The short answer is yes. But it is important that you understand why this discrepancy is occuring.nMost standards/codes are written utilising/assuming nominal stresses. Any accountance for peak stress in a structure is handled by predetermined Stress Intensity Factors, the sort you will find tabulated in Roark's (or a similar engineering textbook). These factors do not always account for all potential geometry configurations, as that pdf highlights regarding d/D for branch connections, and sometimes are simply not accurate for the stock standard geometry.nThese Stress Intensity Factors have been in use for decades (probably more than a century?) and most standards are written using them as FE techniques are much younger. Because of this, it is always a challenge to correlate an FE model with standards. The first check is usually to take the nominal/normal stress from your model, see if that complies, then use any of the SIFs that the standard references on the nominal stress. Then if there are discrepancies between the peak stress from the code and your model, try to understand why.n