V-Rep 79-4

Return to Index

Valve Clamp Ring Stress Analysis

Valve Clamp Ring Stress Analysis
by Abstract
M. J. Kirik The role of a clamp ring joint for use on a
Supervisory
Research Engineer, valve is defined. The results of elastic joint
Applied Mechanics theory are used to show the importance of
Valve Engineering the relative stiffnesses of the joint members
and Research, Flow in determining the load in the clamp ring.
Control Division A conventional approach to the design of
Rockwell International
the central portion of a clamp ring using
First Published 1979
primary stress equations is discussed, fol-
lowed by an axisymmetric finite element
analysis which establishes the maximum
load capacity without yielding of a conven-
tionally designed clamp ring. Further, elas-
tic-plastic finite element analysis shows that
substantial overload capacity exists
through plastic deformation. Finally, clamp
ring body axial stress from the finite ele-
ment analysis is compared to that from an
equation in Appendix Z to Section VIII of
the ASME B&PV Code and demonstrates
the conservatism of that equation.
Nomenclature
C1 = clearance between the yoke
outside radius and the clamp lip
inside radius
C2 = clearance between the hub outside
radius and the clamp body inside
radius
h = overall clamp ring height in axial
direction
He = external axial load on clamp ring
joint
Hp = axial preload due to bolting on
clamp ring
Hr = resultant or design axial clamp
ring load
kc = stiffness of clamp ring
kh = combined stiffness of clamped
hubs
P = valve actuator load
r1 = clamp lip inside radius
ra = hub outside radius
rh = hub/clamp ring contact surface
outside radius
ri = clamp inside radius
ry = yoke outside radius
ta = clamp body thickness
ts - clamp lip shear thickness
m - friction angle at hub/clamp
contact surface slope angle of
hub/clamp contact surface
f = slope angle of hub/clamp contact
surface
Introduction
A clamp or lock ring performs the function
of clamping together axially-adjacent,
axisymmetric structures through the conver-
sion of circumferential bolt load to an axial
clamp load. The connection of the common
street fire hydrant to the upright line from
the supply main under the street is made
frequently with a clamp ring and may be a
familiar example. Clamp rings are used to
join pipes, pipes and fittings and major
valve components, which is the use
described in this paper.
Two clamp ring joints are shown on the
valve in Figure 1; the upper clamp ring
joins the actuator to the yoke and the
lower clamp ring joins the yoke to the
valve body. A typical clamp ring assembly
is shown in Figure 2 and consists of two C-
shaped segments positioned end-to-end
and bolting. A section through the central
portion of a clamp ring and the clamped
hubs of the members to be connected is
depicted in Figure 3. During joint assem-
bly, the bolts are tightened (preloaded),
which causes the clamp ring to be drawn
in radially and to develop an axial clamp
preload on the hubs through the wedging
action of the sloped clamp ring/hub con-
tact surfaces. The gap between the clamp
lugs (see Figure 2) prevents lug-to-lug con-
tact as the bolts are tightened, contact
which would prevent effective conversion
of bolt load to clamp load.
2
Valve Clamp Ring Stress Analysis
Several aspects of clamp ring stress analy- finite element method can be used to
sis are covered in this paper: transfer of establish clamp ring adequacy by deter-
loads to the ring, a conventional method of mining the clamp load which initiates
clamp ring design, finite element analysis yielding.
of a conventionally designed clamp ring Further, it will be shown by elastic-plastic
and comparison of a finite element model finite element analysis that the clamp ring
stress to an ASME B&PV Code equation has substantial overload capacity beyond
value. the load which first causes yielding.
Just the central portion of a clamp ring seg- ACTUATOR Additional protection is thus provided
ment (between the clamp lugs) is consid- against gross deformation or failure due to
ered. The clamp lugs and bolting are omit- unanticipated loading.
ted because their stress analyses are essen- Finally, the equation from Appendix Z to
tially straight-forward. Section VIII – Division 1 of the ASME B&PV
In stress analysis or design it is important ACTUATOR Code for axial stress in the clamp body is
CLAMP RING
to have accurate knowledge of the loading briefly discussed in comparison to the finite
on a structure. Therefore, loading situations element result.
for a valve clamp ring joint will be covered
along with the factors affecting transfer of
joint loads to the clamp ring.
It will be shown that the basic dimensions
of the clamp ring section in Figure 3 can
CLAMP LUGS
be established using a conventional design YOKE
approach based on the valve actuator
load acting to separate the joint, equilibri-
um equations for certain average primary YOKE CLAMP RING

stresses and stress limits which experience

has shown to be adequately conservative.
This is a quick, routine method of clamp VALVE BODY
CENTRAL
ring design. PORTION

Occasionally, a clamp ring of conventional

design must be considered for an applica-
tion where the clamp load is greater than
the design load. This can occur on a valve
requiring an unusually high actuator load
for valve operation or when seismic load
must be considered. In such a situation the

Figure 1: Use of clamp rings on a valve. Figure 2: Clamp ring configuration.

