×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Nozzle reinforcement Div 2 head Div 1 vessel

Nozzle reinforcement Div 2 head Div 1 vessel

Nozzle reinforcement Div 2 head Div 1 vessel

(OP)
I'm designing a Div 1 vessel and for various reasons have had to design the heads per Div 2 under U-2(g) of Div. 1.

My question is: Are there any reasons why I'd not be able to use the Div 1 area replacement reinforcement calculations for nozzles in these heads?

Thanks,
HJ

RE: Nozzle reinforcement Div 2 head Div 1 vessel

more info is needed, se heads? flat? type of joint?

RE: Nozzle reinforcement Div 2 head Div 1 vessel

Though I've never met such a situation, I can't see a reason  why not.
You have determined a minimum required thickness for head with a (permitted) alternative method to UG-32, now, staying within your design code, you go to UG-37 with that minimum thickness and that's OK.

prex
http://www.xcalcs.com : Online engineering calculations
http://www.megamag.it : Magnetic brakes for fun rides
http://www.levitans.com : Air bearing pads

RE: Nozzle reinforcement Div 2 head Div 1 vessel

HowJoh,
If you design the head as per Div 2, then the opening in that head shall be designed for the rules you opted to use, ie as per the Div 2, Clause 4.5.10 or other method described in the Div 2. The reason for that is the stringent design and inspection requirements of the Div 2, which allows the building of a safe and economically feasible equipment. That is the reason for developing the Clause 4.5.10, instead of using the UG-37.
Try to imagine how safe would be an equipment built to 17 international codes, where you pick and choose the most convenient allowances.
However, I believe that you are asking a big question in a wrong place, this post of yours should be answered by your Client, the AI or the local authority.
Hope this helps and doesn't disappoints.
Cheers,
gr2vessels

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources