The Integration of Design Software (PVElite, AutoCAD, Caesar II) in Pressure Vessel and Piping Engineering

Abstract

Effective design of pressure vessels and piping relies on the integration of CAD and CAE software to guarantee structural integrity and compliance with industry standards. This paper analyzes the integration of PVElite, AutoCAD, and Caesar II, focusing on its impact on design accuracy and its support for advanced analysis. The integrated workflow is explored, encompassing initial 3D modeling using AutoCAD, pressure vessel design and analysis using PVElite (following ASME Section 8), and pipe stress analysis using Caesar II (applying codes such as B31.3). The research investigates how this integration reduces errors in stress calculations, optimizes the placement of supports, and improves the accuracy of material quantity estimations. The paper also discusses the challenges of maintaining data integrity across platforms and emphasizes the importance of a unified modeling environment, providing examples from real-world applications.

Introduction

I. Importance of Pressure Vessel and Piping Systems

Pressure vessel and piping systems are critical in various industries, especially oil and gas, for storing, transporting, and processing fluids and gases. Due to the high risks involved, including environmental hazards and safety concerns, their design requires high integrity, precision, and adherence to engineering codes.

II. Evolution of Design Tools

• Traditional Methods: Manual drafting and stress analysis.

• Modern Tools:

  • AutoCAD – for 2D/3D CAD modeling of layouts.

  • PVElite – for pressure vessel design based on ASME codes.

  • Caesar II – for pipe stress analysis (e.g., B31.3 compliance).

However, integrating these tools has been a challenge due to manual data transfers, leading to inefficiencies and errors.

III. Software Integration Case Study

Objective: Investigate how integrating AutoCAD, PVElite, and Caesar II improves design accuracy and efficiency.

A. Caesar II – Piping Stress Analysis

• Modeling: Created 3D model of pipelines; applied material data and support locations.

• Results: Displacement at Node 210 = 1.068 mm.

• Optimization: Hanger placement reduced Stress Intensity Factor (SIF) from 1.068 to 0.860.

B. AutoCAD – Sprinkler System Design

• Designed sprinkler systems with equal and reducing tees.

• Created configurations for 1 LPM and 3 LPM flow rates.

• Support structure designed using IS 2850 angles.

C. PVElite – Pressure Vessel Design

• Modeled pressure vessels (e.g., SHELL2: Ø 3200 mm, L = 250 cm, t = 16 mm).

• Materials: SA-516 70 (shell/head) and SA-106 B (nozzles).

• MAWP for SHELL2 = 12.701 kgf/cm²; Hydrostatic test pressure = 12.456 kgf/cm².

IV. Key Benefits of Software Integration

• Improved Accuracy: Fewer manual errors during data transfer.

• Design Efficiency: Reduced iteration cycles, faster development.

• Enhanced Collaboration: Better coordination across engineering teams.

• Stress Optimization: Use of Caesar II helped identify and reduce critical stress points.

V. Practical Applications

• Case studies from Mahathi Infra Services Pvt Ltd and projects like the Uganda pipeline and IOCL sprinkler system demonstrate real-world application of integrated software workflows.

VI. Future Directions

1. Improved Software Interoperability: Seamless connection between CAD/CAE tools (e.g., PVElite ↔ Caesar II ↔ CFD/FEA).

2. AI & ML for Design Optimization: Predict failure points, optimize configurations using historical data.

3. Digital Twin Technology: Real-time simulations for monitoring and predictive maintenance.

4. Advanced Materials & Fabrication: Explore composites, 3D printing, and new welding methods for improved performance.

Conclusion

The integration of AutoCAD, PVElite, and Caesar II significantly improves the design quality, safety, and efficiency of pressure vessel and piping systems. These tools, when used in a coordinated workflow, not only streamline operations but also enable safer and more cost-effective solutions across industrial projects.

References

[1] Apurva Pendbhaje, Mahesh Gaikwad, Nitin Deshmukh and Rajkumar Patil, “Design and Analysis of Pressure Vessel”, International journal of innovative research in Science and Technology, 2(3): 28-34, 2014. [2] Adithya M and Patnayak M.M.M. “Finite Element Analysis of Horizontal reactor Pressure Vessel supported on saddles”, International journal of innovative research in Science and Technology, 2(7): 3213-3220, 2013. [3] Vishal V. Saidpatil and Arun S. Thakare. “Design & weight optimization of Pressure Vessel due to thickness using finite element analysis.” International Journal of Emerging Engineering, Research and Technology, 2(3): 1-8, 2014. [4] Farhad Nabhani, Temilade Ladokun and Vahid Askari. “Reduction of Stresses in Cylindrical Pressure Vessels Using Finite Element Analysis.” Finite Element Analysis - From Biomedical Applications to Industrial Developments, 2012 edited by Dr. David Moratal (Ed.), 379-90. InTech, [5] Shaik Abdul Lathuef and K. Chandrasekhar. “Design and structural analysis of pressure vessel due to change of nozzle location and shell thickness.” International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and studies 1(II): 218-221, 2012. [6] Zick L.P. “Stresses in large horizontal cylindrical Pressure vessel on two saddle supports.” The welding journal research supplement 950-970. Accessed September 1959. [7] Lloyd E. Brownell and Edwin H. Young. 1959. Process Equipment Design, New York, John Wiley and Sons Inc.

Copyright

Copyright © 2025 Shubham Pal Singh. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.