ASME DIV-2 "STRESS INTENSITY" or "VON MISSES EQUIVALENT STRESS&qu

[BPVFEA]

1)
Refer Following Clause from Div-2
""5.E.6.1 a) General Primary Membrane EQUIVALENT STRESS (Pm) – evaluate the through thickness stress distribution
from the numerical analysis of the equivalent plate for mechanical plus pressure loading. The membrane stress is determined by linearization of the through thickness stress distribution. The maximum STRESS INTENSITY, Pm , shall satisfy the following:""

2) Now refer following Cl.
""5.E.6.2 Primary Membrane (General or Local) Plus Primary Bending Plus Secondary EQUIVALENT STRESS ( PL+PB +Q )– if a fatigue analysis is required, determine the linearized surface stresses from the numerical analysis of the equivalent plate for mechanical, pressure, and thermal loading. The maximum primary plus secondary EQUIVALENT STRESS,( PL+PB+Q) shall satisfy the following ""

Queries -
1) Why ASME has used different wording ( "STRESS INTENSITY" in one clause and "EQUIVALENT STRESS" ) when nature of both clauses is similar.
2) What is correct here "Stress Intensity" or 'Von Misses Equivalent Stress". As per Cl.5.2.2 Elastic Stress Analysis Method (Under Protection Against Plastic Collapse") code specifies to use Von Misses Equivalent stress.
3) Does it mean tubesheet analysis is still based on Tresca Criteria?

Thanks in advance

 

[TGS4]

Equivalent stress should be used throughout the new Code. Congratulations, apparently you have found one of several location where the term "Stress Intensity" was not corrected.

Please submit an inquiry to the ASME Code Committee so that we can fix that reference.