Search results for query: *

Thank you all. I wasn't aware of the "What-if Analysis" option on Excel. It works great for this purpose. Thank you!

Hello, I have an excel calculation sheet that calculates the required thickness under external pressure of a pressure vessel using ASME BPVC Div. 1, UG-28(c). The calculation method is that you have to assume first a thickness to get some parameters in the Code based on the...

Probably proof testing this vessel is an option (in addition to the FEA and FFS) if it is verified there are no cracks on the weld?

r6155, the cracks are present as well on the o-let to header weld which is a category D joint as you can see on another photo sent by the OP. Even with Cat C joint on the o-let to WN flange weld, most likely it is just spot RT. Anyhow, Caustic SCC seems to be one suspect on the cracks: The...

r6155, RT is not typically performed on this kind of joint and it is not a butt weld (Category D for Pressure Vessels).

Are the orientation of the cracks perpendicular to the SS lines? Any results on this?

From what I've seen, the header boxes are fully fabricated even before being drilled for tube holes and plugs. It is possible to expand the tubes through the plug holes.

Nozzle loads are normally described as that (shear loads (Fc,Fl), and axial loads (Fr), same as for bending (Mc,Ml) and torsion (Mt)). Sounds like they provided loads per WRC107 convention. You should know how to translate from WRC107 to that of cartesian coordinate system.

Welds have eroded away? Were those tubes really welded properly in the tubesheet? Do you have fabrication reports?

The standard practice with most Vendors and head forming shops is they buy plates that are 15%~20% thicker than the required calculated thickness to consider the reduction in thickness after forming. It seems that wasn't considered.

Yeah that is why I posted this since I prefer doing a manual calculation since I do not have any access to FEM software. The original Vendor or designer did not provide any calculation for beam deflection. All similar vessels we have before have uniform cross section support beams, so standard...

I have an existing vessel that needs to change out the catalyst with a heavier catalyst and doing verification if the existing bed support (grid with mesh sitting on top of a support ring and beams) would be able to sustain the new loading. However, existing beam is a tapered H-beam where the...

SmallInfo, as suggested by others above, do not apply a lifting lug to this piping. This is normally lifted by a sling wrapped around the shell/pipe. You have a lifting lug located at the top and the radial loading on that may deform the shell unless you have evaluated it will not, especially...

I've seen that done many times on cyclic service equipment on our projects. Another option is to order a Forged Y-Ring of that shape, so your cylindrical shell, hemispherical head, and skirt are all butt-welded to it. If you do not have that much heavy thickness on the hemi-head, deformation...

Why not just use the 50mm as is and have that extra thickness?

A cone inside a pipe? Does it have any loading or pressure applied to it? Some Clients would just require 100% Visual with PT or MT for non-pressure components.

I am assuming since the thickness is governed by bending (see equations applied), joint efficiency is not a factor in that direction.

In actual application, you have to consider gasket relaxation, flange relaxation, bolt relaxation, flange yielding, proper bolt pitch, etc. and not as simple as the responses above. More information has to be provided such as design pressure/temperature, gasket used, and material.

A193-B7 bolts are heat treated that is why you shouldn't do any welding on it.

Calculate it like a reducing flange, 8"x30". Add a hub section to the opening similar to a WN flange. The flange OD, bolt circle dia./size/qty, and flange thk., would be the same as a 30" 600# B16.47 flange. But the flange I.D. is for an 8" pipe. Design a hub section with thickness and length...