×
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

safety factor and joint efficiency
2

safety factor and joint efficiency

safety factor and joint efficiency

(OP)
I have a non-code vessel, SA-36 material, I am increasing the allowable stress to 23200 psi decreasing the safety factor to 2.5, I'm not performing any RT, so I'm using 70% efficiency, but with the thks I have my MAWP is still below my DP, can I increase my Efficiency to reach my DP keeping my Safety factor over 2.5?

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency


Efficency is based on weld profile/type and the amount of NDE you wish to preform.  Minimum thickness required for vacuum design will not be effected by weld efficiency.  

I would say if you are already using SA-36, which is for non pressure parts, and reducing the safety factor to 2.5:1; just overlook the MAWP calculation.  You are already demonstrating a disregard for ASME rules.  Why is this calculation required for non-code?
 

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency

Sergio...

Where will this device be installed ?

   

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency

With E of .7, your actual design allowable "S" is 33,143 psi, which gives you a safety factor of 1.75 or 92% of the SMYS.

As per innovation2, since you have fully disregarded ASME VIII design rules, why are you asking the question? Now you really must consider toughness at the design conditions to avoid fracture during service or pressure testing.

Should you plan to pneumatically test, contact your rescue responders to pick up the human remains.  

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency

(OP)
I know material and other consideration are overlooking the rules for code vessel; the point of this question is: I have several non-code veseel which i try to validate calculations in order to figure out what is the min SF which could not be less than 2.4 (as min required per ASME div. II), so according with your answers can I use 100% efficiency and just modified the Stress to have a SF=2.5,(in this case 23200 for SA-36 or 28000 for SA-516,70). By the way those vessels are already in service in USA.
So in conclusion if i want 2.5 SF I can use the following stress in ASME formulas:
Smodified=S*E/2.5 with E=0.7 (NO RT)

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency

No, you should not and cannot simply modify joint efficiency to make a desired outcome for a non-code vessel. ASME code calculations have conservatisms for material properties and joint design. If you need to increase efficiency, perform volumetric NDT and be done with it. By the way, I presume a non-code vessel means either the Jurisdiction does not regulate the vessel or it operates below 15 psig.  

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency

(OP)
once again thks for your answers, i think i have a mistake on the Smod y suggested, I have some confusions...I know per code Sallow=S/SF, now if i have a Spot RT (E=0.85), when I put those values in the thks formula per UG-27 or APPX 1, the results are having a higher SF than 3.5 due to a lack on examination, my point here is how i correlated the SF, the S value and E, supposed I have a code vessel with no RT req'd with min SF=2.5?
Some body could help me!

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency

(OP)
I forgot something metengr said if I want to increase the efficiency, I must perform volumetric NDE, could you help me to figure out what are the calcs for that?

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency

(OP)
I am sorry guys The volumetric NDE are the RT or UT, so disregard my last comment, so at this point I can't not performed any NDE because the vessels are in service already, and they have been working for couple years. I just tried to have some min requirements for future non-code projects, where we can have some liability, and my main corcern is to have a min SF=2.5 for non-code vessels.

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency

Were these vessels manufactured to another international standard and if so, to what standard? A number of Jurisdictions permit vessels manufactured to Standards other than ASME.  

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency

Quote:

I can't not performed any NDE because the vessels are in service already, and they have been working for couple years.

Yes you can perform NDT on in-service vessels. It is done all of the time and is a matter of proper scheduling.

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency

(OP)
yes, i'm agree to perform any NDE in a service vessel is a matter of scheduling, but again I am thinking in future non-code projects, with min SF=2.5 with no RT, how can i determined if the thks shown by the fabricator have at least this req'd? can i use just E=1 and increase the the Sallow?

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency

Sergio76,
Simply calculate the induced stresses based on the pressure, diameter, thickness and joint efficiency of the actual vessels and compare to the minimum specified ultimate tensile strength of the material to determine the actual factor of safety.  

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency

(OP)
so you mean solve S from the thickness formula per UG-27 or APPX-1, and divided the S"ult"over this value...it sounds valid..thanks
hey guys any other thoughts

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency

Safety factor should be determined from minimum allowable tensiles (SA-36 is 58000psi).

Efficency should be accounted for in the formulas used to calculated stress.

Actual component safety factor can be determined by taking minimum allowable tensiles and deviding by calculated stress.

Try not to cut corners in your design...stick to the rules, that is why they are there.

Honestly you will not save a terrible amount of money on an atomospheric or low pressure tank by using a reduced S.F.   

RE: safety factor and joint efficiency

The application hasn't been stated, but I note that 23,200 psi is the allowable stress for A36 in API-650.

A couple of thoughts on this.  First, I'm not that familiar with ultrasonic testing, but could it be done from the outside while a tank or vessel was in service?

Secondly, the calculation of a particular factor of safety per one code or another also assumes that the vessel was otherwise constructed in accordance with the code.  So if you're designing a vessel with 70% joint efficiency due to not having any radiograhy, you're still assuming that the weld procedures and welders were properly qualified and that the welds were full-penetration and that some degree of visual examination was done on them.  On the other hand, if you look at a weld after the fact and don't know how it was welded or by whom, you don't know any of those things.  You may also find that nozzle reinforcement is what actually limits the pressure rating rather than shell thickness itself.  A lot of the non-code vessels that I see also have heads that don't comply with the knuckle radius requirements of ASME, so you don't really have a good basis for design of them.

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