3
Valve Clamp Ring Stress Analysis
Clamp Loading clamped (or bolted) joints is that the pre- the contact surfaces. Because of this, a
A clamp ring joint is subjected to internal load in the clamp (or bolt) remains case can be made for assuming that the
or self-contained loads that are caused by unchanged when an external load is friction angle is negligibly small compared
the bolt preloading during joint assembly, applied to the joint, if that external load is to the contact surface angle. On the other
and to external loads that are transmitted not greater than the preload. With this mis- hand, it is preferable to measure Hp and
through the joint. An external load that understanding, it would be concluded that Wp experimentally and infer a value for m
must be carried through a valve clamp ring the maximum load to which the clamp ring from equation (1).
joint is the actuator force exerted when is subjected is the clamp preload and, As discussed in the following section on
closing a valve. therefore, the preload would be taken as external loading, the value of the clamp
the design clamp load. However, this is not ring/hub preload is usually taken equal in
In determining the design axial clamp ring
the case. Any external load acting in ten- magnitude to the maximum external joint
load, Hr, acting at the clamp contact sur-
sion on the preloaded joint will cause an load in tension. For a valve, this is normal-
faces, it is important to be aware of how
increase in clamp load beyond the preload ly the actuator load, P, exerted while clos-
an external load on the joint affects the
value. This increase will be a fraction of ing the valve. Joint assembly practice
bolt-induced preload in the clamp ring. A
the external load and depend on the elas- and/or experiments should establish the
common misconception with regard to
tic properties of the joint members. The value of friction angle to be used in equa-
sum of the preload and the fraction of the tion (1) to obtain the bolt preload, Wp,
rh = 6.763 in.
external load acting axially on the clamp necessary to develop a preload of Hp = P
ring should be used as the design axial in the clamp ring.
clamp ring load.
r1 = External Load
6.495 in.
CLAMP LIP Preload Elastic joint analysis [1,2] reveals that an
b Preloading the joint by tightening the bolts external load acting on a joint can have a
induces loads of equal magnitude in the significant effect on the clamp preload and
ts = clamp and across the hubs. It can be
0.976 in. on the contact load at the hub-to-hub inter-
b shown that the bolt preload, Wp, neces- face in the plane of section a-a in Figure
YOKE HUB
sary to produce an axial clamp preload, 3. If the external load acts to separate the
CLAMP
Hp, is expressed by (also see equation (3) joint, as an actuator load would do for a
a a in Appendix Z of the ASME B&PV Code): valve closing operation, then the load in
BODY HUB
ta =
the clamp ring increases beyond the pre-
ri = 6.935 in.
0.973 in. load value.
10°
h = 4.31 in.
This can be deduced from the equation
where f is the slope angle of the contact below for total axial clamp ring load [1]:
z
surface (10 degrees for the joint shown in
20° Figure 3) and m is the friction angle (the
arc-tangent of the coefficient of friction for
r the contact surfaces). As the bolts are tight-
ened, the clamp ring segments are usually where He is an external load acting on the
Figure 3: Cross section of central portion of joint and kc and kh are the stiffnesses of
clamp ring and clamped hubs. malleted to reduce the effects of friction at

