity. The information presented will assist in the evaluation of the load
acting on the saddle support, based on the assumption that the circumferential compressive membrane plus
bending stress at the horn of the saddle is the most limiting factor.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
The key findings of this research are as follows:
 The allowable saddle loads (blue bars) calculated according to RfPV, PD 5500 or ASME VIII-2 which
method initially has been developed by L.P. Zick and where the saddles are placed close to the heads (A / R
 0.5) are substantially higher than calculated according to the limit load-based method as included in EN
13445-3 and AD 2000 S3/2. The prerequisite for this is however that the saddles are provided with a

www.ajer.org Page 71
www.ajer.org
American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2019
continuously welded wear plate to the cylindrical shell with sufficient dimensions according to the
applicable code. The factor between the extremes is between 2.06 and 4.26. The case calculated according to
ASME VIII-1 is an exception to this which is mainly caused by a considerably lower (approx. 31%)
allowable stress.
 For the situation with the saddles in the vicinity of the heads (A/R  0.5) without a wear plate or a wear
plate of insufficient dimensions (yellow bars) , the mutual differences in permissible support reactions are
less extreme. If we conveniently ignore the case calculated according to ASME VIII-1, then there is a factor
of 1.65 between the values calculated according to the L.P. Zick method and those according to the limit-
load method.
 In the case of saddles not placed close to the heads, i.e. A/R  1.0 without wear plate or insufficient wear
plate dimensions (green bars) , it is noticeable that the calculated allowable saddle load according to the L.P.
Zick method is considerably lower than that according to the limit-load method. The difference amounts a
factor of 2.47 to 3.58.
 In the case where A/R  1.0 and a wear plate of sufficient dimensions according to the applicable code (grey
bars) is applied, it is noticeable that with the exception of the calculated value according to ASME VIII-1
the values according to PD 5500 and ASME VIII -2 almost corresponds to the calculated values according
to EN 13445-3 and AD 2000 S3/2. The mutual difference here varies between approx. 2.8 to 11.4 %. The
allowable saddle support loads calculated according to RfPV and ASME VIII-1 differ considerably from
each other, i.e. about 30%. The differences with the other calculated values are even more significant. The
maximum difference amounts a factor of 2.21.
 In general it can be observed that the differences in the calculated allowable saddle support reactions are
quite substantial. In particular the differences between the ones on L.P. Zick - based method and the limit-
load based method (blue bars) are quite striking. Furthermore, we can conclude that a correct interpretation
with regard to incorporating a wear plate in the calculation is crucial and that doubt about it must be
removed. The relevant codes must provide more clarity on this.
 It is inexplicable that substantial differences exist in "saddle load capacity" for the case of saddles placed
near the heads which are provided with a wear plate of sufficient dimensions between "Zick" based or "limit
load" based analysis. Follow-up studies are desirable to provide clarity and insight into this matter.
Numerical analyzes (FEA) offer the possibility to verify the methods.
 It appears that AD 2000 and EN 13445 (Limit Load Method) does not distinguish between A/R  0.5 or
A/R  1.0 , while this is clearly the case with the "Zick" methodology. In other words, saddles placed near
the ends do not lead to a substantial increase in their load capacity in the case of AD 2000 and EN 13445.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author would like to thank Alfred van der Voet from P3 Engineering (the Netherlands) for making
their software package VES available for performing a considerable number of code calculations. Moreover I
want to thank Keith Kachelhofer from MacAljon Fabrication / MacAljon Engineering (USA) for his efforts with
regard to performing a number of ASME Code calculations with the aid of COMPRESS Pressure Vessel Design
Software.
REFERENCES
[1]. Zick,L.P., 1951, "Stresses in Large Horizontal Cylindrical Pressure Vessels on Two Saddle Supports", Welding Journal Research
Supplement, 30(9), pp. 435 - 445, and revision of January 1971.
[2]. Rules for Pressure Vessels, Sheet D 1105 "Horizontal cylinder on two saddle supports", issue 02 - 2012, Sdu Publishers, The Hague,
The Netherlands.
[3]. ASME BPVC Section VIII-Division 2, 2017 - Alternative Rules.
[4]. PD 5500: 2018, "Specification for unfired fusion welded pressure vessels", BSI - UK.
[5]. TGL 32903/17, edition June 1982: "Behälter und Apparate. Festigkeitsberechnung, Schalen bei Belastung durch Tragelemente".
[6]. AD 2000 - Merkblatt S3/2; "Verification of load-carrying capacity for horizontal vessels on saddle supports",February 2014 edition.
[7]. EN 13445 - 3, "Unfired pressure vessels - Part 3": Design; Issue 5: 2018.
[8]. Dennis R.Moss and Michael Basic, "Pressure Vessel Design Manual" Procedure 4-10;Fourth Edition, Elsevier Publications.
[9]. Pressure Vessel Newsletter, Volume 2016, July Issue, pp 5 - 15 by CoDesign Engineering LLC; Ramesh Tiwari.
[10]. ASME BPVC Section VIII-Division 1,2017 - Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels.

