Eng-Tips is the largest forum for Engineering Professionals on the Internet.

Members share and learn making Eng-Tips Forums the best source of engineering information on the Internet!

  • Congratulations JStephen on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

UG-40(c) Contour to Surface

GinBread

Mechanical
Joined
May 6, 2022
Messages
27
Location
US
Hello,

I've done a little bit of digging to try and find an answer to my question but have so far come up empty handed. Perhaps the answer is so simple that nobody has thought to ask, in which case this should be a quick and easy one to put to rest. My question pertains to ASME Section VIII Div. 1.

When there is a nozzle that is centrally located in a head (IE top dead center), how should one interpret UG-40(c) when it talks about measuring the limit of reinforcement from "...the contour of the surface at a distance from each surface equal to the smaller of..."? If the nozzle were in a shell, I can see it simply being from the high point of the shell. In a head, however, would this "high point" be the top of the head that no longer exists, or from the top of the existing contour that mates up to the nozzle outside wall, similar to what Figure UG-37.1 seems to be implying?

I found an interpretation (VIII-1-07-21), but it is equally as clear as mud to me.

I appreciate your feedback.
 
Solution
You should use "... from the top of the existing contour that mates up to the nozzle outside wall ...".

If you have access to the 2010 Edition, Appendix L has Example L-7.6 that uses this method. I suspect ASME publishes a separate book of examples now so they can charge an outrageous amount, but I've never seen it.
ASME is clear, try to understand it.
 
ASME is clear, try to understand it.
What about my post has made you think that I haven't put in some effort to try to understand it to warrant this unhelpful response?

I have checked code interpretations, read and reread the code, looked up ASME PTB-4 examples and am still uncertain...
 
You should use "... from the top of the existing contour that mates up to the nozzle outside wall ...".

If you have access to the 2010 Edition, Appendix L has Example L-7.6 that uses this method. I suspect ASME publishes a separate book of examples now so they can charge an outrageous amount, but I've never seen it.
 
Solution
You should use "... from the top of the existing contour that mates up to the nozzle outside wall ...".

If you have access to the 2010 Edition, Appendix L has Example L-7.6 that uses this method. I suspect ASME publishes a separate book of examples now so they can charge an outrageous amount, but I've never seen it.

I appreciate the pointer.

I double checked this example and I found the language used to still be a little bit unclear, as it says in L-7.6.3(b)(2) "Limit normal to vessel wall...".

I rechecked PTB-4 and I believe I found a clearer wording in the division 2 section that I originally didn't consider because it's Div. 2, not Div. 1.

In the Division 2 portion, it states:

STEP 3 – Calculate the limit of reinforcement along the nozzle wall projecting outside the vessel
surface. See VIII-2, Figures 4.5.9 and 4.5.10.
 
Since L-7.6 did not calculate where the peak of the head would have been I felt this clarified which of your options to use.

Glad you've reached a conclusion.
 
Since L-7.6 did not calculate where the peak of the head would have been I felt this clarified which of your options to use.

Glad you've reached a conclusion.

On one hand, I see your point, but on the other hand... would they need to do that calculation? Wouldn't you just specify on the detail drawings what the overall nozzle height needs to be and ensure that the area of reinforcement is encompassed starting from whatever point you picked? I think that's why it wasn't jumping out to me and wasn't blatantly obvious.
 

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top