4
Valve Clamp Ring Stress Analysis
the clamp ring and the hubs, respectively
This equation indicates that a fraction of
any external joint load is always added to
the clamp ring preload.
For the case where the axial component of
the clamp ring preload, Hp, is set equal to
the actuator load for valve closing, P, and
this actuator load is also acting externally
on the joint, the resultant or maximum
axial clamp ring load, Hr, will be between
P and 2P. When the stiffness of the hubs is
greater than the stiffness of the clamp ring,
the resultant axial clamp ring load is
between P and 1.5P; when the reverse is
true, the resultant axial clamp ring load is
between 1.5P and 2P. For the joint shown
in Figure 3, a theoretical estimate of the
resultant axial clamp ring load is 1.5P and
not P, as would be expected if elastic joint
effects were not considered. Methods for
estimating the stiffness of elastic joint com-
ponents are given in [1,2].
Thus it is important to consider the elastici-
ty of the joint components in determining
the maximum or design clamp load.
Alternatively, a design clamp load of 2P
can be used conservatively.
Elastic joint analysis also reveals that the
reason for setting the clamp preload equal
to the actuator load value is that the joint
will not separate at the hub-to-hub interface
when the actuator load is applied to the
joint, regardless of the stiffnesses of the
hubs and clamp ring. It can be shown that
a separated joint has less stiffness than a
non-separated joint, which may be of
significance depending on the application.
A consequence of possible importance in
seismic analysis is that a structure with a yielding. One is the average axial stress at
clamp ring joint will have lower fundamen- section a-a (saa). Control of this stress pre-
tal natural frequency if the joint hubs vents the ring from pulling apart. The sec-
separate during the vibration cycle. ond stress is the average shear stress on
Moreover, the frequency will be sensitive the ring lip at section b-b (tbb) which is
to the amount of joint separation. Another located at the extremity of the hubs being
consideration is that a joint which clamped. Control of this stress prevents the
separates can reduce fatigue life in a clamp lips from being sheared off. An
cyclic load application. additional stress to be considered is the
The preceding discussion on the effects of contact stress on the clamp lip (sc) due to
external (actuator) load on the clamp pre- the clamping action on the hubs.
load ignores the influence of contact All of these stresses are easily calculated
surface friction. However, it is the author’s from static equilibrium with the design
opinion that even with friction taken into axial clamp ring load and are expressed
account the effects predicted by elastic by:
joint analysis should be substantially average axial stress at section a-a:
similar. The main effect of friction at the
contact surface should be to restrict out-
ward radial deflection of the clamp ring
lips due to application of the external load
and thus reduce the amount of additional average shear stress at section b-b:
load induced in the bolts and bending
stress in the clamp ring body. Ignoring
friction effects is, therefore, a conservative
approach.
average contact stress on clamp lip:
Conventional Design
One approach to the design of clamp
rings is to limit certain average primary
stresses and the bearing stress at the
Important stresses other than those men-
contact surfaces, all due to the design
tioned here occur in the clamp ring, but
axial clamp ring load. The equation and
these stresses are not calculable using sim-
relations presented in this section are
ple equations. An indirect approach to the
sufficient to obtain the basic dimensions of
control of these stresses is to limit the aver-
a clamp ring.
age stresses at sections a-a and b-b and at
An examination of the clamp ring cross the hub/clamp contact surface to low val-
section shown in Figure 3 would indicate ues compared to the yield strength.
that there are two average primary stresses
An example of limits on stresses calculated
which must be limited to prevent excessive
5
Valve Clamp Ring Stress Analysis
from equations (2), (3) and (4) that
experience has shown to be satisfactory
for valve clamp rings are: 5000, 5000
and 20000 psi (34, 34 and 140 MPa),
respectively, for SA 216, WCB carbon
steel. This is a common clamp ring materi-
al in the valve industry and has a minimum
yield strength of 36000 psi (250 MPa) at
room temperature [3].
There are six basic design dimensions
shown for the clamp ring in Figure 3. Of
these six dimensions, three must be chosen
to satisfy the stress limits previously men-
tioned; the other three depend on the
yoke, valve body and hub dimensions. To
illustrate this, a design approach might be:
• Determine the maximum external joint
load (say the valve actuator load P).
• Assume that the design axial clamp ring
load is Hr = 1.5P (or use a coefficient
other than 1.5 consistent with
experience).
• Select a clearance C1, between the yoke
outside radius, ry (not indicated in Figure
3) mind the clamp lip inside radius r1.
Then:
r1 = ry + C1
The clearance C1, must prevent clamp
lip contact with the yoke when the clamp
ring is preloaded.
• Calculate the hub contact outside radius,
rh, from equation (4) using the average
contact stress limit.
• Calculate the clamp lip thickness, ts, at
section b-b from equation (3) using the
section b-b stress limit.
• Select a clearance C2, between the hub
outside radius, ra not indicated in Figure
3), and the clamp inside radius ri. Then:
ri = ra + C2
The clearance C2 must prevent clamp
ring contact with the hub when the
clamp ring is preloaded.
