Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here


Transportation Acceleration Loading

Transportation Acceleration Loading

Transportation Acceleration Loading

PIP Industry Practice VESV1002, Design Criteria for Vessels, Section 4.2.8, Table 1 shows g loading for shipping modes (attached).
Is it the total final load to be used for shipping saddle design ? or additional vertical dead weight shall be added ?

I have seen vendor adding one more g to the vertical acceleration to account for dead weight. Though doing that is fine, but not sure if it is necessary. Anyone has insight of that table ?

RE: Transportation Acceleration Loading

I'm not familiar with the PIP standard on this, but here is another comparison for your reference.

Attached is the transportation load table from the Pressure Vessel Design Manual by Dennis Moss (3rd Ed).

Take a look at Table 7-3, and look at the loads per saddle in the y-direction. Within the brackets you have the term (Ws+Fy), where Fy is defined above Table 7-2 as K*Ws. So in effect, the total load they recommend considering is Ws(1+K), where K is the factor that depends on mode of transportation. So, you have to add dead load to the transportation acceleration.

The vertical factor for both road and rail are comparable in PIP to the values included in the Pressure Vessel Design Manual, so I suspect you should be using the same approach.

RE: Transportation Acceleration Loading

Marty, sounds right. Dead weight shall be added to vertical load, but upward load will be reduced by one g that the size of tie down cable will be smaller, not conservative.

RE: Transportation Acceleration Loading

I believe that Note 2 on the table of your attachment specifies that 1g is already incorporated on the downward acceleration values. Also, we prefer to use the acceleration values provided by the freight forwarder, if available.

RE: Transportation Acceleration Loading

No. Note 2 only explains what "g" means.

RE: Transportation Acceleration Loading

What I meant is that you don't need to add another 1.0g to the downward acceleration values in the table.

You have 2.0g in the ship, so you'll use 3.0g in the downward acceleration? So what you mean to say the the ship can accelerate downward 29.42 m/s2? That is too much from any of my past experiences.

RE: Transportation Acceleration Loading

For what it's worth, the 4th edition of the Pressure Vessel Design Manual has the same transportation load coefficients and the same equations.

On a recent project we were asked to comply with the factors from the following link:

The equipment in question was shipped from Oklahoma to Michigan via truck.

RE: Transportation Acceleration Loading

The above FMCSA seems misses the critical vertical up and down loads, which is the most concern for ocean shipment. We purchase a lot of pressure vessels from Asian and shipped to US every year.

RE: Transportation Acceleration Loading

You are right. We considered the FMCSA loads as another set of shipping criteria, in addition to the ones we received from other shipping parties.

RE: Transportation Acceleration Loading

The two different sets of criteria, ASME and FMCSA shown above are two completely different animals. The ASME criteria are intended to indicate transport loads which might be induced on pressure vessels and the like during transit, and we should design our vessels for these possible loads. The FMCSA criteria are intended to insure that any given load does not shift on or fall off of a hauler/trailer in transit. And, the assumption is that the hauler/trailer better be strong and stable enough to handle these loads. Two completely different considerations, although they are about the same range of magnitudes.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close