WRC Bulletins
WRC Bulletins
(OP)
Does anyone know where to get (buy) these things aside from the WRC? I've been thinking of adding one or more to my personal library, but I'm not giving them $72 unless I can see the thing first.
Does anyone have a copy? How much content is there? Is it actually WORTH $72?
Does anyone have a copy? How much content is there? Is it actually WORTH $72?
--------------------------------
Fitter, happier, more productive





RE: WRC Bulletins
Some of the topics covered in WRC bulletins have also been covered in API publications, so you might check there, also. Of course, they're not cheap either.
You might check in nearby university libraries to see if they have any of these (liable to be old ones if they do).
RE: WRC Bulletins
Also: WRC 497 is needed,
Review http://www
http://www.paulin.com/WEBfe107-1.aspx
RE: WRC Bulletins
However, the Welding Research Council probably isn't getting rich off the published bulletins, nor are the authors of the bulletins. In most cases the writing is done by the authors for free, there may be compensation from from ASME, API, or other supporters for experimental testing, etc.
It begs the question, if no one supports this fundamental engineering research with dollars to buy relatively cheap bulletins, then who else will pay for it? And what will happen to our fields when there is no more new research because the authors and researchers aren't supported any longer?
In years past, large companies had deeper pockets and there was prestige in sponsoring research. In the recent years (not only due to current recession) companies don't have so much spare cash laying around to support research.
RE: WRC Bulletins
If you need it to complete a job... Well, I'd just bet that $72 is less than the contract value of one job.
Now... which WRC bulletin might be the subject? I happen to like 452 myself.
And finally... TomBarsh put it well. 'Cmon folks. You can't just take, take, take. Sometimes you have to give.
jt
RE: WRC Bulletins
my point is better illustrated by the asme prices for technical information. i don't know about you guys, but i don't make six figures, and probably never will. i can't afford to stock my personal library with $300 books that i'll use for 1 or 2 chapters. and look at the cost of their training! they certainly don't seem to be looking to improve the independant engineer, but rather reach into the pockets of the industries that can afford the high pricing.
perhaps i've inadvertantly imposed my opinion on the WRC, but then again...i have no way to tell what my money is buying. and i'm sure some of that cost includes someone to sit and make sure it doesn't leak onto the internet...
--------------------------------
Fitter, happier, more productive
RE: WRC Bulletins
RE: WRC Bulletins
"And what will happen to our fields when there is no more new research because the authors and researchers aren't supported any longer?"
Well.... Your answer is pretty much what you see right now !!
We are a nation of politicians, landlords, realtors, home appraisers, temp agencies, fast food joints and website designers..... we have ad agencies, political consultants, newscasters, interior designers, importers, exporters, coaches, facilitators and sexual therapists.
None of these people nor most others will ever need basic reasearch such as that offered by the WRC
Tom... you have to face facts...
Real engineering is...... dead...
My opinion only..
-MJC
RE: WRC Bulletins
1) Attach is Table of Contents available
MJCronin (Mechanical)
2) Let say thanks to the technical research by AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEER'S & PAULIN RESEARCH GROUP ON THIS SUBJECT at present.
RE: WRC Bulletins
RE: WRC Bulletins
WRC,...Hmmm. Only $72.00?
A different comment from a vessel designer;-
"WRC107 is not an acceptable method for evaluating nozzle external loads on cylindrical shells, especially where reinforcing pads are used. This method does not take the nozzle wall thickness into account for nozzles on cylindrical shells and the only parameter, which is really considered, is the outside radius of the round attachment (ref. WRC107 clause 4.2.2.1). In addition, the basic assumption in developing WRC107 is that the shell is not penetrated by the attachment, which neglects the stress rising effect of the opening. This, in turn, reduces the accuracy of the calculations to some extent.
On top of all, PVElite and CodeCalc calculations are inaccurate with regard to primary membrane stress at shell when using pads. Membrane stress in shells with openings will be higher in the vicinity of the opening. Actually the pad is used to reduce the membrane stress around the opening, ideally to the level of unpenetrated shell. But in PVElite and CodeCalc the membrane stress around an opening without pad is considered equal to an unpenetrated shell, and when the user adds a pad, the software takes the membrane stress around the opening equal to half the value of membrane stress away from the opening, which is totally incorrect!"
Indeed, the WRC bulletin for $72 might be a waste.
Any comments?
Cheers,
gr2vessels
RE: WRC Bulletins
MJC, you left out the lawyers:)
Regards,
Mike
RE: WRC Bulletins
RE: WRC Bulletins
my original question was: is the wrc site the only retail outlet for these bulletins, does anyone have and/or use one enough to give me a sense of the amount of usable content so that i can guage if my $72 will yield a better value somewhere else...
--------------------------------
Fitter, happier, more productive
RE: WRC Bulletins
I would recommend getting WRC 107 just for the fact that once you read it through, you will understand the limitations of the method. Same with 297.
I have both - are you interested in seeing the TOC?
RE: WRC Bulletins
Although they don't specifically specify pads, WRC 297 does provide a method for increasing the thickness for pads and inserts. Wince WRC 297 is a supplement to WRC 107, it is applicable to both.
gr2vessels, I completely agree with you regarding PV Ellite and CodeCalc, we have written to COADE regarding these mistakes but as yet have not had a reply.
I believe if you do this for a living then they are worthwhile, if you use them for their intended purpose they are good for a quick check. Since most of the time they are conservative it means not FEA will be required. If you had to run FEA for all your nozzle it would take considerable time w/o software like NozzlePro. I think they will become obsolete in the near future but does not mean they cannot still be useful.
RE: WRC Bulletins
LOCAL STRESS IN Vessels-Notes on the Application of WRC-107 and WRC-297
L.C. PENG
http://www.pipestress.com/papers/WRC107-297.pdf
RE: WRC Bulletins
tgs4...i would love to see the toc's for both if that's at all possible. unfortunately, i cannot download anything from the files.engineering.com domain. security is tight here.
and LSThill, thank you for the link. i think i brushed past that at some point in my search. your calling it to my attention has brought cause for reading.
--------------------------------
Fitter, happier, more productive
RE: WRC Bulletins
Actually using 297 by hand is a pain. You wind up reading about 30 different factors off the graphs, interpolating, interpolating the interpolations, etc., so it is not a quick and easy process. Some of the PV handbooks give simplified versions based on 297 that are much easier.
RE: WRC Bulletins
--------------------------------
Fitter, happier, more productive