• Calculate the clamp thickness ta, from
equation (2) using the section a-a stress
limit.
• The overall axial clamp ring height, h,
should be greater than the sum of the
thickness of the hubs and the clamp lip 54
thickness or about 4ts. This assumes that
the hub thickness is the same as the
clamp lip thickness in the axial direction CLAMP LOAD
at section b-b. Allowance in h must be
made beyond the minimum height (4ts)
for the sloped surfaces and the outward
shape or appearance desired for the
clamp ring.
• Check hub and clamp ring stiffnesses
using elastic joint analysis to verify the
coefficient used in the calculation of the
design axial clamp ring load in the sec- Figure 4: Finite element model of clamp ring
section shown in Figure 3.
ond step.
Design of clamp rings for a product line of this problem is to perform a load test on
valves on the just described conventional the clamp ring or use a finite element
basis can be accomplished easily and eco- analysis to determine the maximum load
nomically. However, there is the problem without significant yielding. The next sec-
in determining design adequacy for appli- tion describes a finite element analysis per-
cations where the axial clamp load is formed on the clamp ring and the results
greater than the design axial clamp ring obtained.
load (Hr), considering the neglected stress-
es in the clamp ring. As mentioned before, Finite Element Analysis
this situation can occur for seismic loading A finite element model of the clamp ring
on a valve of existing design or when con- shown in Figure 3, pg. 4, was developed
templating the use of an existing clamp and loaded incrementally until a very small
ring for a new application. A solution to portion of the ring yielded. This approxi-
6
Valve Clamp Ring Stress Analysis
mately determined the margin between the
design axial clamp ring load and the load
initiating yielding. It is important that the
clamp load which causes yielding be
known. Additional loading beyond this
point produces permanent deformation
and subsequently relaxes the clamp pre-
load remaining when the additional clamp
load is removed.
Loading was then increased arbitrarily by
a factor of 1.5 to determine if significant
deformation occurred and the extent of
yielding in the clamp ring.
Figure 4 shows the axisymmetric finite ele-
ment model of a half-section of a clamp
ring. Because the half-plane is a plane of
symmetry, the finite element nodes there
are supported axially but free to move
radially. The clamp load is shown distrib-
uted uniformly and normal to the surface.
Friction effects at the contact surface are
neglected.
The CREEP-PLAST computer program was
used for this analysis. This program was
initially distributed by the Oak Ridge
National Laboratory but is now handled
by COSMIC (Computer Software
Management and Information Center) at
the University of Georgia. Capabilities of
the program include elastic-plastic-creep
analysis of two-dimensional plane or
axisymmetric structures. Further description
of the program may be found in [4 and [5]
and an evaluation in [6].
Material properties for this analysis are
based on a temperature of 400°F (200°C)
which should be a representative service
condition. CREEP-PLAST simulates the
STRESS
tan-1 Ep
YIELD
tan-1 E
54
STRAIN
Figure 5: Bilinear representation of stress-strain
curve for elastic-plastic finite element
analysis.
stress-strain curve in a bilinear fashion as
shown in Figure 5. The elastic modulus E is
27 x 106 psi (190 GPa) and the yield
stress is 30800 psi (212 MPa) [3]. The
plastic modulus Ep is 1 x l06 psi (7GPa)
and was calculated from a stress-strain
curve for a SA 216, WCB carbon steel [7]
for strains up to about 1 percent. Poisson’s
ratio is taken to be a nominal value of 0.3.
Yielding is determined by von Mises
criterion; i.e., yielding occurs when the
effective stress s– exceeds the yield strength
sy obtained by a simple tensile test. The
effective stress is defined by
where r, t and z denote the radial, tangen-
tial and axial directions, respectively.
The design axial clamp load for the ring
shown in Figure 3, pg. 4, is Hr = 220,000
lbs (980 kN) and results in the following
stresses from equations (2), (3) and (4):
saa = 4850 psi (33.4 MPa)
tbb = 5300 psi (36.5 M Pa)
sc = 19700 psi (1 36 M Pa)
which are in satisfactory agreement with
the aforementioned stress limits.
To cause about 5 percent yielded volume
in the ring, the clamping load as deter-
mined by the finite element analysis is
440,000 lbs (2-0 MN). An effective stress
contour plot of the finite element stresses is
shown in Figure 6 , pg. 7, for this clamp
load; the yielded regions are specifically
identified (shaded).
When the clamp load is increased further
by 50 percent to 660,000 lbs (2.9 MN)
the yielded volume of the ring increases to
about 30 percent. The corresponding effec-
tive stress contour plot is shown in Figure 7
along with the yielded regions.
To determine more exactly the load where
yielding begins (irrespective of stress con-
centrations), the 5 percent and 30 percent
yielded volume data was linearly extrapo-
lated back to zero percent yielding to give
a clamp load of 400,000 lbs (1.8 MN)
which is a factor of 1.8 or 80 percent high-
er than the design axial clamp ring load
(Hr = 220,000 lbs or 1.0 MN). This then
defines the maximum (elastic) load carrying
capacity of the central region of the clamp
ring and shows that the conventional
design method is adequately conservative.
If the clamp load is increased from the
design load Hr by a factor of 1.8, then the
7
Valve Clamp Ring Stress Analysis
Finite element results for the clamp load of
660,000 lbs (2.9MN), which is the load
approximately 50 percent larger than the

