You generally use the longitudinal joint efficiency for the hoop stress calculation, and the circumferential joint efficiency for the longitudinal stress calculation.
Also, using 2 x 0.7 as joint efficiency would provide an allowable general membrane stress of 40% above what the code allows.
It depends on the plant owner / operator. I've seen standpipes specified to Section VIII Div. 1 and also specified to B31.3. It depends on the owner and the size of the stand pipe as well.
Regarding your opinion on UG-44(b)(3) not making sense, I would refer you to PVP2013-97814 where you will find the reasoning on why this restriction exists.
Bolt torque and elongation each have their own recommended applications. It's not worth to use elongation for all joints - only the critical ones. Bolt torque is enough for most applications. What you basically do is take into account that there will be a wide assembly spread if you use bolt...
Use both. Your flange will have different loading scenarios: Assembly (ambient temperature and no pressure), relaxed and operating state. You need to make sure that the bolt does not yield in any of these conditions because otherwise your gasket will be unloaded and therefore the flange will...
See UG-44(b) referring to "... may be evaluated for flanged joints with welding neck flanges chosen in accordance with (a)(2), (a)(9), and (a)(19)". I believe that should answer the question.
It is very unfortunate that this thread, like others, has been hijacked by individuals more interested in debating egos than contributing constructively.
Circumferential welds to hemispherical heads are considered a Category A joint due to the acting stress over that weld. In the case of semieliptical 2:1 heads, the longitudinal stress (half the governing stress) would be acting over a circumferential weld. This is not the case for hemispherical...
What exactly are you looking for? A separate page for the tube calculation? The software checks and will tell you if the internal / external pressure calculations exceed the allowable stresses. These are very much tied to the tube bundle load cases.
I've found myself in the same situation a couple of times this year. I'm a Mechanical Engineer. Ultimately, I decided that sacrificing my personal life for a job was not worth it - I'm in a stable relationship thus, my partner would not have been able to come with me.
You can philosophize all you want on getting your SA-516 GR 70 material to pass the impact tests required / derrating it according to the membrane stress ratio. Then again, I wish you the best of luck in passing the production weld impact testing that is required for this vessel.
I concur with...
Please read UCS-67(a)(1) through (4).
Figure UCS-66 and impact testing are different routes in ASME VIII Div. 1. Depending on the route selected, different requirements apply.
To your question: yes, it is possible to reduce UCS-66(c) with the corresponding ratio in UCS-66(b)(1)(-b).
Is it advisable? You need to use your engineering judgement here.
The choice of 0.66Sy or 0.9Sy relates to modifying one possible governing option of the allowable stresses in Div. 1. The other option still applies to stainless steel materials with a higher allowable stress: tensile strength / 3.5.
Therefore, the application of an elastic-plastic method with...
You can always try to reduce the Blind Flange's MDMT from 11°C (approx) down to 0°C through UCS-66(b).
The welding neck flange governing thickness is 16 mm.
WRC 537 evaluates a stress state, that is three forces and three moments with their respective signs, and their impact on 4 points (0, 90, 180 and 270 degrees) at the junction between the vessel and the nozzle (or its reinforcing pad, if applicable).
Now - what are the actual stress states that...
