Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations cowski on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Rated MDMT
- Thread starter SamCheung
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #3
I have similar confusion!
For my nozzle assembly(Flange:SA-105,Neck:SA-106-B,Pad:SA-516-70).
Design MDMT is 30F. In the process of reducing MDMT,I calculate Level 1 MAT(Minimum allowable temp) to be 10.38 F for this nozzle assembly considering UCS-66 Impact test excemption curve.And when further reducing this MAT for Neck using curve UCS-66.1, I found out my Coincident ratios(Rts) are too small.Please see following table:
Pressure P psig S*E* (Rts=S*E*/SE) Tr?F MATR
MAWP 175 17100 1.00 0 0
Design 155 569 0.03 52839 -52839
40% MAWP 62 227 0.01 423675 -423675
Start Up 111 407 0.02 113850 -113850
Operating 123 451 0.03 90037 -90037
Now I am confused while making the decision regarding my finallly reduced MDMT.I Checked API579 chapter 3(2007 edition),On page 3-9 under STEP 4 i)1)it states that if the Rts value is less than or equal to the thresold value on UCS 66.1(which in my case is 0.3) set the MAT to -150F.
So Should I Consider the same MAT(-150F) for Nozzle flange and Pad material and set the MAT(Ultimately Final MDMT) for Nozzle assembly to be -150F or Sould I consider UCS-66(b)(1)(b) and restrict the MAT(Final redused MDMT) of the flange to -55F and hence the MAT(Final reduced MDMT) of the whole nozzle assembly to -55F?!
I really really need some ones help to clarify this confusion.
Best regards
For my nozzle assembly(Flange:SA-105,Neck:SA-106-B,Pad:SA-516-70).
Design MDMT is 30F. In the process of reducing MDMT,I calculate Level 1 MAT(Minimum allowable temp) to be 10.38 F for this nozzle assembly considering UCS-66 Impact test excemption curve.And when further reducing this MAT for Neck using curve UCS-66.1, I found out my Coincident ratios(Rts) are too small.Please see following table:
Pressure P psig S*E* (Rts=S*E*/SE) Tr?F MATR
MAWP 175 17100 1.00 0 0
Design 155 569 0.03 52839 -52839
40% MAWP 62 227 0.01 423675 -423675
Start Up 111 407 0.02 113850 -113850
Operating 123 451 0.03 90037 -90037
Now I am confused while making the decision regarding my finallly reduced MDMT.I Checked API579 chapter 3(2007 edition),On page 3-9 under STEP 4 i)1)it states that if the Rts value is less than or equal to the thresold value on UCS 66.1(which in my case is 0.3) set the MAT to -150F.
So Should I Consider the same MAT(-150F) for Nozzle flange and Pad material and set the MAT(Ultimately Final MDMT) for Nozzle assembly to be -150F or Sould I consider UCS-66(b)(1)(b) and restrict the MAT(Final redused MDMT) of the flange to -55F and hence the MAT(Final reduced MDMT) of the whole nozzle assembly to -55F?!
I really really need some ones help to clarify this confusion.
Best regards
- Thread starter
- #5
How ASME determine -55F or why API determine -150F are beyond me. But, one thing for sure is, your Design MDMT is 30F, with MAT of -55F or -150F, ASME or API, you are save.
Sorry that does not answer your question and so was TomBarsh did not answer my question!
Sorry that does not answer your question and so was TomBarsh did not answer my question!
- Thread starter
- #7
According to ASME (-55F) and API (-150F), if you have calculated correctly, you are OK with -37F.
For low pressure applications (say less than 100PSI) UCS66 curves scared a lot of people using carbon steel pressure tank fabrications and with the calculation of Rts, UCS-66(b)(1)(b) almost telling you can use any low grade carbon steels.
For low pressure applications (say less than 100PSI) UCS66 curves scared a lot of people using carbon steel pressure tank fabrications and with the calculation of Rts, UCS-66(b)(1)(b) almost telling you can use any low grade carbon steels.
Good Afternoon SamCheung,
I am sorry that you feel that I did not answer your question.
However, you asked "Under what circumstances SA105 Flanges (B16.5) will have a rated MDMT of -155DegF?"
I directed you to ASME Code Section VIII Division 1, paragraph UCS-66(b)(3). This paragraph applies to standard B16.5 flanges as well as to other components.
Tom Barsh
Codeware Technical Support
I am sorry that you feel that I did not answer your question.
However, you asked "Under what circumstances SA105 Flanges (B16.5) will have a rated MDMT of -155DegF?"
I directed you to ASME Code Section VIII Division 1, paragraph UCS-66(b)(3). This paragraph applies to standard B16.5 flanges as well as to other components.
Tom Barsh
Codeware Technical Support
- Thread starter
- #9
Tom,
Does UCS-66(b)(3) means: When the intended MDMT(not design MDMT)is between -55F to -155F and coincident ratio is less than or equal to the 0.35(lower thresold limit on UCS 66.1)than the componet under evaluation can assume the value of MAT(or rated MDMT) to be -155F.
Do you think my interpretation is correct?!
Thanks.
Does UCS-66(b)(3) means: When the intended MDMT(not design MDMT)is between -55F to -155F and coincident ratio is less than or equal to the 0.35(lower thresold limit on UCS 66.1)than the componet under evaluation can assume the value of MAT(or rated MDMT) to be -155F.
Do you think my interpretation is correct?!
Thanks.
Tom,
Is not it correct that the SA-105 material's MDMT is restricted to -55F(accordig to UCS-66(b)(1)(b)) without performing the impect testing.
Is n't it correct when the Intended MDMT(worst condition during operation) is lower than design MDMT especially below -55F than impect testing of materail(including SA-105) is required. Or use different material such as SA-350-LF3 for flange?
Regards,
Is not it correct that the SA-105 material's MDMT is restricted to -55F(accordig to UCS-66(b)(1)(b)) without performing the impect testing.
Is n't it correct when the Intended MDMT(worst condition during operation) is lower than design MDMT especially below -55F than impect testing of materail(including SA-105) is required. Or use different material such as SA-350-LF3 for flange?
Regards,
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question