TGS4:
Thank you for that response. I would give you two stars if I could.
In the industry and region where I work, there is always enormous pressure put on the "engineers" (the guys and gals who actually do the math and design stuff) by the "non-engineers" (the MBAs and - worse - "Project Engineers / Managers" and - even still worse - "Clients") to do as little engineering as possible and "finish" things as quickly and cheaply as possible. More than occasionally, the "engineers" are threatened with their jobs or with being excluded from subsequent project involvement because they are perceived to be irritants rather than valued professionals if they are to take the time to do everything right.
That said, if flange calculations, as you suggest, were to be made part of all routine stress analyses, the sad truth is that most "clients" and absolutely no "managers" would be on board with the concept and they would most likely not pay for it. With the prevailing budget, schedule, cost and "minimization of engineering" mentality, pretty much nothing would ever be done if it was to be done correctly. It's sad, but it it's an honest encapsulation of the truth.
Honestly, I don't routinely check for flange opening / closing forces if the service otherwise has a low risk assessment rating due to the consequences of loss of containment. One would hope that an engineering team's collective judgement would identify where such extra design effort is mandated, but, sadly, such is seldom the case. We exist in a business where the stakeholders want fast, cheap answers at little to no engineering cost.
Hitherto, after 27 years, my judgement has served me well and I have not produced anything that has "failed" or "given rise to an incident". I now check the things that I feel are important to check, and do the things that I feel I need to do, irrespective of whatever else I am told. The "superiors" sometimes get anxious and impatient, but so far they haven't fired me. Sometimes just handing them my calculator, pencil, and a pad of paper is enough to make them go away until I am "done".
I wouldn't go so far as to say "weak and impotent", although I am compassionate with respect to that sentiment. I would, rather, suggest that engineers get beaten up to the point to where they begin to believe that maybe all of these things that they thought they were supposed to be doing really don't matter. They are not impotent. They are victims of dangerous propaganda from those who refuse to accept the value - or from their perspective, "cost" - of sound engineering.
I agree with you. However, don't underestimate the power of "The Project Team" or "The Client".
Still...star.
Regards,
SNORGY.
).
