## EN 13480-3 Sect 11. Integral Attachments-CONFUSION

## EN 13480-3 Sect 11. Integral Attachments-CONFUSION

(OP)

Greetings,

I was wondering if anyone has gone through the calculations given for the integral attachments, I am trying at the moment and I have some sort of difficulty in understanding some of the issues as I tried to note in the attached file.

1. Notation "eord" is given in some pages of the code and description confuses the user. Fig 4.3-1 gives the definition of the wall thicknesses in a graph and explonation. This seems very clear. However, Table 11.3.2-1 has different definition for that. It calls it "nominal attachment wall thickness". I guess this should be called "nominal/order pipe wall thickness". The formula given by (11.3.3-7) is very common and "eord" is representing the nominal pipe wall thickness.

2.Formula (11.3.4-6) has one more wall thickness "eord,T". There is no definition for this anywhere in the code. Is it the hollow thickness attachment wall thickness?

3. There is a formula (11.3.4-9) for J for attachment. Other formulas (11.3.5-1), (11.3.5-2) and (11.3.5-4) are using Jbar. Are J and Jbar the same? If not how can we describe Jbar.

4. Formulas (11.3.7-7) is giben for hollow round cross section which includes rectangular attachment dimensions. I guess the formulas (11.3.7-7) and (11.3.7-7) should change the titles. Any ideas?

5. Figure 11.3.3-1 is given for circular attachments with keys a,b, and c. I could not find any use of this Figure in the code and causes confusion. Does anybody knows where to use this figure information in the code.

It became a bit long, but to be able to put the code formulation in the spreadsheet I gues we need to clarify all the questions above.

I was wondering if anyone has done integral attachment calculation for hollow and rectangular. I would like to receive a copy if available. But the clarification above still could be sufficient.

Kind regards,

Ibrahim Demir

I was wondering if anyone has gone through the calculations given for the integral attachments, I am trying at the moment and I have some sort of difficulty in understanding some of the issues as I tried to note in the attached file.

1. Notation "eord" is given in some pages of the code and description confuses the user. Fig 4.3-1 gives the definition of the wall thicknesses in a graph and explonation. This seems very clear. However, Table 11.3.2-1 has different definition for that. It calls it "nominal attachment wall thickness". I guess this should be called "nominal/order pipe wall thickness". The formula given by (11.3.3-7) is very common and "eord" is representing the nominal pipe wall thickness.

2.Formula (11.3.4-6) has one more wall thickness "eord,T". There is no definition for this anywhere in the code. Is it the hollow thickness attachment wall thickness?

3. There is a formula (11.3.4-9) for J for attachment. Other formulas (11.3.5-1), (11.3.5-2) and (11.3.5-4) are using Jbar. Are J and Jbar the same? If not how can we describe Jbar.

4. Formulas (11.3.7-7) is giben for hollow round cross section which includes rectangular attachment dimensions. I guess the formulas (11.3.7-7) and (11.3.7-7) should change the titles. Any ideas?

5. Figure 11.3.3-1 is given for circular attachments with keys a,b, and c. I could not find any use of this Figure in the code and causes confusion. Does anybody knows where to use this figure information in the code.

It became a bit long, but to be able to put the code formulation in the spreadsheet I gues we need to clarify all the questions above.

I was wondering if anyone has done integral attachment calculation for hollow and rectangular. I would like to receive a copy if available. But the clarification above still could be sufficient.

Kind regards,

Ibrahim Demir

## RE: EN 13480-3 Sect 11. Integral Attachments-CONFUSION

6. Formula (11.3.5-2) for "SigmaNT =..." second addition is given as "CN*W/ZN". I guess this should be replaced by "CN*MN/ZT". Any idea??

Kind regards,

Ibrahim Demir

## RE: EN 13480-3 Sect 11. Integral Attachments-CONFUSION

I also have had the same problem. Did you ever get to the bottom of these issues? If so can you help me out?

Kind Regards,

James

Jimbo

EngCo Solutions Ltd

www.engcosolutions.com

## RE: EN 13480-3 Sect 11. Integral Attachments-CONFUSION

Jimbo2010,

Unfortunately, there is no answer on the issue yet. I guess we need to wait for the next amandements on the code if one of the code committee memmbers is aware of the problems.

Regards,

Ibrahim Demir

## RE: EN 13480-3 Sect 11. Integral Attachments-CONFUSION

I have just gone through the BS EN 13480 A4:2010. I see that the questions I raised above are still valid, and I do not see any change for the subject.

I hope someone close to the committee can warn them about the confusion. I wish I had dircet contact with one of the committee members to explain what the confusion is causing.

Regards,

Ibrahim Demir