×
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

ASME Div II Vessel Design issues in code

ASME Div II Vessel Design issues in code

ASME Div II Vessel Design issues in code

(OP)
I have a client who originally designed vessels to Div II Add 2010 and place order with fabricator in 2011 before Add 2011 came into effect, however the client removed the order from this particular fabricator and has now re-placed it with me just now. Unfortunately some of the nozzles now fail the design conditions in Add 2011 however i am being told that if the client to us (not end user) issues another PO back dated to 2011 this will be ok and we can use the original nozzles with no need to re-order in accordance with Add 2011. To me this is wrong but i am being told by local ASME Inspector it is acceptable since we actually bid in 2010 during the initial tender.
Any advise would be welcome.

RE: ASME Div II Vessel Design issues in code

JRJJ, I don't do Div 2 work, however:

Code are always changing such that what was previously acceptable now is not. The experience generally is that previous edition(s) produced safe and workable equipment.

If the design meets 2010 rules and all parties are agreeable to that Addenda, I would not have too much problem with it.

Regards,

Mike

RE: ASME Div II Vessel Design issues in code

Int VIII-1-95-29 / VII-2-95-04 uses the word 'contract'. The mandated edition and addenda of the code at the time of contract between the user and the manufacturer.
If you, your customer and the AI are in agreement with using the edition and addenda in effect at quote, you should be fine. My opinion only.

RE: ASME Div II Vessel Design issues in code

(OP)
Thank you gents.

RE: ASME Div II Vessel Design issues in code

I would tend to agree with both SnTMan and weldtek - the choice of Edition and Addenda is a contractual issue and not a matter for the Code, per se.

If you, your customer, and the AI are in agreement, then it should be settled.

I am curious, though, exactly what change in Div 2 in the 2011 Addenda caused the issue.

soapbox
Just my standard rant here: the proper name for the Code is ASME Section VIII, Division 2, not Section 8, not Division II. Getting something as simple as the name of the Code wrong indicates a lack of attention to detail; and attention to detail is what engineers need to be about. Please get the name right.
soapbox

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