30.8
load to initiate yielding, reveal that
although 30 percent of the volume of the
clamp ring has yielded, it still retains con-

25
siderable strength and stiffness. Ring

20 ksi
deflections are about twice those obtained

30.8
had the ring remained linear-elastic (for the
same clamp load). For example, at node

35
54 in Figure 4 – the tip of the clamp lip –

30.8
the axial deflections are 0.0118 inches
30.8

(288mm) for elastic-plastic behavior and

25

0.0057 inches (140mm) for strictly linear-

40
35

elastic behavior. These values indicate that

gross deformation is not evident at signifi-
30.8

cant overloads.

35
The preceding results are to be expected
10 ksi

since a clamp ring (or any ring) has self-

30.8
15
20
15
20
25

restraint against twisting which inhibits the

deformation that would occur for a straight
25

beam having the same cross section. The

Figure 6: Clamp ring effective stress contours
when 5 percent of the volume has
yielded (Shown shaded).
design stresses are increased proportional-
ly to:
saa = 8750 psi (60.3 MPa)
tbb = 9550 psi (65.8 M Pa)
sc = 35500 psi (245 MPa)
Comparing saa to yield strength and tbb
(a shear stress) to 0.58 (from equation (5))
of yield strength gives no indication that
the clamp ring has begun to yield, but the
finite element analysis shows that it has.
Although the average contact stress, ac, is
Figure 7: Clamp ring effective stress contours
when 30 percent of the volume has
yielded (Shown shaded).
somewhat greater than the yield strength
(of 30800 psi or 212 MPa) this is of no
great concern because contact yielding is
highly localized near the contact surface
and does not present a problem regarding
clamp ring failure. This comparison demon-
strates that some of the neglected stresses
are quite significant, as may have been
expected, and clearly substantiates the
need for the detailed finite element analy-
sis for clamp loads greater than the design
load.
clamp load on the lip will induce bending
in the body of the clamp resulting in out-
ward radial movement of the ends and
inward radial movement at the midsection
(section a-a in Figure 3). However, these
movements are partially restrained by the
hoop or tangential stresses produced by
the changes in circumferential fiber lengths
corresponding to the radial movements. A
straight beam does not enjoy this kind of
support, which is in effect equivalent to the
provision of an elastic foundation for the
straight beam. This overload capacity pro-
vides a substantial margin in clamp ring
joint strength to withstand possible over-
loads.

