If you are able to use the 2007 edition, 2008 Addenda of Division 2. Part 4.18 for Tubesheet design is the same design methodology as used in UHX. Obviously there may be some other differences as far as toughness, inspection, or testing requirements; but if you compare the two you will see...
hello,
I am looking for a method to design flat plates under low pressure and some accelerations. The shapes do not fall within the scope of App. 13 in SC 8-1. One shape has an elliptical cross-section, the other is hopper like with an inverted pyramid shape attached to the bottom of a cube...
As an example:
ASCE 7-05 15.4.1 (pg. 162) states that these structures must be designed to resist minimum seismic lateral forces that are not less than the requirements from 12.8.
In 12.8 there is a subparagraph on inherent torsion (from unevenly distributed masses) and a subparagraph on...
This is the pickle, the requirement for the non-building structures not similar to buildings is that the Effective Laterl Force (ELF) method be used as for buildings with some alterations that are then listed. It allows exceptions for certian requirements. It stops there for the last 2 ASCE...
The Seismic codes talk about inherent torsion and accidental torsion. I cannot find an exclusion for non-building structures not similar to building. Is there an example somewhere of how to determine the resultant loads on the vessel supports from torsion on the vessel? I am especially...
SnTMan,
The code is great; but unfortunately many treat it like gospel. This can be good and bad. For instance, most people do not pay attention to all of the points in the code that state "minimum" for the requirements listed here. On the other side, many designers, inspectors, and end...
My understanding of this is that if you are a professional then you can be held liable if it is an issue dealing with your profession. For instance if I am in a
business (corp) and I provide faulty work, then both the corp. and myself are liable. If however, I do not salt the ice on the...
Angsi,
The rules of UHX look cumbersome; but they are not impossible to scale. UHX contains several examples, the most recent volume (128) of The Journal of Pressure Vessel
Technology has an indepth look at the rules. Also I believe the newest edition of the Jawad and Farr Guidebook to...
The UHX rules in SC VII, Div. 1 are very similar to the stress analysis in article 4. This might be a good example to help you see the application of the rules. The derivation is included in the Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology Vol 128 (the most recent volume). My only other comment is...
SnTMan,
1. This is not permitted under UHX; I am not quite clear about the derivation that requires this. However, both tubesheets are required to have the same thickness but may have different edge conditions.
2. It is not that UHX does not require them; I believe it is becaue they are...