www.ajer.org Page 72
www.ajer.org
American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2019
APPENDIX 1
Vessel and saddle data summary
Design conditions:
Quantity Symbol Value Unit
Calculation temperature T=m 50 °C
Internal pressure P 1.5 MPa
Hydrostatic test pressure PT 2.145 MPa
Internal fluid density operating  510 Kg/m3
Internal fluid density hydrotest  1000 Kg/m3
Weld joint efficiency z 1 -
Corrosion allowance c 0 mm
Wall tolerance - 0.0 mm

Materials:
Quantity Symbol Value Unit Remark
Nominal design stress of shell and wear plate f=S 170.67 MPa P265GH

Shell and Head dimensions:

Quantity Symbol Value Unit OD head: 2000 mm; Depth: 503.65 mm
Outside diameter De 2000 mm Dimensions acc. DIN 28013 ; Type Korbbogen
Inside diameter Di 1980 mm Material: P265GH acc. EN 10028-2
Corrosion allowance c 0 mm Tensile strength: 410 MPa
Length of cylindrical part L= l1 7960 mm Yield strength @20°C: 265 MPa respectively 256 MPa@ 50°C
Actual thickness en = t 10 mm Thickness korbbogen head: 10 mm AF
Analysis thickness ea = t 10 mm Nominal design stress: 170.67 MPa @ 50°C and 176.67 @20°C

Saddle data:
Quantity Symbol Value Unit
Included angle of saddle  = 120 degree (°)
Saddle width b1 = b = w 250 mm
Distance to adjacent head a1 = A 495 resp. 995 mm

Wear plate design data:

Quantity Symbol Value Unit Equation
Width of wear plate b2 = wp 340 mm
Critical width wear plate K11 Di + 1.5 b1 510.2 mm 5
b1 = w K11 =
3 Di
( 0.10472. δ
ea
Distance from saddle horn to reinforcing a2 105 resp. mm
(wear) plate 198
Included angle of wear plate 2 132 resp. (°)
143
Thickness of wear plate e2 = tw 13 mm
Combined effective thickness ec 16.4 mm ec = ea 2 + e2 2
Material identical to shell material
Note: The wear plate may only be considered as a reinforcement plate if it satisfy the required conditions

Weights of vessel and contents:

Quantity Symbol Value Unit
Total weight of empty vessel WE 53937 / 5500 N / kg
Weight of content during operating WC,OP 133370/13600 N / kg
Total weight of vessel during operating WOP 187307/ 19100 N / kg
Weight of content during Hydrotest WC,T 260857 / 26600 N / kg
Total weight of vessel during Hydrotest WHT 314793 / 32100 N / kg
Maximum vertical force at saddle F=Q 157397 / 16050 N / kg

www.ajer.org Page 73
www.ajer.org
American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2019
APPENDIX 2
Saddle configuration

APPENDIX 3 - Saddle support arrangement

(Source: The informative images below are derived from the VES user manual from P3 Engineering, Delft - The
Netherlands)

a1 Distance from saddle support to adjacent end of cylindrical part

a3 Length of equivalent cylindrical shell
b1 Axial width of saddle support
b2 Width of reinforcement plate
l1 Distance between two successive saddles
L Length of cylindrical part (including cylindrical part of heads)
Hi Internal head height

Saddle cross-section with reinforcement (wear) plate

Di Inner shell diameter
en Nominal shell wall thickness
a2 Distance from horn of saddle support to end of reinforcement plate
δ Included angle of saddle support (in degrees)
δ2 Included angle of reinforcement plate (in degrees)

Walther Stikvoort "Comparative research into the load-bearing capacity of horizontal

pressure vessels supported by saddles" American Journal of Engineering Research
(AJER), vol. 8, no. 11, 2019, pp 62-74

www.ajer.org Page 74
www.ajer.org