Search results for query: *

@marty007 I did that. The appendix 2 flange thickness comes out higher than the studding outlet thickness, but that was expected. I guess in second calculation i just have to check the bolted cover's thickness, flange thickness will be irrelevant ?

@SnTMan That's right! :)

@SnTMan My bad, I didn't know there was a forum for compress, sorry. I reposted my question there. I haven't a clue. The client had this design approved already for 500psi @ 300 deg F and the want it redesigned for 600psi @ 300 deg F. The only variation they allow is in thickness...

I am redesigning a vertical Sec VIII Div 1 Vessel (24" OD x 48" OAH with ASME Elliptical head on both ends ) MAWP: 600psi @ 300 deg F There is a studding outlet ( 18.75" OD x 13" ID, with 16 drill&tap holes at 16.25" BCD ) on the top head. I want to add a cover to this studding outlet using...

I am redesigning a vertical Sec VIII Div 1 Vessel (24" OD x 48" OAH with ASME Elliptical head on both ends ) MAWP: 600psi @ 300 deg F There is a studding outlet ( 18.75" OD x 13" ID, with 16 drill&tap holes at 16.25" BCD ) on the top head. I want to add a cover to this studding outlet using...

@LittleInch Okay. That was all I wanted to know. Thank you, I am glad you finally understood my question.

@TGS4 It is ambient + 4.034psi ( liquid static head ). @ 203degF

@TGS4 Sorry I can't share the calculations but Fx, Fy, Fz are 1300, 2500,1800 (N) resp. and Mx, My, Mz are 1100, 1350, 900 (N-m) resp. on a 4" RFWN.

Everyone, Code case 2901. This is how I did it and my question is that does API 650 has something similar? @TGS4 and @SnTMan Please follow this link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ld_OHq_G24Y#action=share @LittleInch I have seen only 2 tanks till now and they didn't require external...

@LittleInch In my very first post I wrote ".... I looked at Appendix - P but I cant see how it will help in selecting which class of flange should be used?..." It appears you missed that. Anyways, if you know how it will let me make a selection of class of flange, please enlighten me.

@SntMan What I meant was, I calculated MAWP reduction due to external loads. And according to that class 300 flange was safe to use.

@LittleInch and @TGS4 I am sorry for being vague. I understand that the nozzle will see only the pressure due to fluid column in an API 650 tank, but that's not what I am worried about. There are Force components and Moment components given (External Loads) acting on the flange and I am unable...

@mk3223, so if the BPVC calculations shows that I have to use class 300 flange, I have to use class 300 for API 650 tank as well?

I am designing an API 650 tank for the first time and have loads given for a 4" nozzle with RFWN flange. Is there a section in API 650 giving guidelines to select the class of flange to be used?( if it were ASME section VIII Div 1 I would have to use a 300# under these conditions) I looked at...

Okay. Thanks @SnTMan :)

@SntMan Yes, the Hub Thickness is 0.85" so i have to put 0.85" fillet as per UW-21. I wont be using this thick a pipe if i have to make a 0.85" fillet. And I like to put minimum words on a drawing. It's just that in the definition, t[n] is used and not design thickness. but generally if...

I have a nozzle with slip on flange and the required thickness as per design calculation is satisfied by a pipe with 1/2" Nominal wall thickness. We have a pipe with wall thickness of 1.031" in stock. If I decide to use this thicker wall pipe, do i still have to comply with UW-21 for the...