Search results for query: *

GD2, It is located twice once in para 501-6.2(e) Pneumatic Pressure Test of Pressure Vessels or Piping which states: The maximum calculated stored energy of any vessel or piping system being pneumatically pressure tested should not be greater than 271 000 000 J (200,000,000 ft-Ib). When...

Hey r6155, this is just going to be an attachment for an internal procedure no specific repair.

Hey GD2, I was trying to understand where it came from and eventually ended up buying the paper that PCC-2 references. To roughly summarize the paper: "If the final rupture opening area is larger than the critical opening area A* (i.e., two times the pipe cross-sectional area), the use of the...

georgeverghese, I am pretty sure he's meaning they are cutting the entire 304L nozzle off and replacing with duplex. However the vessel is carbon steel. SntMan, UHA-51s short paragraph of definitions leaves much to be desired when compared to what we get in UCS-66. Must've been a Friday when...

Per UHA-51(d)(3)(-a) austenitic ferritic duplex steels are exempt from impact testing from -20F and warmer if less than 3/8" thick 2205 is duplex and would fall under that. So if it was 32F and .210 wall for the pipe then yes you would be exempt however the flange is going to be thicker than...

Impact testing exemption is for 2205 less than 3/8" thick which the flange is not is why they are saying that.

Hi All, In the new 2022 edition of PCC-2 when calculating the safe distance for pneumatic testing PCC-2 states that for a the stored energy calculation "the total volume of the vessel shall be considered. When calculating the stored energy of a piping system the maximum volume based on a...

Unfortunately this is the case for many vessels when acquisitions occur, this is one of the reasons I am doing the vessel calculations. Final data books rarely make it through usually it's just U1-As, in this case I have the ability to contact the manufacturer and receive the calculations but...

GD2, Running WRC 107/537 load cases using standard API 660 for 600# results in a primary stress of 50,000 psi vs 30,000 psi allowable. Dropping the external loads to minimal doesn't really change much and still results in a primary stress of ~46,500 psi vs 30,000 allowable. If you want to look...

Hey GD2 late reply but this is just required reinforcement calcs for pressure rating using Codeware Compress/Inspect. The issue is that the 2015 code year allows for Appendix 1-10 to be used in lieu of UG-37 reinforcement. The nozzles are grossly under reinforced per UG-37 calculations and Div 2...

Hey TGS4 this issue is prevalent on about 13 different designed vessels all manufactured by the same company all using the same code year. These were 0 CA vessels that just had a baseline done so I was completing models in Inspect and stumbled across this. Doing level 3 on all of the nozzles...

I have an existing vessel that a nozzle per UG-37 calcs is grossly under reinforced (3in^2 vs req 13in^2). Using 2015 code Appendix 1-10 it barely passes 28,800 psi vs 30,000 allowable this is apparently what it was designed to. Running CC 2695 on it shows it as overstressed 45,000 psi vs 30,000...

Hi All, I was wondering how exactly I go about calculating the required reinforcement for these nozzle connections. They seem to be forged where there isn't a shell to nozzle weld and just a circ weld. I've looked through Sec VIII but I've never come across these before.