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!

*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.

Jobs

Clarification to ASME Sec 8 Div 1 U-1(e)(3)

Clarification to ASME Sec 8 Div 1 U-1(e)(3)

(OP)
I am hoping yall can offer some clarity for me. I have a U stamped pressure vessel with a manway on the bottom head that has a nozzle welded to its cover (added for contect). The nozzle is 2" too short. If we cut and weld a new nozzle onto the manway, will that require a R-stamp? There is a differing of opinion at my site. Some people say the code only extends to the manway itself and not the nozzle. I believe the nozzle is part of the manway and therefore covered by U-1(e)(3) and therefore needs an R-stamp for the repair. If it does need an R-stamp do you think it would be acceptable to use 100% x-ray instead of hydrotesting the entire vessel?

Thanks

-Dave

RE: Clarification to ASME Sec 8 Div 1 U-1(e)(3)


Is the Nozzle listed on the Data Report? In my opinion a R Stamp is required, the question of RT instead of a hydro should be discussed with the AI.

RE: Clarification to ASME Sec 8 Div 1 U-1(e)(3)

OK I am a bit confused, how do you have a nozzle on the manway since a manway would have a cover? Note a replacement nozzle welded on the pressure vessel itself will necessitate full penetration welding and therefore will require a "R" stamp. Get a copy of the NBIC for additional information to any additional inquiry that you may have. My most recent copy is almost 30 years old so it would not be worthwhile to attach relevant pages.

RE: Clarification to ASME Sec 8 Div 1 U-1(e)(3)

(OP)
Sorry for the confusion. The nozzle is welded to the manway cover. U-1(e)(3) specifically talks about the pressure-retaining covers for vessel opening so I thought that was understood. The nozzle is welded to the cover. That is a good call to check the data report and U-1 form.

RE: Clarification to ASME Sec 8 Div 1 U-1(e)(3)

Can you add 2" thickness of spacer flanges in there and avoid any welding?

RE: Clarification to ASME Sec 8 Div 1 U-1(e)(3)

(OP)
Adding a spacer is not ideal. It adds additional leak points in a service we do not want leak points. We will also be operating a ram valve for drainage purposes through this nozzle so the spacer could effect its operations. After reviewing the data book and U-1, I have advised that this requires a code repair and believe I have sufficient buy in at this point. Thanks for the quick responses.

RE: Clarification to ASME Sec 8 Div 1 U-1(e)(3)

If I were you, I would contact the manway cover manufacturer as my instinct tells me the manufacturer is not the pressure vessel manufacturer and consequently, the pressure vessel was hydro with a different cover.

RE: Clarification to ASME Sec 8 Div 1 U-1(e)(3)

(OP)
Actually Chicopee, the manway cover is almost always manufactured by the vessel manufacturer since it is covered by the U stamp, which is the case with my vessel. The intention of U-1(e)(3) is to make sure that the manhole cover is properly designed since it is part of the pressure retaining boundary of the vessel and should be installed when a hydro test is performed. At least at my company, we require all permanent covers installed for hydro test and blinds on nozzles that meet the code. We have already called an AI and he bought of on the repair.

RE: Clarification to ASME Sec 8 Div 1 U-1(e)(3)

[quote Dave_MECHE][/the manway cover is almost always manufactured by the vessel manufacturer since it is covered by the U stamp]

Dave, in my experience (however limited it may be), a manway connection designed as an Appendix 2 flange and cover might be fabricated in-house. But, the majority of vessel access points are purchased elliptical manway assemblies (elliptical ring, cover, gasket, yokes and hardware) or ASME B16.5 flanges with blinds.

Your post did not mention the type of manway or cover. If a hydrostatic test of the complete vessel is problematic. Perhaps the AI would allow you to build a fixture to test the cover instead of the full vessel. After all, the point would be to re-test the cover and nozzle weldment, not the entire tank.

Quote: "Sometimes, the biggest problems are caused by the smallest things. Pay Attention!" (Unknown)

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


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close