8
Valve Clamp Ring Stress Analysis
ASME Code Equation
The Summer 1978 Addenda to Section VIII
– Division 1 of the ASME Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Code included new non-
mandatory Appendix Z on design rules for
clamp connections. Equations for various
clamp and hub stresses are given in the
Appendix along with allowable design
stresses.
Equation 11 in Appendix Z – the equation
for clamp longitudinal or axial stress at the
inner radius ri of the clamp body was
checked against the finite element results.
This stress is of particular interest because
it is generally the largest of the clamp
stresses considered in Appendix Z and is
the sum of the average axial stress on sec-
tion a-a and the axial equivalent (linear)
bending stress due to the bending moment
acting on section a-a. It appears from the
form of the equation that it is based on the
clamp cross section behaving like that for
a straight beam. That is, the equation con-
tains no allowance for the self-restraint
effects of a ring-like structure and, there-
fore, would be expected to be conserva-
tive.
A comparison indicates that the Appendix
Z value of the average plus linear bending
axial stress at section a-a is about 33 per-
cent larger than the result obtained using
finite element analysis. For example, at a
clamp load of 220,000 lbs (980 kN) these
stresses are:
Appendix Z – equation 11:
saa = 32200 psi (222 MPa)
finite element:
saa = 24200 psi (167 MPa)
To provide a valid comparison, the finite
element value was calculated from the
force and bending moment acting at sec-
tion a-a. The force was obtained from the
integral through the thickness of a curve fit-
ted to the product of the axial finite ele-
ment center stresses and the differential
area. The moment was obtained similarly
except the integrand also included the
(lever arm) distance from the neutral axis
of section a-a.
Conclusions
The axial design load for clamp rings is
dependent on both bolt preload and on
loading external to the clamp ring joint.
A rationale for conventional clamp ring
design has been presented employing con-
servative stress limits in which basic design
dimensions are related to the design load
by primary stress equations easily deriv-
able from static equilibrium. Maximum
load capacity is determined for clamp
rings by the finite element method.
Elastic-plastic analysis is used to show that
the clamp ring has substantial overload
capacity beyond the yield load without
gross deformation.
In a specific example, the equation for
clamp body axial stress from Appendix Z
to Section VIII of the ASME B&PV Code
indicated a stress 33 percent greater than
that computed by finite element analysis.
Acknowledgements
The help of R. J. Gradle, L. A. Gregory,
and W. D. Mangieri at Rockwell
International in preparing this paper is sin-
cerely appreciated. The author also wishes
to thank the ASME and Rockwell reviewers
for thoughtful and constructive comments.
References
1. FAI RES, V. M., Design of Machine
Elements, 4th ed., Macmillan, New
York, 1965, Section 5.9.
2. MEYER, G. and STRELOW, D., “Simple
Diagrams Aid in Analyzing Forces in
Bolted Joints,”Assembly Engineering,
Vol. 15, January 1972, pp. 28-33.
3. Appendices, Section III-Division 1, 1974
ASME B&PV Code, Nuclear Power Plant
Components.
4. CLINARD, J. A. and CROWELL, J. S.,
ORNL User’s Manual for CREEP-PLAST
Computer Program, Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, Oak Ridge,
Tennessee, 1973.
5. Guidelines and Procedures for Design
of Nuclear System Components at
Elevated Temperatures, RDT Standard F
9-5T, Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 1974.
6. HSU, M. B., BERMAN, 1. and PAI, D.
H., “An Evaluation of the Computer
Program CREEP-PLAST” in the ASME
publication: Pressure Vessels and
Piping: Analysis and Computers from
Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference,
June, 1974.
7. Teledyne Materials Research Seminar on
Code Design of Nuclear Components,
Vol. 2, pg. 8.3-12,1976.
9
Valve Clamp Ring Stress Analysis
Edward Vogt Valve Company Northern Europe, India &
1900 South Saunders Street South Africa
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 USA Tel: 44-1484-602519
FAX: 44-1484-609785
Toll-Free Telephone Service e-mail: kevin.henderson@btrinc.com
(U.S. and Canada)
Day: 1-800-225-6989 Southern Europe &
French speaking North Africa
After Hours Customer Service: Tel: 33-4-77-40-18-79
1-800-543-3927 FAX: 33-4-77-89-17-95
email: gilles.varona@btrinc.com
US Sales Offices
Tel: 919-832-0525 China
FAX: 919-831-3369 Tel: 86-10-6505-5548
FAX: 919-831-3376 FAX: 86-10-6505-5547
e-mail: eddie.vogt@btrinc.com e-mail: david.xu@btrinc.com

Vogt Operations Japan, Korea, Middle East

Tel: 812-218-7700 & Australasia
FAX: 812-218-7777 Tel: 44-1444-443541
e-mail: eddie.vogt@btrinc.com FAX: 44-1444-443540
e-mail: steve.corcoran@btrinc.com
Mexico, Central America
& Caribbean Southeast Asia
Tel: 919-831-3233 Tel: 65-332-0557
FAX: 919-831-3369 FAX: 65-337-6179
e-mail: scott.mayo@btrinc.com
e-mail: mickey.goh@btrinc.com
South America
Tel: 281-564-5671
FAX: 281-564-6052
e-mail: ruben.rios@btrinc.com
Visit Our Website:
www.edwardvogt.com

10