Comparaison with AutoPIPE
Comparaison with AutoPIPE
(OP)
Should we use Autopipe or Ceasar II. Which one is the most user friendly?
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS Come Join Us!Are you an
Engineering professional? Join Eng-Tips Forums!
*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail. Posting GuidelinesJobs |
Comparaison with AutoPIPE
|
Comparaison with AutoPIPEComparaison with AutoPIPE(OP)
Should we use Autopipe or Ceasar II. Which one is the most user friendly?
Red Flag SubmittedThank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts. Reply To This ThreadPosting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! |
ResourcesWhat is rapid injection molding? For engineers working with tight product design timelines, rapid injection molding can be a critical tool for prototyping and testing functional models. Download Now
The world has changed considerably since the 1980s, when CAD first started displacing drafting tables. Download Now
Prototyping has always been a critical part of product development. Download Now
As the cloud is increasingly adopted for product development, questions remain as to just how cloud software tools compare to on-premise solutions. Download Now
|
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
Several years ago we have performed this kind of evaluation ranking the main features we want on a piping software: nozzle loads check modules, flange check module, structure modeling, substructuring, CAD interface facilities, WRC-107/297 calculation and others, dynamic analysis features, capacity to run complex jobs with several non-linear restraints, technical support, input facilities and several others. You have to judge what things are more important considering the cost benefit (do not forget the annual update).
Nowadays we have been using CAESAR II and TRIFLEX.
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
I agree with Medeiros (Mechanical), I also use FE-PIPE which is the Engineering Tool's to check your stress run.
Note: you should check on the court case RE Auto-Pipe 1989!!!
Leonard@thill.biz
www.thill.biz
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
¿What do you mean with " court case RE Autopipe 1989" ?
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
Yeah, what exactly do you mean with " court case RE Autopipe 1989" ?
Is this something we should know ?
Why don't you provide a website or newspaper reference or just SOMETHING !!!!
MJC
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
Let us know what you went for in the end and why so others may benefit.
Isthill,
I too would like more info on the 1989 court case
PW
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
Assuming that every support is rigid can and does produce some very conservative AND unconservative results especially for larger pipe sizes. You don't need to model every bit of steel but you need to model those that have stiffnesses less than say 8-10 times that of the pipe or which affect the load distribution especially between supports and equipment nozzles.
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
Another important consideration is support.
Both of these COADE does a good job with....
Regards,
XHPIPE
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
Come on please expand on this "court case re Autopipe" we all want to know.
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
CRG
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
Follow this link if your interested in old problems with AutoPipe: http://tis.eh.doe.gov/docs/bull/bull0040.html
Team Members: Do detal search under "court case re Autopipe" will give you additional detail.
Leonard@thill.biz
www.thill.biz
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
Because Autopipe, unlike some of the other piping stress programs, is approved for use in nuclear safety apps, they and the govt publish an updated list of known bugs which is a standard nuclear QA requirement. I have seen no evidence of a lawsuit or court case relating to that 1989 bug you linked to. Furthermore, I believe Autopipe is still widely used in DOE work...but anyone interested could probably verify that for themselves by contacting Bentley and request DOE references for Autopipe.
Also, seems a bit unfair to post questions about Autopipe or any other piping program on a Caesar II forum. Why not download demos of each program, ask for references and decide for yourself?
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
Stressed, if there was a court case resulting from problems with AutoPipe in the 1980s, are you party to a dishonest smear of Isthill?
Why wouldn't this forum be a good place to ask about comparable products with Caesar II? Many people in this forum have used both Caesar and AutoPipe. All I see here is Chappy7 asking for first hand experience from those who might be using the programs. Personally, I need to run a program for variety of projects before I can see the benefits/problems with the interface and algorithms.
The way I see it, these old problems (15 years ago) may have little to do with the AutoPipe program today. Yet they can be a good lesson for all of us to use in evaluation of new software packages.
CRG
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
ADLPIPE is one of the few pipe stress programs that has the full ASME III Class 1 analysis capability and has full NRC accreditation. In this area there are few that can compete, PSA5 comes close. Others like CAESAR II avoid this area of analysis and also don't do ASME III Class 2 very effectively either.
It will come down to the projects requirements and personal choice in the end.
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
you did not mention BECHTEL ME-101 Pipe Stress Program.
My understand ADLPIPE is now HOT LINK TO STAAD.PRO 2005, Structural software by www.reiusa.com
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
You are correct about ADLPIPE and STAAD Pro. Loads can be exported from ADLPIPE directly into the structural STAAD model.
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
Another software program that has full ASME III Class 1 analysis capability is PSA5. It does not just "come close" as far as I believe is accredited also.
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
pipesRus (Mechanical) You are correct about ADLPIPE and STAAD Pro. Loads can be exported from ADLPIPE directly into the structural STAAD model. Thank you.
STADD Pro. Pipe Stress Program 2005 has replase ADLPIPE,
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
'STADD Pro. Pipe Stress Program 2005 has replase ADLPIPE'
This is not the case STAAD Pro is a structural package and ADLPIPE is a pipe stress package, they are two separate packages. www.reiworld.com gives more details
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
Mr. Ben Parikh, Director of Corporate Sales & Marketing, Research Engineers International, on June 3, 2005, said the new name for ADLPIPE is a pipe stress package is Stadd Pro pipe stress package.
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
Does it really matter what the name is. ADLPIPE has always been known as ADLPIPE.
I see you have shied away from answering "stressed"'s comment "Lsthill, according the information in your link, this was NOT a court case as you originally claimed and your characterization as such appears to be nothing but a dishonest smear." Why may we ask???
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
Bentley has a proven track record of acquiring companies with world class technology offerings, incorporating the technology into the Bentley products, providing continued technical support for legacy data created using the previous products and versions, and then retaining the top personnel that helped to make the newly acquired company successful in the first place.
Anyone considering a change in their tools for pipe stress should include a review of how this recent event will effect their long term technology solution.
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
RE: Comparaison with AutoPIPE
http://www.reiworld.com/.